Four stages of James Comey grief and warning: Echo opinion

James Comey:  "Comey also slammed the president for his policies, claiming that Trump is jeopardizing the USA.

Sputnik News - This is a Russia Today news site publishing the James Comey critical opinion about Donald Trump first printed in The Washington Post.  In my opinion, the fact that Russia Today is publishing anti-Trump opinions is proof that Donald Trump cannot read; otherwise, he would never be having chatty phone calls with Vladimir Putin.  

Former FBI Director James Comey said Trump has become a “shrunken, withered figure,” and urged Americans to challenge his actions.

....“shrunken, withered figure,”- Donald Trump, described by James Comey

Sputnik News link.

James Comey vowed to devote the next year to removing Trump from power. After that, he admits he’d love to move on to something else.

“I’ve probably now had dozens — and maybe dozens isn’t enough — of encounters with uniformed military, intelligence community people and FBI people in grocery stores, in airports, in hardware stores,” Comey said. “They’ll just come up and touch my arm and say, ‘Please keep speaking. Please keep speaking.’”

The former FBI Director who led an investigation into a Hillary Clinton email server controversy in 2016 and later into allegations that Russia interfered in the 2016 Presidential election, said in an interview he can’t wait until he can finally delete his Twitter feed and move on to something else.

He admitted in the interview that while he doesn’t think he is “that important in the great sweep of American history,” he believes his firsthand insight into the president’s psyche will be beneficial to the anti-Trump movement.

The Washington Post

What it's like to be personally and publicly attacked by Donald Trump.  

Like many others in and out of government, I have some experience. I have also watched friends and former colleagues deal with vicious repeated assaults.  The attacks have interferred with their ability to find work after government service, as even employers who see through th elies fear hiring a "controbersial" person or being attacked themselves.  It can mean reassuring concerned friends and family, who can't imagine themselves the target of presidential wrath, that you're doing just fine.

And, it also means avoiding much of social media, because every presidential assault unleashes truly disturbed Trump supporters on platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. 

So, it's hard on good people, especially those who don't have savings to fall back on.  But the truth is that, in many ways, it is not as hard as you might think, especially as it continues endlessly, leaking power, shrinking its source.  

At first, the attack is stunning and rocks your world. Waking up to find Donald Trump has tweetd that you are guilty of treason or committed assorted oher crimes and are a (insert any one of the epithets by IMpotus here) is jarring and disorienting. That's the first state, but it doesn't last. 

So, the second state is a kind of numbness where it doesn't seem quite real that the so-called leader of the free world is assailing you by tweet and voice.  It is still unsettling, but it is harder to recapture the vertigo of the first assault.  

But, the longer it goes on, the less it means.  In the third stage, the impact diminishes, the power of it shrinks. It no longer feels as though the most powerful human on the planet is after you. It feels as though a strange and slightly sad old guy is yelling at you to get off his lawn, echoed by younger but no less sad people in red hats shouting, "Yeah, get off his lawn!"

In this stage, Donald Trump seems diminished, much as he has diminished the presidency itself.  Foreign leaders laugh at him and throw his letters in the trash.  American leaders clap back at him, offering condescending prayers for his personal well-being.  Indeed, the #IMpotus "trusted" advisers all appear to talk about him behind his back and treat him like a child.  Principled public servants defy his orders not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry.  His record in the court is similar to the Washington Red Skins on the field.

Even his secret weapon has lost power.  Engagement with @realdonaldtrump #IMpotus Twitter account - the company's measure of how often people read share and comment on a tweet, has steadily declined.  Americans are tired of the show. They are channel-surfing on him.  It is appraent that the exhausted middle has arrived at a collective stage three.

I don't mean to sugges tthat Trump is not dangerous.  Indeed, the horrific betrayal of allies in northern Syria demonstrates that an impetuous and amoral leader can do great harm, even in a shrunken from.  Moreover, if he succeeds in redefining our nation's core values so that extorting foreign governments to aid in one's election is consistent with the oath  of office, he will have done lasting damage to this nation- the harm our founders worried about most.

For the fourth, and final, stage, we need to fight through our fatigue and contempt for this shrunken, withered figure.  Spurred by the danger he poses to our nation and to its values, we have to overcome the shock and numbness of earlier stages.  We must not look away.  We must summon the effort necessary to protect this republic from Alexander Hamilton's great fear, that when an unprincipled person, "is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity- to join in the cry of danger to liberty- to take every opportunity  of embarrassing the general Government and bringing it under suspicion - to flatter and fall in with all the nonsense of the realities of the day - it may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may 'ride the storm and direct the whirlwind'."

Yes, we are headed into the storm our founders feared.  Getting safely to the other side will require all of us to resist complacency and cynicism. Yes, the final stage is a test of the founders' design, but it is also an opportunity to demonstrate American character.  This democracy, made up of citizens and their institutions, is strong enough to weather the storm. 

Holocaust and anti-Semitism

Nazis targeted European Jews

Echo opinion published in the History News Network by Claudia Moscovici author of Holocaust Memories.

Nearly eighty years have passed since the Holocaust. There have been hundreds of memoirs, histories and novels written about it, yet many fear that this important event may fall into oblivion.

One of the many difficult lessons the Holocaust has taught us is that Jews need not be influential or numerous in a country to give rise to anti-Semitism. According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Jews comprised only 1% of Germany’s population on the eve of the Nazi rise to power in 1933 (505,000 of 67 million people). Yet this small group of German citizens were singled out as an ideal scapegoat for all of the country’s woes following WWI: its defeat in the war, the staggering inflation and high unemployment rates, and the humiliations imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles. 

