shareblue--2020-01-28--Bolton dashes White House hopes for a strong finish at impeachment trial

Donald Trump 's legal team prepared to wrap up arguments in his impeachment trial Tuesday as Senate Republicans wrestled with whether to allow witnesses , including John Bolton , who appeared ready to contradict a key Trump claim .
The arguments from defense lawyers have jostled for public attention with revelations from a forthcoming book by former national security adviser Bolton , who says Trump wanted to withhold military aid from Ukraine until it committed to helping with investigations into Democratic rival Joe Biden .
Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly insisted he never tied the security aid to political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House hopes for a big finish Tuesday as well as a swift end to the impeachment trial .
Democrats are demanding witnesses , and some Republicans are expressing openness to the idea .
One Republican , Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma , is floating an idea to subpoena Bolton 's book manuscript so senators can see the evidence themselves — in private .
It 's an idea that may be gaining traction even as other Republicans have warned against a protracted legal dispute with the White House , which has tried to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Graham wrote on Twitter that he `` totally '' supports Lankford 's proposal .
Graham , a key Trump ally , said the Bolton document should be made available to the Senate , in a classified setting , `` where each Senator has the opportunity to review the manuscript and make their own determination . ''
However , Chuck Schumer , the Senate 's top Democrat , called the proposal , which would keep Bolton out of public testimony , `` absurd . ''
`` We 're not bargaining with them .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of documents , then the truth will come out , '' Schumer said .
Senate Republicans were to meet behind closed doors to consider next steps .
The Bolton revelations distracted from hours of arguments Monday by Trump 's lawyers , who declared anew that no witness has testified to direct knowledge that Trump 's delivery of aid was contingent on investigations into Democrats .
Bolton appeared poised to say exactly that if summoned by the Senate .
`` We deal with transcript evidence , we deal with publicly available information , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We do not deal with speculation . ''
Trump is charged with abusing his presidential power by asking Ukraine 's leader to help investigate Biden at the same time his administration was withholding hundreds of millions of dollars in security aid .
A second charge accuses Trump of obstructing Congress in its probe .
On Monday , Trump 's attorneys , including high-profile lawyers Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz , launched a historical , legal and political attack on the entire impeachment process .
They said there was no basis to remove Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appropriate and assailed Biden , who is campaigning for the Democratic nomination to oppose Trump in November .
Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi devoted her presentation to Biden and his son Hunter , who served on the board of a Ukraine gas company when his father was leading the Obama administration 's diplomatic dealings with Kyiv .
The legal team argued that Trump had legitimate reasons to be suspicious of the younger Biden 's business dealings and concerned about corruption in Ukraine and that , in any event , he ultimately released @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Republican president wanted .
Trump has sought , without providing evidence , to implicate the Bidens in the kind of corruption that has long plagued Ukraine .
Though anti-corruption advocates have raised concerns , there has been no evidence of wrongdoing by either the former vice president or his son .
Democrats say Trump released the money only after a whistleblower submitted a complaint about the situation .
Starr , whose independent counsel investigation resulted in the impeachment of President Bill Clinton — he was acquitted by the Senate — bemoaned what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeachment . ''
Impeachment , he said , requires an actual crime and a `` genuine national consensus '' that the president must go .
Neither exists here , Starr said .
`` It 's filled with acrimony and it divides the country like nothing else , '' Starr said of impeachment .
`` Those of us who lived through the Clinton impeachment understand that in a deep and personal way . ''
Dershowitz , the final speaker of the evening , argued that impeachable offenses require criminal-like conduct — a view largely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` nothing in the Bolton revelations , even if true , would rise to the level of an abuse of power or an impeachable offense . ''
`` Purely non-criminal conduct , including abuse of power and obstruction of Congress , are outside the range of impeachable offenses , '' Dershowitz said .
Even as defense lawyers laid out their case as planned , it was clear Bolton 's book had scrambled the debate over whether to seek witnesses .
Trump 's legal team has rejected Bolton 's account , and Trump himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats , including the Bidens , '' Trump tweeted .
`` If John Bolton said this , it was only to sell a book . ''
Republican senators face a pivotal moment .
Pressure is mounting for at least four to buck GOP leaders and form a bipartisan majority to force the issue .
Republicans hold a 53-47 majority .
`` John Bolton 's relevance to our decision has become increasingly clear , '' GOP Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said she has always wanted `` the opportunity for witnesses '' and the report about Bolton 's book `` strengthens the case . ''
At a private GOP lunch , Romney made the case for calling Bolton , according to a person unauthorized to discuss the meeting and granted anonymity .
Other Republicans , including Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania , said if Bolton is called , they will demand reciprocity to hear from at least one of their witnesses .
Some Republicans want to call the Bidens .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book , his office said .
But the GOP leader appeared unmoved by news of the book .
His message at the lunch , said Indiana GOP Sen. Mike Braun , was , `` Take a deep breath , and let 's take one step at a time . ''
Once the president 's team wraps up its arguments , senators have 16 hours for written questions to both sides .
By late in the week , they are expected to hold a vote on whether or not to hear from any witnesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repeatedly that Democrats are using impeachment to try to undo the results of the last presidential election and drive Trump from office .
Democrats , meanwhile , say Trump 's refusal to allow administration officials to testify only reinforces that the White House is hiding evidence .
The White House has had Bolton 's manuscript for about a month , according to a letter from Bolton 's attorney .
Schumer said : `` We 're all staring a White House cover-up in the face . ''
Bolton 's account was first reported by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Associated Press by a person familiar with the manuscript .
`` The Room Where It Happened ; A White House Memoir '' is to be released March 17 .
Joe Biden , campaigning in Iowa , said he sees no reason for testimony by him or his son .
`` I have nothing to defend .
This is all a game , even if they bring me up , '' he told reporters .
`` What is there to defend ?
This is all — the reason he 's being impeached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government to smear me and they would n't .
Come on . ''

