Jared Kushner's downfall: from golden boy to emperiled black sheep

First son-in-law Jared Kushner, once "the prince of Trump's Washington," according to the Washington Post trio of reporters (Philip Rucker, Ashley Parker, and Josh Dawsey), has had a disastrous February.   Citing "an unlikely cascade of events," they suggest that February 2018 "could mark the fall of the House of Kushner."

Based on interviews with 20 senior administration officials, congressional aides, and other advisers to the president, these reporters back up that prediction with the following:   "Kushner is now stripped of his access to the nation's deepest secrets, isolated and badly weakened inside the administration, under scrutiny for his mixing of business and governmental work and facing the possibility of grave legal peril in the Russia probe."

The article continues:  "Kushner's tensions with chief of staff John  F. Kelly have spilled into public view, while other dormant rivalries have resurfaced.   Some colleagues privately mock Kushner as a shadow of his former self, . . . [while] others said fear of the Russia probe has made some officials wary of interacting with Kushner on sensitive matters.   And his reputation as an interlocutor for foreign governments has been undermined by the lowering of his security clearance level, which generated embarrassing headlines worldwide."

The Trump White House should go down in the books as the prime example of why nepotism is a very bad idea.  Leon Panetta -- a former White House Chief of Staff, as well as former Secretary of Defense and CIA Director in Democratic administrations -- says:  "This was predictable from the get-go. . . . Under the best of circumstances, these are tough jobs.   But when you now add to that list family members who have no clear-cut role, no experience, no real understanding of the rules and a host of financial connections and business dealings that can obviously be used to manipulate you, then that is a prescription for the kind of chaos you're seeing in the White House" . . . .

"The Washington Post reported earlier this week that officials in at least four countries have privately discussed ways to manipulate Kushner through his myriad financial interests -- a factor in his inability to obtain a security clearance.  On a separate issue, the New York Times reported that Apollo, a private equity firm, and Citigroup loaned more than $500 million combined to the Kushner family real estate business, after executives of the firms attended meetings with Kushner at the White House."

*     *     *     *     *

From Vox.com's Andrew Prokop's "Jared Kushner's Many Scandals Explained":

". . . . When Trump decided to name Kushner to a top White House job last year, Jared followed his father-in-law’s lead by doing the bare minimum to disentangle himself from his business interests. He stepped down from his official role at Kushner Companies but he kept most of his interest in it and his real estate holdings. . . .  Since then, there have been a seemingly endless array of reports about conflicts and questionable activity from either Jared or the Kushner Companies, which is privately held and has opaque finances.

"Much of this involves one Kushner investment in particular: the skyscraper at 666 Fifth Avenue in Manhattan . . . setting a new record for the highest price for a single real estate asset ever paid in the United States, and financing it almost entirely through debt near the peak of the housing bubble.

"Now, a $1.2 billion mortgage — half of which the Kushners are responsible for — is coming fully due in February 2019. They’ve paid off none of it and could be in danger of losing control of the building. . . . 

"The problem is evident: Kushner Companies needs a huge pile of money and they’re looking for it from foreign sources as Jared holds a foreign policy portfolio in the White House.

"But the problems don’t stop with one skyscraper."  There are also questionable loans obtained from people Jared met with in the White House.   There are questionable investors who are under scrutiny for potential bribery and money laundering.   And there are questionable business practices having to do with mismanagement of apartment complexes.

On top of all this, Jared himself is also under investigation by Robert Mueller concerning Russian interference in the 2016 election, including his meetings with the Russian ambassador and the head of a sanctioned Russian bank during the transition.    He discussed his own business interests with the Chinese ambassador in early 2017, and he has met with several foreign nationals without informing the National Security Council.

*     *     *     *     *

And from Marcy Wheeler at the New York Times:

"The biggest concern . . . is that foreign countries would offer him [Kushner]  personal financial benefits in the same conversations in which he purports to represent America’s best interests. . . .  Such appearances of conflict might not, by themselves, get Mr. Kushner in trouble. . . .

