Mueller Subpoenas Bannon in the Russia Investigation

The Russiagate investigation took a new turn today as Robert Mueller issued a grand jury subpoena to Steve Bannon even as Bannon was slapped with a subpoena by the House Intelligence Committee when he refused to answer questions during his questioning by the Committee.  Said refusal was purportedly at the direction of the White House.   While the Mueller subpoena suggests that Bannon is not a target in the investigation, it ups the risk to Bannon should he refuse to cooperate or answer questions.   Should he refuse to testify to the grand jury, he would face contempt charges.  Should he lie to the grand jury, he would be guilty of perjury and the consequences could be even worse.   One can only hope that Bannon will decide that it is in his best interest to cooperate and, if need be, throw Trump and others on the White House staff under the bus.  In short, self-preservation should motivate Bannon to "do the right thing" and testify fully.  Here are excerpts from the New York Times on this development:

Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s former chief strategist, was subpoenaed last week by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, to testify before a grand jury as part of the investigation into possible links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter.

The move marked the first time Mr. Mueller is known to have used a grand jury subpoena to seek information from a member of Mr. Trump’s inner circle. The special counsel’s office has used subpoenas before to seek information on Mr. Trump’s associates and their possible ties to Russia or other foreign governments.

The subpoena could be a negotiating tactic. Mr. Mueller is likely to allow Mr. Bannon to forgo the grand jury appearance if he agrees to instead be questioned by investigators in the less formal setting of the special counsel’s offices about ties between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia and about the president’s conduct in office, according to the person, who would not be named discussing the case.

The subpoena is a sign that Mr. Bannon is not personally the focus of the investigation. Justice Department rules allow prosecutors to subpoena the targets of investigations only in rare circumstances.

On Tuesday, Mr. Bannon testified behind closed doors before the House Intelligence Committee, which is also investigating Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election and ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. Mr. Bannon did not address reporters before entering the proceeding on Tuesday, and a spokesman for Mr. Mueller and a senior White House lawyer did not respond to messages seeking comment.

Some legal experts said the subpoena could be a sign that the investigation was intensifying, while others said it may simply have been a negotiating tactic to persuade Mr. Bannon to cooperate with the investigation. The experts also said it could be a signal to Mr. Bannon, who has tried to publicly patch up his falling-out with the president, that despite Mr. Trump’s legal threats, Mr. Bannon must be completely forthcoming with investigators.

“By forcing someone to testify through a subpoena, you are providing the witness with cover because they can say, ‘I had no choice — I had to go in and testify about everything I knew,’” said Solomon L. Wisenberg, a prosecutor for the independent counsel that investigated Bill Clinton when he was president.

Significant grand jury activity may undermine the case that White House officials have made for months: that they believe the inquiry is coming to an end and are convinced that the president will be cleared. Mr. Mueller has told Mr. Trump’s lawyers that he will probably want to question the president before the investigation concludes, but no interview has been scheduled.

Mr. Bannon has limited firsthand knowledge about two key issues within Mr. Mueller’s purview — the president’s firing of James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, a decision made without Mr. Bannon present, and the drafting of a misleading statement about the subject of the June 2016 meeting with Russians, in which they promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

But even Mr. Bannon’s secondhand knowledge could be used to draw a contrast with statements from people with firsthand knowledge whom Mr. Mueller has already interviewed. And Mr. Bannon was directly involved in a number of other major moments, including the decision-making around the firing of Michael T. Flynn . . . And Mr. Bannon was the chief executive of the Trump campaign in October 2016 when WikiLeaks began releasing thousands of stolen personal emails from the hacked account of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman, John D. Podesta.

In “Fire and Fury,” Mr. Bannon was quoted by the author, Michael Wolff, as suggesting that Donald Trump Jr.; the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner; and Paul Manafort, his campaign chairman at the time, were “treasonous” and “unpatriotic” for attending the meeting with Russians at Trump Tower. Mr. Bannon said that he believed there was “zero” chance that the younger Mr. Trump did not take them to meet his father, who has said he knew nothing about the meeting.

