Tag: the United States

Trump Has Had a Terrible October… The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

October has not been good to President Trump. He has implemented many policies that are ethically deficient and economically disastrous. With just a few days left in the month, here are the good, the bad and the ugly.

The Good

  • Before I dive into the long list of bad events in Trump’s October, I will mention the one (semi) positive action of his presidency: he deserves credit for brokering a ceasefire in Gaza. Nevertheless, he was premature, naïve and arrogant in labeling it as an “everlasting peace” The ceasefire has held…barely but the president does seem to be trying to follow through on his commitments. He sent the top people in his cabinet to Israel last week: Special Envoy Witkoff, VP Vance, and Secretary of State Rubio. When israel’s Knesset voted in favor of annexing parts of the West Bank, Trump said “Never”. I hope he keeps his word about the Gazans having “self-determination”. This sounds like a “2 state” solution, at best, or at the very least, a permanent international peace council that guarantees stability in Gaza. (the latest bad news is that Israel has renewed heavy bombing in Gaza.)
  • If Trump would use his “art of the deal” skills to broker a just, lasting peace in Ukraine, I might even support his Noble Peace Prize quest.

The Bad

  • George Santos was one of the most despicable members of the House of Representatives in recent history. He was elected to the House in 2022 and was sworn in as a member in January, 2023 but evidence soon surfaced regarding his lack of integrity. Santos admitted to having lied about his education and employment history, and his disclosures about his business activities, income, and personal wealth were sketchy at best. Furthermore, he had not disclosed his criminal history or the existence of lawsuits against him. Following an investigation by the House Ethics Committee and a federal indictment, the House of Representatives (including half of the Republicans) voted 311–114 to expel Santos on December 1, 2023. He pleaded guilty to wire fraud and identity theft in August 2024. He was sentenced to 87 months in prison, but had only served three months when President Trump commuted his sentence a week ago. Although presidents have the authority to pardon federal prisoners and/or commute their sentences, there was no good reason for Trump to show him leniency (except for the fact that both are frequently guilty of lying).
  • “It’s the economy, stupid.” This phrase was coined by James Carville, a strategist/advisor for Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign in 1992, but it aptly applies to the highest priority for most American voters. Trump made the economy his most important theme in the 2024 campaign. He repeatedly promised that he would “lower prices” on groceries, housing, energy, etc. Note carefully: this means an inflation rate of below zero. Last week, even during the government shutdown, the Bureau of Labor Statistics revealed that inflation rose 0.3% during the month of September for an annual rate of over 3%. This is slightly worse than the inflation rate during the last year of the Biden presidency. Nevertheless, many Americans “feel” that inflation is much worse. Coffee prices are up 20% and beef is up 15%, American voters might be more forgiving if the president at least made some effort to lower inflation instead of his obsession with tariffs (=tax increases) or bailing out Argentina (see below).
  • “Don’t cry for me Argentina.” Out of the clear blue, Trump offered the Argentina government a $20 billion “bailout” now, with a promise of another $20 billion in the near future. This has no relationship with making America great again. Rather, it seems to be due to Trump’s friendship with Argentina’s austerity president Javier Milei. This bailout has raised opposition from two of Trump’s traditional supporters: farmers and ranchers. and they are angry. Trump’s tariffs on China prompted them to stop all purchases of U.S. soybeans. Now they are buying soybeans from Argentina. The president then aggravated his supporters even more by buying tons and tons of beef from Argentina to bring down meat prices for American consumers.
  • The Federal Government shutdown is now the second longest in US history. The Democrats blame the Republicans…and vice versa. Furloughed Federal employees are working without pay. Air travel is reduced as many air traffic controllers are calling in sick. The SNAP food program runs out of funds on November 1st and 42 million recipients (children, women, retirees, and veterans) will no longer be eligible to receive food. The USDA has blocked release of contingency funds which were designed to cover shutdowns (funds already authorized by Congress). Back in 2013, businessman Trump said that a government shutdown is due to the president’s lack of leadership, because a strong leader would bring all the key players into a room and negotiate a fair deal. The American people agree with the earlier Trump and generally blame the damage caused by a federal shutdown on the person in the White House.
  • President Trump has flirted with the idea of running for a third term as president. The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution prohibits a person from being elected to the presidency a third time. Even the Speaker of the House Johnson has grown some backbone and now confirms the Constitution’s prohibition of a third presidency. Many are seeing Trump’s flirtation with a third term as covering up his fear of becoming a “lame duck” president so early into his 2nd term.
  • The national polls reveal the country’s growing discontent. Trump won the presidential election last year with slightly less than 50% of the popular vote. As he began his presidency, the polls showed he had an approval rate of about 54-58%. Those same polls now show his approval rate ranging between 37 and 42%. After his disastrous debate performance with Trump last year, former President Biden’s weak approval rate was the same as Trump’s is today.
  • This brief analysis of bad news could continue for quite a while. To keep it short, here is just an additional listing: a judge’s ruling against ICE in Chicago, the on again/of again trade/tariff talks with China, Trump is still getting played by Putin as the war in Ukraine goes way past Day One,  getting sued by 25 states over SNAP, having to shake up the leadership of ICE, the warlike strikes against boats off of Venezuela and Colombia without getting authorization from Congress.

