Could We End Up With President Orrin Hatch?

Where the Russiagate investigation will lead is anyone's guess at this point, but I for one hope it ends with the removal of both Donald Trump and Mike Pence from office.  That scenario then leads to the question of which morally bankrupt Republican would end up in the oval office.  A piece in The Week conjectures that it could be Senator Orrin Hatch given that Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell may prove to be tainted in the Russiagate scandal since indications exist that Mitch - and likely Ryan - knew of the collusion and looked the other way in their zeal to have the GOP win the White House at literally any cost.  It is an interesting conjecture and the piece and certainly has some possible plausibility in America's insane political nightmare.  Here are highlights:  

The Republican Party holds the White House and both houses of Congress. A majority of the justices on the Supreme Court have been appointed by Republican presidents. The GOP controls a majority of state governments. Yet members of the president's senior staff and immediate family are under investigation, and the president himself may well come to face impeachment and/or calls to resign, not to mention indictment and prosecution for charges ranging from violations of election laws to obstruction of justice and even treason.

The Trump-Russia scandal may well come to be the biggest in American history. There's nothing funny about that.

And yet ... there is something a little amusing about the prospect of the Republican leadership in Washington attempting to replace a President Trump who's been taken down by the Russian scandal. The fact is that if the scandal grows wide enough to topple the president, it's quite likely to touch a number of other high-ranking Republicans, several of whom stand in the line of succession. What happens then?

Let's start with Vice President Mike Pence, the man who would be tapped first to take over in the event that Donald Trump doesn't complete his term. A Pence spokesperson appeared uncertain on Wednesday when asked whether the vice president had ever met during the presidential campaign or transition with representatives of the Russian government. By Thursday morning, the uncertainty had been replaced by assurance that no such meeting ever took place. It would be nice to think that this is true, though the Trump administration's record is somewhat … spotty when it comes to forthrightness about Russian contacts.

But let's assume it's true: Pence never met with Russian officials. Good! But is it also the case that he knew nothing about meetings and conversations that clearly did take place between a prominent Russian attorney and Donald Trump's eldest son, son-in-law, and one-time campaign manager? And between the Russian ambassador and Mike Flynn? And Jeff Sessions? On several (vaguely remembered) occasions? Unless Pence can show that the Trump circle made concerted efforts to keep him out of this rather large and permeable loop, the claim sounds implausible on its face. Or at least implausible enough that leading Republicans are likely to consider it ill-advised to allow Pence to succeed Trump as commander-in-chief when he could end up having to govern under the same cloud of Russian suspicions.

That's how we could easily end up with Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, second in the line of succession, ascending to the presidency (as some intelligent commentators have already begun to predict).

There's just one problem with that scenario: Reports have indicated that Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell may have known about Russia's attempts to meddle in the election on Trump's behalf as early as last summer, more than two months before Election Day. That means it's possible, and perhaps likely, that Ryan and his Senate counterpart will end up tainted by the Russian scandal as well — at least enough to raise concerns about allowing anyone from the Republican leadership to take over for a disgraced President Trump.

And that brings us to the third person in the line of succession: the president pro tempore of the Senate, who just so happens to be … the 83-year-old Republican from Utah, Orrin Hatch.

That's right: There is a non-negligible chance that at some point prior to the 2020 election, we could see President Hatch in the White House. And here's the thing: Given the available options and the still-unclear scope of the Russian scandal, Hatch may well be the best choice around. If you doubt it, take a look at who comes immediately after him in the line of succession: Secretary of State Rex "Russian Order of Friendship" Tillerson. And he's followed by a series of other Trump Cabinet members, all of whom could end up tainted by the scandal as well. Only Hatch is sufficiently distant from both the White House and the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill to be a safe bet.

There's another compelling wrinkle in the Hatch thought experiment, too: He's a devout member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Mormon folklore includes an 1843 prophecy by church founder Joseph Smith according to which a Mormon will one day become president of the United States at a moment when the Constitution is "hanging by a thread," thereby saving the country from calamity. Mormons call this the "White Horse Prophecy."