In difficult historical or economic conditions, people often stigmatize and dehumanize those they disdain and distrust. Without adequate education about the past and discussion of the dangers of anti-Semitism, many believe that history could repeat itself. This is why Holocaust education is crucial to dispelling the fear, anxiety and ultimately hatred of the Jews. Unfortunately today, as the last Holocaust survivors pass away, we risk losing touch with the human-caused catastrophe that nearly wiped the Jewish people off the face of the Earth, increasing the risk of rampant anti-Semitism.

In fact, there seems to be an inverse proportion between knowledge of the Holocaust and anti-Semitism. In February 2019, Schoen Consulting conducted a survey at the behest of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims against Germany. The survey indicated that there is a serious deficiency in knowledge about the Holocaust among US adults and that fewer people care about the Holocaust than they did in the 1950s through 90s. 70 percent of those polled believe that fewer people care about the Holocaust today than in the past and nearly 60 percent believe that the Holocaust could happen again.

According to the Schoen findings, one third of Americans, and a staggering 40 percent of Millennials, believe that substantially fewer than 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust (they mistakenly consider the figure to be closer to 2 million). Half of the respondents could not name a single concentration camp or Jewish Ghetto among the 40,000 camps and Ghettos across Europe. Stunningly, 41 percent of older adults and 66 percent of Millennials hadn’t heard of Auschwitz, the largest and most notorious concentration camp. Moreover, 80 percent of US adults had never visited a Holocaust museum. Despite these serious gaps in their historical knowledge, the vast majority of the Claims Conference poll respondents—80 percent--believed that education about the Holocaust could help prevent such genocides in the future.

The Never Again Education Act is an effort by a bipartisan group of US legislators in both the House and the Senate to promote Holocaust education. Several senators introduced a bill that would help fund and encourage Holocaust education programs in American schools. Jacky Rosen, a Democratic senator from Nevada, spearheaded this bill in 2016. The bill stipulates combining private donations as well as federal and state funding for the Holocaust Education Assistance Program Fund. The program would help pay for training teachers and guest speakers on the Holocaust, cover the cost of textbooks, as well as fund the transportation and housing for teachers to attend conferences and seminars about the Holocaust.

This bill found bipartisan support in the Senate from Republican senator Ted Cruz (Texas), Marco Rubio (Florida), Kevin Cramer (North Dakota) and Democratic senators Tim Kaine (Virginia) and Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut). The bill also has strong proponents in the House of Representatives. Sponsored by Representative Carolyn B. Maloney (Democrat, New York) and Elise Stefanik (Republican, New York), the bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on April 10, 2018 and has gained 209 bipartisan supporters.

The Never Again Education Act would fund and facilitate Holocaust Education in every state in the US. So far several states have already implemented some local codes or guidelines that require that information about the Holocaust and other genocides be taught in public schools, including California (1985), Illinois (1989), New Jersey (1991), Florida (1994), New York (1994) and, more recently Maryland (2019). In the wake of an alarming rise in anti-Semitic domestic terrorism and attacks on Jewish centers and synagogues, I am glad to see that legislators across the country see the urgent need for a more in-depth, national program of Holocaust education.

Echo opinion call for Donald Trump's resignation

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/476118-trump-must-be-removed-for-more-than-reasons-offered-in-impeachment

Echo opinions by Neil Baron and quote by George Conway:

"Donald Trump's tax cuts have not created enough economic growth to cover revenue losses.....ballooned federal deficit..."

"You don’t need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows, and you don’t need to be a mental-health professional to see that something’s very seriously off with Trump—particularly after nearly three years of watching his erratic and abnormal behavior in the White House,'  George Conway wrote this quote in The Atlantic.

Trump must be removed — for more than reasons offered in impeachment- echo opinion published in The Hill by Neil Baron

If Congress doesn’t remove Donald Trump from office, foreign nations will worry long after his presidency that America’s legislative branch is incapable of removing a president whose party controls the Senate no matter how lawless and destructive he or she might be.

Removing Trump would prove that Congress won’t tolerate a president who betrays and imperils America’s allies. In pulling out of Syria, Trump exposed the Kurds, America’s longtime allies, to annihilation, which has been Turkish President Erdoğan's goal.
Turkey is a NATO member whose military might has deterred Russian aggression. 

The U.S. withdrawal abetted Vladimir Putin’s dream of weakening NATO by luring Turkey closer to Russia.  So did the sanctions Trump imposed on Turkey for an invasion Trump himself triggered.

In leaving the Iran nuclear deal, Trump rejected national security officials' urging to stay in the agreement because it was in America’s best interests.

Trump launched steel and aluminum tariffs when he became “unglued” over other matters (such as Hope Hicks’s testimony on Russian interference). He acted on impulse and didn’t inform our trading partners, Congress, or the Treasury, State or Defense departments before making his announcement.

From Marie Yovanovitch to Jennifer Williams, Trump has disrespected and removed enough ambassadors to make leaders wonder who will be next. His depletion of the State Department and engagement of Secretary Mike Pompeo in the Ukraine scandal has diminished the credibility and gravitas of U.S. diplomacy.

Removing Trump is necessary to regain America’s ability to conduct foreign policy. But Senate Republicans resist because they need his base to get elected. Trump has held on to it by eroding the credibility of institutions that exist — in part — to check the presidency, including our intelligence and justice agencies, the Federal Reserve, the judiciary, and the press.

