AuthorTopic: 🤡 Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread  (Read 157595 times)

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
Everything is a fucking "National Emergency"!  ::)

RE

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/15/trump-signs-executive-order-declaring-national-emergency-over-threats-against-us-technology.html

Trump declares national emergency over threats against US technology amid campaign against Huawei
Published Wed, May 15 2019 4:44 PM EDTUpdated 5 hours ago


Tucker Higgins
@tuckerhiggins
Key Points

    President Donald Trump on Wednesday declared a national emergency over threats against American technology, the White House said.
    The move, done via executive order, is expected to precede a ban on U.S. firms doing business with the Chinese telecommunications company Huawei.
    The announcement comes as the U.S and China remain locked in a trade dispute. 

watch now
VIDEO01:32
Trump targets Huawei

President Donald Trump on Wednesday declared a national emergency over threats against American technology, the White House said.

The move, done via executive order, authorized the Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, in consultation with other top officials, to block transactions that involve information or communications technology that “poses an unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States.”

Following the order, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced the addition of Huawei Technologies and its affiliates to the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) Entity List, making it more difficult for the Chinese telecom giant to conduct business with U.S. companies.

The addition means that U.S. companies cannot sell or transfer technology to Huawei without a license issued by the BIS. That could make it harder for Huawei to do business, as it depends on some U.S. suppliers for parts.

President Donald Trump backed the decision, which will “prevent American technology from being used by foreign owned entities in ways that potentially undermine U.S. national security or foreign policy interests,” Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said in a statement.

In a statement to CNBC on Thursday, Huawei said: “Restricting Huawei from doing business in the US will not make the US more secure or stronger; instead, this will only serve to limit the US to inferior yet more expensive alternatives, leaving the US lagging behind in 5G deployment, and eventually harming the interests of US companies and consumers.”

The Chinese tech company also said: “We are ready and willing to engage with the US government and come up with effective measures to ensure product security.”

The announcement has been under discussion for a year. It comes as the U.S and China remain locked in a trade dispute and could escalate tensions between the world’s two largest economies.

The order had been opposed by small rural carriers, who continued to rely on Huawei equipment even after it was largely dropped by the larger telecommunications companies.

In a statement, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote that the administration will “protect America from foreign adversaries who are actively and increasingly creating and exploiting vulnerabilities in information and communications technology infrastructure and services in the United States.”

The Trump administration has pushed allies around the world not to adopt the company’s next generation 5G network technology, which American officials have warned could be used for spying by the Chinese. Those efforts have had mixed results in Europe, where several countries declined to stop doing business with the company.

Huawei has forcefully denied allegations that it is not independent from the Chinese government.

In recent months, the U.S. has taken a number of steps against the firm.

In January, the Department of Justice announced a slew of charges against two units of the company, including for stealing trade secrets from T-Mobile USA. And both Huawei and ZTE, another Chinese technology firm, were barred from most U.S. government contract work by the 2019 Defense Authorization Act.

In December, Canadian authorities arrested Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou to serve an extradition request from the U.S. government, which has alleged that the company defrauded several banks by concealing payments from Iran in violation of sanctions against that country.

Earlier Wednesday, David Wang, an executive at the company, told The Wall Street Journal that such an order would be misguided.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
🤡 Republican senators meet with Jared Kushner, conclude he's clueless
« Reply #1936 on: May 17, 2019, 12:00:10 AM »
Like father, like son-in-law.  ::)

RE

https://www.salon.com/2019/05/16/after-meeting-with-jared-kushner-on-immigration-republicans-say-hes-clueless-on-the-issue/


Republican senators meet with Jared Kushner on immigration, conclude he's clueless
Kushner fails to impress GOP senators in private meeting on immigration plan: "He's in his own little world"

Igor Derysh
May 16, 2019 10:00AM (UTC)

Republican senators came away unimpressed from an immigration meeting with Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner and privately questioned whether he even understood the issue, the Washington Post reports.

Kushner, President Trump’s point man on the upcoming immigration bill the administration plans to introduce as soon as Thursday, met with Republican senators Tuesday on Capitol Hill to discuss their issues with the plan.

While senators publicly voiced support for the plan, Republicans privately expressed concern that Kushner was unable to provide “clear answers” to their questions despite a room with a “friendly audience,” the Post reported.

As a result, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, a hardline immigration hawk, was reportedly forced to interrupt Kushner to take over the discussion at several points.

Throughout the meeting, Kushner dismissed several topics that senators considered crucial to the bill. He told Sen. Susan Collins of Maine that the plan would not address DACA, the program that protects people who were brought into the United States illegally as children from deportation. The exchange “confused” some of the senators, since Democrats would not support a bill without DACA protections. It may not even get support from Collins.

“I am concerned about the fate of the DACA young people, and they cannot be excluded from any immigration package,” she told the Post.

Kushner told Collins that Trump had not asked him to address the issue and instead wanted to focus on issues that “bring people together.”

Republicans left the meeting with “little hope” that the immigration plan would move forward and some senators “left the meeting wondering whether Kushner understood the issue,” several Republican officials told The Post.
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

“He’s in his own little world,” an anonymous official told the outlet. “He didn’t give many details about what was in [his plan]. . . . And there were a number of instances where people had to step in and answer questions because he couldn’t.”

At the core of the plan is a merit-based point system for people applying to come to the United States and a required civics test that immigrants would have to pass even before being assessed based on the point system. But Republican officials said that Kushner “appeared to struggle” to answer basic questions about the policy and about what the administration plans to do about undocumented immigrants who are already in the United States.

“Miller interrupted him a lot,” an official told the Post.

Kevin Hassett, head of the Council of Economic Advisers, also tried to help Kushner at the meeting by claiming that the plan would generate $600 billion in net federal revenue, which was similarly met with skepticism in the room. Studies have shown that undocumented immigrants likely provide a boost to the economy, even more so than legal immigrants because they do not qualify for public benefits but still often pay taxes.

"I think folks in the room were underwhelmed" with the "whole plan," a Republican official told CNN.

Despite the skepticism from Republicans, Trump is expected to unveil the plan on Thursday, CNN reported.

The last time Trump tried to push through an immigration bill in the Senate, it was voted down 39-60, failing even worse than three other competing Republican proposals.

The report also does not bode well for Kushner’s role as the point man on developing a Middle East peace deal, a task he was assigned in the early days of Trump’s presidency.