The president appeared to ease his anger toward Mr. Bannon at the end of last week. People close to Mr. Bannon took the president’s comments as a signal that Mr. Trump was aware that his fired strategist would soon be contacted by investigators.

Mr. Bannon has hired William A. Burck of the Washington office of the Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan law firm to represent him in the defamation threats from Mr. Trump and the congressional inquiries.

Are We at a Clarifying Moment in American History?

Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign I made it clear that I viewed Donald Trump as unfit for the office of the presidency and that the man was nothing short of dangerous.  To those who told me to "get over it" and/or "to move on," the first eight days of Trump's regime has proven me correct. Unlike some, I am not the least bit surprised the Trump has ignored judicial orders, exhibited self-dealing (countries where he has investments were excluded from the Muslim ban), and  kicking generals off the National Security Council in favor of an alt-right extremist.  For those who voted for Trump, it would be nice if they ad the guts to admit that they made a horrific mistake,   A piece in The Atlantic looks at (i) why no one should be surprised by the crisis Trump has ignited, and (ii) why anyone who expects Trump to moderate is simple as insane as Trump.  Here are excerpts:

I am not surprised by President Donald Trump’s antics this week. Not by the big splashy pronouncements such as announcing a wall that he would force Mexico to pay for, even as the Mexican foreign minister held talks with American officials in Washington. Not by the quiet, but no less dangerous bureaucratic orders, such as kicking the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff out of meetings of the Principals’ Committee, the senior foreign-policy decision-making group below the president, while inserting his chief ideologist, Steve Bannon, into them. Many conservative foreign-policy and national-security experts saw the dangers last spring and summer, which is why we signed letters denouncing not Trump’s policies but his temperament; not his program but his character.

We were right. And friends who urged us to tone it down, to make our peace with him, to stop saying as loudly as we could “this is abnormal,” to accommodate him, to show loyalty to the Republican Party, to think that he and his advisers could be tamed, were wrong.  In an epic week  . . . . he has lived down to expectations.

Precisely because the problem is one of temperament and character, it will not get better. It will get worse, as power intoxicates Trump and those around him. It will probably end in calamity—substantial domestic protest and violence, a breakdown of international economic relationships, the collapse of major alliances, or perhaps one or more new wars (even with China) on top of the ones we already have. It will not be surprising in the slightest if his term ends not in four or in eight years, but sooner, with impeachment or removal under the 25th Amendment. The sooner Americans get used to these likelihoods, the better.

The question is, what should Americans do about it? To friends still thinking of serving as political appointees in this administration, beware: When you sell your soul to the Devil, he prefers to collect his purchase on the installment plan. 

For the community of conservative thinkers and experts, and more importantly, conservative politicians, this is a testing time. Either you stand up for your principles and for what you know is decent behavior, or you go down, if not now, then years from now, as a coward or opportunist. Your reputation will never recover, nor should it.

Rifts are opening up among friends that will not be healed. . . . . The biggest split will be between those who draw a line and the power-sick—whose longing to have access to power, or influence it, or indeed to wield it themselves—causes them to fatally compromise their values. For many more it will be a split between those obsessed with anxiety, hatred, and resentment, and those who can hear Lincoln’s call to the better angels of our nature, whose America is not replete with carnage, but a city on a hill.

This is one of those clarifying moments in American history, and like most such, it came upon us unawares, although historians in later years will be able to trace the deep and the contingent causes that brought us to this day.

Some Americans can fight abuses of power and disastrous policies directly—in courts, in congressional offices, in the press. But all can dedicate themselves to restoring the qualities upon which this republic, like all republics depends: on reverence for the truth; on a sober patriotism grounded in duty, moderation, respect for law, commitment to tradition, knowledge of our history, and open-mindedness.

He will do much more damage before he departs the scene, to become a subject of horrified wonder in our grandchildren’s history books. To repair the damage he will have done Americans must give particular care to how they educate their children, not only in love of country but in fair-mindedness; not only in democratic processes but democratic values. 

