monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

N (4) I (8) S (14)

Did the president of the United States just betray the nation’s security in return for a bribe from the Chinese government?

Don’t say that this suggestion is ridiculous: Given everything we know about Donald Trump, it’s well within the bounds of possibility, even plausibility.

Don’t say there’s no proof: We’re not talking about a court of law, where the accused are presumed innocent until proved guilty. Where the behavior of high officials is concerned, the standard is very nearly the opposite: They’re supposed to avoid situations in which there is even a hint that their actions might be motivated by personal gain.

.Oh, and don’t say that it doesn’t matter one way or the other, because the Republicans who control Congress won’t do anything about it. That in itself is a key part of the story: An entire political party — a party that has historically wrapped itself in the flag and questioned the patriotism of its opponents — has become entirely complaisant in the possibility of raw corruption, even if it involves payoffs from hostile foreign powers.

The story so far: In the past few years ZTE, a Chinese electronics company that, among other things, makes cheap smartphones, has gotten into repeated trouble with the U.S. government. Many of its products contain U.S. technology — technology that, by law, must not be exported to embargoed nations, including North Korea and Iran. But ZTE was circumventing the ban.

Initially, the company was fined $1.2 billion. Then, when it became clear that the company had rewarded rather than punished the executives involved, the Commerce Department forbade U.S. technology companies from selling components to ZTE for the next seven years.

And two weeks ago the Pentagon banned sales of ZTE phones on military bases, following warnings from intelligence agencies that the Chinese government may be using the company’s products to conduct espionage.

All of which made it very strange indeed to see Trump suddenly declare that he was working with President Xi of China to help save ZTE — “Too many jobs in China lost” — and that he was ordering the Commerce Department to make it happen.

It’s possible that Trump was just trying to offer an olive branch amid what looks like a possible trade war. But why choose such a flagrant example of Chinese misbehavior? Which was why many eyes turned to Indonesia, where a Chinese state-owned company just announced a big investment in a project in which the Trump Organization has a substantial stake.

That investment, by the way, is part of the Belt and Road project, a multinational infrastructure initiative China is using to reinforce its economic centrality — and geopolitical influence — across Eurasia. Meanwhile, whatever happened to that Trump infrastructure plan?

Back to ZTE: Was there a quid pro quo? We may never know. But this wasn’t the first time the Trump administration made a peculiar foreign policy move that seems associated with Trump family business interests. Last year the administration, bizarrely, backed a Saudi blockade of Qatar, a Middle Eastern nation that also happens to be the site of a major U.S. military base. Why? Well, the move came shortly after the Qataris refused to invest $500 million in 666 Fifth Avenue, a troubled property owned by the family of Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law.

And now it looks as if Qatar may be about to make a deal on 666 Fifth Avenue after all. I wonder why?

Step back from the details and consider the general picture. High officials have the power to reward or punish both businesses and other governments, so that undue influence is always a problem, even if it takes the form of campaign contributions or indirect financial rewards via the revolving door.

But the problem becomes vastly worse if interested parties can simply funnel money to officials through their business holdings — and Trump and his family, by failing to divest from their international business dealings, have basically hung a sign out declaring themselves open to bribery (and also set the standard for the rest of the administration).

And the problem of undue influence is especially severe when it comes to authoritarian foreign governments. Democracies have ethical rules of their own: Justin Trudeau would be in big trouble if Canada were caught funneling money to the Trump Organization. Corporations can be shamed or sued. But if Xi Jinping or Vladimir Putin make payoffs to U.S. politicians, who’s going to stop them?

The main answer is supposed to be congressional oversight, which used to mean something. If there had been even a whiff of foreign payoffs to, say, Gerald Ford or Jimmy Carter, there would have been bipartisan demands for an investigation — and a high likelihood of impeachment.

But today’s Republicans have made it clear that they won’t hold Trump accountable for anything, even if it borders on treason.

An entire political party — a party that has historically wrapped itself in the flag and questioned the patriotism of its opponents — has become entirely complaisant in the possibility of raw corruption, even if it involves payoffs from hostile foreign powers.

But today’s Republicans have made it clear that they won’t hold Trump accountable for anything, even if it borders on treason.

And that's how you drain a swamp.

The Deep State Planted a Spy in Trump’s 2016 Campaign in the Most Scandalous Revelation Yet

First, this Deep State operation began as a means for “President” Hillary Clinton to punish Donald Trump. The FBI and DOJ left-wingers believed all along that their girl would win the election. All of the intelligence-gathering against President Trump and his family was done so that Fuhrer Hillary would be able to punish her main political enemy after she won the election. The Deep State had no doubt that it was going to put Hillary in the White House.

By punishing Trump and imprisoning him, Hillary wanted to send a message to you and every other Trump supporter that resisting the iron hand of the Deep State would be futile. (This was remarkably like how the Bill Clinton administration treated its political opponents as well.)

Second, we have no doubt that the spy’s life is in fact endangered by Nunes’ investigation. Just not from the sources that the left is claiming. Give us a break! This was a person wandering around inside the Trump campaign. They weren’t a deep cover operative inside an ISIS terror cell or even an agent working in a Chinese nuclear plant. It was a presidential campaign.

His comment followed a six-part morning tweetstorm in which he lashed out at “the World’s most expensive Witch Hunt,” trashing a new report in the New York Times that said an emissary representing the governments of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates offered help to Trump’s 2016 campaign.

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz announced in March he would explore a series of controversial applications to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page — meaning at least part of the president’s request already is covered.

The White House chief of staff, John Kelly, defended the Trump administration's "zero-tolerance" policy toward immigrants who cross the border illegally, telling NPR that separating parents from their children could be a "tough deterrent."

The new policy has garnered backlash from critics who say that criminally prosecuting 100% of illegal border-crossing cases, as the Trump administration has vowed to do, will require children to be taken away from their detained parents.

When asked by NPR about those who say it's "cruel and heartless to take a mother away from her children," Kelly brushed off the question, according to an interview transcript released Friday.

John Kelly: It's not 'cruel' to separate families at the border — children will be 'put into foster care or whatever'

Europe may be realizing America isn’t their sugar daddy or punching bag

Mueller Plans to Wrap Up Obstruction Inquiry Into Trump by Sept. 1, Giuliani Says
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mueller-plans-to-wrap-up-obstruction-inquiry-into-trump-by-sept-1-giuliani-says/ar-AAxyBwH?ocid=UE13DHP

Somebody might want to tell Giuliani that Mueller is not working by any timetable set by Giuliani.
Somebody also might want to tell Giuliani that he is not a spokesperson for Mueller.

Quote:

N (4) I (8) S (14)

glitter, how do you play this word game...

Sent you a PM, no point in boring the rest of the forum.

Are you trying to say Mueller, with his tactics, actually cares what anyone says?

I personally find it quite entertaining and funny.

Personally I would like to know if a foreign country is screwing with our elections because if they are we need to make it stop.

In 2005, Lawrence Franklin, a Pentagon analyst pleaded guilty to espionage charges of passing US government secrets to AIPAC policy director Steven Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman, in what is known as the AIPAC espionage scandal. Rosen and Weissman were later fired by AIPAC. In 2009, charges against the former AIPAC employees were dropped.


AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation related to Israel. AIPAC regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. AIPAC is not a political action committee, and does not directly donate to campaign contributions. However, Josh Reinstein, President of the Israel Allies Foundation regards informal Christian support for Israel as "more influential than AIPAC

To stop a president from doing his job is not funny.