We don’t trust John “chickenhawk” Bolton


Why would anybody trust “chickenhawk” John Bolton to tell the truth about his buddy Donald Trump? These belligerent bullies are cut from the same cloth. Bolton’s not going to turn on Trump unless it makes him some serious money.

Even rightwing republican apologist Joe Scarborough doesn’t trust John Bolton’s intentions when it comes to testifying before Donald Trump’s impeachment trial. The “Morning Joe” host said he believes the former national security adviser has cut a behind-the-scenes deal with the White House on his offer to testify.

“Forgive me for being cynical, but I think John Bolton wants to sell his book,” Scarborough said. (no shit!) “These people who were saying, you know what? We’ll give you Bolton. You give us, fill in the blank. I mean, whoever else is called, if the Republicans call (anyone), will not talk about executive privilege, but I guarantee you John Bolton will.”

“You talk about drug deals,” he said. “I think there’s a smaller drug deal going on between Bolton and the White House right now, where there’s a nod and a wink. Yes, I’m going to say that I’ll testify, knowing perfectly well the second he gets there to testify the White House will claim executive privilege, and he’ll say, you know what? I came here to testify, but this really does fit under executive privilege, and I’m not going to weaken the presidency and so then Republicans call who they want to call. I think the fix is already in here.”

We think Scarborough is right, this is Bolton injecting meth into his book sales. He’s teasing testimony knowing he’ll never give it so people will be forced to by his book.

John Bolton who always wants to send people to their deaths fighting in some war he’s provoked is a POS and always will be.

Don’t overlook that other very impeachable offense

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then–Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak that Trump

This is the way things work now: Donald Trump is credibly reported to have given aid and comfort to an enemy that attacked the United States—and this allegation, several days later, is not part of the news cycle or the scandal that is fueling the impeachment drive on Capitol Hill. The story of the most profound betrayal a president can commit has vanished from the national discourse.

Last Friday night, the Washington Post published a stunning article reporting that during an Oval Office meeting in May of 2017, Trump told Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then–Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak that Trump was unconcerned about Moscow’s attack on the 2016 presidential election. Trump noted the Russians that their assault on the United States was no big deal because the United States did the same in other countries, according to three former officials. It was at this meeting that Trump, as had been previously reported, revealed highly classified information to his Russian visitors and said that his firing of FBI chief James Comey the previous day had relieved “great pressure” on him. Yet Trump’s comments dismissing the importance of the Russian attack—which, according to the US intelligence community, was mounted in part to help Trump win the White House—now stands as the most significant moment of that gathering, where Trump and the two Russians were photographed smiling.

David Corn – Mother Jones

The greatest threat to democracy; it’s not just Trump

Trump, for all his destruction of leadership norms and erratic, inflammatory behavior, is not the greatest threat to democracy, argues Eleanor Clift in The Daily Beast. That dubious honor goes to Republican Senate Majority Leader “Moscow” Mitch McConnell
“The events in El Paso and Dayton over the weekend give new meaning to the phrase the enemy within. The country is under siege from what law enforcement officials are calling domestic terrorism inspired by white supremacist ideology,” writes Clift. “What to do? All roads lead to Moscow Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, who won’t allow debate on remedies for gun violence and refuses to take up gun-control legislation passed by the House to expand background checks.”

Moscow Mitch could fight the bloodshed right now and call back the Senate to vote on the House’s background check bill, writes Clift. But he won’t.

“Anyone who knows anything about McConnell knows that’s not happening,” says Clift. “At Team Mitch, it’s been business as usual. Just hours after the El Paso shooting, the campaign tweeted a photo of a single tombstone bearing the name of McConnell’s Democratic challenger. Another tweet shows seven grinning young white men in ‘Team Mitch’ T-shirts pawing a cardboard cutout of Rep. Ocasio-Cortez with the caption, ‘break me off a piece of that.’”

“McConnell’s cudgel is the 60-vote filibuster,” continues Clift. “In today’s closely divided senate (53 to 47), those few votes give McConnell his power. There’s no way to get to 60 votes to force a floor vote on anything gun-related, so McConnell gets to operate with absolute immunity knowing a handful of GOP defectors joining the Democrats can’t reach that threshold, and most won’t even risk it.”

