A reader who uses the name “Bill” left a comment in response to my post yesterday, “Another excellent guide to understanding the Trump whistleblower complaint.”
His comment was concise and to the point:
Trump can ask about Biden corruption if he wants to. What the heck is wrong with you people?
I think “Bill” has been a relatively frequent commenter here. He’s often seems to be on the conservative end of the opinion spectrum, but he’s usually reasonable.
But this latest comment leaves me wondering whether he actually read the article in question. Because the clear point is that, no, Trump cannot misuse the powers of his office, or the resources of the government, to “question” or investigate his political rivals. That is illegal.
Here’s one excerpt from that article:
Assuming that all or most of it is accurate—and there are ample reasons to believe that is the case—the complaint describes an utterly devastating abuse of power. As described by the whistleblower, the president essentially subverted or hijacked the machinery of government to his personal and political ends. To their credit, the White House and intelligence community officials who spoke to the whistleblower seem to have recognized this and reacted with alarm. Even when measured against Trump’s prior behavior, the Ukrainian episode is very bad.
When I began writing this piece, I thought I might need to explain in some detail why the president’s behavior was improper. I believe now that I do not. It is, or ought to be, obvious that the president of the United States may not deploy the machinery of government, including foreign policy and potentially law enforcement, for personal political gain. The country learned that lesson during the administration of President Nixon, with his infamous “enemies list,” which outlined ways to “use the available federal machinery,” like IRS audits, “to screw our political enemies.” This effort by Trump is quite similar, and similarly corrupt.
I’m wondering what part of this brief excerpt Bill takes issue with?
Let’s get closer to home. Honolulu’s mayor now has formed a committee for his run for governor. Isn’t it obvious that while he can raise questions about his potential opponents in that future election, it would be wrong for him to call the chief of police from his office and suggest that the chief use the resources at his disposal to investigate the person expected to be the strongest other candidate for governor?
Hey, weren’t Katherine and Louis Kealoha just convicted for doing just that, i.e., using the powers of their official positions to target, investigate, and harass family members with whom they had a private dispute?
So when Bill says that “Trump can ask about Biden corruption if he wants to,” he’s wrong. Trump can’t legally use the powers and resources of the presidency to attack his political opponents. He can’t mix public business and campaigning. He would not be allowed to divert funds from the Pentagon budget into his campaign. And he can’t direct the Department of Justice–or solicit a foreign government–to search for dirt on rival candidates. Isn’t that pretty basic?
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I like the Kealoha example cited as exemplar of “no one is above doing anything”. Fact is under Obama and or Clinton no investigation of The Kealoha’s, Caldwell, Kaneshiro or HART would ever start or result in conviction!!!
Honolulu, largely composed of liberal Trump opposition, would remain in complete cover up mode with Senator Inouye controlling Federal law enforcement oversight if he lived forever.
The division are deepening, even if Impeachment successful, it like the Senate Nuclear Option already in use will be faced by the next President of either party in retribution. Tit for tat & toe to toe till democracies destruction.
Ian, maybe you need to cite the specific laws that Trump may have broken in the incident being discussed You may have done this in previous posts, sorry if I missed that.
BTW, getting all sorts of bells and whistles not to come on your site from my security software. Is your certificate expired?
You said: “I think “Bill” has been a relatively frequent commenter here. He’s often seems to be on the conservative end of the opinion spectrum, but he’s usually reasonable.” Conservative end BUT usually reasonable? Speaks volumes about where you seem to be coming from but not as much about Bill.