The Ugly

  • President Trump has repeatedly declared that he would not object to the Jeffrey Epstein files being released to the public. At the same time, he has doggedly fought against their release. Through Speaker Mike Johnson, Adelita Grijalva has been blocked from being sworn into her seat in the House because her vote would force the files to be released. All of this has led to speculation that the files have some horrible “dirt” on the president. The people deserve to know the truth…even if it is ugly.
  • The Big Beautiful? Ballroom. In the midst of the shutdown when many are not receiving their paychecks and their kitchens are bare, Trump initiated the destruction of the East Wing of the People’s House in order begin construction of the White House Ballroom which would seat 999 guests. He had promised it would be adjacent to, but not touching, the East Wing. He lied. The East Wing is now totally gone. Its destruction symbolizes the more serious destruction of our democracy. Truly ugly.

Let’s hope the news gets better after Halloween.

The Mueller Report

The Mueller Report…What do we know now?

A week ago, on Thursday, April 18, Attorney General Bill Barr held a press conference about the Mueller Report. He then sent a redacted version of that report to congressional members which he also made available for public view.

Let us not be naïve. Both political sides are putting their “spin” on the Report and the analyzed events. These spins range from one extreme, “This is the best day so far in the Trump presidency” to the other extreme, “He should be impeached!” Trump himself exclaimed at first, “No collusion! No obstruction!” Nevertheless, upon becoming aware of the details of the Report that portray him in a negative light, he has claimed that the Report is full of lies.

As seekers of truth, we need to work hard to filter out the spin. This means we need to read with great care the Mueller Report for ourselves and to not accept blindly the “Cliff Notes” of secondary sources. It also means reading and listening to various points of view. I have forced myself to listen to CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and PBS, plus going on line to view additional sources.

Original purpose of the Mueller investigation

What has been overlooked by most news outlets is the conclusion that Mueller arrived at regarding the main purpose of his investigation: Did Russia interfere in our 2016 presidential election? Mueller’s answer was a resounding “Yes!” He provided pages and pages of evidence showing the multiple ways Russia tried to influence the election on behalf of Trump and against Hillary Clinton. Nevertheless, neither the White House, nor the Republicans, nor the Democrats have taken enough steps to block this type of interference in the future.

Attorney General William Barr

Every Attorney General swears to uphold the Constitution and is the highest law enforcement officer in the country.  He or she is supposed to be a neutral arbiter of justice and should be above partisan politics. The Attorney General is the attorney for the U.S. people, not the private defense attorney for the president. I believe that Attorney General Barr has lost credibility for the following reasons:

  1. Barr shared the redacted document with the White House and Trump’s lawyers prior to making it available to Congress or to the public. The Attorney General should be committed to equality and to not show favoritism.
  2. In Barr’s four-page summary letter of March 24, 2019 as well as in his press conference last Thursday morning, he distorted the Mueller Report on both the allegations of collusion and obstruction of justice, the right of Congress to evaluate the report, and the supposed eagerness of the President to cooperate with the investigation. (see below)

The Redaction of the Report

Attorney General Barr has emitted a redacted edition of the Mueller Report, not the complete version. Four kinds of information were blacked out. They are the following:

  1. Grand Jury material
  2. Classified information regarding secret intelligence content and sources
  3. Information that could interfere with other ongoing legal investigations
  4. Information that could hurt the privacy and reputation of ´peripheral third parties’

It seems reasonable to me that the first three types of information should not be revealed to the general public.  Because I am committed to the truth, I am not quite so convinced that peripheral third parties need to be protected. Nevertheless, I believe that Republican and Democrat congressional leaders have the right to see the entire non-redacted version plus the evidence that undergirds it. The reason is obvious. Attorney General Barr has lost credibility in the eyes of half of our citizens. He did not let Robert Mueller confirm the veracity of his “Summary” of last month nor the redacted version last week. I do not trust Barr to be the “gatekeeper” of what information is released. I also believe that Barr, Mueller, Don McGahn and others need to appear before Congress to answer important questions so that the truth can be made more public.

Legal Context – A President cannot be indicted but can be impeached

According to the Justice Department’s traditional position and the specific judgment of its Office of Legal Counsel, a sitting president cannot be indicted while in office. The rationale behind this is that presidents should not be distracted from fulfilling their executive responsibilities due to legal procedures against them. The options are the following:

  1. A president can be accused of a crime, but not indicted. Nevertheless, without being indicted, a president does not have a legal way to respond to the alleged crimes.
  2. A president can be indicted for crimes committed during his/her presidency, but only after leaving office.
  3. If a president’s actions reach the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors”, Congress has the responsibility to impeach a president. This is essentially the only way to remove a president from office.