Trump-touting outlets are the dominant sources of information for his base. His tweets reach 19 percent of Twitter followers. His supporters overwhelmingly tune in to Fox News, Trump’s biggest promoter, which topped all other cable news in the third quarter of 2019. Trumpers were not educated by his impeachment hearings. Only 17 percent of American households watched them, compared to the 85 percent of households that tuned in to the Nixon Watergate hearings.

As a result, voters are woefully misinformed. They give Trump credit for our strong economy even though he’s riding 100 straight months of job growth and greater gross domestic product growth and productivity from the Obama years. His base doesn’t seem to grasp that his tax cuts didn’t generate enough economic growth to cover the lost revenues. That ballooned the federal deficit and the debt needed to cover it. Other than during wartime, when government spending skyrocketed, our deficits and debt always shrank during periods of low unemployment and growing GDP. But not under Trump. His profligacy threatens our economy.

It will be difficult to convince Trump supporters that the best thing for the country is to remove him, and Republicans will face retaliation in the voting booth if they try. It may be easier to convince Trump to resign voluntarily or not run again in exchange for immunity from all charges being investigated. 

That way, Senate Republicans wouldn't have to vote to convict him and would likely keep their seats.

But no matter how it’s done, America must remove Trump to show the world that it won’t tolerate a destructive, shameful, lawless and dangerous president. 

Otherwise, nations will always wonder, if we let one president go rogue with impunity, when will it happen again?

Opinion by Neil Baron - advised the Security and Exchange Commission and congressional staff on rating agency reform. He represented Standard & Poor’s from 1968 to 1989, was vice chairman and general counsel of Fitch Ratings from 1989 to 1998. He also served on the board of Assured Guaranty for a decade.

Donald Trump cannot provide exculpatory witnesses - he must provide *under oath* testimonies

Echo opinion letter published in the Florida Sun Sentinel - Donald Trump cannot exculptate himself because there are zero witnesses who will agree to lie for him when "under oath".  On the other hand, witnesses who have put their professional reputations at risk did testify under oath to provide proof of Donald Trump's obstruction of Congress and abuse of power, as charged in the Articles of Impeachment.

Where are the Trump exculpatory witnesses who are willing to provide testimony under oath? IOW, the exculpatory witnesses do not exist.  

Echo opinion letter from Florida:

Dr. Fiona Hill, the former National Security Council, while under oath, corroborated the U.S. Intelligence Community and those who testified before her. She said she refuses to legitimize the conspiracy theory she called a false narrative, fueled by Russian propaganda, that Ukraine interfered in our election in 2016, and warned of Russian efforts to “weaponize” U.S. politics. That’s really scary to me.

The Mueller report is clear on this point, so Donald Trump knows better: The U.S. intelligence community has concluded that the Russian government was behind an orchestrated campaign to interfere in the 2016 US presidential election and sought to help Donald Trump win the White House. The Mueller investigation did indict 26 Russian nationals and three Russian companies.

David Holmes testified, under oath as well, that the president didn’t care about the corruption in Ukraine, he just cared about getting dirt on the Bidens. That is illegal and the America public needs to know that Donald Trump broke the law, even if he is not impeached. Maybe future presidents will think twice before they break the law.  

From Ann O’Leary, Lauderhill, Florida

Florida echo viewpoint - How they lead: Speaker Pelosi the most influential woman to hold national elective office

Nancy Pelosi v. Mitch McConnell: 

What a difference a leader makes | Editorial in the Florida Sun-Sentinel

The paradox stands out not simply in how differently the House and Senate vote, but in how they are led.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, serving her third two-year term as Speaker of the House, has already taken her place alongside the late Sam Rayburn as one of its greatest leaders. In fact, Pelosi is the most influential woman ever to hold national elective office, as well as the first to lead either chamber and the first to serve as a minority leader.

She controls the House by force of personality, as well as the use of power. Having raised five children before she was elected to Congress in 1987, she perfected a steely glance — “that look,” some call it — that speaks louder than words. She used it to good effect to silence applause after the vote to impeach President Trump Wednesday night.

She didn’t need the impeachment to achieve historic stature, although it is certainly an accomplishment.

Without her, the Affordable Care Act probably would not have been enacted nine years ago, during her previous term as speaker. Given what has been happening in the courts, she might have to do it again next year.

In this term, the House has passed more than 400 bills, some of such extreme importance as restoring vital parts of the Voting Rights Act that the Supreme Court had overturned, protecting the 2020 election from renewed Russian interference, raising the minimum wage, and reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act.

Despite today’s hyper-partisan climate, the Democratic speaker produced a bipartisan budget agreement and a new North American trade bill, one of the president’s highest priorities, which he will owe to her.

Only five bills, not counting resolutions, remain to be voted on in the House.

Pelosi represents the best of times.

But more than 300 of these bills are languishing in the Senate, including some 275 that passed the House with bipartisan support.

That brings us to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. He personifies the worst of times.

There is no valid reason for him to prevent the Senate from voting on any of the House bills other than his contempt of Democrats and his desperation to keep Trump in power, for the sake of the Republican Party, even if it leaves the nation vulnerable to foreign meddling in our elections.

McConnell’s abuse of power is second only to Trump’s. He plumbed the depths of partisan irresponsibility when he stole a Supreme Court appointment from President Barack Obama on the spurious and historically inaccurate pretext that a president shouldn’t be allowed to make such an appointment during his last year in office.

Pelosi’s leadership is a case study in the wise use of power. McConnell’s is quite the reverse.

Only a year ago, however, some younger House Democrats were agitating for her and other veteran Democratic leaders to step aside. Despite their having shattered Republican control in the 2018 mid-term elections, there were even hints that some might throw in with Republicans to deny her a majority when it came time in January for the official vote.