Donald Trump’s legal team prepared to wrap up arguments in his impeachment trial Tuesday as Senate Republicans wrestled with whether to allow witnesses, including John Bolton, who appeared ready to contradict a key Trump claim.
The arguments from defense lawyers have jostled for public attention with revelations from a forthcoming book by former national security adviser Bolton, who says Trump wanted to withhold military aid from Ukraine until it committed to helping with investigations into Democratic rival Joe Biden. Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly insisted he never tied the security aid to political investigations.
News of the book clouded White House hopes for a big finish Tuesday as well as a swift end to the impeachment trial. Democrats are demanding witnesses, and some Republicans are expressing openness to the idea.
One Republican, Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, is floating an idea to subpoena Bolton’s book manuscript so senators can see the evidence themselves — in private.
It’s an idea that may be gaining traction even as other Republicans have warned against a protracted legal dispute with the White House, which has tried to block administration officials.
GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham wrote on Twitter that he “totally” supports Lankford’s proposal. Graham, a key Trump ally, said the Bolton document should be made available to the Senate, in a classified setting, “where each Senator has the opportunity to review the manuscript and make their own determination.”
However, Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s top Democrat, called the proposal, which would keep Bolton out of public testimony, “absurd.”
“We’re not bargaining with them. We want four witnesses, and four sets of documents, then the truth will come out,” Schumer said.
Senate Republicans were to meet behind closed doors to consider next steps.
The Bolton revelations distracted from hours of arguments Monday by Trump’s lawyers, who declared anew that no witness has testified to direct knowledge that Trump’s delivery of aid was contingent on investigations into Democrats. Bolton appeared poised to say exactly that if summoned by the Senate.
“We deal with transcript evidence, we deal with publicly available information,” Trump attorney Jay Sekulow said. “We do not deal with speculation.”
Trump is charged with abusing his presidential power by asking Ukraine’s leader to help investigate Biden at the same time his administration was withholding hundreds of millions of dollars in security aid. A second charge accuses Trump of obstructing Congress in its probe.
On Monday, Trump’s attorneys, including high-profile lawyers Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz, launched a historical, legal and political attack on the entire impeachment process. They said there was no basis to remove Trump from office, defended his actions as appropriate and assailed Biden, who is campaigning for the Democratic nomination to oppose Trump in November.
Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi devoted her presentation to Biden and his son Hunter, who served on the board of a Ukraine gas company when his father was leading the Obama administration’s diplomatic dealings with Kyiv. The legal team argued that Trump had legitimate reasons to be suspicious of the younger Biden’s business dealings and concerned about corruption in Ukraine and that, in any event, he ultimately released the aid without Ukraine committing to investigations the Republican president wanted.
Trump has sought, without providing evidence, to implicate the Bidens in the kind of corruption that has long plagued Ukraine. Though anti-corruption advocates have raised concerns, there has been no evidence of wrongdoing by either the former vice president or his son.
Democrats say Trump released the money only after a whistleblower submitted a complaint about the situation.
Starr, whose independent counsel investigation resulted in the impeachment of President Bill Clinton — he was acquitted by the Senate — bemoaned what he said was an “age of impeachment.” Impeachment, he said, requires an actual crime and a “genuine national consensus” that the president must go. Neither exists here, Starr said.
“It’s filled with acrimony and it divides the country like nothing else,” Starr said of impeachment. “Those of us who lived through the Clinton impeachment understand that in a deep and personal way.”
Dershowitz, the final speaker of the evening, argued that impeachable offenses require criminal-like conduct — a view largely rejected by legal scholars. He said “nothing in the Bolton revelations, even if true, would rise to the level of an abuse of power or an impeachable offense.”
“Purely non-criminal conduct, including abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, are outside the range of impeachable offenses,” Dershowitz said.
Even as defense lawyers laid out their case as planned, it was clear Bolton’s book had scrambled the debate over whether to seek witnesses. Trump’s legal team has rejected Bolton’s account, and Trump himself denied it.
“I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens,” Trump tweeted. “If John Bolton said this, it was only to sell a book.”
Republican senators face a pivotal moment. Pressure is mounting for at least four to buck GOP leaders and form a bipartisan majority to force the issue. Republicans hold a 53-47 majority.
“John Bolton’s relevance to our decision has become increasingly clear,” GOP Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah told reporters. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said she has always wanted “the opportunity for witnesses” and the report about Bolton’s book “strengthens the case.”
At a private GOP lunch, Romney made the case for calling Bolton, according to a person unauthorized to discuss the meeting and granted anonymity.
Other Republicans, including Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, said if Bolton is called, they will demand reciprocity to hear from at least one of their witnesses. Some Republicans want to call the Bidens.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell hadn’t known about Bolton’s book, his office said. But the GOP leader appeared unmoved by news of the book. His message at the lunch, said Indiana GOP Sen. Mike Braun, was, “Take a deep breath, and let’s take one step at a time.”
Once the president’s team wraps up its arguments, senators have 16 hours for written questions to both sides. By late in the week, they are expected to hold a vote on whether or not to hear from any witnesses.
Trump and his lawyers have argued repeatedly that Democrats are using impeachment to try to undo the results of the last presidential election and drive Trump from office.
Democrats, meanwhile, say Trump’s refusal to allow administration officials to testify only reinforces that the White House is hiding evidence. The White House has had Bolton’s manuscript for about a month, according to a letter from Bolton’s attorney.
Schumer said: “We’re all staring a White House cover-up in the face.”
Bolton’s account was first reported by the New York Times and was confirmed to the Associated Press by a person familiar with the manuscript. “The Room Where It Happened; A White House Memoir” is to be released March 17.
Joe Biden, campaigning in Iowa, said he sees no reason for testimony by him or his son.
“I have nothing to defend. This is all a game, even if they bring me up,” he told reporters. “What is there to defend? This is all — the reason he’s being impeached is because he tried to get a government to smear me and they wouldn’t. Come on.”


shareblue--2020-01-28--Accused war criminal pardoned by Trump outs Navy SEALS who testified against him

Former Navy SEAL and accused war criminal Eddie Gallagher put service members in jeopardy with a new video attack launched from his social media accounts on Monday .
Gallagher 's video revealed sensitive information about the Navy SEALS who testified against him in his war crimes trial , the San Diego Union-Tribune reported .
In the three-minute-long video posted to his Facebook and Instagram pages , Gallagher identified his accusers by posting their names , photographs , duty status , and the units they serve in — which experts said jeopardizes those Navy SEALS ' safety .
`` As a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our special operators , '' Capt .
Tamara Lawrence , a spokesperson for Naval Special Warfare Command , told the Union-Tribune .
`` We do n't identify them by name , or by any other manner , due to the nature of their work , for the protection of their teammates and their families , and to protect on-going and future missions . ''
In the video , Gallagher calls the service members `` cowards '' for testifying about his actions in Iraq .
Those service members accused Gallagher of shooting civilians and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the neck — both of which are considered war crimes .
Gallagher was acquitted on some of the charges but was convicted of posing with the corpse of a dead ISIS fighter .
Fox News hosts lobbied Trump to pardon Gallagher for his conviction , which Trump eventually did .
Trump also forced out the secretary of the Navy who did not agree with Trump 's order to go over Navy leadership 's head to demand the restoration of Gallagher 's rank — which had been reduced thanks to his conviction .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Navy investigators that Gallagher is `` freaking evil '' and `` toxic , '' and said he `` wants to kill anybody he can . ''
Trump , however , has embraced Gallagher , hosting him at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach , Florida , over the holiday season .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Former Navy SEAL and accused war criminal Eddie Gallagher put service members in jeopardy with a new video attack launched from his social media accounts on Monday. Gallagher’s video revealed sensitive information about the Navy SEALS who testified against him in his war crimes trial, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.
In the three-minute-long video posted to his Facebook and Instagram pages, Gallagher identified his accusers by posting their names, photographs, duty status, and the units they serve in — which experts said jeopardizes those Navy SEALS’ safety.
“As a matter of policy we do not identify our special operators,” Capt. Tamara Lawrence, a spokesperson for Naval Special Warfare Command, told the Union-Tribune. “We don’t identify them by name, or by any other manner, due to the nature of their work, for the protection of their teammates and their families, and to protect on-going and future missions.”
In the video, Gallagher calls the service members “cowards” for testifying about his actions in Iraq. Those service members accused Gallagher of shooting civilians and killing an ISIS fighter by stabbing him in the neck — both of which are considered war crimes. Gallagher was acquitted on some of the charges but was convicted of posing with the corpse of a dead ISIS fighter.
Fox News hosts lobbied Trump to pardon Gallagher for his conviction, which Trump eventually did.
Trump also forced out the secretary of the Navy who did not agree with Trump’s order to go over Navy leadership’s head to demand the restoration of Gallagher’s rank — which had been reduced thanks to his conviction.
Navy SEALS who worked with Gallagher testified to Navy investigators that Gallagher is “freaking evil” and “toxic,” and said he “wants to kill anybody he can.”
Trump, however, has embraced Gallagher, hosting him at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, over the holiday season.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-28--GOP senators say they need to review Bolton book in secret to decide if he should testify

As pressure mounts to have former national security adviser John Bolton testify in Donald Trump 's impeachment trial , a pair of Republican senators is proposing an idea to stall and possibly block Bolton from speaking publicly about his knowledge of the Ukraine scandal .
In a forthcoming memoir about his time in the Trump White House , Bolton says Trump told him that he was withholding congressionally appropriated military aid to Ukraine until the country 's leadership announced an investigation into his political rivals .
That is exactly what Democrats charge Trump with doing , calling that quid pro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Lindsey Graham ( R-SC ) and James Lankford ( R-OK ) suggested a deal that would allow senators to review Bolton 's book in a classified setting before deciding on whether to have him testify .
Lankford was the first to suggest allowing senators to review Bolton 's book manuscript in a classified setting to determine whether he should be called as a witness .
( Bolton submitted his book to the National Security Council for classification review ahead of the book 's scheduled March 17 public release date . )
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should actually be able to get and I am encouraging the White House , anybody that I can talk to to say : That manuscript is pertinent and we should get access to that manuscript to see what they 're actually saying , '' Lankford told the Oklahoman Monday .
Graham tweeted on Tuesday morning that he backs Lankford 's proposal .
`` I totally support @ SenatorLankford 's proposal that the Bolton manuscript be made available to the Senate , if possible , in a classified setting where each Senator has the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own determination , '' Graham tweeted .
Democrats have been seeking Bolton 's testimony for months .
House Democrats called on Bolton to testify in the House impeachment inquiry last October , but Bolton refused to show up .
However , after Democrats passed articles of impeachment against Trump in December , Bolton appeared to have a change of heart and said he would testify if the Senate subpoenaed him during the trial .
Senate Democrats then attempted to secure Bolton 's testimony earlier in January , before the Senate passed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every Republican senator voted to block Bolton 's testimony .
Following Monday 's leak of Bolton 's book , in which he discusses Trump 's quid pro quo with Ukraine , calls for Republicans to allow Bolton to testify have heightened .
Despite those allegations , many high-ranking Republicans still say Bolton 's firsthand account is n't relevant and does n't change their plan to block witnesses and quickly acquit Trump before the Feb. 4 State of the Union .
So far , only one Republican , Sen. Mitt Romney ( R-UT ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Sen. Susan Collins ( R-ME ) said that she is `` likely to vote to call witnesses , '' but she has n't said definitively that she plans to vote for Bolton 's testimony .
Democrats ultimately need four GOP votes to call Bolton to the witness stand .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

