This is a lie. Because:
a. The problem isn’t a long list of unapproved ambassadors. It’s that Trump left the most important slots vacant for virtually his entire first 2 years (eg Saudi Arabia)
b. Ambassadors need only 50 votes. Mitch, not Chuck, is the issue. https://t.co/0lm6ybPk5L
— Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) December 31, 2018
Category: Trump appointees
NASA will host a sanctioned Russian
Bad idea
Lawmakers and former national security officials say Dmitry Rogozin's invitation undermines U.S. sanctions and would give a government-approved platform to an anti-American bigot https://t.co/U7fBktH6ob
— POLITICO (@politico) January 1, 2019
Oppose Barr for Attorney General
.@JoyceWhiteVance makes a compelling case that confirming Barr would do serious damage to the US Department of Justice and to our legal system. Senators need to read this ⬇️https://t.co/BpeEDFiEox
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 28, 2018
WSJ: Trump’s attorney-general pick pushed pardons for some in Iran-Contra affair because he thought they had been unjustly treated by a special counsel. https://t.co/Z3egFA6QFe via @WSJ
— Will Rabbe (@WillRabbe) December 28, 2018
Trump’s AG pick, Bill Barr, sent an unsolicited 20-page memo to the Justice Department this year excoriating Mueller’s obstruction of justice investigation. He apparently told Trump about the memo and said it could come up during his confirmation hearings. https://t.co/tw2NcKAjHt
— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) December 20, 2018
Now we know why Trump picked Barr. https://t.co/tob9dToX3S
— Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) December 20, 2018
This is a pretty devastating attack on nominee Barr's memo, a memo which effectively puts the President above the law. The Senate should really scrutinize this memo and ask if our Founders really fought King George III to establish such a regime. https://t.co/IhVe0pPECO
— Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) December 26, 2018
Barr’s memo takes an indefensibly regal view of a president’s powers. We wouldn’t have fought a revolution to end up with a presidency unbound by law. Any Senator who finds the views in this memo acceptable either doesn’t understand it or is a sellout.https://t.co/OiygNwgB4A
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 28, 2018
Another corrupt Trump employee
This is a scam – sounds like they’ll make him work now.
Mulvaney on @maggieNYT/@npfandos report that Kelly deputy Zach Fuentes planned to "hide out" in the WH before taking advantage of early retirement program: Trump "doesn't let people sit around and do nothing."
"Zach's a good man. We'll find something for him to do productive."— Ben Siegel (@benyc) December 23, 2018
Loving @maddow recap tonight of the wild @maggieNYT & @npfandos story on Zach Fuentes, deputy WH chief of staff, & his maneuvers for early Coast Guard retirement. She points out that this program has been killed elsewhere, as my colleague @CDicksteinDC reported last year. pic.twitter.com/UpXESV71sV
— Claudia Grisales (@cgrisales) December 22, 2018
A wild @maggieNYT & @npfandos story about Zach Fuentes, deputy WH chief of staff, maneuvering to secretly “hide out” on payroll past Kelly’s ouster and get Coast Guard retirement rules changed for his personal benefit https://t.co/nvafjqFQgx
— Philip Rucker (@PhilipRucker) December 21, 2018
The dreaded day has come. Figured he'd take our name national sooner or later…thanks Zach.https://t.co/vrucrQZBhI
— Zach Fuentes (@ZachFuentesKION) December 21, 2018
Mattis departure
Mattis planned to stay until February but Trump wants him out on 1/1/19.
Let's see how many Republicans step up now to defend Secretary Mattis now that Trump has decided to un-person him.