There is in this week’s events the foretaste of things to come. We have yet to see what happens when Trump tries to use the Internal Revenue Service or the Federal Bureau of Investigation to destroy his opponents. He thinks he has succeeded in bullying companies, and he has no compunction about bullying individuals, including those with infinitely less power than himself. His advisers are already calling for journalists critical of the administration to be fired: Expect more efforts at personal retribution. He has demonstrated that he intends to govern by executive orders that will replace the laws passed by the people’s representatives.

In the end, however, he will fail. . . . . He will fail most of all because at the end of the day most Americans, including most of those who voted for him, are decent people who have no desire to live in an American version of Tayyip Erdogan’s Turkey, or Viktor Orban’s Hungary, or Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

I hope the author's forecast for ultimate victory over Trump and his toxic supporters.  Meanwhile, I believe he was far too kind toward many who voted for Trump: they have no objection to living in a country akin to Putin's Russia as long as they are empowered to abuse others and feel superior about themselves as they engage in hate and animus motivate actions. 

Some Christianists Endorse Lisa Miller’s Kidnapping of Isabella

In yet another example of the contempt that many Christianist hold for the civil laws and for Court rulings, several supporters of Lisa Miller appear to be supporting the apparent kidnapping of her daughter Isabella in defiance of a Vermont court order directing that she turn custody of the child over to Janet Jenkins, Miller's former partner under a Vermont civil union. Miller now claims that she's no longer a lesbian - yes, just like I'm Mona Lisa - and has moved back to Virginia and endeavored to use Virginia's anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment to void the Vermont court rulings. The ploy has not worked and twice the Virginia Supreme Court has upheld the Vermont custody rulings. Meanwhile the U. S. Supreme Court has refused to review the case. As a result, Lisa Miller appears to have resorted to her form of vigilante justice by disappearing with the child. Debbie Thurman (pictured at right), the facilitator of an ex-gay ministry in Lynchburg, Virginia, supports Lisa Miller's move as evidenced by these highlights from Box Turtle Bulletin:

*

It was, I suppose, inevitable that Thurman would become interested in Lisa Miller, the woman who is seeking to keep Janet Jenkins, her former partner, from having contact with their child. Thurman’s anti-gay political attitudes, along with their mutual attendance at Thomas Road Baptist Church (the church Jerry Falwell founded), surely drew them together.

*
And, indeed, Thurman is an avid advocate for Lisa Miller. Although she pretends some distance and objectivity in some of her comments, it is not coincidence that the “Protect Isabella” website is registered at her business address and that she was their contact person (the site is rife with homophobic smear and insinuation).

*

[S]he seems incapable of seeing gay people as equal to herself or, indeed, much other than an enemy to conquer and vanquish. Convinced that a battle is waging between homosexuality and God, she appears incapable of disengaging from her Culture War.

*

Responding to Miller’s disappearance with Isabella, Thurman wrote an article titled “This is True Motherhood”, in which she endorses Lisa Miller’s apparent kidnapping of Isabella and compares her to the nation’s founding fathers.

*
I cannot answer the burning question on everyone’s lips: Where are Lisa and Isabella? Somewhere safe, I pray. How and when did they get there? Only God knows.

*
What happens now? A lot of frustration, recrimination and more lies on one side and a collective sigh of relief on the other. The courts still have a huge task set before them, meanwhile. Lisa and Isabella represent only one of many similar cases waiting to be resolved. We need precedents that honor the prevailing states’ rights, laws and constitutions. The majority of Americans overwhelmingly support traditional marriage. If the tyrannical minority wants to push against that, it can and will be met with civil disobedience. There is no other way.

*

Lisa Miller is a mother who would give up her life to save her child. Of that there is no doubt. She apparently has chosen to forfeit a large measure of her liberty, personal property and pursuit of happiness in assuring that child her God-ordained future, much as a group of patriots pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor more than two centuries ago to establish this nation.

*
I say God bless and long live Lisa and Isabella Miller. All who have known them are the better for it.

*

Kidnapping a child so as to spite a former partner, using religion as an excuse for one’s own selfish desires, and taking advantage of local bigotries to elicit sympathy are not admirable traits. But, in the passion of parental ownership and the emotions of failed relationships, these are not unheard of or unfathomable. But endorsing kidnap as a tactic in a Culture War, that’s just plain evil.