As pressure mounts to have former national security adviser John Bolton testify in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, a pair of Republican senators is proposing an idea to stall and possibly block Bolton from speaking publicly about his knowledge of the Ukraine scandal.
In a forthcoming memoir about his time in the Trump White House, Bolton says Trump told him that he was withholding congressionally appropriated military aid to Ukraine until the country’s leadership announced an investigation into his political rivals. That is exactly what Democrats charge Trump with doing, calling that quid pro quo an abuse of power.
Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and James Lankford (R-OK) suggested a deal that would allow senators to review Bolton’s book in a classified setting before deciding on whether to have him testify.
Lankford was the first to suggest allowing senators to review Bolton’s book manuscript in a classified setting to determine whether he should be called as a witness. (Bolton submitted his book to the National Security Council for classification review ahead of the book’s scheduled March 17 public release date.)
“That’s a minimum amount that we should actually be able to get and I am encouraging the White House, anybody that I can talk to to say: That manuscript is pertinent and we should get access to that manuscript to see what they’re actually saying,” Lankford told the Oklahoman Monday.
Graham tweeted on Tuesday morning that he backs Lankford’s proposal.
“I totally support @SenatorLankford’s proposal that the Bolton manuscript be made available to the Senate, if possible, in a classified setting where each Senator has the opportunity to review the manuscript and make their own determination,” Graham tweeted.
Democrats have been seeking Bolton’s testimony for months. House Democrats called on Bolton to testify in the House impeachment inquiry last October, but Bolton refused to show up.
However, after Democrats passed articles of impeachment against Trump in December, Bolton appeared to have a change of heart and said he would testify if the Senate subpoenaed him during the trial.
Senate Democrats then attempted to secure Bolton’s testimony earlier in January, before the Senate passed the rules governing the impeachment trial, but every Republican senator voted to block Bolton’s testimony.
Following Monday’s leak of Bolton’s book, in which he discusses Trump’s quid pro quo with Ukraine, calls for Republicans to allow Bolton to testify have heightened.
Despite those allegations, many high-ranking Republicans still say Bolton’s firsthand account isn’t relevant and doesn’t change their plan to block witnesses and quickly acquit Trump before the Feb. 4 State of the Union.
So far, only one Republican, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT), said he believes Bolton should testify. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said that she is “likely to vote to call witnesses,” but she hasn’t said definitively that she plans to vote for Bolton’s testimony.
Democrats ultimately need four GOP votes to call Bolton to the witness stand.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-28--These tweets from Republicans praising John Bolton are super awkward now

Congressional Republicans have taken aim at former national security adviser John Bolton over the past few days , suggesting new allegations leveled at Donald Trump in his upcoming book were made up to sell more copies .
Many members of those same House and Senate Republicans have long backed the hawkish Bolton and relied on his help for their campaigns .
Earlier this week , the New York Times obtained an unpublished manuscript of Bolton 's book , which revealed Trump told Bolton in August that he `` wanted to continue freezing $ 391 million in security assistance to Ukraine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats including the Bidens [ ... ] . ''
Republicans immediately went on the attack , with several members of Congress targeting Bolton himself for supposedly making up the allegations .
Rep. Mark Meadows ( R-NC ) , for instance , dismissed the new claim , saying Bolton 's allegations had been `` refused by the White House . ''
He then suggested the manuscript had been leaked as part of a plot to manipulate Republican senators .
Meadows , a Trump impeachment team member , acknowledged that he did n't know whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or someone else in the `` Deep State . ''
But in separate comments to reporters , he suggested `` that it was to sell more books . ''
`` Some have suggested that indeed the leak was designed to create chaos , '' he said .
Meadows previously backed Trump 's decision to install Bolton as his national security adviser .
`` President Trump could not have made a better choice for National Security Advisor than @ AmbJohnBolton , '' he tweeted in 2018 .
`` He is excellent and will serve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans were more overtly critical of Bolton this week , calling him as a `` disgruntled former employee '' who puts `` Bolton first and America last . ''
`` No human being is ever in a more hyperbolic state than when they ’ re pitching a book deal , '' Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz tweeted Monday .
`` John Bolton isn ’ t negotiating testimony , he ’ s negotiating the size of his advance . ''
But most House and Senate Republicans broadly and enthusiastically backed Trump 's selection of Bolton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 .
And many trumped his endorsements and relied on his backing to help their campaigns , despite the GOP 's reluctance this week to listen to his new allegations .
Rep. Lee Zeldin ( R-NY ) , who argued on Monday against the Senate even hearing new testimony from Bolton , said in 2018 that Bolton would `` be a great National Security Adviser '' as he is `` Ridiculously knowledgeable '' and a `` Very underrated , amazing American . ''
Rep. Jim Banks ( R-IN ) tweeted in March that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have his leadership , '' while Rep. Alex Mooney ( R-WV ) tweeted that Bolton would `` help keep America safe and secure ! ''
Rep. Joe Wilson ( R-SC ) , for his part , described Bolton as `` uniquely qualified to meet the demands of the job '' and `` a perfect fit '' for Trump 's team .
Sens .
Marco Rubio ( R-FL ) and Tom Cotton ( R-AR ) each said Bolton was an `` excellent choice , '' for national security adviser , and Sens .
Todd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( R-GA ) , and Pat Roberts ( R-KS ) each also highlighted his support as a major endorsement for their most recent campaigns .
Bolton 's new allegations directly contradict a key part of Trump 's impeachment defense , namely Trump 's insistence that the aid freeze was intended only to ensure Ukraine was properly fighting corruption .
Bolton 's manuscript proves that argument false , detailing how Trump demanded the country announce investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and a long debunked conspiracy involving the Democratic National Committee before it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Representatives impeached Trump last month on two counts , one for abuse of power related to his pressure campaign against Ukraine , and another for obstruction of Congress related to his efforts to block witness testimony in the House inquiry and withhold evidence .
The Government Accountability Office has since said the decision by the Trump administration to withhold previously appropriated congressional funding to Ukraine violated federal law .
Trump — who hired and fired Bolton — has repeatedly denied he did anything wrong , calling the impeachment proceedings against him a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Congressional Republicans have taken aim at former national security adviser John Bolton over the past few days, suggesting new allegations leveled at Donald Trump in his upcoming book were made up to sell more copies.
Many members of those same House and Senate Republicans have long backed the hawkish Bolton and relied on his help for their campaigns.
Earlier this week, the New York Times obtained an unpublished manuscript of Bolton’s book, which revealed Trump told Bolton in August that he “wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens […].”
Republicans immediately went on the attack, with several members of Congress targeting Bolton himself for supposedly making up the allegations.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), for instance, dismissed the new claim, saying Bolton’s allegations had been “refused by the White House.” He then suggested the manuscript had been leaked as part of a plot to manipulate Republican senators.
Meadows, a Trump impeachment team member, acknowledged that he didn’t know whether the leak was from Bolton’s team or someone else in the “Deep State.” But in separate comments to reporters, he suggested “that it was to sell more books.”
“Some have suggested that indeed the leak was designed to create chaos,” he said.
Meadows previously backed Trump’s decision to install Bolton as his national security adviser. “President Trump could not have made a better choice for National Security Advisor than @AmbJohnBolton,” he tweeted in 2018. “He is excellent and will serve our country well.”
Other congressional Republicans were more overtly critical of Bolton this week, calling him as a “disgruntled former employee” who puts “Bolton first and America last.”
“No human being is ever in a more hyperbolic state than when they’re pitching a book deal,” Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz tweeted Monday. “John Bolton isn’t negotiating testimony, he’s negotiating the size of his advance.”
But most House and Senate Republicans broadly and enthusiastically backed Trump’s selection of Bolton to be national security adviser in March 2018. And many trumped his endorsements and relied on his backing to help their campaigns, despite the GOP’s reluctance this week to listen to his new allegations.
Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY), who argued on Monday against the Senate even hearing new testimony from Bolton, said in 2018 that Bolton would “be a great National Security Adviser” as he is “Ridiculously knowledgeable” and a “Very underrated, amazing American.”
Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) tweeted in March that year that America was “fortunate to have his leadership,” while Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV) tweeted that Bolton would “help keep America safe and secure!”
Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC), for his part, described Bolton as “uniquely qualified to meet the demands of the job” and “a perfect fit” for Trump’s team.
Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Tom Cotton (R-AR) each said Bolton was an “excellent choice,” for national security adviser, and Sens. Todd Young (R-IN), David Perdue (R-GA), and Pat Roberts (R-KS) each also highlighted his support as a major endorsement for their most recent campaigns.
Bolton’s new allegations directly contradict a key part of Trump’s impeachment defense, namely Trump’s insistence that the aid freeze was intended only to ensure Ukraine was properly fighting corruption. Bolton’s manuscript proves that argument false, detailing how Trump demanded the country announce investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and a long debunked conspiracy involving the Democratic National Committee before it could receive any aid.
The House of Representatives impeached Trump last month on two counts, one for abuse of power related to his pressure campaign against Ukraine, and another for obstruction of Congress related to his efforts to block witness testimony in the House inquiry and withhold evidence.
The Government Accountability Office has since said the decision by the Trump administration to withhold previously appropriated congressional funding to Ukraine violated federal law.
Trump — who hired and fired Bolton — has repeatedly denied he did anything wrong, calling the impeachment proceedings against him a “hoax” and “witch hunt.”
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--Jared Kushner says his Middle East peace plan works if you forget all of history