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) December 23, 2018
Mattis resignation could be the "beginning of the functional end" of Trump's presidency, Meet the Press host says https://t.co/iEi7Rf6vsR pic.twitter.com/ynYFmK6fLL
— Newsweek (@Newsweek) December 23, 2018
Active duty military approval ratings:
Mattis- 84% and just 4% disapproval
Trump- 44% approval
Trump approval with military women- 26%
Trump approval with military minorities- 29% https://t.co/JGus62EHJV pic.twitter.com/Ofit2CZH4t— Evan Siegfried (@evansiegfried) December 23, 2018
UPDATE: Deputy Secretary of Defense, Patrick Shanahan, will assume the title of Acting Secretary of Defense starting 1/1/2019. Defense Secretary James Mattis announced his resignation last week in protest of Trump's decision to withdraw U.S. forces from Syria. pic.twitter.com/w9O8yc0QHi
— Ben Kennedy (@BenKennedyTV) December 23, 2018
Who is Patrick Shanahan? Trump forces James Mattis out early amid frustration over resignation https://t.co/16Q62cfLKv pic.twitter.com/2tIsaSDX7t
— Newsweek (@Newsweek) December 23, 2018
Amazing. “One aide said although Trump had already seen the resignation letter when he praised Mattis, the president did not understand just how forceful a rejection of his strategy Mattis had issued.” https://t.co/vYyaF9oq3N
— Mark Dubowitz (@mdubowitz) December 23, 2018
Sen. Dick Durbin said he is heartbroken that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is leaving the Cabinet and worried for the next two years of the Trump administrationhttps://t.co/KboS4MOtCv
— POLITICO (@politico) December 23, 2018
One effect of Trump pushing Mattis now: It cuts down opportunities for the secretary to speak in an official capacity.
Mattis was due to testify before both armed services committees in January, and planned to make one last visit to meet with NATO.https://t.co/2qBd3cOGra
— Dan Lamothe (@DanLamothe) December 23, 2018
"The chaos that finally cemented Mattis’s decision to leave…confirms the worst fears of Trump’s most dire critics."
This @RadioFreeTom is what i NEEDED this morning.https://t.co/zL1rlbRbkv
— Dennis Herring (@dcherring) December 23, 2018
In light of this hour's Mattis news, reupping this from today's paper –> "A rogue presidency": The era of containing Trump is over https://t.co/vGEfWLdBMr
— Philip Rucker (@PhilipRucker) December 23, 2018
This is an important essay:
It’s not often I call something a “must read.” This is one of those rare times. You must read this.https://t.co/ovTCSg7w7T
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 23, 2018
Trump wants to fire Jerome Powell
Trump makes everything political and about him. The Federal Reserve should not be subject to politics. He should shut up and leave it alone.
BREAKING: Trump has discussed firing Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell as his frustration has intensified after this week’s interest-rate increase and months of stock-market losses.
Advisers close to Trump aren’t convinced he will try to do it, but say he wants to.
— Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) December 22, 2018
Exasperated over the market plunge, Trump asks advisers whether he can fire Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. https://t.co/kgymiS7FPl
— Shane Harris (@shaneharris) December 23, 2018
Trump blames Mnuchin for Powell pick https://t.co/ePCZTYqYt1
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) December 23, 2018
Trump reportedly wants to fire Fed head Powell, a move that could wreak havoc on the financial markets https://t.co/gxGYdck8go
— Ali Velshi (@AliVelshi) December 22, 2018
Trump is obstructing justice again
Trump is angry at Whitaker for not controlling prosecutors investigating his businesses. This is an even more obvious case of obstruction of justice than when Trump wanted Comey to stop the Flynn investigation. At least, Trump and Whitaker haven’t ordered the investigation to stop. That would really be bad. I hope Trump gets indicted if he is guilty (which I think he clearly is).