Pelosi is 79. Her two top aides, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland and Majority Whip James Clyburn of South Carolina are 80 and 79 respectively.

The insurgents should be glad they didn’t get what they wished for. Most seem to be.

“I thought it was time for new leadership, and I’ve got to tell you: Thank goodness, thank goodness that we have Nancy Pelosi speaking for the House of Representatives,” said Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn.

Pelosi won the decisive caucus vote with 124 votes to 63 for Rep. Tim Ryan, 46, of Ohio, who mounted a short-lived campaign for president this year.

But the confrontation prompted her to promise to abdicate the speakership after one more term, assuming the Democrats hold the House in 2020. The policy she proposed would have her and the other top leaders serve only three two-year terms in those capacities, with a fourth depending on the support of two-thirds of the party caucus.

She said she sees herself “as a bridge to the next generation of leaders,” with a “continuing responsibility to mentor and advance new members into positions of power and responsibility in the House Democratic caucus.”

Hoyer said he wouldn’t be bound by that. There was discussion of the caucus making it a party rule, but nothing has been heard of it since.

Term limits for leadership positions would be a plausible check on abuse of power, such as McConnell has demonstrated. But while Senate Republicans term-limit their committee chairs, no Republican there has cared or dared to challenge McConnell’s dictatorship.

On the other hand, there’s nothing right and much wrong in term limits for individual members of Congress, the nostrum touted by presidential candidate Tom Steyer. Term limits ruined the Florida Legislature and would leave U.S. representatives and senators even more dependent than now on keeping in good graces with whomever happen to be Speaker and Senate majority leader. Worse, term limits would make the presidency even stronger at the expense of Congress.

It’s not by coincidence that the Founders devoted the first article of the Constitution to the Congress and only the second to the executive branch.

“In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates,” wrote the anonymous author of The Federalist 51, who was either James Madison or Alexander Hamilton.

The three branches of our government were meant to be co-equal. Power is dispersed among 535 people in the Congress and among nine at the Supreme Court, but in the executive branch it is concentrated in one person, the president, which makes it easier to abuse.

The Founders left each house to make its own rules, allowing them to give as much or as little power to their presiding officers as it suits the members from time to time. The caucuses, not the presiding officer, determine who lead committees and who serve on them. That still leaves enormous power to the House Speaker and Senate Majority leader to decide what will or won’t become law.

But the last word isn’t theirs. This is still a democracy.

In next year’s elections, the voters will pass judgment not only on Trump but, indirectly, on the respective leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell.

Their own voters may or may not return them to Washington. Pelosi’s surely will and McConnell’s shouldn’t. But it’s Americans across the nation who’ll determine control of the House and Senate.

Thanks to Pelosi, House Democrats have a strong case for retaining the majority. McConnell’s drones do not.

Editorials are the opinion of the Sun Sentinel Editorial Board and written by one of its members or a designee. The Editorial Board consists of Editorial Page Editor Rosemary O’Hara, Sergio Bustos, Steve Bousquet and Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson.

George Conway a clever Cancer windmill survivor and Twitter Trumpzi troll expert

I can't help but respect the way George Conway is able to draw attention to the dangerous character flaws exhibited by @realdonaldtrump, using sharp humor and searing wit.  

Donald Trump's expert Twitter Troll - George Conway: Is this duo a modern political spin on the vaudevillian Laurel and Hardy lunacy?

Yet, I can't imagine how he and his wife Kellyanne can carry on a civil conversation at home, based on their divergent Trumponian views. Obviously, Kellyanne is a Trumpzi surrogate and creator of the bizarre concept about "alterative facts". Their strange duet is far more confounding than whatever attraction drew James Carville, a high level adviser for President Clinton. to fall in love with and eventually marry his Repubican wife Mary Matalin.

But, that's their inside family business.

Nevertheless, the following article published in Newsweek, by James Crowley, describes the classic Conway style. 

By the way, Conway's Twitter page boasts about him being a Cancer windmill survivor....he sure knows how to troll Trump.

George Conway @gtconway3d:

"The problem you have with foreign leaders, @realDonaldTrump, is that they think you are a deranged idiot. They see it in your tweets, and they see it on TV. And their ambassadors give them an earful about the fact you’re inept, like the British one you got to resign. #IMPOTUS https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1210207810291671045 …"

George Conway, a lawyer and the husband of White House adviser Kellyanne Conway, said that foreign leaders think President Donald Trump is a "deranged idiot," in a tweet Thursday.

The frequent presidential critic responded to a tweet by the president in which he complained about challenges he's faced in dealing with foreign leaders. Trump claimed it is "difficult to deal with foreign leaders (and others) when I am having to constantly defend myself against the Do Nothing Democrats & their bogus Impeachment Scam."

Conway replied directly to the president, writing that Trump himself was the only one to blame for his struggles with foreign leaders. "The problem you have with foreign leaders, @realDonaldTrump, is that they think you are a deranged idiot," he wrote. "They see it in your tweets, and they see it on TV."

Conway also wrote that foreign ambassadors to the United States report back to their home offices about the issues they face working with Trump. "And their ambassadors give them an earful about the fact you're inept, like the British one you got to resign," he wrote, referring to former U.K. Ambassador Kim Darroch's July resignation. Darroch resigned after diplomatic cables in which he called Trump "insecure" and "incompetent" leaked to the public.

George Conway, the White House and the Trump campaign did not immediately respond to request for comment.

