File this under “Of course he did.”
If you recall, last week at the G7 meetings in France, Trump told reporters that Chinese officials had “reached out to him” to “ask that trade negotiations be re-opened” and that it would happen soon. “They have been hurt very badly but they understand this is the right thing to do and I have great respect for it,” Trump said. “This is a very positive development for the world. I think we are going to have a deal.”
Of course he did.
I am sure you know what is coming …
Shortly after, Chinese officials said they had no idea what the president* was talking about and there had been no high-level calls. It seemed to be just another lie from a guy who would tell you it’s sunny outside during a hurricane.
So, yes, he lied.
Right.
How is that any different than any other lie? It is different when one adds this salient fact:
. CNN reported this week that Trump’s “aides privately conceded the phone calls Trump described didn’t happen the way he said they did. Instead, two officials said Trump was eager to project optimism that might boost markets.”
He lied to project optimism to “boost markets”?
That is a crime. Uttering a lie with the intent to manipulate market prices is, indeed, an SEC violation that carries severe penalties.
market manipulation is “intentional conduct designed to deceive investors by controlling or artificially affecting the market,”
I realize that we are now reporting the second crime that we believe Trump might have committed this week, second to the release of possible classified materials for his own purposes, not properly “declassified.” So, it is not “shocking” that we are reporting that Trump committed a crime.
But let yourself be shocked, because Presidents generally know that their statements move markets and are thus “generally” very cautious about making any statement at all, let alone lie, to boost markets.
As Rawstory notes, the trouble with these types of crimes is that it is difficult to detect intent to manipulate the markets. Except, this time, his aides simply told CNN that he did, in fact, lie in order to boost the markets. That’s it, that’s a crime.
I realize that it is near impossible to track each and every crime Trump commits. Indeed, Dahlia Lithwick at Slate has an impressive run down of each impeachable offense Trump committed just this last week. Yet, just as Lithwick notes, just because it is near impossible, doesn’t mean we should ignore each and every crime.
If one were to consider, again, the articles of impeachment against the three sitting presidents who have historically faced impeachment proceedings, not only has Trump clearly achieved all of them—he actually now achieves most of them in under a week.
Exactly.
We should not sit on our hands and shake our heads, wishing there was just something we could do about it.
We should demand action from the one person who could actually ‘do something about it,” Nancy Pelosi. And Nancy Pelosi still believes that it is wrong to go forward on an impeachment inquiry because “the public doesn’t support impeachment.”
Which “public,” Speaker Pelosi?
Regardless, keep tabs, we have to. Because the crime above? The SEC violation? It didn’t even make Dahlia Lithwick’s list.
****
Peace, y’all
Jason
[email protected], or Follow me on Twitter: @MiciakZoom
Jason,
I’ve been wondering how I can communicate with Nancy Pelosi for a long time.
I’d love to know. Can you clue us in please?
I use the email she has as Speaker: www. speaker. gov/ contact/
(You’ll have to take out the spaces.)
Thanks! I thought no one could contact any rep if you didn’t live in their district.
At that address, you’re writing to her, not as a Rep, but as the Speaker. Otherwise, yes, you need an address in the district. (I’ve used that of a public library sometimes, writing to one outside my district.)
GOOD one. Shared with WIKI Definition and section citations Market manipulation is “intentional conduct Designed to Deceive investors by controlling or artificially affecting the market,”
Market manipulation is prohibited in most countries, in particular, it is prohibited in the United States under Section 9(a)(2)[2] of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
in the European Union under Article 12 of the Market Abuse Regulation, in Australia under Section 1041A of the Corporations Act 2001, and in Israel under Section 54(a) of the securities act of 1968.
BUT ALSO Disagree about what @SpeakerPelosi wants.. SHE WANTS HIM JAILED FOR SOME OF HIS CRIMES.. and the one most likely to upset ALL of his lifelong ‘business’ partners (and Family) is #(Income)TaxEvasion .. this to All global #LawEnforcement agencies such as @FBI @FBIWFO @NewYorkStateAG @Europol is a marker for #IntlOrgCrime ILLEGAL earnings being hidden. Al Capone was jailed for that in 1931. #Manafort and others more recently. SEE MORE in ProofOfConspiracy Published WED SEP 3
NOTE: The #DeutscheBank story is Trump and TrumpCrimeFamilies Report to the world that INDEED Trump Paid Little to No Taxes and in fact got his money from Russian oligarchs. SEE @MSNBC report by (Attorney) @Lawrence … it is Trumps DEEP THROAT story. .. MORE WILL BE COMING ON THIS. The #DeutscheBank files were obtained by #Germany NOV 29,2018 see original story here. #German authorities descended on DB NOV 2018 in coordinated raid related to #moneylaundering. tinyurl.com/y5hovk2
I can only hope that we will be seeing more coming out on this. I do agree that the bank records might well be the key. DB is acting highly strange, unusual for it to want to go to such lengths over one customer, it must go much much deeper, probably billions in illegal assets all tied together through one common denominator. DB is more likely protecting Putin than Trump.