Donald Trump 's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner said on Tuesday that the administration 's newly released Israeli-Palestinian peace plan will work if you simply forget decades of history regarding the conflict .
`` What I would encourage people to do is try to divorce yourself from all of the history that 's happened over the years and read this plan , '' Kushner said in an interview with CNN 's Christiane Amanpour .
Conflict between Israelis and Palestinians has existed for decades , dating back years before Israel became a state in 1948 .
Deadly wars have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by American presidents to try and resolve the land disputes .
And the peace plan Kushner helped craft — which Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Tuesday — looks just as likely to fail as past attempts .
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has already rejected the proposal .
`` After the nonsense that we heard today we say a thousand no 's to the Deal of The Century , '' Abbas said at a news conference on Tuesday .
Yossi Mekelberg , professor of international relations at Regent 's University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this week that Kushner 's plan might in fact worsen the situation .
`` Is it going to lead to an agreement with the Palestinians ?
Categorically not , '' he said .
`` In fact , it will harden their position . ''
Kushner is still pushing his plan despite the criticism , explaining on `` Fox & Friends '' Wednesday morning that the plan was substantial and even contained `` a map . ''
`` If you look at the original proposal , the Arab Peace Initiative , that was an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faith proposal , past proposals have been two to three pages , this is an over 80-page proposal with a map , never been done before , '' Kushner said .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner said on Tuesday that the administration’s newly released Israeli-Palestinian peace plan will work if you simply forget decades of history regarding the conflict.
“What I would encourage people to do is try to divorce yourself from all of the history that’s happened over the years and read this plan,” Kushner said in an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour.
Conflict between Israelis and Palestinians has existed for decades, dating back years before Israel became a state in 1948.
Deadly wars have been fought over territory, with multiple attempts by American presidents to try and resolve the land disputes.
And the peace plan Kushner helped craft — which Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Tuesday — looks just as likely to fail as past attempts.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has already rejected the proposal.
“After the nonsense that we heard today we say a thousand no’s to the Deal of The Century,” Abbas said at a news conference on Tuesday.
Yossi Mekelberg, professor of international relations at Regent’s University in London, also told NBC News this week that Kushner’s plan might in fact worsen the situation.
“Is it going to lead to an agreement with the Palestinians? Categorically not,” he said. “In fact, it will harden their position.”
Kushner is still pushing his plan despite the criticism, explaining on “Fox & Friends” Wednesday morning that the plan was substantial and even contained “a map.”
“If you look at the original proposal, the Arab Peace Initiative, that was an eight-line proposal, it was a good faith proposal, past proposals have been two to three pages, this is an over 80-page proposal with a map, never been done before,” Kushner said.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--GOP senator accidentally makes the case for John Bolton to testify

On Wednesday , Sen. Thom Tillis ( R-NC ) made a compelling case for why Donald Trump 's former national security adviser John Bolton should testify in the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump .
When asked by Kevin Frey , a reporter for Spectrum News , about the contents of the forthcoming book by Bolton , Tillis refused to answer .
`` I think it 's a hypothetical because I do n't know what he said , '' Tillis replied .
`` But you could find out , '' Frey responded , alluding to the fact that Tillis could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the impeachment trial .
Thus far , most Republicans have been resistant to subpoenaing new witnesses to uncover additional evidence .
According to reports , Bolton claims in the book that Trump said he was withholding critical military aid to Ukraine in order to pressure the government to open investigations that could benefit Trump politically .
Tillis stumbled in his response before finally casting blame on the House of Representatives .
`` Well , I..
I ... uh ...
I would hope that if the House thought that it was something serious that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for drawing up an article of impeachment , that they would make that decision in the House . ''
Despite Tillis ' claim , the House of Representatives did ask Bolton to testify in November .
However , Bolton refused to do so voluntarily .
In January , Bolton announced that he was willing to testify in the Senate impeachment trial if called as a witness , which would give Tillis the opportunity to learn what is in Bolton 's book .
Before the Senate trial started , Tillis voted 11 times against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including testimony from Bolton .
Senators are likely to vote on hearing from witnesses again at the end of the week .
Polls repeatedly show Americans support witnesses in the trial Tillis , who faces a tough reelection race in November , has not definitively said how he will vote on the issue , but has previously called the impeachment of Trump `` a sham '' and a `` waste of America 's time . ''
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

On Wednesday, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) made a compelling case for why Donald Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton should testify in the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump.
When asked by Kevin Frey, a reporter for Spectrum News, about the contents of the forthcoming book by Bolton, Tillis refused to answer.
“I think it’s a hypothetical because I don’t know what he said,” Tillis replied.
“But you could find out,” Frey responded, alluding to the fact that Tillis could vote to subpoena Bolton to testify in the impeachment trial. Thus far, most Republicans have been resistant to subpoenaing new witnesses to uncover additional evidence.
According to reports, Bolton claims in the book that Trump said he was withholding critical military aid to Ukraine in order to pressure the government to open investigations that could benefit Trump politically.
Tillis stumbled in his response before finally casting blame on the House of Representatives.
“Well, I.. I… uh… I would hope that if the House thought that it was something serious that would ultimately rise to a credible basis for drawing up an article of impeachment, that they would make that decision in the House.”
Despite Tillis’ claim, the House of Representatives did ask Bolton to testify in November. However, Bolton refused to do so voluntarily.
In January, Bolton announced that he was willing to testify in the Senate impeachment trial if called as a witness, which would give Tillis the opportunity to learn what is in Bolton’s book.
Before the Senate trial started, Tillis voted 11 times against subpoenaing documents and witnesses in the trial, including testimony from Bolton.
Senators are likely to vote on hearing from witnesses again at the end of the week. Polls repeatedly show Americans support witnesses in the trial
Tillis, who faces a tough reelection race in November, has not definitively said how he will vote on the issue, but has previously called the impeachment of Trump “a sham” and a “waste of America’s time.”
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--Trump impeachment lawyer claims new witnesses are never called at trials

An member of Donald Trump 's impeachment defense team argued at the Senate trial on Wednesday that no fact witnesses should be called by the House impeachment managers .
His reasoning : at trials , witnesses do n't testify for the first time .
Pat Philbin , a deputy White House counsel , was asked about the administration 's opposition to witnesses .
`` The House managers try to present it as if it 's just a simple question : 'How can you have a trial without witnesses ? '
'' he noted .
`` In real litigation , no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
No one goes to trial without having heard from the witnesses first .
You do n't show up at trial and then start trying to call witnesses for the first time . ''
Doing so , he said , would be `` very grave '' for the Senate as an institution .
In reality , prosecutors typically do try to interview witnesses before trials for strategic reasons , but there is no requirement that they do so .
`` Surprise witnesses '' have long been a fact of life in American jurisprudence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not wish to testify or are `` hostile '' to the side that calls them .
Moreover , under Philbin 's logic , House managers would be free to call any fact witness that the House impeachment inquiry previously spoke with .
Given that Rep. Eliot Engel ( D-NY ) , House Foreign Affairs chair , revealed on Wednesday that he spoke John Bolton in September about the Ukraine scandal , he would seemingly be included .
The Trump administration and its Senate allies have been pushing to quickly end the trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all .
Last week , Senate Republicans voted repeatedly against Democratic proposals to subpoena relevant records and witnesses for the trial .
At the time , Republicans said they would decide whether to hear from witnesses after the first phrase , but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has spent the past several days working to whip his caucus to simply end the trial with no witness testimony .
After a caucus meeting on Wednesday , Sen. Mike Rounds ( R-SD ) told reporters that they planned to skip witnesses and end the trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