Kushner has met with a number of experts and lawmakers in recent weeks to discuss the proposal, leaving many “astounded” and worried that the plans are “woefully short on detail,” Politico reported.

The backlash to his plans, and his involvement in general, has not dampened Kushner’s confidence.

“Some people have the belief that he had the magic touch on criminal justice. And what he did there he can do on anything else: trade, Middle East peace, immigration,” a Republican senator told Politico after recently meeting with Kushner. “He perceives himself as a dealmaker with elected senators and representatives.”
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 16145
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Like father, like son-in-law.  ::)

Republican senators meet with Jared Kushner on immigration, conclude he's clueless
Kushner fails to impress GOP senators in private meeting on immigration plan: "He's in his own little world"

Republican senators came away unimpressed from an immigration meeting with Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner and privately questioned whether he even understood the issue, the Washington Post reports.

//
As a result, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, a hardline immigration hawk, was reportedly forced to interrupt Kushner to take over the discussion at several points.
//


You have to wonder why Trump sent The Dauphin to the meeting at all, when anyone scoring at home knows that Miller is the alpha and the omega for immigration policy. Miller tells Trump what to think, in keeping with established administration policy for listening to the Worst People On the Planet for advice on any matters of policy.
"It is difficult to write a paradiso when all the superficial indications are that you ought to write an apocalypse." -Ezra Pound

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
🤡 The Pompeo Bolton Tag Team from Hell
« Reply #1938 on: May 18, 2019, 02:54:04 AM »
https://www.globalresearch.ca/pompeo-bolton-team/5677698

The Pompeo Bolton Tag Team from Hell
By Renee Parsons
Global Research, May 17, 2019
Region: Middle East & North Africa, USA
Theme: Media Disinformation


There was little pretense that when former UN Ambassador John Bolton became President Trump’s National Security Adviser and former Rep. Mike Pompeo moved into the Secretary of State position, that either would bring a professionally credible and respectable presence to  world diplomacy or foreign affairs.

It is fair to say that both have surpassed any of the bleak expectations and proven to be more extreme in their ideology, more personally amoral and malevolent than previously feared.  What we are seeing now is as if all constraints have been removed with free rein to fulfill their zio-neocon agendas specifically against Venezuela and Iran.

    While speaking to a student audience recently at Texas A&M University, Pompeo revealed his utter contempt for a democratic government based on the rule of law when he bragged about “lying, cheating and stealing” as CIA Director. To an audience of undergraduates which clapped and laughed throughout, Pompeo offered

    “What’s the cadet motto at West Point? You will not lie, cheat or steal or tolerate those who do. I was the CIA Director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. (laughing as if he had said something humorous) We had entire training courses. (Audience applause and cheers) It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment.” (emphasis added)

First in his class at West Point and a graduate of Harvard Law School, Pompeo prides himself on having “come to an understanding of Jesus that fundamentally changed“ his life as a cadet and today claims to  be a “man of faith.”  It is not clear who Pompeo thinks he is kidding with the religious fervor schtick but for sure it is not any divine deity which will one day sit in Judgment on his character and integrity.  The Texas A&M exchange reveals an unscrupulous bully who knows no limit to his omnipotence and a willingness to condone war crimes on behalf of the disreputable Empire he serves.

    Keynote speaker at AIPAC’s 2019 conference, Pompeo proved where his fidelity lies when he declared “Let me go on record: Anti-zionism is anti-semitism” which has become the new rallying cry for the poor, beleaguered state of Israel.
    As the State Department is now defining the term ‘anti Zionism,’ Pompeo appointed Elan Carr as Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism with the ultimate goal to intimidate and criminalize critics of Israel’s foreign policy objectives.

In describing his responsibilities, Carr’s stated priorities will be to “reduce the feelings of insecurity”, review “indoctrination of anti semitic textbooks” and “focus relentlessly on eradicating this false distinction between anti Zionism and anti-semitism.”  It takes living in a simulated reality to not grasp the distinction between criticism of Israel’s apartheid policy toward the Palestinians and its belligerent foreign policy in the Middle East and a genuine prejudice or discrimination based on one’s religious preference or ethnic differences.

At his press briefing, Carr was immediately in the weeds and lost total control of the narrative before being shut down by the State Department official spokesman.

As a one dimensional thinker,  Mr. Carr never described who or how anti-semitism will be identified. Will the State Department issue a weekly list of anti-Semitic offenders and what will  be the penalty?  Will State provide a list of forbidden anti-semitic words? How will deliberate intent be determined?   If a non-jew utters words like apartheid, yenta, yarmulke or illegal settlements, will they be considered proof of anti-Semitic?   Will the Nazis still be permitted to march in Skokie?  Will the tech giants rewrite their algorithms to search for ‘banned’ words?
‘Thuggish’: Trump Imposes Visa Bans on ICC Staff Probing US War Crimes in Afghanistan

    On April 10th, Omar Barghouti (image on the right), a prominent Palestinian human rights defender and a co-founder of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement was denied entry by the US Consulate before departing Ben Gurion Airport despite having valid travel documents and having visited the US previously. Barghouti responded that

    “Supporters of Israeli apartheid in the US are desperately trying to deny US lawmakers, media, diverse audiences at universities, a bookstore and a synagogue, their right to listen, first-hand, to a Palestinian human rights advocate calling for ending US complicity in Israel’s crimes against our people.”

    In a 2016 report, the International Criminal Court chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda initiated an investigation into possible war crimes in Afghanistan involving the torture of 61 prisoners committed by the US Army and the torture and rape of 27 prisoners committed by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) at CIAprison sites in Poland, Romania and Lithuania.

In response to the ICC inquiry in 2018, Bolton warned

    “We will ban its judges and prosecutors from entering the United States. We will sanction their funds in the US financial system, and we will prosecute them in the US criminal system. We will do the same for any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans,”

In March 2019, Pompeo repeated the ICC threats with no apology in a straight forward defense of torture and war criminals.

    “Since 1998, the US has declined to join the ICC because of its broad unaccountable prosecutorial powers and the threat it poses to American national sovereignty.  We are determined to protect the American and allied military and civilian personnel from living in fear of unjust prosecution for actions taken to defend our great nation.   I’m announcing a policy of US visa restrictions on those individuals directly responsible for any ICC investigation of US personnel. These visa restrictions may also be used to deter ICC efforts to pursue allied personnel, including Israelis without allies consent. These visa restrictions will not be the end of our efforts.We are prepared to take additional steps, including economic sanctions, if the ICC does not change course,”

After the Court responded that itwould continue its investigation with “war crimes and crimes against humanitywere, and continue to be, committed by foreign government forces in Afghanistan,”  Reference to ‘allied” personnel and Israeli involvement in US war crimes remains impenetrable.  True to his word, in early April Pompeo revoked the visa for Bensouda (image on the left).