Could the deeply pious octogenarian be America's gallant knight riding in on a white steed, sent by God himself to save us from civic doom? Sure, it's unlikely. But then again, two years ago the idea of America electing a septuagenarian reality-show star and transparent con artist to the highest office in the land sounded like a bad joke.

Trump Jr. Told in Email of Russian Effort to Aid Campaign

Donald Trump, Jr. - did Ivanka get all the brains?

While Der Trumpenführer continues to claim that all Russiagate stories are "fake news," it appears that another shoe may have dropped this evening with a follow up to the New York Times piece that exposed a meeting between Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort and a Russian attorney with ties to the Kremlin.  Amazingly, Trump, Jr., - who increasingly appears to me a moron - eve admitted that the carrot that attracted him to the meeting was the promise of damaging dirt on Hillary Clinton.  Now, tonight, the New York Times has revealed that Trump, Jr., had received an email confirming the promised information was derived from the Russian government.  It's as if Trump, Jr., is striving to singlehandedly document collusion between his father's campaign and the Kremlin.   The fact that Trump, Jr., has hired a criminal defense attorney suggest that the dullard son has realized that he is not above the law.  Here are highlights of the newest development:

Before arranging a meeting with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer he believed would offer him compromising information about Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump Jr. was informed in an email that the material was part of a Russian government effort to aid his father’s candidacy, according to three people with knowledge of the email.

The email to the younger Mr. Trump was sent by Rob Goldstone, a publicist and former British tabloid reporter who helped broker the June 2016 meeting. In a statement on Sunday, Mr. Trump acknowledged that he was interested in receiving damaging information about Mrs. Clinton, but gave no indication that he thought the lawyer might have been a Kremlin proxy.

Mr. Goldstone’s message, as described to The New York Times by the three people, indicates that the Russian government was the source of the potentially damaging information.

[T]he email is likely to be of keen interest to the Justice Department and congressional investigators, who are examining whether any of President Trump’s associates colluded with the Russian government to disrupt last year’s election. American intelligence agencies have determined that the Russian government tried to sway the election in favor of Mr. Trump.

The Times first reported on the existence of the meeting on Saturday, and a fuller picture has emerged in subsequent days.

It is unclear whether Mr. Goldstone had direct knowledge of the origin of the damaging material. One person who was briefed on the emails said it appeared that he was passing along information that had been passed through several others.

Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, and Paul J. Manafort, the campaign chairman at the time, also attended the June 2016 meeting in New York. Representatives for Mr. Kushner referred requests for comments back to an earlier statement, which said he had voluntarily disclosed the meeting to the federal government.

On Monday, after news reports that he had hired a lawyer, he indicated in a tweet that he would be open to speaking to the Senate Intelligence Committee, one of the congressional panels investigating Russian meddling in the election. “Happy to work with the committee to pass on what I know,” the younger Mr. Trump wrote.

Mr. Goldstone represents the Russian pop star Emin Agalarov, whose father was President Trump’s business partner in bringing the Miss Universe pageant to Moscow in 2013. In an interview Monday, Mr. Goldstone said he was asked by Mr. Agalarov to set up the meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and the Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya.

“He said, ‘I’m told she has information about illegal campaign contributions to the D.N.C.,’” Mr. Goldstone recalled, referring to the Democratic National Committee. He said he then emailed Donald Trump Jr., outlining what the lawyer purported to have.

But Mr. Goldstone, who wrote the email over a year ago, denied any knowledge of involvement by the Russian government in the matter, saying that never dawned on him.
His [Trump, Jr.] decision to move ahead with such a meeting was unusual for a political campaign, but it was consistent with the haphazard approach the Trump operation, and the White House, have taken in vetting people they deal with ahead of time.

News of the meeting involving the younger Mr. Trump, Mr. Kushner and Mr. Manafort blunted whatever good feeling the president’s team had after his trip to Europe for the Group of 20 economic summit meeting.

The president learned from his aides about the 2016 meeting at the end of the trip, according to a White House official. But some people in the White House had known for several days that it had occurred, because Mr. Kushner had revised his foreign contact disclosure document to include it.