An member of Donald Trump’s impeachment defense team argued at the Senate trial on Wednesday that no fact witnesses should be called by the House impeachment managers. His reasoning: at trials, witnesses don’t testify for the first time.
Pat Philbin, a deputy White House counsel, was asked about the administration’s opposition to witnesses.
“The House managers try to present it as if it’s just a simple question: ‘How can you have a trial without witnesses?'” he noted. “In real litigation, no one goes to trial without doing discovery. No one goes to trial without having heard from the witnesses first. You don’t show up at trial and then start trying to call witnesses for the first time.” Doing so, he said, would be “very grave” for the Senate as an institution.
https://twitter.com/owillis/status/1222611017341046786
In reality, prosecutors typically do try to interview witnesses before trials for strategic reasons, but there is no requirement that they do so. “Surprise witnesses” have long been a fact of life in American jurisprudence. Sometimes attorneys even call witnesses who do not wish to testify or are “hostile” to the side that calls them.
Moreover, under Philbin’s logic, House managers would be free to call any fact witness that the House impeachment inquiry previously spoke with. Given that Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), House Foreign Affairs chair, revealed on Wednesday that he spoke John Bolton in September about the Ukraine scandal, he would seemingly be included.
The Trump administration and its Senate allies have been pushing to quickly end the trial without hearing from any fact witnesses at all.
Last week, Senate Republicans voted repeatedly against Democratic proposals to subpoena relevant records and witnesses for the trial. At the time, Republicans said they would decide whether to hear from witnesses after the first phrase, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has spent the past several days working to whip his caucus to simply end the trial with no witness testimony.
After a caucus meeting on Wednesday, Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) told reporters that they planned to skip witnesses and end the trial “by Friday, hopefully.”
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--Anti-human trafficking groups boycott Ivanka event: It's just 'a photo op'

Anti-human trafficking groups are boycotting an event on the issue this week that is being hosted by Ivanka Trump , citing the Trump administration 's harsh policies against immigrants , who are often the victims of trafficking .
Along with Vice President Mike Pence , Ivanka Trump plans to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act which was signed into law by President Bill Clinton .
Martina Vandenberg , founder of the Human Trafficking Legal Center , told the Washington Post that the event has created `` a chasm between rhetoric and reality '' and noted that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ built for trafficking victims over two decades . ''
`` I don ’ t think any of us have the desire to be a part of a photo op , '' Vandenberg added .
Polaris , the organization that runs the national human trafficking hotline , along with the largest anti-trafficking coalition , Freedom Network USA , will not attend the event .
At least eight groups have turned down invitations so far .
According to the Post , the groups argue that `` although the president frequently invokes human trafficking , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of trafficking victims : immigrants . ''
Among the groups ' biggest concerns is the Trump administration 's decision to cut back on `` T '' visas as part of Donald Trump 's anti-immigration initiatives .
Those visas have often been used to allow immigrant victims of trafficking to have temporary legal status while cases against their traffickers are built .
`` It ’ s going to be very difficult to access those witnesses who can tell you about serious crimes or trafficking , '' Jacinta Ma of the conservative National Immigration Forum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crackdown .
In 2019 , only 500 such visas were granted , the lowest since 2010 .
Donald Trump has often invoked lurid , unverified stories of people being bound up and brought across the border to justify spending billions on a southern wall between the United States and Mexico .
As the New York Times noted in February last year , while there have been isolated instances of this , Trump 's claims are mostly exaggerated .
While she has spoken and written about the problem of human trafficking on multiple occasions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ herself from her father 's anti-immigrant stances while serving in his White House .
Asked about the policy of separating children from their families , she told CBS in December the issue is `` not part of my portfolio . ''
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Anti-human trafficking groups are boycotting an event on the issue this week that is being hosted by Ivanka Trump, citing the Trump administration’s harsh policies against immigrants, who are often the victims of trafficking.
Along with Vice President Mike Pence, Ivanka Trump plans to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act which was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
Martina Vandenberg, founder of the Human Trafficking Legal Center, told the Washington Post that the event has created “a chasm between rhetoric and reality” and noted that “this administration is undermining protections carefully built for trafficking victims over two decades.”
“I don’t think any of us have the desire to be a part of a photo op,” Vandenberg added.
Polaris, the organization that runs the national human trafficking hotline, along with the largest anti-trafficking coalition, Freedom Network USA, will not attend the event. At least eight groups have turned down invitations so far.
According to the Post, the groups argue that “although the president frequently invokes human trafficking, his administration is actively endangering a significant portion of trafficking victims: immigrants.”
Among the groups’ biggest concerns is the Trump administration’s decision to cut back on “T” visas as part of Donald Trump’s anti-immigration initiatives. Those visas have often been used to allow immigrant victims of trafficking to have temporary legal status while cases against their traffickers are built.
“It’s going to be very difficult to access those witnesses who can tell you about serious crimes or trafficking,” Jacinta Ma of the conservative National Immigration Forum told Bloomberg last year of the visa crackdown.
In 2019, only 500 such visas were granted, the lowest since 2010.
Donald Trump has often invoked lurid, unverified stories of people being bound up and brought across the border to justify spending billions on a southern wall between the United States and Mexico. As the New York Times noted in February last year, while there have been isolated instances of this, Trump’s claims are mostly exaggerated.
While she has spoken and written about the problem of human trafficking on multiple occasions, Ivanka Trump has tried to distance herself from her father’s anti-immigrant stances while serving in his White House.
Asked about the policy of separating children from their families, she told CBS in December the issue is “not part of my portfolio.”
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--Trump lawyer: Trump can break the law since his reelection is 'in the public interest'

Donald Trump 's defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz raised eyebrows on Wednesday when he argued that Trump has free reign to cheat in an election if he believes his victory would be in the best interest of the American people .
`` If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest , that can not be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment , '' Dershowitz said on the Senate floor , during the question-and-answer period of the impeachment trial against Trump .
Dershowitz 's argument got immediate pushback by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a House impeachment manager , who has been arguing that Trump has to be removed from office because his cheating cuts at the very heart of the Constitutional right to free and fair elections .
`` Bear in mind that efforts to cheat in an election are always going to be in proximity to an election , '' Schiff said .
`` So if you say you ca n't hold a president accountable in an election year , where they 're trying to cheat in an election , then you are giving them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Dershowitz 's argument means that former President Richard Nixon could 've made the same argument against his impeachment and removal from office for covering up the break-in of the Democratic National Committee office .
`` Using Dershowitz 's logic , could n't Nixon have justified that both the break-in and the cover-up of Watergate ( which were both purely for his political interest ) as 'in the national interest , ' and therefore not impeachable ? ''
Mo Elleithee , a former DNC official who now teaches at Georgetown University , tweeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Independent Foundation .

Donald Trump’s defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz raised eyebrows on Wednesday when he argued that Trump has free reign to cheat in an election if he believes his victory would be in the best interest of the American people.
“If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment,” Dershowitz said on the Senate floor, during the question-and-answer period of the impeachment trial against Trump.
Dershowitz’s argument got immediate pushback by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a House impeachment manager, who has been arguing that Trump has to be removed from office because his cheating cuts at the very heart of the Constitutional right to free and fair elections.
“Bear in mind that efforts to cheat in an election are always going to be in proximity to an election,” Schiff said. “So if you say you can’t hold a president accountable in an election year, where they’re trying to cheat in an election, then you are giving them carte blanche.”
Others pointed out that Dershowitz’s argument means that former President Richard Nixon could’ve made the same argument against his impeachment and removal from office for covering up the break-in of the Democratic National Committee office.
“Using Dershowitz’s logic, couldn’t Nixon have justified that both the break-in and the cover-up of Watergate (which were both purely for his political interest) as ‘in the national interest,’ and therefore not impeachable?” Mo Elleithee, a former DNC official who now teaches at Georgetown University, tweeted.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--White House claims Bolton's book is classified after Trump said it's fake

The White House is attempting to block former national security adviser John Bolton 's book from publication , claiming it contains `` significant amounts of classified information , '' some of which is `` at the top secret level , '' even as Donald Trump himself insists the book is fake .
The White House made the claim in a letter to Bolton 's lawyer , Charles Cooper , saying that , `` under federal law and the nondisclosure agreements your client signed as a condition for gaining access to classified information , the manuscript may not be published or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ classified information . ''
It 's unclear what information in the book — which makes explosive allegations against Trump — the White House deems classified .
Cooper initially submitted the manuscript for review out of courtesy to the White House , saying that he and Bolton were sure there is no classified information in the book but wanted to let the National Security Council review it anyway .
`` Ambassador Bolton has carefully sought to avoid any discussion in the manuscript of sensitive compartmented information ( 'SCI ' ) or other classified information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that prepublication review is required , '' Cooper wrote in a letter to the NSC on Dec. 30 .
`` We are nonetheless submitting this manuscript out of an abundance of caution . ''
The claim that Bolton 's book contains classified information also comes after Trump himself deemed Bolton 's book fake altogether .
`` I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats , including the Bidens , '' Trump tweeted on Monday .
`` In fact , he never complained about this at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If John Bolton said this , it was only to sell a book . ''
Trump also retweeted several posts from right-wing figures declaring the allegations in Bolton 's book were supposedly manufactured .
Bolton 's book has upended the impeachment trial against Trump , increasing calls for Bolton to testify about his knowledge of Trump 's dealings with Ukraine .
Those dealings with Ukraine are at the very heart of the impeachment charges Trump faces .
The book specifically alleges that Trump told Bolton he wanted to withhold critical aid to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigations into his political rivals , including former Vice President Joe Biden .
Trump has repeatedly claimed those demands were warranted and based on his desire to root out corruption in Ukraine .
Republicans are trying to ensure that Bolton 's testimony is blocked from inclusion in the trial .
Democrats would need four GOP senators to vote with them to compel Bolton 's testimony .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