In a devastating setback for the ICC, its pre-trial chamber recently refused to approve the investigation from moving forward citing a lack of US cooperation.  Certainly the Pompeo – Bolton threat to criminally prosecute and personally sanction the Court’s judges or that the US would ‘use any means necessary ” had nothing to do with that decision.  Bensouda says she will appeal the chamber’s decision.

    After the January meeting with North Korea ended in failure, NK’s Deputy Defense Minister, who took part in the meeting, revealed that while Trump had shown a willingness to lift some sanctions based on NK’s moratorium on missile tests, he was later overridden by Pompeo and Bolton who brought “an atmosphere of hostility and mistrust” to the table with their “gangster like behavior.”

As the zio-neocons continue to move on Venezuela and/or Iran as uncontrollable malevolent fiends, loose cannons with no concept of international law or the need for global harmony, men of no conscience and no morality, it is only a matter of time before cosmic law balances the scale.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Renee Parsons has been a member of the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC. She can be found on Twitter @reneedove31
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
🤡 Something Wrong with Trump: The Insulting Names Are No Longer Welcome
« Reply #1939 on: May 18, 2019, 03:32:31 AM »
At least some Tumpovetsky Righty Voters are having second thoughts...

RE

Something Wrong with Trump: The Insulting Names Are No Longer Welcome
Philip Giraldi
May 16, 2019


Remaining promoters of the concept of Donald Trump as President of the United States cite the fact that he has started no new shooting wars while Russiagate has turned out to be a flop and the economy seems to be doing well. He also seems serious about leaving Syria and Afghanistan, though those initiatives are currently on hold pending the approval of his consigliere “Defender of Israel” award winner John Bolton.

The Trump supporters however choose to ignore that the president has been unable to secure the southern border, which was a significant campaign pledge, and has initiated a series of trade and economic wars supplemented by a heavy dose of sanctions that have possibly killed more people and destroyed more American jobs collaterally than if he deliberately gone out and sought to do so. And also on his watch relations with Russia, the most important country in the world with respect to national security, have gotten worse, not better. Far worse.

I voted for Trump because he was not Hillary Clinton and he presented himself as the peace and reconciliation candidate. Almost everyone I know from my national security and moderate conservative background did the same, but now few of those supporters are enthusiastic about Trump based on his record of war-crime cruise missile attacks on Syria and his shameful and never ending pandering to Israel, which has included withdrawal from a highly beneficial nuclear agreement coupled with almost weekly piling on Iran. Venezuela, which is a sideshow, has merely confirmed that the Trump Administration has a lot of loose cannons on deck and the least tethered of all just might be the president.

At this point, people I know are completely disillusioned by what is going on – or not going on – in the White House and would only vote for Trump if he again runs against Hillary in 2020. But that is a Clinton thing that actually has little to do with what Trump is or represents and it begs the question why America tends to produce such terrible presidential candidates.

Unfortunately, when one thinks about Donald Trump the words “boorish” and “uncouth” come immediately to mind, followed by “possibly insane.” Some observers suggest that the crudeness is a ploy on Trump’s part, the kind of language that his supporters expect, something that excites them, but I tend to think that he has lost more than he has gained by his demeanor. And then there is the tweeting. It is so far beneath the dignity of the office that Trump holds to tweet insults far and wide that it is difficult to imagine what he thinks he gains by doing it. It is perhaps an indication that his self esteem is so fragile that he has to be on the attack constantly and his chosen method for dealing with critics is ridicule.

A recent Trump target was putative Democratic presidential candidate Pete Butteig, whom he nicknamed Alred E. Neuman, Mad Magazine’s perennial cover nerd. In an interview, Trump declared to Politico that “Alfred E. Neuman cannot become president of the United States,” an insult presumably based on Trump’s assessment of Buttigieg’s appearance. Buttigieg, for his part, did not know who Neuman was as the “What, me worry?” boy was a humor magazine staple well-known half a century ago in the 1960s and 1970s. He responded that he was “surprised” Trump wasn’t “spending more time trying to salvage this China deal.”
Save As Many As You Can

Offline AJ

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 237
    • View Profile
Re: 🤡 Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #1940 on: May 18, 2019, 03:46:53 AM »
Yeah, but . . . if the dems nominate OLD MAN Biden maybe they could elect Trump to a second term? :icon_scratch:
AJ
Nullis in Verba

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
Re: 🤡 Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #1941 on: May 18, 2019, 03:57:07 AM »
Yeah, but . . . if the dems nominate OLD MAN Biden maybe they could elect Trump to a second term? :icon_scratch:
AJ

Again IMHO Uncle Joe is not the best candidate of the bunch here for POTUS, but he is the one who the Demodope establishment supports and wants.  He'll cowtow to corporate interests.  It really depends on who he picks as running mate if he does in fact get the nomination.  He should pick a female, and either Liz Warren or Kamala Harris will do for that.  That will secure the women's vote, and that should carry him over the top against Trumpovetsky.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline K-Dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3161
    • View Profile
    • K-Dog
At least some Tumpovetsky Righty Voters are having second thoughts...

RE

Something Wrong with Trump: The Insulting Names Are No Longer Welcome
Philip Giraldi
May 16, 2019


Remaining promoters of the concept of Donald Trump as President of the United States cite the fact that he has started no new shooting wars while Russiagate has turned out to be a flop and the economy seems to be doing well. He also seems serious about leaving Syria and Afghanistan, though those initiatives are currently on hold pending the approval of his consigliere “Defender of Israel” award winner John Bolton.

The Trump supporters however choose to ignore that the president has been unable to secure the southern border, which was a significant campaign pledge, and has initiated a series of trade and economic wars supplemented by a heavy dose of sanctions that have possibly killed more people and destroyed more American jobs collaterally than if he deliberately gone out and sought to do so. And also on his watch relations with Russia, the most important country in the world with respect to national security, have gotten worse, not better. Far worse.