The president was frustrated by the news of the meeting, according to a person close to him — less over the fact that it had happened, and more because it was yet another story about Russia that had swamped the news cycle.

Virginia's Misguided War on Marijuana

In my November, 2015, column in VEER Magazine I noted that changes in Virginia's marijuana laws over the next two years were unlikely and looked at the way in which archaic marijuana laws were causing Virginia's prisons to burst at their seams:

What does all of this portent for Virginia with respect to reform of the marijuana laws?  Most likely nothing will occur during the next two years given the Republican Party control of the House of Delegates.  Sadly, most members of the Virginia GOP must swear fealty to The Family Foundation which not only opposes changes to the marijuana laws but would ban all gambling, including the Virginia Lottery, and ban alcohol sales.  What is unfortunate is that doing nothing means another 40,000+ Virginians will have arrest records for marijuana offenses, with blacks being disproportionately impacted. 

In 2012, the year for which the most recent data is available, there were 23,423 marijuana related arrests in Virginia, 20,914 for possession and 2,509 for selling marijuana.  Under § 18.2-250.1, Code of Virginia, possession of marijuana is punishable by up to 30 days in jail and a fine up to $500 for the first offense and up to one year in jail and a fine up to $2,500 for subsequent offenses.  Under § 18.2-248.1, the delivery or sale of one-half ounce of marijuana or less is punishable by up to one year in jail and a fine up to $2,500. For greater than one-half ounce, the penalties increase to a possible 1 - 10 years in prison and a fine up to $2,500.  Is there any wonder why our jails and prisons are overflowing?  Wake up!

From what I have observed, the police seem to disproportionately target blacks, especially young black males, the majority of whom cannot afford legal counsel.  White defendants who appear with legal counsel typically get off with suspended sentences which are dismissed after a year of good conduct.  Black males without counsel typically get convicted and thereafter have permanent criminal records which are impediments to many employment opportunities.  Meanwhile, conservatives and Republicans whine about the poor - read blacks - not being gainfully employed, yet Virginia's outdated marijuana laws help to insure these types of criminal convictions will bar gainful employment.

Two Anti-Gay Bishops Resign in Minnesota Over Sexual Abuse Coverups

I would have posted on this story (which I revel in personally) sooner, but the last few days for work have been insane with evening meetings and today an early business breakfast the result of which has been no time to write blog posts.  As many will recall, now former Archbishop John C. Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis has been among the most virulently anti-gay prelates of the Roman Catholic Church in America.  His lap dog, auxiliary bishop, Lee A. Piché, has all too willingly gone along for the homophobic ride.  Meanwhile, of course, Nienstedt has been up to his ears in cover ups for sexual predator priests and even had an abuse complaint filed against him personally.  Now, both Nienstedt and Piché have tendered their resignations.  One can only hope that they will be named personally for criminal prosecutions.  One can likewise hope that the many other bishops and cardinals who aided and abetted predatory priest will also soon be driven or removed from their positions.  The New York Times looks at this much needed development.   Here are excerpts:

Two bishops in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis resigned their posts Monday, the second time this spring that American church leaders have stepped aside after complaints over their handling of sexual abuse claims involving priests.

In Minnesota, Archbishop John C. Nienstedt and an auxiliary bishop, Lee A. Piché, announced their departures less than two weeks after prosecutors in St. Paul accused the archdiocese of willfully ignoring warning signs of a pedophile priest. Their resignations followed the April exit of Bishop Robert W. Finn from the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph in Missouri, who had been convicted of a misdemeanor for failing to report a priest who took pornographic pictures of girls.

Though sexual misconduct by individual priests has long drawn headlines in Minnesota and around the world, the latest resignations come amid a push to punish the church leaders who did not intervene.

Under Pope Francis, the Vatican has stepped up efforts to hold bishops accountable for covering up or failing to take action in sexual abuse cases, including the announcement last week of a tribunal to weigh such cases.

The Rev. Federico Lombardi, a Vatican spokesman, did not say Monday whether the two Minnesota bishops had been or would be judged by the tribunal. “It is a valid question,” Father Lombardi said. “I have no information for now.”