"But Mr. Kushner might face more trouble to the extent he keeps such negotiations secret from those in charge of carrying out United States foreign policy. When the national security adviser, H. R. McMaster, learned of some of Mr. Kushner’s communications only after the fact . . . " he was not pleased, to say the least.

"That means he [Kushner] has conducted an entire year of foreign policy without officially disclosing all the personal interests he may have been serving.

"Finally, the risk might be greater still if Mr. Kushner negotiated such deals before Mr. Trump’s inauguration. That’s the possibility raised by Mr. Kushner’s pre-inauguration meetings with Russia. In December 2016, Mr. Kushner met with Sergey Gorkov, the head of a bank under American sanctions, Vnesheconombank. That meeting came after Mr. Kushner suggested a back channel of communications in a meeting with Russia’s ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, according to Mr. Kislyak" . . . .

"Perhaps Mr. Kushner is just a person who had no idea what he was doing and wanted to improve his and his family’s finances. Still, there are many reasons to question whether he has talked with foreign officials with the proper disclosures, designed to ensure that those claiming to represent the interests of the United States aren’t hiding their own interests or those of foreign governments.

"In pursuing his investigation into Russian tampering, Mr. Mueller appears to be doing something more: restoring the regulatory teeth to ensure that those engaging in American politics are doing what they publicly claim they are. If Mr. Mueller extends this effort to foreign policy, Mr. Kushner may be in real trouble."

*     *     *     *     *

In appearance and demeanor, two men could hardly be more different than Donald Trump and Jared Kushner.   And yet . . . Jared seems every bit as cavalier about going his own way without regard for the rules or traditions -- or the obligations of a public servant to put the interests of the American people ahead of his own personal interests.

What a mess this whole clan has dumped on the White House and the American people.

Ralph

Repeal NRA-backed Dickey amendment

Receiving almost no attention in all the discussion about gun control legislation is the NRA-mandated Dickey amendment, which was passed in 1996 and forbids the CDC to spend any money on research on gun violence.

The result is virtually no empirical data to consult when and if we ever do try to craft legislation to limit gun violence.  It is simply because the NRA will not allow their congressional puppets to vote to fund such research. 

I remember when this passed in 1996.   I knew someone who, at the time, worked in the CDC office where they were just beginning to tackle the effects of gun violence as a public health problem.   I know the anguish and disgust the people at CDC felt toward the politicians who let themselves be controlled by the NRA.

New York Times op-ed columnist Charles M. Blow concludes his essay on this subject with these words:

"The American idea is caught up in carnage.  Its very beginning is rooted in gun violence.  It is by the barrel that this land was acquired.  It is by the barrel that the slave was subdued and his rebellions squashed. . . .

"We have venerated the gun and valorized its usage.  America is violent and the gun is a preferred instrument of that violence.   America, in many ways, is the gun."

We now believe gun reform could happen

HuffPost's Ariel Edwards-Levy writes, "The Last Two Weeks Have Convinced Americans Gun Reform Could Happen."

Polls show that there is a usual pattern following a mass shooting in the U.S.:  a brief uptick in concern about gun violence, maybe a brief spike in support for tighter gun restriction.  Then, as the story fades, the polls fall back to the previous level.

But, Edwards-Levy writes:  "This time looks different."



A HuffPost/YouGov survey shows that this time "the numbers have continued to shift in favor of congressional action on guns.   There is also a rising belief that Congress could actually take such action."

"Americans now say by a nearly two-to-one margin, 50% to 26%, that it is politically possible to pass stricter gun laws . . . a remarkable swing from less than two weeks ago, when just 38% saw it as feasible."

"The shift spans political lines and includes both those who favor such a change and those who don't."   Among Clinton voters, those believing it could happen rose 13%;  among Trump voters, it rose 17%.

At 65%, including a majority in each party, Americans now say it's possible to enact some kinds of new gun regulations while still maintaining our right to bear arms.   This compares to the post-Las Vegas number of 53%.

Here's the striking thing.  Most of these changes are due to changing attitudes among those on the right politically.    Republicans now say that gun laws can be tightened without violating Second Amendment rights:   in this latest poll it's 61% compared to 43% just last fall after the Las Vegas shooting. 