I voted for Trump because he was not Hillary Clinton and he presented himself as the peace and reconciliation candidate. Almost everyone I know from my national security and moderate conservative background did the same, but now few of those supporters are enthusiastic about Trump based on his record of war-crime cruise missile attacks on Syria and his shameful and never ending pandering to Israel, which has included withdrawal from a highly beneficial nuclear agreement coupled with almost weekly piling on Iran. Venezuela, which is a sideshow, has merely confirmed that the Trump Administration has a lot of loose cannons on deck and the least tethered of all just might be the president.

At this point, people I know are completely disillusioned by what is going on – or not going on – in the White House and would only vote for Trump if he again runs against Hillary in 2020. But that is a Clinton thing that actually has little to do with what Trump is or represents and it begs the question why America tends to produce such terrible presidential candidates.

Unfortunately, when one thinks about Donald Trump the words “boorish” and “uncouth” come immediately to mind, followed by “possibly insane.” Some observers suggest that the crudeness is a ploy on Trump’s part, the kind of language that his supporters expect, something that excites them, but I tend to think that he has lost more than he has gained by his demeanor. And then there is the tweeting. It is so far beneath the dignity of the office that Trump holds to tweet insults far and wide that it is difficult to imagine what he thinks he gains by doing it. It is perhaps an indication that his self esteem is so fragile that he has to be on the attack constantly and his chosen method for dealing with critics is ridicule.

A recent Trump target was putative Democratic presidential candidate Pete Butteig, whom he nicknamed Alred E. Neuman, Mad Magazine’s perennial cover nerd. In an interview, Trump declared to Politico that “Alfred E. Neuman cannot become president of the United States,” an insult presumably based on Trump’s assessment of Buttigieg’s appearance. Buttigieg, for his part, did not know who Neuman was as the “What, me worry?” boy was a humor magazine staple well-known half a century ago in the 1960s and 1970s. He responded that he was “surprised” Trump wasn’t “spending more time trying to salvage this China deal.”

Lets quote that again:

Quote
I voted for Trump because he was not Hillary Clinton and he presented himself as the peace and reconciliation candidate. Almost everyone I know from my national security and moderate conservative background did the same,

Perhaps thinking 'Russian collusion' the same way that I think the ping that looks at http://chasingthesquirrel.com/ fifty times a week from Lviv Ukraine might not really from Lviv Ukraine might not be crazy?
« Last Edit: May 18, 2019, 11:14:13 AM by K-Dog »
Under ideal conditions of temperature and pressure the organism will grow without limit.

Offline AJ

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 237
    • View Profile
Re: 🤡 Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #1943 on: May 18, 2019, 03:51:44 PM »
I think you are wrong RE :icon_mrgreen:
If the dems nominate Biden (with anyone as a running mate) he will turn off so many that Trump will get re-elected. PROVIDED the economy doesn't tank completely before election day. Then all bets are off. Biden is Hilary in pants (corporate, MAINSTREAM (bought and paid for) right of center sycophant).
AJ
Nullis in Verba

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
Re: 🤡 Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #1944 on: May 18, 2019, 04:40:07 PM »
I think you are wrong RE :icon_mrgreen:
If the dems nominate Biden (with anyone as a running mate) he will turn off so many that Trump will get re-elected. PROVIDED the economy doesn't tank completely before election day. Then all bets are off. Biden is Hilary in pants (corporate, MAINSTREAM (bought and paid for) right of center sycophant).
AJ

Well, only time will tell on this.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
The Rats are Jumping Ship!  :icon_sunny:


RE

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/justin-amash-michigan-republican-congressman-becomes-first-gop-member-to-call-for-trump-impeachment/

Michigan congressman Justin Amash becomes first GOP lawmaker to call for impeachment


By Caroline Linton

Updated on: May 18, 2019 / 9:21 PM / CBS News

U.S. Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan on Saturday became the first Republican lawmaker to say President Trump had "engaged in impeachable conduct." In a series of tweets, Amash wrote he had read the full report by special counsel Robert Mueller and had concluded there is a "threshold for impeachment."

"Under our Constitution, the president 'shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors,'" Amash wrote Saturday. "While 'high Crimes and Misdemeanors' is not defined, the context implies conduct that violates the public trust."

Amash also wrote that impeachment does not require "probable cause" has been committed, but rather "simply requires a finding that an official has engaged in careless, abusive, corrupt or otherwise dishonorable conduct."   
Trending News

    2019 Preakness Winner
    Jimmy Carter
    Meghan Markle's Friends
    Tornado Update

After Mueller concluded his report in mid-March, Attorney General William Barr released a four-page summary, which Amash said "deliberately misrepresented" the full 448-page report. "Barr's misrepresentations are significant but often subtle, frequently taking the form of sleight-of-hand qualifications or logical fallacies, which he hopes people will not notice," he wrote.   

Amash wrote that, contrary to Barr's initial assessment of Mueller's report, Mr. Trump had "engaged in specific actions and a pattern of behavior that meet the threshold for impeachment.

Congress, too, was not spared from criticism by Amash. He called out the partisanship of many lawmakers, saying they shift their perceptions "180 degrees" when discussing former President Bill Clinton and Mr. Trump.

"Few members of Congress even read Mueller's report; their minds were made up based on partisan affiliation — and it showed, with representatives and senators from both parties issuing definitive statements on the 448-page report's conclusions within just hours of its release," Amash wrote.

Amash, who has been described as the "new Ron Paul" due to his Libertarian beliefs, has broken ranks with the Republican party before — and especially against Mr. Trump, whom he did not endorse in 2016. Earlier this year, he was one of 14 Republican representatives who tried to override Mr. Trump's veto over an emergency declaration for the border wall. In March, Amash did not rule out running for president as a Libertarian in 2020.

Several of the Democrats running for president have called for Mr. Trump's impeachment.