This is what he has used to block popular action on everything from background checks to protecting young immigrants to election security, all while spending the Senate’s whole time confirming far-right judges.

“McConnell is accountable only to the Republican voters of Kentucky, and he showers them with benefits,” writes Clift. “He’s up for reelection in 2020 and he’s facing the best the Democrats have to offer, Amy McGrath, a retired Marine Corps fighter pilot who will have the blue wave at her back in red Kentucky. That may not be enough, but wouldn’t it be sweet if it were.”

She quotes Ira Shapiro, a former congressional staffer, who told her in an email, “We will not have a functioning Senate or a healthy politics until Senator McConnell is ousted from power.”

Raw Story


Traitor Trump is at it again; can we really wait for Mueller to finish?  

Worldwide thug and Russian dictator Vladimir Putin is very happy with his little minion Trump’s decision to withdraw from the IMF treaty.


On Saturday morning in response to Trump, Putin announced that he had suspended the Cold War-era Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty after Trump said he would withdraw the US from the arms control pact.

An analysis by the Washington Post claims that Trump played right into the Kremlin’s hands and allowed Putin to fulfill a dream he has had for years.

It’s true that Trump’s decision is a significant action that appears on the surface to punish Russia.  Experts point out that is a move that the Obama administration resisted, even though it also concluded that Russia was violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, forged at the tail end of the Cold War, in large part because it believed it would trigger a new nuclear arms race, not necessarily because it was afraid of holding Russia accountable. Even with Russia violating the treaty, the reasoning went, it was better to leave it in place as a deterrent. The violations were real but the treaty remained largely intact. Most observers believed better that, than a rekindled arms race.

Vladimir Putin expressed his wish to withdraw back in 2007.

We need to convince other (countries) to assume the same level of obligation as assumed by the Russian Federation and the United States,” Putin stated. “If we are unable to obtain such a goal … it will be difficult for us to keep within the framework of the treaty in a situation where other countries do develop such weapon systems, and among those are countries located in our near vicinity.”

He later complained that the treaty limited Russia and gave too large of an advantage to the U.S.

“What we ultimately got was a clear imbalance: the United States has kept its medium-range missiles. It does not matter whether they are based at sea, in the air, or on land; however, the Soviet Union was simply left without this type of weapons,” Putin claimed.

That doesn’t sound like someone who wanted to keep the treaty, which Putin argued was stacked against Russia, to begin with. Putin just didn’t want Russia to be seen on the world stage as the one that backed out of it. The Russians’ obvious flouting of the treaty promotes the theory that Russia was goading the United States to cancel it. Of course, eager idiot Trump was more than willing to oblige.

According to a report from Reuters, Putin is already making plans to beef up Russia’s military capabilities. “Putin said Russia will start work on creating new missiles, including hypersonic ones, and told ministers not to initiate disarmament talks with Washington, accusing the United States of being slow to respond to such moves,” the news service reported.

Another gift to Vladimir

original source material from Raw Story

More Russian puppet news

Fresh off his successful procedural vote to block the Trump administration from lifting sanctions on a Russian oligarch, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced that he only needs a few more Republicans to defect to make the move even stronger.
Schumer told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow he was “pleasantly surprised” when 11 of his Republican colleagues joined Democrats in voting to block the Treasury Department’s lifting of sanctions on businesses linked to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, a figure linked to both Vladimir Putin and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.
“We’re only two votes away from telling Vladimir Putin he can’t run the show here in the United States, no matter what the Trump Administration does,” the ranking Democrat said.
He added that his GOP colleagues must join Democrats in reaching a 60-vote majority to make the rebuke stronger.
Schumer pointed out that “On the floor, today Senate Republican Majority Leader McConnell had said, ‘Putin is a thug,’” the ranking Democrat said calling out duplicitous Mitch. “I believe that, if you believe that, if our Republican friends believe that, they should be voting with us, not just the 11” but McConnell himself and others.

