Tag: trump investigations
GOP 'Whataboutism' Won't Save Trump If He Faces Federal Indictment

GOP 'Whataboutism' Won't Save Trump If He Faces Federal Indictment

Temporarily anyway, Donald J. Trump resembles the Br’er Rabbit of the Joel Chandler Harris tales, flung into the briar patch by the FBI search of his Mar-a-Lago country club. Not only has the former president gotten to star in his favorite role as heroic martyr by loudly denouncing the Justice Department’s seizure of stolen documents, but he's reduced his Republican rivals for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination to bit players.

Meanwhile, the grift goes on. Yesterday, I received two solicitations, one for “Official Donald J. Trump Fine Point Markers” just like those the great man used in the White House. Only $18. The second offered an “Official 2022 ULTRA MAGA MEMBER” decal for $45. I haven’t been so excited since receiving my very own glow-in-the-dark Flash Gordon magic decoder ring when I was eight.

MAGA cultists, of course, will buy anything. Trump’s reported to be pulling in a cool million bucks a day on this junk, not to mention the cash pouring into his legal defense fund. That’s the main reason he keeps hinting at declaring his candidacy but never crossing the line. Because the minute he does, campaign finance laws prevent him putting the cash in his pocket.

The estimable blogger Digby Parton thinks this is good news for the Biden administration. “Trump is the gift that keeps on giving—for Democrats” she writes. “[T}he drumbeat of Trump, Trump, Trump, has turned the midterm election from a standard referendum on the president to a choice between the undisputed leader of the Republican Party and the leader of the Democratic Party. And while it’s true that Biden’s popularity numbers are low, Trump’s are even worse.”

Exactly what the former president had in mind hoarding Top Secret documents is impossible to say. According to the New York Times, boxes seized during the Mar-a-Lago search “related to some of the most highly classified programs run by the United States.” The Washington Post describes papers “relating to nuclear weapons,” while the Wall Street Journal reported that “information about the ‘President of France” was listed on the FBI’s three-page receipt of items confiscated at Trump’s country club hide-away.

“Sacre bleu!”

But unless you believe Trump’s mutually contradictory alibis—the FBI planted the evidence, the president declassified it with his own magic decoder ring, Hillary Clinton got away with much worse, etc.—the Big Man would appear to have some explaining to do.

For Trump’s sake, it had better not take place in a federal courtroom, given the poor quality of lawyers he’s hired. (That’s what happens when you get a reputation as a deadbeat client.) Anyway, the time to petition for a Special Master to monitor the DOJ’s examination of the evidence was two weeks ago. It's just a stalling tactic now.

As for Trump’s magnanimous offer to help Attorney General Merrick Garland calm public anger after two weeks of yelling about the government’s “Gestapo” tactics, that’s particularly rich.

You do know, don’t you, that Kenneth Starr had the White House living quarters searched for Rose Law Firm billing records? Including Hillary and Chelsea’s underwear drawers. Also, when the records eventually turned up where an aide had misplaced them, they showed exactly what Hillary said they would.

As for the 30,000 “missing” emails Trump urged the Russians to find (knowing perfectly well, thanks to Wikileaks, that the Kremlin had already stolen them), they turned out to contain, according to FBI director James Comey, exactly eight containing “Top Secret” information.

Seven talked about CIA drone strikes that had already been in the newspapers. The eighth was about the secretary of state’s conversation with the president of Malawi.

And that’s why even the grandstanding Comey couldn’t find anything to charge her with.

Under what I used to call the “Clinton Rules,” however, reporters would skip over Hillary’s exoneration, scold her for acting suspicious, and move on to the next accusation.

Meanwhile, even ostensibly respectable Republicans are employing classic “whataboutism” to rewrite history in Trump’s favor. Writing in the New York Times,National Review editor Rich Lowry asks what if George W. Bush’s Justice Department had ordered Al Gore’s office searched? Would Democrats have said “Let’s wait, and see?”