Read the full tweet thread below:

    Here are my principal conclusions:
    1. Attorney General Barr has deliberately misrepresented Mueller’s report.
    2. President Trump has engaged in impeachable conduct.
    3. Partisanship has eroded our system of checks and balances.
    4. Few members of Congress have read the report.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    I offer these conclusions only after having read Mueller’s redacted report carefully and completely, having read or watched pertinent statements and testimony, and having discussed this matter with my staff, who thoroughly reviewed materials and provided me with further analysis.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    In comparing Barr’s principal conclusions, congressional testimony, and other statements to Mueller’s report, it is clear that Barr intended to mislead the public about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s analysis and findings.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    Barr’s misrepresentations are significant but often subtle, frequently taking the form of sleight-of-hand qualifications or logical fallacies, which he hopes people will not notice.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    Under our Constitution, the president “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” While “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined, the context implies conduct that violates the public trust.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    Contrary to Barr’s portrayal, Mueller’s report reveals that President Trump engaged in specific actions and a pattern of behavior that meet the threshold for impeachment.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    In fact, Mueller’s report identifies multiple examples of conduct satisfying all the elements of obstruction of justice, and undoubtedly any person who is not the president of the United States would be indicted based on such evidence.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    Impeachment, which is a special form of indictment, does not even require probable cause that a crime (e.g., obstruction of justice) has been committed; it simply requires a finding that an official has engaged in careless, abusive, corrupt, or otherwise dishonorable conduct.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    While impeachment should be undertaken only in extraordinary circumstances, the risk we face in an environment of extreme partisanship is not that Congress will employ it as a remedy too often but rather that Congress will employ it so rarely that it cannot deter misconduct.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    Our system of checks and balances relies on each branch’s jealously guarding its powers and upholding its duties under our Constitution. When loyalty to a political party or to an individual trumps loyalty to the Constitution, the Rule of Law—the foundation of liberty—crumbles.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    We’ve witnessed members of Congress from both parties shift their views 180 degrees—on the importance of character, on the principles of obstruction of justice—depending on whether they’re discussing Bill Clinton or Donald Trump.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    Few members of Congress even read Mueller’s report; their minds were made up based on partisan affiliation—and it showed, with representatives and senators from both parties issuing definitive statements on the 448-page report’s conclusions within just hours of its release.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

    America’s institutions depend on officials to uphold both the rules and spirit of our constitutional system even when to do so is personally inconvenient or yields a politically unfavorable outcome. Our Constitution is brilliant and awesome; it deserves a government to match it.
    — Justin Amash (@justinamash) May 18, 2019

First published on May 18, 2019 / 9:09 PM
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
🤡 Conway Shreds Trumpofsky: "You never stop lying, do you?"
« Reply #1946 on: May 20, 2019, 02:26:41 AM »
https://www.newsweek.com/george-conway-shreds-trumps-attack-amash-lie-lie-breakdown-you-never-stop-1429897

Mon, May 20, 2019
George Conway Shreds Trump's Attack on Amash With Itemized Breakdown: 'You Never Stop Lying, Do You?'
By Christina Zhao On 5/19/19 at 5:00 PM EDT
Video Player is loading.


George Conway, attorney and husband to White House advisor Kellyanne Conway, shredded President Donald Trump’s attack on Rep. Justin Amash on Sunday with what could best be described as a "lie-by-lie" breakdown of the president’s tweets.

After Amash became on Saturday the first Republican lawmaker to publicly declare that Trump had engaged in an impeachable offense while in office, the president fired back Sunday morning at the congressman with a series of angry tweets, where he called Amash a “loser” and maintained his own innocence.

“Never a fan of [Justin Amash], a total lightweight who opposes me and some of our great Republican ideas and policies just for the sake of getting his name out there through controversy,” the president tweeted.

“If he actually read the biased Mueller Report, 'composed' by 18 Angry Dems who hated Trump, he would see that it was nevertheless strong on NO COLLUSION and, ultimately, NO OBSTRUCTION...Anyway, how do you Obstruct when there is no crime and, in fact, the crimes were committed by the other side? Justin is a loser who sadly plays right into our opponents hands!” Trump added in another post.

Hours later, Conway attempted to tear Trump’s tweets apart by claiming the president lied on almost every point he made.

“You never stop lying, do you?,” the attorney tweeted, alongside a reshare of Trump’s attacks on Amash.

Conway flagged a series of quotes Trump's tweets — that the Mueller report was "son NO COLLUSION," that the special counsel had concluded there had been "ultimately, NO OBSTRUCTION," that one can't obstruct "when there is no crime," that the "crimes were committed by the other side" as "LIES."

The only statement Conway flagged as "TRUE" was Trump's assertion that Amash had played "right into our opponents hands." Conway's reasoning? "[Y]ou seem to oppose justice and the rule of law, so, at least on this one, TRUE.”

    • “strong on NO COLLUSION” _LIE

    • “and, ultimately, NO OBSTRUCTION”_LIE

    • “how do you Obstruct when there is no crime”_LIE to suggest you couldn’t and didn’t

    •”the crimes were committed by the other side”_LIEhttps://t.co/BlxcGmM9qy
    — George Conway (@gtconway3d) May 19, 2019


Newsweek has reached out to Amash for comment but did not receive a response at the time of publication.

Amash offered some “principal conclusions” of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report after he wrote on Twitter that he had read the full 448-page redacted document on Russia campaign meddling and possible obstruction of justice committed by Trump’s administration and inner circle.

“Here are my principal conclusions: 1. Attorney General [William] Barr has deliberately misrepresented Mueller’s report. 2. President Trump has engaged in impeachable conduct. 3. Partisanship has eroded our system of checks and balances. 4. Few members of Congress have read the report,” the GOP lawmaker tweeted.

Barr provided Congress a summary of Mueller’s report on March 24, nearly 48 hours after the special counsel officially finalized the probe, that said that investigation “did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election.” On the issue of whether Trump obstructed justice, Barr said the special counsel’s report neither exonerted nor indicted the president.
Loading...
Related Stories

    Trump Brands Rep. Justin Amash a 'Loser' over Impeachment Talk
    Romney: Rep. Amash 'Courageous' for Trump Impeachment Comments
    CNN Guests: Are Amash's Impeachment Comments a 2020 Campaign Precursor?
    GOP Rep: 'President Trump Has Engaged in Impeachable Conduct'

However, when Mueller’s 448-page report, with redactions, we released almost a month later, it painted a more damning picture for Trump. Within the document, Mueller detailed at least a dozen instances in which Trump might have obstructed justice.

“We’ve witnessed members of Congress from both parties shift their views 180 degrees—on the importance of character, on the principles of obstruction of justice—depending on whether they’re discussing Bill Clinton or Donald Trump,” Amash wrote on Saturday. “Few members of Congress even read Mueller’s report; their minds were made up based on partisan affiliation—and it showed, with representatives and senators from both parties issuing definitive statements on the 448-page report’s conclusions within just hours of its release.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
Next stop: The SCOTUS.  ::)

RE

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/20/us/politics/trump-financial-records.html

Accountants Must Turn Over Trump’s Financial Records, Lower-Court Judge Rules

President Trump lost an early test of his strategy of stonewalling all oversight demands for information by Congress, but the ruling is just the first step in what could be a lengthy process.