John J. Choi, the prosecutor in Ramsey County, Minn., said the resignations would not affect his office’s criminal and civil cases against the archdiocese, which accused church leaders of failing to intervene against a priest despite repeated complaints of misconduct. That priest, Curtis Wehmeyer, has since been defrocked and imprisoned on sexual abuse charges involving boys in his parish.

“While today’s resignation will be viewed as a positive development by many in our community, the pending criminal action and civil petition and the ongoing investigation will continue,” Mr. Choi said in a statement. “As we have said, the goals of our actions are to hold the Archdiocese accountable, seek justice for the victims and our community, and to take appropriate steps to ensure that what we have alleged and intend to prove about the past conduct of church officials will never be repeated.”

In accepting the resignations, the pope appointed the Rev. Bernard A. Hebda, a coadjutor archbishop of Newark, as apostolic administrator to oversee the Minnesota archdiocese. The Vatican also announced on Monday that it would open a trial in July of its former ambassador to the Dominican Republic, Jozef Wesolowski, on charges of sexually abusing boys while he served in the Caribbean and of possessing child pornography.

Jeff Anderson, a lawyer in Minnesota who has represented victims of sexual abuse by clergy, said more top officials needed to be held accountable for their actions, and that criminal charges would be appropriate for some of them.

Mr. Anderson attributed Monday’s developments to the criminal charges against the archdiocese and unflattering disclosures made in recent civil cases. Many of those lawsuits were made possible by legislation that allowed victims to sue the church over abuse that happened years ago, and for which the statute of limitations had expired.

“This is about a culture and system that has been intractable,” Mr. Anderson said. “It needs to continue on a headlong course toward full accountability and full disclosure.”

Are International Legal Cases Against Torture Participants Coming?

As noted in one of the last posts uploaded yesterday, under the UN Convention on Torture, if the United States fails to prosecute American torture participants, then other countries can launch prosecutions and the United States will have to either allow the defendants to be extradited or find itself further outside the bounds of international law.  Think Progress has a piece that looks at the question of whether international prosecutions are in the offing.  It's probably safe to say that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney won't be traveling outside the USA any time soon.  Here are article highlights:

New evidence might bring new legal cases against American officials involved in the Central Intelligence Agency’s “enhanced interrogation” program after the release of previously classified information on Tuesday. The Senate Intelligence Committee’s 525-page report report which details the “brutal” interrogations of 39 detainees has spurred calls for prosecution from the U.N., as well as human rights’ and civil liberties organizations. 

“We made mistakes,” C.I.A. director John Brennan said in a statement, but he maintained that his agency’s policies were legal. 

But Ben Emmerson, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on counter terrorism and human rights doesn’t think official authorization from agencies within the U.S. frees those who carried out torture from facing justice. 

“The fact that the policies revealed in this report were authorized at a high level within the U.S. government provides no excuse whatsoever,” Emmerson said in a statement. “Indeed, it reinforces the need for criminal accountability.” 

He added that as a signatory to the U.N. Convention Against Torture, the U.S. is legally obligated to prosecute acts of torture and enforced disappearance if there is sufficient evidence to to bring about a case.

International law does not permit individuals who carried out torture to dismiss liability because they were acting on orders. And, Emmerson said, “States are not free to maintain or permit impunity for these grave crimes.”

“Other countries have all the information they need should they wish to exercise universal jurisdiction and prosecute these officials should they appear in their borders,” Andrea Prasow of Human Rights Watch said.

Universal jurisdiction is a legal doctrine that allows the courts of any country to try certain crimes against humanity including torture regardless of where those crimes took place or who is alleged to have committed them. It stems from a 1998 case brought by a Spanish court against the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet for the murder and torture of opposition figures. 

Some organizations that have already invoked this principle and are planning to use this new release of information to build their case against American officials.

In a fact sheet, the ACLU notes that there are a number of U.S. laws that could be invoked to hold those accused of torture responsible including the federal torture statute that criminalizes the infliction of severe physical or mental suffering with intent outside of the U.S. 