*

Thurman's website that seeks to use Lisa Miller and Isabella as a money making device - homophobic diatribes and all - can be found here.

Defenders of Proposition 8 Ignore Court Orders

In a demonstration of their contempt for the courts and the civil laws, the proponents of Proposition 8 have ignored the third federal court order compelling them to turn over internal campaign materials and memos in the federal court case wherein the Constitutionality of Proposition 8 under the U.S. Constitution is at issue. One can only hope that Judge Walker will begin sending some of the recalcitrant defendants in the case to jail so that they will turn over the ordered materials. Obviously, the proponents of Proposition 8 do not want daylight shined on their internal conspiracy and machinations against the civil rights of others. Unfortunately, the behavior of the proponents of Proposition 8 is typical of Christianists who deem themselves above the law. The Court's latest order compelling the production of the materials can be viewed here. Proposition 8 and the Right to Marry has commentary on the situation. Here are some highlights:

*
Today Judge [Spero] dropped the hammer on Prop. 8 proponents and ordered immediate production of internal communications concerning their campaign strategies and messages to voters. Among other things, Judge [Spero] admonished Prop. 8 proponents that his previous discovery orders, while being appealed to the Ninth Circuit, remain in effect because the appellate court has not issued a stay. Thus, Prop. 8 proponents risk contempt of the court if they continue to withhold production. According to today’s order, Prop. 8 proponents are ordered to produce additional responsive documents on a rolling basis to conclude not later than the close of fact discovery on November 30, 2009.
*

Obviously, those who have nothing to hide do not act in the manner of the proponents of Proposition 8 in this lawsuit. One can only wonder what embarrassing and revealing materials they are trying to keep out of the court case. Bigotry needs to be exposed wherever it exists and subjected to the light of day and public scrutiny.

What McCain's Body language Tells Us

I just got home from watching the second debate between McCain and Obama and was greeted by an e-mail forwarding me a link to a post on Huffington Post that analyzes John McCain's body language from the first debate. What McCain's body language tells us is that McCain held Obama in contempt and was struggling to disguise his anger. I hate to say it, but I suspect that McCain is a racist - we know that such is true of many in the GOP base - and that he had a difficult time holding back when he was being challenged (and bested) by an uppity - a term some of McCain's minions have used - black man. Here are some highlights:

*

The morning after the first debate we saw something odd. Several pundits made mention of the remarkable display of twitches, smirks and jaw-clenches that flickered across the face of John McCain throughout the debate. Others mentioned his lack of eye contact, particularly his unwillingness to look Obama in the eye. . . . Any good therapist learns to read the language of the body, but you don't need an advanced degree to understand John McCain's. His patterns are about as subtle as the flashing lights on a sign that says "Danger Ahead." Since we may end up married to him for four years, we need to pay particularly close attention to two patterns of his: smirking and jaw-clenching.

*

You probably noticed how often McCain smirked, particularly when he was being forced to listen to Obama speak. It's his expression of contempt. If he were speaking the truth behind his smirk, he'd be saying something like "I hold you in utter contempt. I am superior to you. My disdain for you is boundless."

*

Out of politeness one is tempted to look away from McCain's jaws, because his left jaw has a permanent bulge from his bouts with cancer. We encourage you, though, to turn your attention to his right jaw; it's a symphony of clenches that played practically non-stop every time he was forced to listen to Obama in the first debate. Since McCain won't release all his medical records, we don't know the story behind the cancer in his left jaw. However, we know a great deal about what causes his right jaw to clench repeatedly. People clench their jaws when they're angry and can't, won't or don't know how to say it plainly.

*

Frankly, we'd rather see him go ahead and blow his stack, rather than hide his anger and contempt under more and more layers of deception. We've seen enough of that already.

*

Personally, I have lost any respect I once had for John McCain. Increasingly, he strikes me as a mean spirited angry man who is dispositionally unsuited for the presidency. Worse yet, he abandoned all respect for the country when he selected Sarah "Bible Spice" Palin as his running mate. She is an insult to every thinking American.