President Trump last week at the White House.Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times

Charlie Savage

By Charlie Savage

    May 20, 2019

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s accounting firm must turn over his financial records to Congress, a Federal District Court judge ruled on Monday, rejecting his legal team’s argument that lawmakers had no legitimate power to subpoena the files.

But Mr. Trump vowed that his legal team would appeal rather than permit the firm, Mazars USA, to comply with the subpoena and the ruling, so the legal fight is far from over.

The ruling by the judge, Amit P. Mehta of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, was an early judicial test of the president’s vow to systematically stonewall “all” subpoenas by House Democrats, stymieing their ability to perform oversight of Mr. Trump and the executive branch after winning control of the chamber in last year’s midterm elections.

[Read the ruling.]

Mr. Trump’s legal team, led by William S. Consovoy, had argued that the House Committee on Oversight and Reform had no legitimate legislative purpose in seeking Mr. Trump’s financial records and was just trying to dig up dirt — like finding out whether the president broke any laws — for political reasons, so the subpoena exceeded its constitutional authority.

Advertisement

But Democrats have said they need the records because they are examining whether foreigners are in a position to use business dealings with the president to exert hidden influence over American policymaking, and whether ethics and disclosure laws need to be strengthened.

Judge Mehta — an appointee of former President Barack Obama — said that justification was sufficient to make the subpoena valid.
You have 3 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times

“These are facially valid legislative purposes, and it is not for the court to question whether the committee’s actions are truly motivated by political considerations,” he wrote. “Accordingly, the court will enter judgment in favor of the Oversight Committee.”

In a statement, Representative Elijah Cummings, the Maryland Democrat who chairs the Oversight Committee, hailed the decision as a “resounding victory” for the rule of law and constitutional checks and balances.

“Congress must have access to the information we need to do our job effectively and efficiently, and we urge the President to stop engaging in this unprecedented cover-up and start complying with the law,” he said.

Advertisement

Mr. Consovoy did not respond to an email requesting comment, but Mr. Trump separately told reporters that he would appeal the ruling, which he denounced as “totally the wrong decision by obviously an Obama-appointed judge.” He also said was “crazy because if you look at it, this never happened to any other president.”

The judge also rejected Mr. Consovoy’s request that, were he to rule against Mr. Trump, he issue a stay of his ruling until the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia completed its review of the case.

The judge said that the Mr. Trump’s legal arguments were too thin to merit a stay because they did not raise a “serious legal question,” and said that issuing such a stay would amount to interfering with the constitutional powers of Congress.

“The court is well aware that this case involves records concerning the private and business affairs of the president of the United States,” he wrote. “But on the question of whether to grant a stay pending appeal, the president is subject to the same legal standard as any other litigant that does not prevail.”
Tracking 29 Investigations Related to Trump

Federal, state and congressional authorities are investigating Donald J. Trump’s businesses, campaign, inauguration and presidency.

Mr. Trump accused Democrats of trying to get a “redo” of the Mueller investigation. “They’re trying to get what we used to call in school a do-over,” he told reporters on the South Lawn early Monday evening before departing for a campaign rally in Pennsylvania.

Judge Mehta had appeared to signal initial skepticism about Mr. Consovoy’s arguments during a May 14 hearing, pointing to several past congressional inquiries — like the Watergate inquiry of President Richard M. Nixon and the Whitewater investigation of President Bill Clinton — that would seem to be illegitimate under the Trump legal team’s rationale.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2019, 12:09:56 AM by RE »
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
https://www.thedailybeast.com/pelosis-strategy-is-working-and-trump-is-one-step-closer-to-being-fcked

Pelosi’s Strategy Is Working, and Trump Is One Step Closer to Being F*cked

Democrats who want impeachment yesterday aren’t paying attention. Between McGahn, the ruling on taxes, and Cohen, the Resistance has had a banner week.

Rick Wilson
05.21.19 4:05 PM ET


Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty

I’ve been a deep skeptic of impeachment as a political strategy, putting me solidly in the Nancy Pelosi go-slow camp. I’ve argued time and again that the smart play is IIABN: Impeachment in All but Name, but the great beast of Washington shambles ever forward, its ponderous, inexorable tread leading it toward the inevitable impeachment proceedings against Donald John Trump, 45th president of the United States.

Can you make an impeachment case for obstruction based purely on the released information in the Mueller Report? Absolutely.
Advertisement

Are you there yet politically? Nope.

For my Democratic friends, I know how frustrating this seems to you. This week, forward progress on a number of fronts will help move the nation into the mental and political frame where impeachment could lead to the conviction of Trump, not just what he’ll view as a wrist-slap and a campaign motivation point for his base. You cannot shame the shameless. You cannot make a man who is without a single ethical standard change the behavior that allowed him to grift his way into office and to monetize the presidency.

    SPOILER ALERT
    Trump Is on the Iron Throne, and American Democracy Is Dead
    Rick Wilson

“But damn it, Wilson, why can’t we get on with fucking Trump? Doesn’t he deserve it? Haven’t we waited long enough?”

I feel your pain and frustration, but unless you convict him in the Senate and destroy his political future, you’re not fucking anyone; you’re just enjoying a masturbatory revenge fantasy. Democrats are making an argument on the impact of impeachment hearings based largely on magical political thinking.

This isn’t the Watergate era. Not a single Republican vote beyond Justin Amash can be guaranteed in the House, and the Senate landscape is entirely bleak. Until you can get to two-thirds of the Senate for a conviction, impeachment means nothing.

For all that, the Democrats chomping at the bit to hold Trump to account are having a good week already, whether they know it or not. It’s so good, they’d be fools not to keep doing the things that are starting to work—the exercise of congressional power, the use of the courts to uphold the law, and the momentum building in the public mind for an accounting of Trump’s full-spectrum lawbreaking, contempt, obstruction, and corruption.
ADVERTISING

The Pelosi-Nadler strategy is starting to shift that political battlefield, and the legal landscape is breaking in their favor. The judicial branch isn’t yet a wholly owned subsidiary of Trump, Inc. Yet. Trump’s own mistakes are helping move the investigation strategy forward and are beginning to ensure that when Congress does start getting testimony and documents from the White House and Department of Justice, Trump will have painted himself into a corner he can’t tweet his way out of.

Even without impeachment proceedings on deck yet, here’s why this week is shaping up well for the Resistance.