The group points out that while some of the alleged crimes occurred more than a decade ago, “There is no statute of limitations under the torture statute when the abuse risked or resulted in serious physical injury or death.”

UN Human Rights Chief Calls for Prosecution of Torture Architects

German defendants at Nuremberg trials

The full executive summary of the Senate torture report can be found here (NOTE: many names and details are redacted).  Not surprisingly, some at the United Nations want the architects of the torture program prosecuted.  The Guardian has details:

The UN special rapporteur on counter terrorism and human rights, Ben Emmerson, has released a statement saying “It is now time to take action” and “The individuals responsible for the criminal conspiracy revealed in today’s report must be brought to justice.” The statement reads in part:

The summary of the report which was released this afternoon confirms what the international community has long believed - that there was a clear policy orchestrated at a high level within the Bush administration to commit systematic crimes and gross violations of international human rights law. The identities of the perpetrators, and many other details, have been redacted in the published summary report but are known to the Select Committee and to those who provided the Committee with information on the programme. It is now time to take action. 

The individuals responsible for the criminal conspiracy revealed in today’s report must be brought to justice, and must face criminal penalties commensurate with the gravity of their crimes. The fact that the policies revealed in this report were authorised at a high level within the US Government provides no excuse whatsoever. Indeed, it reinforces the need for criminal accountability. 

International law prohibits the granting of immunities to public officials who have engaged in acts of torture. This applies not only to the actual perpetrators but also to those senior officials within the US Government who devised, planned and authorised these crimes. As a matter of international law, the US is legally obliged to bring those responsible to justice.

Note: under international law and treaties to which the United States is a signatory, Barack Obama has NO legal authority to either (i) refuse to prosecute the offenders or (ii) grant pardons to such criminals. 

If one looks at the Nuremberg trials, here is what happened to Ernst Kaltenbrunner, the highest ranking SS leader to be tried at Nuremberg.  -  Hanged 16 October 1946.

Virginia Police/Prosecutor Back Off Request for Nude Photos of Teen Boy

Try as Virginia might to project an image of a modern, at least slightly enlightened and progressive state, some Virginians are working in overdrive to make the state a laughing stock in the national and international media.  The latest example comes from the Manassas City police department which had been seeking to serve a search warrant on a 17-year-old boy charged with “sexting” an explicit video to his 15-year-old girlfriend.  The plan was to medically induce an erection and photograph it apparently to prove the 17 year old was the individual in the texted material.  Now, having made Virginia look utterly stupid and backward, the cretins in Manassas are backing down on their lurid demands.  Obviously, some folks need to be promptly fired and the Commonwealth Attorney needs to resign immediately.  It is perhaps telling that Manassas is in Prince William County, home of Del. Bob Marshall who seeks to police the sex lives of all Virginians.  Here are highlights from the Washington Post on the Manassas batshitery:

Manassas City police said Thursday they would not serve a search warrant seeking to take photos of a 17-year-old boy charged with “sexting” an explicit video to his 15-year-old girlfriend earlier this year.

The teen is facing felony counts of manufacturing and distributing child pornography. As the case was headed to trial last week, Manassas City police and Prince William County prosecutors said in juvenile court that they had obtained a warrant to photograph the teen’s erect penis, in order to compare with the video he allegedly sent in January, according to the teen’s lawyers. When defense lawyer Jessica Harbeson Foster asked how they would obtain a photo of her client while aroused, she said police told her they would take him to a hospital and inject him with a drug to force an erection.

On Thursday, Prince William authorities decided to drop that plan. Lt. Brian Larkin of the Manassas City police said, “We are not going to pursue it.” He said the police planned to allow the search warrant, obtained last week, to expire. He would not say why the decision had been made to abandon the warrant or discuss the reasons for the search.

Larkin referred further questions to Prince William Commonwealth’s Attorney Paul B. Ebert. Ebert did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Carlos Flores Laboy, appointed the teen’s guardian ad litem in the case, said he thought it was just as illegal for the Manassas City police to create their own child pornography as to investigate the teen for it.