In other Russian traitor News:

A top Kremlin aide on Wednesday actually tried to dismiss as ridiculous claims that Donald Trump has acted as an agent for Russia amid mounting controversy over his alleged ties to Moscow.
“Why comment on something stupid? How can Trump be an agent of another country?” President Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy advisor Yuri Ushakov told a briefing after a journalist if Trump was a Russian agent.
Ushakov lame assertion is that Russia’s relations with the US were “at rock bottom” and “nothing has happened in the context of developing them.”
Trump tried to deny the obvious fact that he’s Putin’s puppet by claiming that he has “never worked for Russia” and told reporters: “It’s disgrace that you even ask that question.” (No idiot, it’s your disgrace that we even have to ask it!)
Trump was responding to a report in The New York Times that said the FBI had opened an investigation into whether he was acting on Russia’s behalf soon after he was elected.
In addition, The Washington Post reported on what it said were unusual lengths taken by Trump to hide details of his conversations with Putin.
The bombshell reports as came as special prosecutor Robert Mueller presses a huge investigation into alleged Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election — and the probable Kremlin conspiracy with Trump and his campaign.

Edited from Raw Story

“Individual number one” is making conservatives squirm

Corrupt Traitor Trump and his handler Vladdy

Things are ramping up in Robert Mueller’s universe. In recent days, “Individual number one” or Donald Trump has provided written responses to the Mueller team’s questions. On top of that, longtime Roger Stone confidant Jerome Corsi refused a plea deal and faces perjury charges at a minimum. Then on Thursday, former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about Trump’s business dealings with Russia during the 2016 presidential campaign potentially springing the perjury trap on Trump.

Increasingly conservatives are being put in a lot of very difficult situations and there will be many more next few weeks or months. How they react won’t just determine the Republican Party’s future but, will have a long-term impact on the country.

This is seeming like quite a familiar place for conservatives. The Trump reign has had the effect of pushing conservatives to different corners. Some erstwhile conservatives have become so disenchanted with Trump that they have abandoned previously held positions on issues ranging from climate change and guns to the Iraq War. To them, defending Trump has become so untenable and distasteful that it’s easier to wash their hands of it all.

Others have completely drunk the Trumpism kool-aid. In some cases, this is part of a devils bargain: They get very conservative judges and look the other way on the extreme rhetoric and horrible character flaws. In other cases, there is a lesser-of-two-evils paradigm at play. The left is too scary—the media so biased—that the only way to overcome it all is standing by their (strong) man.  They tell themselves, Trump is far from perfect, but, that Obama and Clinton were worse.

The courageous move would be to stand by enduring conservative principles and remain a person of character who isn’t afraid to call out Trump. That path has always been hard but will be made even harder as the stakes are raise in the weeks ahead.

As of now, it looks likely that Trump is, himself, guilty of collusion at least and probably worse, but what is proven, is that he was surrounded by people who were involved in some illegal and very unethical endeavors. Those endeavors are about to become more public, and the public is about to get a big window into the unseemly underbelly of Trump world.

Conservatives should resist the urge to defend Trump in these moments simply because he has an R next to his name or because he’s being targeted by people who they don’t like.

They should be ready to accept the very real possibility that felony’s and serious misdemeanors were committed and lies were told. Frankly, if it becomes clear that Trump made foreign-policy or public-policy decisions—while in office—based on the fact that he was (a) compromised, or (b) seeking personal gain by virtue of his position, that should be a bridge too far and those acts should be nullified.

Trump has created an environment where every conservative really must be introspective about where they draw the line and at what point they are willing to stand with him. For Republican politicians, it seems highly unlikely that Mitch McConnell will allow any sort of legislation to protect Robert Mueller. But that doesn’t absolve them from wrestling with questions like, what do they do if Trump or his recently installed acting attorney general, actually goes ahead and fires Mueller?

The people, who defend the indefensible—who put “loyalty” to a man (not principle or America) above all else—will not be judged mercifully by history.

taken from pieces in Raw Story and Daily Beast

The treasonous damage Trump is committing not only needs to be stopped, but completely obliterated.

His royal “hindass”

It’s not enough to impeach Trump, says Robert Reich, his entire presidency should be annulled! (hell ya!) 