The White House is attempting to block former national security adviser John Bolton’s book from publication, claiming it contains “significant amounts of classified information,” some of which is “at the top secret level,” even as Donald Trump himself insists the book is fake.
The White House made the claim in a letter to Bolton’s lawyer, Charles Cooper, saying that, “under federal law and the nondisclosure agreements your client signed as a condition for gaining access to classified information, the manuscript may not be published or otherwise disclosed without the deletion of this classified information.”
It’s unclear what information in the book — which makes explosive allegations against Trump — the White House deems classified.
Cooper initially submitted the manuscript for review out of courtesy to the White House, saying that he and Bolton were sure there is no classified information in the book but wanted to let the National Security Council review it anyway.
“Ambassador Bolton has carefully sought to avoid any discussion in the manuscript of sensitive compartmented information (‘SCI’) or other classified information, and we accordingly do not believe that prepublication review is required,” Cooper wrote in a letter to the NSC on Dec. 30. “We are nonetheless submitting this manuscript out of an abundance of caution.”
The claim that Bolton’s book contains classified information also comes after Trump himself deemed Bolton’s book fake altogether.
“I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens,” Trump tweeted on Monday. “In fact, he never complained about this at the time of his very public termination. If John Bolton said this, it was only to sell a book.”
Trump also retweeted several posts from right-wing figures declaring the allegations in Bolton’s book were supposedly manufactured.
Bolton’s book has upended the impeachment trial against Trump, increasing calls for Bolton to testify about his knowledge of Trump’s dealings with Ukraine. Those dealings with Ukraine are at the very heart of the impeachment charges Trump faces.
The book specifically alleges that Trump told Bolton he wanted to withhold critical aid to Ukraine to force the country to open investigations into his political rivals, including former Vice President Joe Biden. Trump has repeatedly claimed those demands were warranted and based on his desire to root out corruption in Ukraine.
Republicans are trying to ensure that Bolton’s testimony is blocked from inclusion in the trial.
Democrats would need four GOP senators to vote with them to compel Bolton’s testimony.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--Majority of Americans want Senate to call witnesses at Trump's trial

Americans across the country want the Senate to call witnesses as a part of Donald Trump 's impeachment trial , according to a slew of national polls on the topic .
Despite the popularity of the idea , Republican senators are still largely opposed to calling any witnesses at all .
Since Jan. 13 , at least eight national polls have shown majority support for witnesses in the trial , ranging from 55 % to 75 % : Many Democrats are in favor of calling witnesses , especially in light of new evidence that has emerged since the House impeached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a close associate of Rudy Giuliani , gave a mid-January interview to MSNBC 's Rachel Maddow , during which he outlined Trump 's knowledge of a plot to pressure the Ukrainian government to open a politically motivated investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden .
`` President Trump knew exactly what was going on , '' Parnas told Maddow , adding Trump `` was aware of all my movements . ''
In late January , snippets from a forthcoming book by John Bolton , Trump 's former national security adviser , revealed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was withholding critical military aid to Ukraine until its government assisted with politically motivated investigations .
At the start of the Senate impeachment trial , Republicans voted 11 times against subpoenaing witnesses and documents in the trial .
After Tuesday 's conclusion of opening remarks from both the House managers arguing for Trump 's removal and Trump 's defense team , Republican senators met to discuss the possibility of calling witnesses .
According to the Wall Street Journal , several vulnerable Republicans facing tough 2020 reelection races urged their colleagues to block witnesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R-CO ) was reportedly concerned that a longer impeachment trial would be politically disadvantageous for his race .
On Wednesday , Gardner announced he will not support efforts to call new witnesses .
The next phase of the trial will center on questions by senators for the House managers and Trump 's defense team .
The Senate is expected to vote on the issue of witnesses later this week .
On Tuesday night , the Washington Post reported that Majority Leader Mitch McConnell does not yet have the 51 votes he needs to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans — Sens .
Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah — have publicly indicated a willingness to vote in favor of witnesses .
Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate , meaning at least four Republicans would need to join all Democrats in order for witnesses to be called .
If there are no witnesses , it would be the first Senate impeachment trial in U.S. history without them .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Americans across the country want the Senate to call witnesses as a part of Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, according to a slew of national polls on the topic. Despite the popularity of the idea, Republican senators are still largely opposed to calling any witnesses at all.
Since Jan. 13, at least eight national polls have shown majority support for witnesses in the trial, ranging from 55% to 75%:
Many Democrats are in favor of calling witnesses, especially in light of new evidence that has emerged since the House impeached Trump in late December.
Lev Parnas, a close associate of Rudy Giuliani, gave a mid-January interview to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, during which he outlined Trump’s knowledge of a plot to pressure the Ukrainian government to open a politically motivated investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden.
“President Trump knew exactly what was going on,” Parnas told Maddow, adding Trump “was aware of all my movements.”
In late January, snippets from a forthcoming book by John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, revealed that Trump himself told Bolton that he was withholding critical military aid to Ukraine until its government assisted with politically motivated investigations.
At the start of the Senate impeachment trial, Republicans voted 11 times against subpoenaing witnesses and documents in the trial.
After Tuesday’s conclusion of opening remarks from both the House managers arguing for Trump’s removal and Trump’s defense team, Republican senators met to discuss the possibility of calling witnesses.
According to the Wall Street Journal, several vulnerable Republicans facing tough 2020 reelection races urged their colleagues to block witnesses from testifying. Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) was reportedly concerned that a longer impeachment trial would be politically disadvantageous for his race.
On Wednesday, Gardner announced he will not support efforts to call new witnesses.
The next phase of the trial will center on questions by senators for the House managers and Trump’s defense team. The Senate is expected to vote on the issue of witnesses later this week.
On Tuesday night, the Washington Post reported that Majority Leader Mitch McConnell does not yet have the 51 votes he needs to block any witnesses from testifying. Two Republicans — Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah — have publicly indicated a willingness to vote in favor of witnesses.
Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, meaning at least four Republicans would need to join all Democrats in order for witnesses to be called.
If there are no witnesses, it would be the first Senate impeachment trial in U.S. history without them.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--US expands military presence at Saudi base as tension with Iran festers