Conway has been relentless in his criticism of his wife's employer. In another Thursday tweet, he humorously urged the Senate to remove Trump from office ahead of the upcoming impeachment trial. Sharing a tweet about Trump's cameo in the 1992 film Home Alone 2 being cut in a Canadian broadcast, Conway pointed out how easy it had been to remove Trump. "You see, Senators? It's not that hard," he wrote.

In a Washington Post op-ed, Conway warned Senate Republicans that if they cut Trump's impeachment trial short, they would be "shamed on the pages of history."

He also likened lies that Republicans told to support Trump to "merit badges" that a boy or girl scout would earn. "You see, it's like merit badges in the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, except that instead of earning them by doing good deeds, with IMPOTUS @realDonaldTrump you earn them by telling lies to the public for his benefit, the bigger the better," he tweeted.

Conway responded to one of Trump's all-caps tweets on Wednesday December 18, as impeachment drama unfolded. "SUCH ATROCIOUS LIES BY THE RADICAL LEFT, DO NOTHING DEMOCRATS," the president tweeted, calling the vote to impeach him, "AN ASSAULT ON AMERICA, AND AN ASSAULT ON THE REPUBLICAN PARTY," on Twitter. Conway trolled the president "You seem unhappy," the lawyer responded. 

Tennessee echo - US military deserves a competent potus- #IMpotus45

Another Tennessee echo opinion letter published in the Chattanooga Times Free Press:

Trump owes Russia (kompromat!); putting US military at risk
Donald Trump proudly brags about his criminal behavior, including compromising the security of our entire nation. 

His supporters, Sen.Marsha Blackburn and (fake!) AG Bill Barr, happily applaud these actions.

Donald Trump is the worst kind of deplorable human that can walk on the planet. He is a self-serving, self-aggrandizing criminal who hates democracy because it means equal rights for minorities and women.

Yes, we are a divided country because, just like during our first Civil War, nearly half of Americans admire, support and endorse obviously despicable policies led by a misogynist, racist criminal.

But I am concerned for those serving in the military and those who are contemplating serving. Serving in theighest devotion to country. Because the Trump Organization allegedly owe military is an expression of the hs Russia/Putin hundreds of millions of dollars, and Trump is the commander in chief, our military is now serving Putin's interests with full support of Republican voters.

Do you have a loved one serving in the military? 

Think about it. Donald Trump is the military's top commander who could possibly send your loved one in harm's way for no other reason than to pay down his debt to Putin. In the 2020 elections, D=Democrat, R=Russian.

Jonathan D. Nessle

Republicans are sunk in the metaphoric swamp - echo opinion: Thank You Senator Jeff Flake

Jeff Flake opinion echo: Donald Trump is on trial and so are my Senate Republican colleagues.

Former Republican Senator Jeff Flake asks his colleagues to save the Grand Old Party before it's just too late.
Echo opinion published in The Washington Post (courtesy of Mother Jones).

(Maine Writer summary- Republicans have denigrated themselves into being the Trumpzi party and are abandoning their pride as the Grand Old Party of Abraham Lincoln - God Rest His Soul.)

Jeff Flake, a Republican, represented Arizona in the U.S. Senate from 2013 to 2019. He is a resident fellow at Harvard University and a contributor to CBS News.

To my former Senate Republican colleagues,

I don’t envy you.
It might not be fair, but none of the successes, achievements and triumphs you’ve had in public office — whatever bills you’ve passed, hearings you’ve chaired, constituents you have had the privilege of helping — will matter more than your actions in the coming months.

Donald Trump is on trial. But in a very real sense, so are you.

And so is the political party to which we belong.

As we approach the time when you do your constitutional duty and weigh the evidence arrayed against the president, I urge you to remember who we are when we are at our best. And I ask you to remember yourself at your most idealistic.

We are conservatives. The political impulses that compelled us all to enter public life were defined by sturdy pillars anchored deep in the American story. Chief among these is a realistic view of power and of human nature, and a corresponding and healthy mistrust of concentrated and impervious executive power. Mindful of the base human instincts that we all possess, the founders of our constitutional system designed its very architecture to curb excesses of power.

Personally, I have never met anyone whose behavior can be described as perfect, but so often has the president repeated this obvious untruth that it has become a form of dogma in our party. And sure enough, as dogma demands, there are members of our party denying objective reality by repeating the line that “the president did nothing wrong.” My colleagues, the danger of an untruthful president is compounded when an equal branch follows that president off the cliff, into the abyss of unreality and untruth.

Those curbs are especially important when the power is wielded by a president who denies reality itself and calls his behavior not what it is, but “perfect.”

Call it the founders’ blind spot: They simply could not have envisioned the Article I branch abetting and enabling such dangerous behavior in the Article II branch.

Moreover, when we are complicit, we cede our constitutional responsibilities, we forever redefine the relationship between Congress and the White House, and we set the most dangerous of precedents.

My simple test for all of us: What if President Barack Obama had engaged in precisely the same behavior? I know the answer to that question with certainty, and so do you. You would have understood with striking clarity the threat it posed, and you would have known exactly what to do.

Regarding the articles of impeachment, you could reasonably conclude that Donald Trump's actions warrant his removal. You might also determine that the president’s actions do not rise to the constitutional standard required for removal. There is no small amount of moral hazard with each option, but both positions can be defended.

But what is indefensible is echoing House Republicans who say that the president has not done anything wrong. He has.

The willingness of House Republicans to bend to the president’s will by attempting to shift blame with the promotion of bizarre and debunked conspiracy theories has been an appalling spectacle. It will have long-term ramifications for the country and the party, to say nothing of individual reputations.