Exactly right, @renato_mariotti. The bright red lines Trump crossed in telling Whitaker he needs to be more loyal to POTUS in the SDNY vis-a-vis Michael Cohen make the impropriety of Clinton’s silly chat with Lynch turn pale pink by comparison @JRubinBlogger https://t.co/5E4eabG8NQ
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 23, 2018
This is Trump yelling at the acting Attorney General for not doing enough to obstruct justice https://t.co/gV4QEdlTxw
— Dan Pfeiffer (@danpfeiffer) December 22, 2018
Does anybody really believe that President Trump wasn’t trying to influence an ongoing criminal investigation when he vented his frustration to acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker? pic.twitter.com/oGD3e2RCvn
— Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) December 22, 2018
On the one hand, it’s appalling that Trump is trying to influence the acting AG. On the other hand, it seems encouraging that despite this pressure, even a toady like Whitaker hasn’t hampered investigations into the president. https://t.co/5PLY5Gqrm7
— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) December 22, 2018
Remember when the #GOP went berserk because Hillary's spouse had a casual conversation with AG Lynch at the airport?
Waiting for GOP to go berserk again because @POTUS is now having direct conversations to influence acting AG Whitaker on investigations that implicate him …. https://t.co/q6WD9dZ4Lo
— Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) December 22, 2018
When @realDonaldTrump reportedly discussed the Cohen investigation with the acting Attorney General and pushed him to control New York prosecutors, was he trying to “work out a deal?” Is the system “totally rigged & corrupt?” pic.twitter.com/PL8zWhCppG
— Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) December 22, 2018
This is crossing the red line again, worse than his conversations with Comey: “Trump pressed Whitaker on why more wasn't being done to control prosecutors in New York who brought the charges in the first place.” https://t.co/8KKOT3gVTN
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 22, 2018
Folks concerned about Bill Clinton talking to Loretta Lynch on the tarmac during HRC probe may want to look at this https://t.co/W6Igz1nZha
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 22, 2018
Whitaker disregarded a recommendation to recuse himself from the Russia investigation
Whitaker’s team wrongly claims no AG has ever recused to avoid an appearance of conflict. It’s actually happened at least 3 times:
1. Ashcroft in Valerie Plame leak investigation (h/t @nycsouthpaw)
2. Holder in John Edwards investigation.
3. Holder in AP leak investigation. https://t.co/4LwTSIwBBH
— Eric Columbus (@EricColumbus) December 20, 2018
Typical of Trumglodytes: ask a question of the relevant experts and follow their advice — unless you don’t like it. Remember when Trump said he’d abide by the 2016 election results — unless they said he lost. Heads I win, tails you lose. I fear for 2020.https://t.co/ZRB8L0V32C
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 20, 2018
Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker will go against an ethics official's advice and will not be recusing himself from the Russia investigation. He will have final say over any of the inquiry's major developments. https://t.co/wagKEF8uAZ
— The New York Times (@nytimes) December 20, 2018
New information on Whitaker/ethics review:
– he never sought a formal recommendation on whether to recuse from Mueller, he did get guidance on the applicable rules
– ethics thought it was a close call on the *appearance* of a conflict, but found no actual legal conflict— Laura Jarrett (@LauraAJarrett) December 20, 2018
This ethics opinion must be shared with Congress. Now.
DOJ officials must avoid not only actual impropriety but the appearance of impropriety.
Given Whitaker’s prejudicial comments about Mueller, the public can have no confidence in him. We will scrutinize his every action. https://t.co/0Jxbn1eJSP
— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) December 20, 2018
This is turning into an enormous scandal. Ethics officials told Whitaker they would recommend recusal, so he set up a different group of officials (probably political appointees, but unclear) to make a different recommendation. What in the hell is going on at DOJ? https://t.co/gYBeY3RoGP
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 20, 2018
It gets better. DOJ won't even disclose the identify of the team they assembled to countermand the ethics recommendation that Whitaker recuse: "The senior official who described the Whitaker discussions refused to identify the particular Justice Department employees involved." https://t.co/6wPqm0s6Ha
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 20, 2018
The unwinding of the initial backward spin on this story is (finally) making it clear what happened.