You said: “So when Bill says that “Trump can ask about Biden corruption if he wants to,” he’s wrong. Trump can’t legally use the powers and resources of the presidency to attack his political opponents.” So, just where does the “attack” manifest itself What are the elements of the attack? In asking? Is questioning an investigation into a candidate’s son an offense against the candidate? Biden was proud of getting the Ukrainian Prosecutor fired and blew his horn repeatedly in public with the story. It is no secret people. Watch the CSpan clip of his comments at the Council of Foreign Relations. Even if Trump asked the investigation to be reopened, wasn’t it focused against a company that Biden was not legally part of? Wasn’t it his son working for the company? What possible criminal activity would Joe Biden’s behavior, which he seemed so proud of publicly, have constituted? Is there something people are sensitive to here that is so far unspoken and lurking to be revealed? Possibly. But, the bottom line is, why should Biden care so much about this and why does it touch a nerve now that it doesn’t touch when Joe Biden himself gaffed about it over and over? Where is the connection between Ukraine and Joe Biden, i.e. criminal connection? How can Trump be misusing his power when their investigation did not focus on Joe Biden? So Biden was the one who forced the investigation to be halted but he was not under investigation. It simply makes him look like a political hack, which he had no bones with by his pride in telling the story of shutting down the Ukrainian Prosecutor repeatedly. If the case is reopened in the Ukraine will it lead to something embarrassing beyond Joe Biden’s unusual sons antics? Or the DNC or the Democratic Party? The Democrats protest too much methinks. This is where the movement to impeach appears orchestrated and a repeat of the Russia ordeal. Is it thought that some kind of Ukrainian inquiry would set off a smoking gun to implicate Biden or the Democrats, and in time for the election? Still how does it become “dirt on Joe and not Hunter Biden?” This is even more interesting in light of the Clinton and DNC money paid out for the nefarious Steele Memo and other dead-end roads in the run up to the election. My biggest question is, why are the Democrats so Biden-obsessed. Maybe that in itself is the Democratic The danger to them must be Crowdstrike – something surrounding that scares the daylights out of them? Therefore a need for this diversion. Who knows. One thing for sure. Nothing in this is what it seems and my guess is, we ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Just my opinion.
Is using the power of Congress to suppress and impeach a President for asking a mere question about an investigation – even if requesting it be reopened on a relative of a candidate – a possible misuse of the powers of Congress?, itself an attempt to bring down a duly elected head of state for assumed criminal intent that has not been proven? As with all Trump “scandals” we already have the flood of articles by this or that attorney or bureaucrat treating the small and, by the way, uncorroborated evidence so far as a prima facie case and Trump’s guilt taken for granted. If anything is in danger from these forays at Trump, it is the insistent news coverage that repeatedly infers the whole thing is “a done deal.” There is no rule of law.? There is still the law. There is still a presumption.
Only other comment: The analogy to the Kealohas is a red herring at best. There is no allegation that Trump contrived to make a false report that a crime was committed, then fabricated evidence to support his allegations and provided false statements to authorities. To say the comparison is weak is an understatement. Nixon and enemies lists? You gotta be kiddin’ Ian. If you want to talk misuse of the IRS you need only look as far as Obama and Lois Lerner.
I am not a Repub or Demo. I lean conservative. But I’m usually reasonable – you know – two party system, OK to have different viewpoints, etc.
Great DISSERTATION! Like reading Muller Report.
Are there no allegations outstanding from that last Impeachment Act.
Let me guess, ending like Soprano’s, to the tune “DON’T STOP BELIEVING”….
Bazbo, your second paragraph does catch Ian possibly hinting (maybe more than hinting?) that he thinks conservatism and reasonableness don’t go together. Maybe he’ll clarify whether that’s what he thinks.
By the way, I lean liberal but I’m not liberal on all issues.
Sometimes I think the labels of “conservative” and “liberal” are too sweeping.
Oleander, based on my personal review of a number of sources, here are some of the laws that appear to have been violated if, based on future testimony and evidence, the whistle blower’s complaints are found to be valid .
1) It is illegal for a US citizen to ask a foreign nation to provide “a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value . . . in connection with a Federal election” (52 U.S. Code 30121).
2) It is illegal for a governmental official to ask for a favor for himself from somebody in exchange for the government official supporting or approving governmental action that would benefit the person.
3) It is illegal for a governmental official to direct his subordinates to conduct illegal actions or to cover up evidence or obstruct investigation of possible misconduct.
4) It is illegal to misclassify documents as Secret or Top Secret and store them in filing systems for such highly classified materials when they do not include any Secret or Top Secret information.
5) It is illegal for the White House and the Justice Department to interfere with the transmission of the whistle blower’s complaint to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees once the Inspector General had found the complaint to be “urgent” and “credible”.
6) It is a violation of the civil rights of the Bidens for the President to directly ask a foreign government to investigate them, especially when the intent of asking for the investigation is to dig up “dirt” on the Bidens for use in the 2020 election.
He wasn’t asking for a Biden “invedtigation”, he wants manufactured evidence. But that wasn’t all he wanted. He wants to go after the American firm hired by the DNC to investigate. Claiming that the whole thing around Russian interference in the election-was actually Hillary and the Ukranians. Recall the nost detailed findings of Mueller and indictments were of Russian nationals, with details like when they tried to wipe evidence.
Both Ralph Nader Newsletter and info#rootsaction.org site numerous impeachable Trump offenses.