AS A SHORT ANSWER (cuz long comment probably too long) NO ..disagree about @SpeakerPelosi GOALS.. she wants him ‘Jailed’ or ‘Out of Office’ never to run for dog catcher anywhere. .. and Committing more Crimes Daily .. enough for @Slate to tally weekly as per Dahlia .. is just the stuff to turn off #Voters and Political Money Backers .. UNLESS they are using ILLEGAL FOREIGN FUNDS.. (Right? JusticeROBERTS? It Is YOUR SCOTUS who allowed ALL THIS ILLEGAL MONEY IN..#TimesUp It’s your LEGACY . FIX IT)
ALL CAPS is yelling. Please don’t.
IT IS Republicans NOW who would love Trump IMPEACHED.. you wrote the column yourself Jason.. THEY are stuck w MAGA TRUMP.. and see no way to dump him themselves. HELl NO DEMS won’t do it for them.
Perhaps some will back #JustinAMASH ?! DEMS want him to slink away in #MarineOne like NIXON .. ask Richard W Painter of @CREWcrew about their evidence on Nixon.
“And Nancy Pelosi still believes that it is wrong to go forward on an impeachment inquiry because “the public doesn’t support impeachment.”
Which “public,” Speaker Pelosi?”
Um, I haven’t seen any polls that indicate there’s a majority of the “public” at large support impeachment. Maybe it’s THAT public, Jason. The “public” that consists of more than just readers of left-leaning, progressive blogs. I mean, we’ve already heard that only ~130 members of the House are currently in the “impeachment caucus” but the overwhelming majority are from “safe blue” districts. According to a recent Monmouth poll (at https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_082219.pdf/), only 35% said “Yes” when asked “Do you think Trump should be impeached and compelled to leave or not?” compared to 59% who said “No.” When asked, “Do you think it’s a good or bad idea to conduct an inquiry?,” only 41% said “Good idea” compared to 51% who said “Bad idea.” (Those latter figures move to 37% “Good” and 56% “Bad” when the question added the idea of “if the Senate is unlikely to vote to remove Trump.”)
The poll had 800 respondents. 86% were registered voters. 25% identified as Republican compared to 29% identifying as Democrats. 35% identified as Conservative compared to 23% identifying as Liberal. (The remainder for the first question identified as Independent and for the second question as Moderate; less than 1% of respondents to each question gave no answer.) But probably the most amazing point to this poll was the location of the respondents: Those whose counties went for Trump by 10 pts or more comprised only 35%; those whose counties went for Clinton by 10 pts or more comprised just under 45%.
So, maybe Pelosi is just a bit smarter than you are Jason. If the polls which survey the “public” don’t show support for impeachment yet and show absolutely NO plus-side for Democrats if Trump isn’t impeached and removed. Questions 10 and 11 refer to House impeachment but Trump stays in office; #10 showed only 23% saying Trump’s chances are weakened but 36% said no impact while #11 showed a full 34% saying chances of Democrats holding the House are weakened but only 31% said no impact. Questions 12 and 13 referred to “your” House member voting for and against and how likely the respondent was to re-elect: #12 (member for impeachment) showed 24% more likely to vote for, 26% less likely and 46% no impact; #13 (member against impeachment), however, showed only 16% more likely to vote for, 28% less likely and 51% no impact). Obviously, real leaders don’t go JUST by polling but when barely half your own caucus are publicly backing impeachment and no reputable poll is showing there’s any real groundswell of support in “flyover country” or “Middle America,” going full-on and having impeachment hearings (especially when there’s almost zero chance of removing Trump) isn’t really a smart move. No matter how much nipping and biting there is by a group of gadflies.
As I have written many times, I believe that an impeachment inquiry is needed for no larger reason than to establish the record against which Trump must run. Set out, piece by piece, his crimes, keep the committee open, if need be. Someone needs to tally each and every crime against his oath. I think once people are called to testify, and they speak about what they have seen and heard, a greater number of the public will come around, just as a greater number of the Dem caucus have come around. I also think that should Pelosi change her mind, the entire caucus would favor it.
Regardless, when I asked “which public” I was referencing the majority of the public in her caucus, which does support it now, putting Pelosi in quite a spot.
I think things are accelerating now, as I have said over the last 3 weeks. He is decompensating, and she needs to have the committees and such ready.
I was not always of this belief. Well into the summer, I believed as you did. Holding off, don’t scare the horses. But at this point, I think that it is close to dereliction to not be doing all one can to get him out. He will come out through the vote, unless something horrid (like co-signed taxes) comes forward. But, the vote is near ensured – in my mind – IF there has been a mechanism to document each and every crime.
Take care, and thanks for reading.
Russia’s long-standing mantra: “We will destroy America from within.” seems to be working.