“They’re using a statute that was designed to protect children from being exploited in a sexual manner to take a picture of this young man in a sexually explicit manner,” Flores Laboy said. “The irony is incredible.”

All I can say is "Only in Virginia" - especially conservative areas of Virginia.  I hope  Prince William Commonwealth’s Attorney Paul B. Ebert is happy that he's made the entire state look ridiculous and backward.

Bob McDonnell Pleads Unbelievable Ignorance - Throws Wife Under the Bus

The "Gift Gate" scandal surrounding Republican Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell continues to escalate and, based on coverage in the Washington Post, McDonnell is seemingly trying to claim that it is all the fault of his greedy wife and that he had no idea how much she was sucking up at Jonnie R. William, Sr.'s trough of gifts and questionable loans to Virginia's first family.  Frankly, McDonnell's story line defies belief - especially since Williams disputes it and says that McDonnell knew what was going on.  Whatever happens, it would seem that McDonnell's political career is over.   One can only hope that as the star Scientific scandal grows it will also envelop Ken Cuccinelli.  Here are highlights from the Post coverage: 

Attorneys for Virginia Gov. Robert F. McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, will spend Monday locked in separate hours-long meetings trying to convince federal prosecutors that the first couple should not be charged in the gifts scandal that has dominated state politics.

The meetings open a new, critical phase of the investigation, timed to help prosecutors decide over the next few weeks whether to file charges, according to two people with knowledge of the investigation.

The central issues for prosecutors are what precisely McDonnell may have said or offered to Williams on his own and how much the governor knew about his wife’s acceptance of gifts from Williams and her actions to help his company just as Star was launching a new product.

As the scandal has shined an uncomfortable spotlight on the governor’s marriage, McDonnell’s side has conveyed to authorities that his wife often purposely kept him in the dark about the largess she was accepting from Williams, according to a person familiar with the investigation.

Their goal with that assertion is to convince prosecutors that it would have been impossible for Williams’s gifts to have influenced the governor in his official duties because McDonnell learned of many only after his wife had accepted them.

Prosecutors will have to decide how credible they find those assertions when considered against the timeline of the first couple’s interactions with Williams and other evidence, including Williams’s recollections.
According to two people familiar with his version, Williams has countered the account from the governor’s side.

The now fast-paced timeline of the investigation is driven in part by two factors.  First, prosecutors generally wish to move as quickly as possible if they think there is evidence of criminal actions by a sitting, still powerful elected official.  Second, Justice Department guidelines discourage prosecutors from taking action during an election season to avoid the perception that they are trying to influence the outcome.

Over a roughly 18-month span in 2011 and 2012, Williams gave $15,000 in clothing to Maureen McDonnell, a $6,500 Rolex watch he intended for the governor, $15,000 for catering at the wedding of one of McDonnell’s daughters and $10,000 as an engagement gift to another daughter.


Two people confirmed over the weekend that there were additional gifts, including golf clubs for each of the governor’s college-age twin sons and an iPhone for the first lady.

Most significant, in 2011 and 2012, Williams provided $120,000 to Maureen McDonnell and to a small holding company owned by the governor and his sister, money the governor has said were loans that he has now repaid.
[T]the governor’s team has told authorities that McDonnell did not know that Williams paid for a shopping trip for Maureen McDonnell at Bergdorf Goodman in New York City in spring 2011.  They also have told prosecutors that he didn’t know it was Williams who bought the Rolex watch inscribed with the words “71st Governor of Virginia.”

They say he learned of a $50,000 loan Williams made to his wife in May 2011, about two weeks after the money arrived, by which time it had been spent.   About $30,000 went to purchase Star stock intended for the McDonnell children and the rest to pay down debt.  McDonnell learned five months later, in November 2011, that the stock was in his wife’s name and had not been transferred to their children as she had indicated, according to someone familiar with the governor’s account.

 There's more, but it's hard not to conclude either (i) Bob McDonnell is an idiot, or (ii) that he thinks the prosecutors and Virginia voters are idiots.  I opt for option (ii).