Who knows? It never happened.

More tellingly, Lowry parrots Trump’s characterization of the “Russia investigation” as a “national fiasco that brought discredit on the F.B.I. and everyone who participated in it. The probe prominently featured a transparently ridiculous dossier generated by the Clinton campaign.”

This is simply false. Robert Mueller’s probe documented more than 70 meetings between Trump staffers and Kremlin operatives, including, let us recall, a sit down in Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer promising “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”

It had almost nothing to do with the infamous “dodgy dossier.”

Trump hasn’t been charged with any crimes. But if that happens, it will be in a real courtroom, with real evidence.

Appeals Court Rules Trump Must Testify In New York Probe

Appeals Court Rules Trump Must Testify In New York Probe

By Jan Wolfe

(Reuters) -Former President Donald Trump must testify under oath in the New York state attorney general’s civil investigation into his business practices, an intermediate state appeals court ruled on Thursday.

A four-judge panel unanimously upheld a trial court decision from February enforcing subpoenas for Trump and his two eldest children, Donald Trump, Jr. and Ivanka Trump, to provide deposition testimony in Attorney General Letitia James’ investigation.

"Once again, the courts have ruled that Donald Trump must comply with our lawful investigation into his financial dealings," James said in a statement. "We will continue to follow the facts of this case and ensure that no one can evade the law."

Alan Futerfas, a lawyer for Trump, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In January, James said her nearly three-year investigation into the Trump Organization had uncovered significant evidence of possible fraud.

She described what she called misleading statements about the values of the Trump brand and six properties, saying the company may have inflated real estate values to obtain bank loans and reduced them to lower tax bills.

Trump issued a statement earlier this year calling the accusations false and accusing James of a political agenda in targeting him and his family.

Trump and his children have said testifying would violate their constitutional rights because their words could be used in a related criminal probe led by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, which James joined last May.

Trump, a Republican, has also accused James of selectively prosecuting him because he is a political enemy. James and Bragg are Democrats.

The appeals court rejected those arguments, saying James reviewed "significant volumes of evidence" before issuing the subpoenas.

"Appellants have not identified any similarly implicated corporation that was not investigated or any executives of such a corporation who were not deposed," the court said of the Trumps. "Therefore, appellants have failed to demonstrate that they were treated differently from any similarly situated persons."

(Reporting by Jan Wolfe; additional reporting by Luc Cohen; editing by Noeleen Walder, Diane Craft, and Bill Berkrot)

Now Focus Of Criminal Probes, Trump's Money Man Said He Leaves 'Legal Side' To Others

Now Focus Of Criminal Probes, Trump's Money Man Said He Leaves 'Legal Side' To Others

NEW YORK — Allen Weisselberg, the financial sentry at the Trump Organization now in the crosshairs of prosecutors diving into Donald Trump’s business dealings, frankly claims he steers clear of the “legal side” of the money flow. In previously unreported deposition documents obtained by the New York Daily News, Weisselberg, who has micromanaged the organization’s finances for decades, shrugged off interest in or knowledge of the legalities of Trump’s till. “That’s not my thing,” he declared. It’s very much the thing of Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance Jr., who recently used a grand jury su...

House Oversight Panel Reissues Subpoena For Trump's Tax Records

House Oversight Panel Reissues Subpoena For Trump's Tax Records

By Jan Wolfe (Reuters) - A U.S. House of Representatives panel has reissued a subpoena seeking Donald Trump's tax and financial records, saying in a memo made public on Tuesday it needs the documents to address "conflicts of interest" by future presidents. In a court filing on Tuesday, House lawyers told a judge that the House Oversight Committee reissued a subpoena to Trump's accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP, on Feb. 25. The committee issued a similar subpoena in 2019, but that subpoena expired in January when new U.S. lawmakers took office. Tuesday's court filing included a Feb. 23 memorandum...