Nearly all of you condemned the president’s behavior during the 2016, campaign* Nearly all of you refused to campaign with him. You knew then that doing so would be wrong — would be a stain on your reputation and the standing of the Republican Party, and would do lasting damage to the conservative cause.

Ask yourself today: Has the president changed his behavior? Has he grown in office? Has the mantle of the presidency altered his conduct? The answer is obvious. 

In fact, if the president’s political rally in Michigan on Wednesday is any measure, his language has only become more vulgar, his performance cruder, his behavior more boorish and unstable.

Next, ask yourself: If the president’s conduct hasn’t changed, has mine? Before President Trump came on the scene, would I have stood at a rally and cheered while supporters shouted “lock her up” or “send them back”? Would I have laughed along while the president demeaned and ridiculed my colleagues? Would I have ever thought to warm up the crowd for the president by saying of the House speaker: “It must suck to be that dumb**”?

As I said above, I don’t envy you. You’re on a big stage now. Please don’t accept an alternate reality that would have us believe in things that obviously are not true, in the service of executive behavior that we never would have encouraged and a theory of executive power that we have always found abhorrent.

If there ever was a time to put country over party, it is now. And by putting country over party, you might just save the Grand Old Party before it’s too late. 

Maine Writer trickster asterisks post scripts:

* Example: Transcript The New York Times Access Hollywood: Donald Trump's taped comments about women. "Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything."

 

**Esquire: Louisiana Senator John Kennedy's 'Dumb' Attack on Nancy Pelosi Is a Reminder Every Republican Is Trump Now. "... a perfect illustration of how, in the Age of Trump, The Base now demands the performance of bludgeoning the various Enemies. At every one of these traveling arena shows..." by Jack Holmes.

A Tennessee echo opinion might make covfefe sense- Donald Trump babble

When outright lying isn't effective - Gish Gallop: A technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible.  (Soooo...maybe this topic is the real meaning behind "covfefe", the Trumpziim neologism?)

Tennessee Chattanooga Times Free Press

Outright lying is not the only way to deceive in public discourse. For more than 2,000 years, those who care about getting the truth have universally agreed on a number of fallacies that have nothing to do with an issue being discussed. 

In such cases, the purpose is to win the argument, not to get at the truth.

Examples of this were on full display by the Republican minority in the House Judiciary Committee's first impeachment session. Here are a few of their misleading tactics:

They used arguments against the persons testifying rather than against what they were saying. Whatever might be said about those testifying (good or bad) has nothing to do with the validity of their testimony.

Several threw out the red herring of investigating Hunter Biden. Whatever could be discovered about Biden's activity (good or bad) has nothing to do with what Donald Trump did or did not do.

Others used what is known as the Gish gallop. The tactic is to talk nonstop in the effort to overwhelm without regard to accuracy.

Some appealed to pity ("look how badly we're being treated").

Those who used these tactics were not discussing in good faith.

Boyce Brawley

Republicans who support the Rule of Law

Pleasantly surprised to find this website! Today is December 25, 2019....a nice Christmas Internet surprise.

Republicans for the Rule of Law is a group of life-long Republicans dedicated to defending the institutions of our republic and upholding the rule of law. We are fighting to make sure that the laws apply equally to everyone, from the average citizen to the president of the United States.

We believe in fidelity to the Constitution, transparency, and the truth.  https://www.ruleoflawrepublicans.com/about-us/

Republicans for the Rule of Law is a coalition of Republicans who believe law enforcement investigations should be completed without political interference, the laws apply equally to everyone, and the Constitution needs to be followed.  Republicans for the Rule of Law is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit and a project of Defending Democracy Together. Contributions are NOT tax deductible.

This letter was published in the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, a Texas newspaper.  

With the start of public impeachment hearings, Congressional Republicans should look to their predecessors from the last time a Republican president was impeached.

Rep. M. Caldwell Butler, Republican from Virginia, said, “It is we, not the Democrats, who must demonstrate that we are capable of enforcing the high standards we would set for them.”

Rep. Lawrence Hogan, Republican of Maryland and father of the current governor of Maryland, told his colleagues, “For our system of justice and our system of government to survive, we must pledge our highest allegiance to the strength of the law and not to the common frailties of men.”

They were right. The Republican Party needed to divorce itself from the shame of Nixon and Watergate so it could reinvent itself. In a prediction of our current moment, Connecticut Republican Lowell Weicker said, "If we try to play coy or to be less than extremely forceful in getting the truth out, people are going to impute to us this rather sordid succession of events." 

Republicans, take note.

Stan Twardy, legal adviser to Republicans for the Rule of Law

Trump will wear impeachment like a proverbial scarlet letter

‘I would like you to do us a favor, though’, is clear evidence, proof of Donald Trump's quid pro quo.  #IMpotus45

Donald Trump's administration and his bullying arrogance has been pretty much a train wreck.

Opinion echo published in the Boston Herald.com by Joyce Ferriabough Bolling

His campaign vow to “build the wall” (that Mexico was going to pay for!) is under construction, as funding for the massive project continues to circulate through Congress and the courts. 

Trump touts a great economy, but actually he inherited a pretty strong one, pulled from the brink of disaster by his predecessor, President Obama. No doubt Trump deserves credit for building on Obama’s success. He’s also given Twitter a boost with his incessant, and often insensitive posts — that have some calling him the Commander-in-Tweet.

Whether the impeachment train sputters and finally derails in the Senate as expected, history will judge Trump and his entire administration through the prism.of impeachment. 