Across the vast expanse of this desert airbase , hundreds of tents have popped up and a newly arrived squadron of U.S. Air Force F-15E fighters is lined up on the tarmac , flying daily missions over Iraq and Syria .
Off in the distance , two American Patriot missile batteries are scanning the skies , prepared to knock down any Iranian attack against the Saudi kingdom .
The U.S. troop presence here has grown to roughly 2,500 since last summer , when the United States announced it had begun deploying forces to what once was a major U.S. military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Prince Sultan Air Base is one of the more dramatic signs of America 's decision to beef up troops in the Middle East in response to threats from Iran .
On Wednesday , the top U , S .
commander in the Middle East spent a few hours meeting with his commanders and troops here , assessing what he called a `` sweet spot '' of U.S. force projection in the region .
Prince Sultan Air Base , said Marine Gen. Frank McKenzie , presents a complicated target for Iran to hit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ troops , fighter jets and other assets .
It also provides greater security for Saudi Arabia , which asked for U.S. help in the wake of an Iranian drone and missile attack on oil facilities in the kingdom last September .
Right now , the large white tents that flap in the stiff winds give a temporary feel to the mission .
But according to Air Force Col. Jason King , vice commander of the 378th Air Expeditionary Wing here , there is `` prudent planning '' underway that could lead to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more permanent structures .
Saudi Arabia is a decadeslong American ally , a relationship initially built on America 's dependence on Middle East oil .
The military connection has been strong , even during periods of stress in the broader relationship , including in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 , 2001 , attacks in which most of the hijackers were Saudis .
The kingdom also has been harshly criticized in Congress for the 2018 killing of Saudi dissident and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi and for its role in errant airstrikes in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civilians .
McKenzie is careful when asked how long the U.S. will stay .
`` I think this is an important part of our architecture right now and we will continue to evaluate that as we go forward , '' he said .
`` It 's a well defended place and we can put a lot of combat power here . ''
The base 's future , he told reporters traveling with him , is part of a discussion with Defense Secretary Mark Esper about how many forces are needed in the region @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the backdrop of Donald Trump 's push to get U.S. forces out of the Middle East and end what he calls America 's `` endless wars . ''
Speaking to troops inside one of the large tents , McKenzie acknowledged the less-than-ideal living conditions .
But he said their presence sends a signal to Iran that the U.S. is serious , and it also gives him more options for any military action in the region .
The base is a vivid representation of the struggle to balance the escalating threats in the Middle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. military shift more of its focus to Asia and the risks from China and Russia .
U.S. tensions with Iran have been roiling for months but spiked after the U.S. carried out a drone strike in Iraq that killed Qassem Soleimani , Iran 's top general .
In response , Iran on Jan. 8 fired as many as two dozen ballistic missiles at two Iraqi bases where U.S. troops were stationed .
The U.S. had no Patriot defenses at those bases because it judged other locations , in Saudi Arabia and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more likely Iranian targets .
U.S. officials contend that both sides do not seek war and have moved to de-escalate , but threats from Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria still pose a worrisome threat .
Wednesday 's stop at Prince Sultan Air Base was the second time in a week that McKenzie has visited a military site in the Middle East where the U.S. recently set up Patriot batteries to protect against missiles fired by Iran and Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Iraq .
Reporters accompanied McKenzie to the first site on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for security reasons .
Any possible future conflict with Iran , McKenzie said , `` is not going to be a ground maneuver war , it 's going to be a war of fires , it 's going to be a war of ballistic missiles , a war of unmanned aerial systems and cruise missiles .
So the ability of nations in the region to provide for their air defense is going to be important . ''
It was a little more than a year ago when then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis pulled four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Kuwait .
It was all part of the Pentagon 's new national defense strategy that pointed to China and Russia as key adversaries and the top priorities for the future .
But the rapidly escalating threat from Iran — which includes attacks against tankers and other commercial ships in the Gulf region as well as the strikes against Saudi facilities and U.S. troops — has forced the U.S. to reverse those moves and send even more of the high-tech systems to the region .
In addition to the Patriots , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ missile defense system , which complements the Patriots by providing a defense against ballistic missiles traveling outside the Earth 's atmosphere .
According to Army Lt. Col. Tom Noble , there are four Patriot batteries in Saudi Arabia , including the two at Prince Sultan Air Base .
Noble , the commander of the Air Defense Artillery Battalion , said each battery has from six to nine truck-based missile launchers that routinely scour the air for threats .

Across the vast expanse of this desert airbase, hundreds of tents have popped up and a newly arrived squadron of U.S. Air Force F-15E fighters is lined up on the tarmac, flying daily missions over Iraq and Syria. Off in the distance, two American Patriot missile batteries are scanning the skies, prepared to knock down any Iranian attack against the Saudi kingdom.
The U.S. troop presence here has grown to roughly 2,500 since last summer, when the United States announced it had begun deploying forces to what once was a major U.S. military hub. The return of U.S. forces to Prince Sultan Air Base is one of the more dramatic signs of America’s decision to beef up troops in the Middle East in response to threats from Iran.
On Wednesday, the top U,S. commander in the Middle East spent a few hours meeting with his commanders and troops here, assessing what he called a “sweet spot” of U.S. force projection in the region.
Prince Sultan Air Base, said Marine Gen. Frank McKenzie, presents a complicated target for Iran to hit and provides a remote location for U.S. troops, fighter jets and other assets. It also provides greater security for Saudi Arabia, which asked for U.S. help in the wake of an Iranian drone and missile attack on oil facilities in the kingdom last September.
Right now, the large white tents that flap in the stiff winds give a temporary feel to the mission. But according to Air Force Col. Jason King, vice commander of the 378th Air Expeditionary Wing here, there is “prudent planning” underway that could lead to the tents being replaced with trailers and other more permanent structures.
Saudi Arabia is a decadeslong American ally, a relationship initially built on America’s dependence on Middle East oil. The military connection has been strong, even during periods of stress in the broader relationship, including in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in which most of the hijackers were Saudis. The kingdom also has been harshly criticized in Congress for the 2018 killing of Saudi dissident and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi and for its role in errant airstrikes in Yemen that have killed or injured many civilians.
McKenzie is careful when asked how long the U.S. will stay.
“I think this is an important part of our architecture right now and we will continue to evaluate that as we go forward,” he said. “It’s a well defended place and we can put a lot of combat power here.”
The base’s future, he told reporters traveling with him, is part of a discussion with Defense Secretary Mark Esper about how many forces are needed in the region. That calculation is being made against the backdrop of Donald Trump’s push to get U.S. forces out of the Middle East and end what he calls America’s “endless wars.”
Speaking to troops inside one of the large tents, McKenzie acknowledged the less-than-ideal living conditions. But he said their presence sends a signal to Iran that the U.S. is serious, and it also gives him more options for any military action in the region.
The base is a vivid representation of the struggle to balance the escalating threats in the Middle East against the Pentagon’s insistence that the U.S. military shift more of its focus to Asia and the risks from China and Russia.
U.S. tensions with Iran have been roiling for months but spiked after the U.S. carried out a drone strike in Iraq that killed Qassem Soleimani, Iran’s top general. In response, Iran on Jan. 8 fired as many as two dozen ballistic missiles at two Iraqi bases where U.S. troops were stationed. The U.S. had no Patriot defenses at those bases because it judged other locations, in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the Gulf, to be more likely Iranian targets.
U.S. officials contend that both sides do not seek war and have moved to de-escalate, but threats from Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria still pose a worrisome threat.
Wednesday’s stop at Prince Sultan Air Base was the second time in a week that McKenzie has visited a military site in the Middle East where the U.S. recently set up Patriot batteries to protect against missiles fired by Iran and Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Iraq. Reporters accompanied McKenzie to the first site on the condition they not disclose its location for security reasons.
Any possible future conflict with Iran, McKenzie said, “is not going to be a ground maneuver war, it’s going to be a war of fires, it’s going to be a war of ballistic missiles, a war of unmanned aerial systems and cruise missiles. So the ability of nations in the region to provide for their air defense is going to be important.”
It was a little more than a year ago when then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis pulled four Patriot batteries out of Jordan, Bahrain, and Kuwait. It was all part of the Pentagon’s new national defense strategy that pointed to China and Russia as key adversaries and the top priorities for the future.
But the rapidly escalating threat from Iran — which includes attacks against tankers and other commercial ships in the Gulf region as well as the strikes against Saudi facilities and U.S. troops — has forced the U.S. to reverse those moves and send even more of the high-tech systems to the region. In addition to the Patriots, the U.S. has also sent a THAAD anti-ballistic missile defense system, which complements the Patriots by providing a defense against ballistic missiles traveling outside the Earth’s atmosphere.
According to Army Lt. Col. Tom Noble, there are four Patriot batteries in Saudi Arabia, including the two at Prince Sultan Air Base. Noble, the commander of the Air Defense Artillery Battalion, said each battery has from six to nine truck-based missile launchers that routinely scour the air for threats.


shareblue--2020-01-29--Lindsey Graham changes his mind about 'disturbing' evidence in Trump trial

Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-SC ) said Wednesday that he would oppose hearing testimony from fact witnesses in Donald Trump 's impeachment trial despite glaring new evidence of a quid pro quo with Ukraine — a notable shift in sentiment from his comments on the matter last October .
His comments come amid rising scrutiny over new allegations outlined in former nation security adviser John Bolton 's forthcoming book , `` The Room Where It Happened . ''
In that book , Bolton claims Trump informed him he wanted to continue withholding critical aid to Ukraine until the country announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter — a clear quid pro quo , which Trump has long denied .
`` For the sake of argument , '' Graham said in a statement Wednesday , `` one could assume everything attributable to John Bolton is accurate and still the House case would fall well below the standards to remove a president from office . ''
Graham claimed that Trump was justified in demanding investigations into the Bidens , as `` there is ample evidence for the President to be concerned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hunter Biden and that Vice President Joe Biden 's failure to take appropriate action was unacceptable . ''
That statement contradicts Graham 's past comments on the issue .
The South Carolina Republican — who once called Trump a `` jackass '' — has become one of Trump 's most vocal defenders over the past few years .
But in October he was asked by Axios whether anything could make him change his mind and back Trump 's removal from office .
`` Sure , '' he told the outlet .
`` I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a crime .
If you could show me that , you know , Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo , outside the phone call , that would be very disturbing . ''
Trump has maintained his demand that Ukraine investigate Biden was above board and that he did nothing improper , repeatedly stating that there was `` no quid pro quo '' and telling Americans to `` read the transcript '' of his call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy from July last year .
During that call , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigate Biden , before the two discussed a potential White House meeting , which to date has not happened .
Multiple officials have since testified under oath that the quid pro quo arrangement existed and that the coveted White House meeting and aid both hinged on Ukraine 's willingness to open the investigations Trump requested .
Graham 's repeated flip-flops have haunted him throughout the Trump impeachment saga .
During Bill Clinton 's impeachment trial in 1999 , then-Rep. Graham served as a House impeachment manager and took positions counter to his views @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argued that not having witnesses at Clinton 's trial would set a terrible precedent .
`` The whole point that we 're trying to make is that in every trial that there 's ever been in the Senate , regarding impeachment , witnesses were called , '' he said .
`` There may be some conflict that has to be resolved by presenting live witnesses , '' Graham explained back then .
`` That 's what happens every day in court and I think the Senate can stand that . ''
Published with @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Wednesday that he would oppose hearing testimony from fact witnesses in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial despite glaring new evidence of a quid pro quo with Ukraine — a notable shift in sentiment from his comments on the matter last October.
His comments come amid rising scrutiny over new allegations outlined in former nation security adviser John Bolton’s forthcoming book, “The Room Where It Happened.” In that book, Bolton claims Trump informed him he wanted to continue withholding critical aid to Ukraine until the country announced investigations into Trump’s political rivals, including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter — a clear quid pro quo, which Trump has long denied.
“For the sake of argument,” Graham said in a statement Wednesday, “one could assume everything attributable to John Bolton is accurate and still the House case would fall well below the standards to remove a president from office.”
Graham claimed that Trump was justified in demanding investigations into the Bidens, as “there is ample evidence for the President to be concerned about conflicts of interest on behalf of Hunter Biden and that Vice President Joe Biden’s failure to take appropriate action was unacceptable.”
That statement contradicts Graham’s past comments on the issue.
The South Carolina Republican — who once called Trump a “jackass” — has become one of Trump’s most vocal defenders over the past few years. But in October he was asked by Axios whether anything could make him change his mind and back Trump’s removal from office.
“Sure,” he told the outlet. “I mean …show me something that … is a crime. If you could show me that, you know, Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo, outside the phone call, that would be very disturbing.”
Trump has maintained his demand that Ukraine investigate Biden was above board and that he did nothing improper, repeatedly stating that there was “no quid pro quo” and telling Americans to “read the transcript” of his call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy from July last year. During that call, Trump asked Zelenskiy for a favor, to investigate Biden, before the two discussed a potential White House meeting, which to date has not happened.
Multiple officials have since testified under oath that the quid pro quo arrangement existed and that the coveted White House meeting and aid both hinged on Ukraine’s willingness to open the investigations Trump requested.
Graham’s repeated flip-flops have haunted him throughout the Trump impeachment saga.
During Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial in 1999, then-Rep. Graham served as a House impeachment manager and took positions counter to his views today.
At that time, he argued that not having witnesses at Clinton’s trial would set a terrible precedent. “The whole point that we’re trying to make is that in every trial that there’s ever been in the Senate, regarding impeachment, witnesses were called,” he said.
“There may be some conflict that has to be resolved by presenting live witnesses,” Graham explained back then. “That’s what happens every day in court and I think the Senate can stand that.”
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-01-29--Pro-Trump group uses cash to try to win black voters

A tax-exempt `` charitable '' group run by a close Trump ally is reportedly hosting pro-Trump events that aim to win over black voters with cash raffles .
According to a report in Politico on Wednesday , the events are being hosted by the Urban Revitalization Coalition , a 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) `` charitable organization '' run by Darrell Scott , co-chair of Black Voices for Trump .
At the gatherings , attendees hear pro-Trump messages , and envelopes stuffed with hundreds of dollars in cash are raffled off .
The Urban Revitalization Coalition 's December @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advertised as having a `` $ 25,000 cash giveaway '' and featured one of Trump 's few black staffers .
The money was distributed to some of the attendees , mostly in $ 300 to $ 500 bundles .
Scott refused to tell Politico where the money came from ; the Trump campaign denied any involvement .
A tax law expert told Politico this scheme could run afoul of tax law if the group does not first determine whether the recipients are actually needy .
`` It 's not immediately clear to me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at an event is a charitable act , '' a former Internal Revenue Service official said .
But while this group is seemingly attempting to win support for Trump by giving small cash prizes to a few black voters , his administration has spent the past three years working against their broader interests .
Trump has repeatedly tried to repeal and sabotage the Affordable Care Act , commonly known as Obamacare , even after a 2017 study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that under the law the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than a third .
Under Secretary Ben Carson , the Department of Housing and Urban Development has worked to eliminate housing rules that ensure communities address racial segregation .
And under then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions , the Justice Department greatly limited the use of consent decrees where police departments with a history of civil rights violations agreed to change their behavior .
The Trump administration has also worked to make it harder for black citizens to vote , backing voter suppression efforts while pushing a false narrative of widespread voter fraud to justify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neo-Nazis and white supremacists in Charlottesville , Virginia in 2017 , Trump praised the racists as `` very fine people . ''
He has repeatedly attacked prominent lawmakers of color , including Rep. Maxine Waters ( D-CA ) , Rep. Frederica Wilson ( D-FL ) , and members of `` the squad , '' including Rep. Ilhan Omar ( D-MN ) and Rep. Ayanna Pressley ( D-MA ) .
He mocked African nations as `` shithole countries . ''
A recent poll found that over 80 % of African Americans say Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the United States .
While Trump has often bragged that African American unemployment is at a historic low , the same poll found only 1 in 5 of the black adults surveyed believe Trump deserves credit for that .
Ironically , Trump and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney have complained that their Democratic opponents win by giving `` free stuff '' to minority groups in order to win votes via government social programs .
Back in 2017 , Trump reportedly tried to buy affection from another prominent black American .
Rapper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ television interview that Trump had offered him $ 500,000 just to attend his inauguration .
He said he rejected the offer because `` All money is not good money . ''
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

A tax-exempt “charitable” group run by a close Trump ally is reportedly hosting pro-Trump events that aim to win over black voters with cash raffles.
According to a report in Politico on Wednesday, the events are being hosted by the Urban Revitalization Coalition, a 501(c)(3) “charitable organization” run by Darrell Scott, co-chair of Black Voices for Trump. At the gatherings, attendees hear pro-Trump messages, and envelopes stuffed with hundreds of dollars in cash are raffled off.
The Urban Revitalization Coalition’s December “Christmas Extravaganza” in Cleveland was advertised as having a “$25,000 cash giveaway” and featured one of Trump’s few black staffers. The money was distributed to some of the attendees, mostly in $300 to $500 bundles.
Scott refused to tell Politico where the money came from; the Trump campaign denied any involvement.
A tax law expert told Politico this scheme could run afoul of tax law if the group does not first determine whether the recipients are actually needy. “It’s not immediately clear to me how simply giving money away to people at an event is a charitable act,” a former Internal Revenue Service official said.
But while this group is seemingly attempting to win support for Trump by giving small cash prizes to a few black voters, his administration has spent the past three years working against their broader interests.
Trump has repeatedly tried to repeal and sabotage the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, even after a 2017 study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that under the law the number of uninsured African Americans had dropped by more than a third.
Under Secretary Ben Carson, the Department of Housing and Urban Development has worked to eliminate housing rules that ensure communities address racial segregation.
And under then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the Justice Department greatly limited the use of consent decrees where police departments with a history of civil rights violations agreed to change their behavior.
The Trump administration has also worked to make it harder for black citizens to vote, backing voter suppression efforts while pushing a false narrative of widespread voter fraud to justify them.
After a deadly march by neo-Nazis and white supremacists in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017, Trump praised the racists as “very fine people.” He has repeatedly attacked prominent lawmakers of color, including Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-FL), and members of “the squad,” including Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA). He mocked African nations as “shithole countries.”
A recent poll found that over 80% of African Americans say Trump is a racist and has made racism worse in the United States.
While Trump has often bragged that African American unemployment is at a historic low, the same poll found only 1 in 5 of the black adults surveyed believe Trump deserves credit for that.
Ironically, Trump and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney have complained that their Democratic opponents win by giving “free stuff” to minority groups in order to win votes via government social programs.
Back in 2017, Trump reportedly tried to buy affection from another prominent black American. Rapper 50 Cent said last year in a television interview that Trump had offered him $500,000 just to attend his inauguration. He said he rejected the offer because “All money is not good money.”
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.