Here is how:

The only way I see the end of Trump is if there’s overwhelming evidence he rigged the 2016 election. In which case impeachment isn’t an adequate remedy. His presidency should be *annulled. *(to make void or null; abolish; cancel; invalidate. To reduce to nothing; obliterate, to cancel.)

Let me explain. Many people are convinced we’re already witnessing the beginning of the end of Trump.

In their view, bombshell admissions from Trump insiders with immunity from prosecution, combined with whatever evidence Mueller uncovers about Trump’s obstruction of justice and his aide’s collusion with the Russians, will all tip the scales.

Democrats will take back the House and begin an impeachment, and the evidence of impeachable offenses will put enough pressure on Republican senators to send Trump packing.

I don’t believe this for a moment.

First, the Senate has never in history convicted a president of impeachment.

Second, even if Democrats flip the House in November, Republicans will almost certainly remain in control of the Senate – and so far they’ve displayed the integrity of lizards.

Third, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing sleaze media will continue to distort and cover up whatever the evidence shows – convincing 35 to 40 percent of Americans, along with most Republicans, that Trump is the innocent victim of a plot to remove him.

Finally, Trump himself will never voluntarily resign, as did Nixon. He’ll lie and claim a conspiracy to unseat him.

He’s proven himself a superb conman, an entertainer-demagogue capable of sowing so much confusion and instigating so much hate and paranoia that he has already survived outrages that would have broken any garden-variety loathsome president – Helsinki, Charlottesville, children locked in cages at the border, firings and cover-ups, racist slurs, clear corruption.

In all likelihood, we’ll have him for another two and a half years.

Don’t bet the house on him losing in 2020, either. A malignant bullying megalomaniac who lies like most people breathe, and who’s able to suck the oxygen out of every news cycle, might pulverize any Democratic opponent.

Even if he loses in 2020, we’ll be fortunate if he concedes without being literally carried out of the Oval Office amid the stirrings of civil insurgency.

Oh, and let me remind you that even if he’s impeached, we’d still have his loathsome administration – Pence on down.

But lest you fall into a miasma of gloom, there’s another scenario – unlikely, but entirely possible.

Suppose, just suppose, Robert Mueller finds overwhelming and indisputable evidence that Trump conspired with Putin to rig the 2016 election, and the rigging determined the election’s outcome.

In other words, Trump’s presidency is not authorized under the United States Constitution.

Suppose these findings are so compelling that even Trump loyalists desert him, the Republican Party decides it has had enough, and Fox News calls for his impeachment.

What then? Impeachment isn’t enough.

Impeachment would remedy Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors.” But impeachment would not remedy Trump’s unconstitutional presidency because it would leave in place his vice president, White House staff and Cabinet, as well as all the executive orders he issued and all the legislation he signed, and the official record of his presidency.

The only response to an unconstitutional presidency is to annul it. Annulment would repeal all of an unconstitutional president’s appointments and executive actions, and would eliminate the official record of the presidency.

Annulment would recognize that all such appointments, actions, and records were made without constitutional authority.

The Constitution does not specifically provide for annulment of an unconstitutional presidency. But read as a whole, the Constitution leads to the logical conclusion that annulment is the appropriate remedy for one.

After all, the Supreme Court declares legislation that doesn’t comport with the Constitution null and void, as if it had never been passed.

It would logically follow that the Court could declare all legislation and executive actions of a presidency unauthorized by the Constitution to be null and void, as if Trump had never been elected.

The Constitution also gives Congress and the states the power to amend the Constitution, thereby annulling or altering whatever provisions came before. Here, too, it would logically follow that Congress and the states could, through amendment, annul a presidency they determine to be unconstitutional.

As I’ve said, my betting is Trump remains president at least through 2020 – absent compelling and indisputable evidence he rigged the 2016 election.

But if such evidence comes forth, impeachment isn’t an adequate remedy because Trump’s presidency would be constitutionally illegitimate.

It should be *annulled. *(to make void or null; abolish; cancel; invalidate. To reduce to nothing; obliterate, to cancel.)