Trial or not, he will wear impeachment like a proverbial scarlet letter as only the third president in our history to be impeached

Despite his brashness, and new way of doing business, impeachment unfortunately will be his most enduring legacy. 

That has to hurt, especially since he is only three years into his first term. Trump supporters argue that impeachment was on Democrats’ radar even before the president was sworn in, and the levying of impeachment charges a way to reclaim the 2016, election and deny him a second term in 2020. But they deny the litany of guilty verdicts, since day one of his administraton and the subsequent jail sentences given to Trump associates.  

But, watching so many of Trump's friends, employees and associates being handed prison sentences for their criminal activities has to also hurt, even if just a little. 

At the very least, it leaves a not so favorable impression of the president as a member of a “birds of a feather, flock together” crew that includes former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, ex national security adviser Michael Flynn, political adviser Roger Stone and longtime attorney Michael Cohen. While conventional wisdom is that Trump is sure to pardon most of them, the public and history will not. They, too, as well as their shenanigans will also be part of Trump’s legacy.

Sure to be debated ad nauseum, in the next few weeks and months, is whether the president’s actions rise to the “high crimes and misdemeanors” status warranting impeachment. I have to admit, I pondered that as well and in a previous column I wondered whether censure might be the right course of action. 

Either way, impeachment or censure, neither is a good look for a president’s record

I do think acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said it best when he stunned reporters by admitting that quid pro quo happens. Perhaps, — but not so blatantly, "though". I think most can agree that this situation was poorly executed, to say the least. I don’t think there can be much dissent about the messy way all this was handled by the president and many of the president’s men.

I feel sorry that President Trump either didn’t know better or just didn’t care.

No #IMpotus45 witnesses will exculpate Donald Trump under oath - GOP Senators must face the truth

Associated Press (AP) echo report published in the Chattanooga Times Free Press (Tennessee) by Colleen Long, Mike Balsamo, Eric Tucker, Laurie Kellman, Alan Fram, Zeke J. Miller and Matthew Daly in Washington, who contributed to this report.

Since the AP report was published on November 13, 2019, the following headline was released in Time.com:
Ukraine Ambassador Bill Taylor, a Key Player in the Impeachment Inquiry, to Leave Post

Obviously, Donald Trump has zero witnesses who can give testimony under oath to exculpate his guilt in the Ukraine quid pro quo impeachment #IMpotus45.

Impeachment witness says Trump asked about Ukraine probes

WASHINGTON (AP) — For the first time a top diplomat testified under oath Wednesday that Donald Trump was overheard asking about "the investigations" he wanted Ukraine to pursue that are central to the #IMpotus45 impeachment inquiry.

William Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, revealed the new information as the House Intelligence Committee opened extraordinary hearings on whether the 45th president of the United States should be removed from office.

Taylor said his staff recently told him they overheard Trump when they were meeting with another diplomat, Ambassador Gordon Sondland, at a restaurant the day after Trump's July 25, 2019, phone call with the new leader of Ukraine (Volodymyr Zelensky) that sparked the impeachment investigation.

The staff explained that Sondland had called the president and they could hear Trump on the phone asking about "the investigations." The ambassador told the president the Ukrainians were ready to move forward, Taylor testified.

The hearing Wednesday was the first public session of the impeachment inquiry, a remarkable moment, even for a White House full of them.

It's the first chance for America, and the rest of the world, to see and hear for themselves about Trump's actions toward Ukraine and consider whether they are, in fact, impeachable offenses.

An anonymous whistleblower's complaint to the intelligence community's inspector general — including that Trump had pressed Ukraine's president to investigate Democratic foe Joe Biden and Bidens' son and was holding up U.S. military aid — ignited the rare inquiry now unfolding in Congress.

The country has been here only three times before, and never against the 21st century backdrop of real-time commentary, including from the Republican president himself. The proceedings were being broadcast live, and on social media, from a packed hearing room on Capitol Hill.

The session unfolded in measured, quietly dramatic tones. Taylor, a former Army infantry leader, his voice weathered after a 50-year career in foreign service, paused for sips of water during what he acknowledged was a lengthy recitation of facts. It took 40 minutes.

The scene, with Republican questioning still to come, was offering the credibility that Democrats wanted to set the stage and sway public opinions, but Trump still offered counter-programming.

Moments after the hearings began, his Trumpzi reelection machine sent out an email blast: "FAKE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS HAVE BEGUN! ... I WANT TO RAISE 3 MILLION DOLLARS IN THE NEXT 24 HOURS."

At the start, Rep. Adam Schiff, the Democratic chairman of the Intelligence Committee, outlined the question at the core of the impeachment inquiry -- whether the president used his office to pressure Ukraine officials for personal political gain.

"The matter is as simple and as terrible as that," said Schiff of California. "Our answer to these questions will affect not only the future of this presidency but the future of the presidency itself, and what kind of conduct or misconduct the American people may come to expect from their commander in chief."

Republicans lawmakers immediately pushed Democrats to hear in closed session from the anonymous whistleblower.

Schiff denied the request at the time but said it would be considered later.

"We will do everything necessary to protect the whistleblower's identity," Schiff declared.

The top Republican on the panel, Rep. Devin Nunes of California, accused the Democratic majority of conducting a "scorched earth" effort to take down the president after the special counsel's Russia investigation into the 2016 election failed to spark impeachment proceedings.

"We're supposed to take these people at face value when they trot out new allegations?" said Nunes, a top Trump ally. He derided what he called the "cult-like atmosphere in the basement of the Capitol" where investigators have been interviewing witnesses behind closed doors for weeks. Transcripts of those interviews have been released.