McGahn Flirts With #ETTD

Trump’s decision to forbid Don McGahn from testifying before Congress this week about matters on which the White House had already waived executive privilege was a tactical and strategic mistake. On the tactical side, it sets a precedent that anyone who cooperated in the Mueller probe will now have a much harder time claiming executive privilege to maintain Trump omertà.
Related in Politics
If Trump Weren’t President, He Would Already Be Charged
Everybody Is Wrong. Impeachment Hearings Will Help Dems.
WSJ: Trump Asked McGahn to Clear Him of Obstruction

The strategic mistake is that McGahn’s testimony took on an even more consequential cast once Trump tried to stop it. The president knows McGahn can be asked to pull back the curtain on the Trump reality show and to describe this president’s behavior, actions, and desires.

McGahn is also liberated by something you may have missed. Shortly after the Mueller Report was released, the Trump 2020 presidential campaign fired Jones-Day, McGahn’s law firm. It would have seemed like the usual Trumpian shit-fit for McGahn daring to tell the truth to the special counsel. Now, McGahn doesn’t have to worry about his law firm losing a large piece of business; Trump already fucked him on the deal.

McGann arguably saved an administration from itself by refusing the president’s direct orders to make himself a tool of obstruction of justice. He protected the most ungrateful man in America and has already been punished for it by having the president’s crew turn against him.

McGahn was missing from Tuesday’s House Judiciary Committee hearings, and Chairman Jerry Nadler dropped the hammer. Trump, master of the reality TV form, made a huge mistake here. All eyes will be on McGahn now, making his inevitable appearance a must-see television moment.

The Mehta Decision

Another area where Trump is losing bigly this week is his desire to—as always—hide his tax returns and financial records from the American people and their representatives. This is a matter of black-letter law, with almost no serious legal scholars making even the most superficial defense of the current contempt with which Secretary Steve Mnuchin and the Treasury Department are behaving.
“That smell? It’s Trump’s panicked flopsweat. Trump’s taxes are his kryptonite, and you can expect him to fight harder on this point than any other.”

Judge Amit Mehta made it quite clear in his 14-page ruling that the rights of Congress to conduct oversight are not founded by the moods and whims of the man-child engaged in stompy-foot time in the Oval Office or in the novel legal theories of his legal team. This is on a high-speed collision, potentially with Judge Merrick Garland presiding over the case. Who says karma isn’t a delicious bitch?

Of course, noted Twitter legal scholar Donald Trump called the ruling ridiculous and totally wrong and made sure to point out it was made by a judge appointed by Barack Obama. That smell? It’s Trump’s panicked flopsweat. Trump’s taxes are his kryptonite, and you can expect him to fight harder on this point than any other.

The sweeping claims of executive privilege from the White House are backed up only by the Trump Family Legal Defense Center—by which I mean the Office of Legal Counsel at Bill Barr’s Department of Justice. Their weak argument in Monday’s memo and the apparent direction of the courts will have implications for the release to Congress of the unredacted Mueller Report and briefings on the ongoing counterintelligence operation mounted in response to Russia’s verified attacks on our republic.

Once even one of these cases becomes an exemplar, it will be less and less likely the courts will allow Trump’s legal team to mount the same defense over and over. It means Congress will get to see Robert Mueller before the cameras, and damn near any other player in this drama.

Cohen Testimony

In related good news, a new tranche of Michael Cohen's testimony to Congress has now been released. As I’ve said from the beginning, Cohen may be a lying liar who lies, an utterly shit-tier human being, a wannabe bad guy, and an all-around dick, but he still holds many of the keys to understanding Trump’s financial kingdom. Think of him as a douchebag Rosetta Stone to Trump’s personal, sexual, legal, and financial shenanigans.

The most compelling part of these new revelations is that Cohen states under oath that Jay Sekulow, Trump’s lead attorney, requested Cohen lie under oath to Congress on the details of Trump’s real estate deal in Moscow. That Sekulow wanted this from Cohen is a monstrous tell over Trump’s terror that the details of the Russia deal will emerge more completely.

It’s a damn good week. Trump’s strategy is flawed, his decisions are leading him deeper into the political mire. The arc of this story is moving the right direction. Keep doing the things that work, Democrats. Impeachment is the end goal, not the first step, and you’re closing in.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38597
    • View Profile
🤡 Trump Walks Out on Pelosi and Schumer After 3 Minutes
« Reply #1949 on: May 22, 2019, 01:24:33 PM »
Trumpovetsky is getting a little testy.  lol..

RE

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/us/politics/donald-trump-speech-pelosi-schumer.html

Trump Walks Out on Pelosi and Schumer After 3 Minutes

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/gAar8f7V8LE" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/gAar8f7V8LE</a>

Video
President Trump spoke to reporters in the Rose Garden after walking out of a scheduled meeting with Democratic congressional leaders to discuss infrastructure. Before the meeting, Speaker Nancy Pelosi accused him of engaging in a cover-up.CreditCreditDoug Mills/The New York Times

By Peter Baker, Katie Rogers and Emily Cochrane

    May 22, 2019

WASHINGTON — President Trump abruptly blew up a scheduled meeting with Democratic congressional leaders on Wednesday, lashing out at Speaker Nancy Pelosi for accusing him of a cover-up and declaring that he could not work with them until they stopped investigating him.

He then marched out into the Rose Garden, where reporters had been gathered, and delivered a statement bristling with anger as he demanded that Democrats “get these phony investigations over with.” He said they could not legislate and investigate at the same time. “We’re going to go down one track at a time,” he said.

The confrontation came on a day when pressure over a possible impeachment effort raised temperatures on both sides of the aisle. Ms. Pelosi arrived at the White House for a session with the president set to talk about infrastructure shortly after meeting with restive House Democrats on Capitol Hill to talk about impeachment. She emerged from that meeting with Democrats accusing Mr. Trump of a “cover-up.”

When she and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, arrived at the White House, Mr. Trump was loaded for bear. He walked into the Cabinet Room and did not shake anyone’s hand or sit in his seat, according to a Democrat informed about the meeting. He said that he wanted to advance legislation on infrastructure, trade and other matters, but that Ms. Pelosi had said something “terrible” by accusing him of a cover-up, according to the Democrat.

Advertisement

After just three minutes, he left the room before anyone else could speak, the Democrat said. From there, he headed to the Rose Garden, where a lectern had been set up with a sign that said “No Collusion, No Obstruction” and gave statistics intended to show that he had cooperated with the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.