In addition, Barr wrote an unsolicited letter to the Justice Department in June 2018 before he had become Attorney General. In that article he wrote that the Mueller investigation was illegal and a waste of time and taxpayer money, and that a sitting president could not commit obstruction of justice. Many people think that Trump chose Barr to be the Attorney General precisely due to these opinions. In essence, Mueller’s only course of action was to lay out the evidence and then let Congress take the next step. He clearly stated this, “We determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes.”

No Conspiracy and Cooperation between Russia and the Trump Campaign

The good news for Trump is that Mueller did not find evidence of conspiracy. The word “collusion” is not a legal term, and as a consequence, Mueller chose to hold a rather strict definition of the legal crime of “conspiracy”. Although Russia interfered in the election in support of Trump and against Hillary Clinton, and the Trump Campaign appreciated their support (ex. “We love WikiLeaks!), Mueller did not find that there was actual cooperation between the Russian government and the Campaign.

Obstruction of Justice

In his summary letter a month ago, Barr concluded (together with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein) that Trump was not guilty of obstruction of justice. This is where Barr distorted the facts. The Mueller Report clearly stated that it did not reach that conclusion. The Report reads, “If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. We are unable to reach such a judgment.” It continues, “While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” Thus, Attorney General Barr gave false information when he provided the first “spin” of the Mueller Report in his March 24th letter and then again in his press conference on April 18.

Why didn’t Mueller reach a decision regarding possible obstruction of justice? He investigated 10 episodes of alleged obstruction by the Trump campaign and administration. He then laid out the evidence both in favor and against that possible obstruction. Was the evidence so divided and balanced that Mueller could not reach a decision? No! He believed that his role was not to render a decision. He wanted the evidence to be weighed in the court of public opinion. If there would be a judgment, it would not be made by him nor by the Attorney General. The U.S. Constitution dictates that it is the Congress that should evaluate if impeachment is required for an obstruction of justice. (See comments below on Congress)

Did President Trump eagerly cooperate with the Mueller investigation?

                           During his press conference and in other moments, Barr affirmed that President Trump willingly and eagerly cooperated with the investigation. The facts do not confirm this claim. Mueller wanted to directly interview the president and so requested. Trump’s lawyers fought this request over and over again. Finally, it was agreed that Mueller would ask questions that Trump would answer in writing. (Mueller considered subpoenaing the president to an oral interview, but finally decided against doing that because the delay tactics of Trump’s lawyers would have caused the Report to have been extended by months or years.)

                           In his written answers, Trump was not very cooperative nor transparent. Over thirty times, he answered “I do not remember” or “I do not recollect”. Given that he had several days to turn in his answers, he had plenty of time to review emails, his notes, etc. to refresh his memory. (This is particularly ironic given that he has boasted over and over again that he has one of the best memories of anyone in the history of humanity.) During this past week, Trump has again refused to turn over his tax records. He has also demanded that his White House staff (both current and previous) refuse to appear before Congressional committees, even when they have been subpoenaed. It sure seems that he is trying to hide information from public view.

The Role of Congress to Evaluate the Report

Barr repeatedly affirmed that Mueller never said that the report was to be evaluated by the Congress. This goes directly against Mueller’s testimony. On repeated occasions, Mueller indicates the role of Congress to not only read his report, but if necessary, to act upon it. For example, “The conclusion that Congress may apply obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.”

The Report also states, “With respect to whether the President can be found to have obstructed justice by exercising his powers under Article II of the Constitution, we concluded that Congress has authority to prohibit a President’s corrupt use of his authority in order to protect the integrity of the administration of justice.” It is quite clear that Mueller wants Congress to evaluate his findings.

“Sincere” Beliefs?

Attorney General Barr made an unusual comment that has not received much comment by the press. He claimed that some of President Trump’s actions were based upon his “sincere” beliefs that he was being unfairly attacked. I take issue with the word “sincere”. Only God can determine the sincerity of people’s hearts. So, unless Barr has an infallible connection with God, he should be an impartial Attorney General and not vouch for the sincerity of anyone.

Where do we go from here?

The two options that are generally proposed are: (1) We should forget about the Report and move on with other challenges; or (2) Congress should begin impeachment procedures now. I disagree with the first option because the serious Russia threat needs to be addressed and because Mueller has placed the ball in Congress’ court.  I am against the second option because an impeachment procedure is painful and divisive for the entire nation and should only be entered into after thoughtful deliberations. I urge a third way. It is the responsibility of Congress to clarify remaining doubts and answer lingering questions by calling Mueller, Barr, McGahn, and others to bear witness to the truth. Let us follow that truth wherever it leads.