(MoooooveOn stupid!) Nunes* called the Ukraine matter a "low rent" sequel to the Russia probe. "Democrats are advancing their impeachment sham," he said.

Both Taylor and the other public witness, George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary at the State Department, defied White House instructions not to testify. They both received subpoenas to appear.

The veteran foreign service officers delivered heartfelt history lessons about Ukraine, a young and hopeful democracy, situated next to Russia but reaching out to the West.

Kent, in his opening remarks, directly contradicted a core complaint against Joe Biden being raised by allies of the White House, saying he never heard any U.S. official try to shield a Ukraine company from investigations.

Kent acknowledged that he himself raised concerns in 2015 about the then vice president's son, Hunter Biden, being on the board of Burisma, a Ukraine gas company. He warned that it could give the "perception of a conflict of interest." But Kent indicated no one from the U.S. was protecting the company from investigations in Ukraine as Republicans have implied.

"Let me be clear; however, I did not witness any efforts by any U.S. official to shield Burisma from scrutiny," Kent said.

The career diplomat did not go into detail about the issues central to the impeachment inquiry, but he voiced his concerns with them.

"I do not believe the United States should ask other countries to engage in selective, politically associated investigations or prosecutions against opponents of those in power, because such selective actions undermine the rule of law regardless of the country," he said.

So far, the narrative being unspooled in weeks of investigations for the inquiry is splitting Americans, mostly along the same lines as Trump's unusual presidency. The Constitution sets a dramatic but vague bar for impeachment, and there's no consensus yet that Trump's actions at the heart of the inquiry meet the threshold of "high crimes and misdemeanors."

Trump calls the whole thing a "witch hunt," a retort that echoes Nixon's own defense.

At its core, the inquiry stems from Trump's July 25 phone call with Ukraine's newly elected president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy when he asked the Zelenskiy for "a favor."

Trump wanted the Ukraine government to investigate Democrats in the 2016 election and his potential 2020 rival, Joe Biden, all while holding as leverage military aid the young democracy relies on as it confronts an aggressive Russia.

The anonymous whistleblower first alerted officials to concerns about the phone call. The White House released a rough transcript of the conversation, with portions deleted.

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was initially reluctant to launch a formal impeachment inquiry. But she pressed ahead in September after the whistleblower's complaint.

Over the past month, witness after witness has appeared behind closed doors to tell the investigators what they know.

Whether Wednesday's proceedings begin to end a presidency or help secure Trump's position, it was certain his chaotic term had finally arrived at a place he could not control and a force, the constitutional system of checks and balances, that he could not ignore.

Unlike the Watergate hearings and Richard Nixon, there is not yet a "cancer-on-the-presidency" moment galvanizing public opinion. Nor is there the national shrug, as happened when Bill Clinton's impeachment ultimately didn't result in his removal from office. It's perhaps most like the partisanship-infused impeachment of Andrew Johnson after the Civil War.

*Devin Nunes Demands Satirical Internet Cow Stop Making Fun Of Him… Or Else

Donald Trump is defined by his afinity for despots - echo letter

Trump has co-opted the GOP completely- echo opinion published in the Chattanooga Times Free Press.  

#IMpotus45

Maine Writer- Actually, I would subtitle this opinion letter instead as, "the Growing Old Party" is now co-opted by the 73, year old (b. 1946)  #IMpotus45.

It has never been a matter of if, but when, President Trump would be impeached. He cheated and lied in his business and personal life. He was a corrupt businessman, and he is a corrupt president. He has tried to play the victim during this process when he has no one to blame but himself.

What he has played is the American people, especially his base, and the Republican Party has let him get away with it. Meanwhile, Trump is being played by every despot and autocrat in the world, and he is too narcissistic and naïve to see through it, even while they are laughing at him. His handshake and photo op diplomacy has been a "disaster," to use one of his favorite words in his limited vocabulary.

I watched both the Nixon and Clinton impeachment hearings, and I have watched almost all of Trump's hearings. Congress could distinguish fact from fiction during the Nixon and Clinton hearings and were able to vote with country and the Constitution as its lodestar, not the next election.

By Rebecca Rochat

Donald Trump #IMpotus45 - impeachment is about abuse of power!

Withholding Ukraine Aid was Flat Out Wrong!
Two opinion echos published in the California newspaper the Fresno Bee

"It really just boils down to Donald Trump (IMpotus45) placing more importance on his political future instead of the security of the United Sates of America. This impeachment is about an abuse of power, plain and simple," Rod Palmer, Visalia California.

Irresponsible Republicans made zero attempts to defend Donald Trump's illegal actions during the impeachment hearings to #IMpotus45. Most likely, this lack of truth was because they could not come up with any viable defense for the quid pro quo, "though". 

Instead, Republicans ignore truth and misdirect the issue by attacking witnesses, wrongly refer to purported misdeeds by the previous administration and incredulously say the #IMpotus45 actions are more favorable to Ukraine than Russia. (OMG!)

To simplify the timeline: the military aid for Ukraine that was approved by Congress was held up at the direction of Donald Trump for almost two months and then was released only after the whistle-blower complaint became public, That was aid meant to help Ukraine confront Russia's military aggression; so such a long delay probably cost lives as well as our reputation.

Just because Ukraine finally received the aid doesn't mean Trump didn't abuse his authority in withholding it, especially for personal gain. If you really want to clarify just how bad that really is, replace the name "Trump" with "Obama" or "Clinton" in any of the news articles you read and then you can't help but get the perspective.

Joe Messer, Fresno California