WaPo headline here is long, but gets it:
"Ethics officials said Whitaker should recuse from the Mueller probe, but his advisers told him not to"https://t.co/2Vk4gKT8fA
— Rachel Maddow MSNBC (@maddow) December 20, 2018
If it’s a “close call,” in these circumstances, Whitaker should recuse. https://t.co/CLoL70LTf5
— Preet Bharara (@PreetBharara) December 20, 2018
Trump at war with Justice. Crony refuses to follow Ethics decision that he should recuse himself. https://t.co/QnjASMYbGt
— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) December 20, 2018
This is about as outrageous as it gets. I cannot imagine any AG I have worked for or known disregarding ethics advice in this way. https://t.co/WbXE7wEUfx
— Ronald Klain (@RonaldKlain) December 20, 2018
Stop enabling liars
I can’t listen to Trump, Conway, or Sanders. I am glad they invented the mute button.
In a world awash in disinformation, there’s no ‘both sides’ to the truth. The media must stop enabling liars. My column https://t.co/GoB3WeYybf
— Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) December 17, 2018
Lock him up!
Flynn is a liar.
He was not ambushed by the FBI.
Judge Sullivan disagrees. https://t.co/aUxq8GeV2B
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) December 18, 2018
Former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s sentencing is on hold after a dramatic rebuke from the judge, who stressed that prison time was not off the table — even though that’s what Flynn’s lawyers and Mueller's team agreed to in sentencing memos. https://t.co/9xlgIEX5kl pic.twitter.com/4nVmkz81yX
— The Lead CNN (@TheLeadCNN) December 18, 2018
A federal judge blasted Michael Flynn for lying to the FBI and questioned whether Robert Mueller’s prosecutors could have tried him for treasonhttps://t.co/2Mpi362GKz
— POLITICO (@politico) December 18, 2018
"[Flynn's] lawyers tried a sentencing strategy and it misfired really badly." – @JoyceWhiteVance w/ @NicolleDWallace pic.twitter.com/w0xaRzj62O
— Deadline White House (@DeadlineWH) December 18, 2018
New: Flynn's lawyers appear to have badly miscalculated in shifting at least part of the blame for Flynn's lies to the FBI—that is, unless they were playing for a pardon. “Maybe, on some level, this was an appeal to Trump and his base," says @Mimirocah1 https://t.co/EVN4oVcYKp
— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) December 18, 2018
SULLIVAN WARNS FLYNN OF A PRISON SENTENCE:
"You were an unregistered agent of a foreign country while serving as the National Security Adviser to the president!
"Arguably, this undermines everything this flag over here stands for! Arguably, you sold your country out!"
— Steven Portnoy (@stevenportnoy) December 18, 2018
Shorter Judge Sullivan: What’s all this BS on Fox News about you being trapped? Flynn: Nevermind.
— Ken Dilanian (@KenDilanianNBC) December 18, 2018
What I don't understand is *why* Flynn's team tried to falsely suggest wrongdoing where none existed. They had to know that deception was going nowhere with the judge. Perhaps Flynn wanted to set up his post-conviction speaking tour or political career. https://t.co/GtOJiTGz0Q
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) December 18, 2018
Judge Emmett Sullivan said he would not hide his “disdain” and “disgust” of Flynn’s crimes and criticized the former national security adviser’s lawyer’s attempts to construe that the FBI had engaged in entrapment, writes @natashabertrand. https://t.co/1tfC263thu
— The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) December 18, 2018
And I would add that hearsay is not allowed in court so the FBI needs witnesses to testify to relevant facts, because agents cannot. So even if they know the answer, they still need to admit the answer in court. https://t.co/ATXiDp7v0Y
— Daniel Goldman (@danielsgoldman) December 18, 2018
A remarkable turn within days: from Flynn lawyers claiming entrapment, to Flynn and lawyers admitting he repeatedly & willfully lied, to lawyers clearly concerned he may be facing jail time and asking for delay.
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) December 18, 2018
Sad! 