“Instead of walking in happily into a meeting, I walk in to look at people that have just said that I was doing a cover-up,” Mr. Trump said. “I don’t do cover-ups.”

    You have 1 free article remaining.

Subscribe to The Times

“I walked into the room and I told Senator Schumer, Speaker Pelosi: ‘I want to do infrastructure. I want to do it more than you want to do it. I’d be really good at that, that’s what I do. But you know what? You can’t do it under these circumstances. So get these phony investigations over with,’” he said.

The Democratic leaders returned to Capitol Hill and expressed disappointment, saying they were ready to make a deal with the president on a $2 trillion plan to rebuild the nation’s roads, bridges, airports and other infrastructure.

“He just took a pass and it just makes me wonder why he did that,” Ms. Pelosi said. “In any event, I pray for the president and I pray for the United States of America.”

Advertisement

Mr. Schumer expressed shock at the outcome. “What happened in the White House would make your jaw drop,” he said.

Mr. Schumer said Mr. Trump’s eruption was hardly spontaneous, noting the preprinted sign on the lectern he used afterward to speak with reporters. Instead, he suggested the president staged it because he had not come up with a way to pay for such an enormous spending package.

“Hello! There were investigations going on three weeks ago when we met, and he still met with us,” Mr. Schumer said. “But now, when he was forced to say how he would pay for it, he ran away. And he came up with this preplanned excuse.”

The blowup was reminiscent of a meeting in January when Mr. Trump erupted at Ms. Pelosi during the partial government shutdown as he sought money for his promised border wall. After she refused to go along, he snapped, “bye-bye” and stormed out.

In this case, Mr. Trump has been in a foul mood since Monday, snapping at aides about his rally in Pennsylvania and complaining about news media coverage of the investigations. In his view, people close to him said, Democrats are seeking to render his presidency illegitimate.

When Mr. Trump arrived for Wednesday’s meeting, he did not take his seat near the center of the table and instead stood at the end of the table and admonished Democrats, according to an account from two people in the room, one Republican and one Democrat.

After Mr. Trump walked out, Ms. Pelosi turned to other Democrats there and recounted a story about how Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt had each brought people together to solve infrastructure problems.

Advertisement

“I knew he was looking for a way out,” Ms. Pelosi concluded. “We were expecting this.”

Kellyanne Conway, the counselor to the president, was in the room. “Respectfully, Madam Speaker, do you have a direct response to the president?”

Ms. Pelosi said she was responding to the president, not members of his staff.

“Really great,” Ms. Conway replied. “That’s really pro-woman of you.”

In his report, Mr. Mueller established that Russia sought to influence the 2016 presidential campaign to benefit Mr. Trump but that he could not establish any conspiracy or coordination with Mr. Trump’s campaign. Mr. Mueller outlined nearly a dozen instances when Mr. Trump, as president, sought to impede the investigation but offered no conclusion about whether those efforts constituted obstruction of justice.

In his appearance in the Rose Garden, Mr. Trump once again claimed vindication by the report and accused Democrats of refusing to accept that he did nothing wrong. Mr. Trump has vowed to defy all subpoenas for testimony and documents sought by the House, which has angered enough Democrats that pressure is building to open a formal impeachment inquiry.

Mr. Trump emphasized that he and his team provided documents and testimony to Mr. Mueller without citing executive privilege even though he said the special counsel was biased against him, and although he did not himself agree to be interviewed in person.

“These people were out to get us, the Republican Party and President Trump, they were out to get us,” he said, referring to himself in the third person. “So here’s the bottom line,” he added. “There was no collusion, there was no obstruction. We’ve been doing this since I’ve been president, and actually the crime was committed on the other side.”

He followed up the news conference with a series of tweets. “You can’t investigate and legislate simultaneously — it just doesn’t work that way,” he wrote. “You can’t go down two tracks at the same time.”

Advertisement

He added: “Democrat leadership is tearing the United States apart, but I will continue to set records for the American People — and Nancy, thank you so much for your prayers, I know you truly mean it!”

Infrastructure has been one area where Mr. Trump and the Democrats have repeatedly suggested that they could work together, only to get nowhere in more than two years. It has become something of a joke in Washington — the phrase “infrastructure week” evokes laughter or eye rolling whenever it comes up.

The Wednesday meeting was probably doomed even before Ms. Pelosi’s “cover-up” comment. Mr. Trump upended any prospect of agreement on Tuesday night by sending Democrats a letter saying that infrastructure should wait until after Congress passes his revised version of the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada.

Mr. Trump had also challenged Democrats to arrive on Wednesday with more specific ideas about how the money would be spent. After the meeting blew up, Mr. Schumer said he was prepared to do just that, holding up a document that he said was a 35-page plan.

The plan was the same $1 trillion blueprint unveiled last March and was going to be used as a proposal for where and how Democrats would like to invest in infrastructure. The suggestions for how to pay for it were removed because Mr. Trump, who proposed doubling it to $2 trillion, had said he would present his own ideas, according to a Democrat briefed on the decision.

Prospects for such a plan at either price tag were already dim on Capitol Hill, as several Republicans in the Senate majority had balked at the scope of the package, particularly without a way to pay for it. As in the initial infrastructure meeting three weeks ago, no Republicans from either chamber were present for this meeting.

But Mr. Trump’s curt dismissal of infrastructure negotiations has cast a further shadow on a slew of budget and funding deadlines, just a day after administration officials began talks with congressional leaders over a possible budget deal. Without an agreement between Mr. Trump and the two chambers before the end of the fiscal year at the end of September, federal agencies will be forced to cut billions of dollars and adhere to steep limits on federal spending.

Advertisement

What was not clear was whether Mr. Trump would stick by his refusal to work with Democrats unless they drop their investigations.

“There’s going to be investigations on this administration for a while,” said Senator Thomas R. Carper, Democrat of Delaware. “To say that we’re not engaged on trade and other issues because of those investigations, I don’t know how realistic that is. It’s disappointing.”

Maggie Haberman contributed reporting.

Follow Peter Baker, Katie Rogers and Emily Cochrane on Twitter: @peterbakernyt, @katierogers and @ESCochrane.
Save As Many As You Can

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
1439 Views
Last post January 13, 2017, 04:34:48 PM
by RE
1 Replies
1647 Views
Last post January 18, 2017, 12:55:29 AM
by RE
3 Replies
1140 Views
Last post June 02, 2018, 09:43:37 AM
by agelbert