Although this seems to be lasting longer than usual, the question is:  can this momentum be sustained to the November election?    The March on Washington this month should give it another good jolt, but then we have to keep it up for another eight months.

We used to say that Trump is very good at reading the mood of the electorate.   This poll suggests that his recent support for gun regulations that provoked such skepticism might just be that he is reading the public reflected in this poll.

Ralph

Sports store chooses to restrict gun sales

Dick's Sporting Goods national retail chain announced that it will no longer sell semi-automatic rifles nor high-capacity ammunition magazines, and it will no longer sell any type of guns to anyone under the age of 21.  It will also strictly apply background checks on all gun purchasers.

This is a very significant, voluntary repudiation of the 'guns everywhere and the more the better' mantra that is being so effectively challenged by the movement sparked by those smart, articulate young students from Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland Florida.

Ralph

PS:   As of Wednesday evening, Walmart also announced that it is raising the age requirement to 21 for all gun purchases.  It also says it will remove from its website any items that resemble "assault-style rifles, including nonlethal airsoft guns and toys."

News flash -- before it goes away

The New York Times released the following last evening.   I'm rushing to reprint it here before it changes -- as some of President Trump's statements are wont to do.  The Times article is by Michael D. Shear.

*     *     *     *     *

"Trump Stuns Lawmakers With Calls For Gun Control"

"WASHINGTON — President Trump stunned Republicans on live television Wednesday by embracing gun control and urging a group of lawmakers at the White House to resurrect gun safety legislation that has been opposed for years by the powerful National Rifle Association and the vast majority of his party.

"In a remarkable meeting in the Roosevelt Room, the president veered wildly from the N.R.A. playbook in front of giddy Democrats and stone-faced Republicans. He called for comprehensive gun control legislation that would expand background checks to weapons purchased at gun shows and on the internet, keep guns from the mentally ill, secure schools and restrict gun sales from some young adults. He even suggested a conversation on an assault weapons ban.

"At one point, Mr. Trump suggested that law enforcement authorities should have the power to seize guns from mentally ill or other dangerous people without first going to court. 'I like taking the guns early,' he said, adding, 'take the guns first, go through due process second.'

"The president’s declarations prompted a frantic series of calls from N.R.A. lobbyists to their allies on Capitol Hill and a statement from the group calling the ideas Mr. Trump expressed “bad policy.” Republican lawmakers issued statements or told reporters they remain opposed to gun control measures.

"'We’re not ditching any Constitutional protections simply because the last person the President talked to today doesn’t like them,' snapped Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska.

"Democrats, too, said they were skeptical that Mr. Trump will follow through.

"'“The White House can now launch a lobbying campaign to get universal background checks passed, as the president promised in this meeting, or they can sit and do nothing,' said Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut."

*     *     *     *     *

As Chris Hayes pointed out, disbelieving that Trump will follow through:   on the DACA question, he sat in the same room with a bipartisan group of lawmakers and declared that he would sign whatever immigration bill they came up with.    Then, of course, he later added the stipulation that it had to also include money for his border wall and a reduction in the total number of immigrants we admit.

Let's see how this plays out.   We've been wrong about Trump so many times, it's risky to skoff at this.   Wouldn't it be great if he can actually get this done.  I'll be the first to give him credit where it's due.   But, no, I'm not holding my breath.

Ralph

Trump has done nothing to stop Russia from interfering in our midterm election

CNN's Zachary Cohen covered a hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee in which US Cyber Command Chief Admiral Mike Rogers testified.   Sen. Jack Reed asked him if he has been directed by the President, through the Defense Secretary, to confront Russian election hacking operations where they originate.

Adm. Rogers answered, "No, I have not."  Rogers clarified, however, that -- although he has not been granted authority by the president to disrupt Russian hacking operations where they originate -- it is not true that the US has just been "sitting back and waiting."

Rogers explained that he has tried to work within the authority he maintains as a commander.  Nevertheless, he admitted that what has been done so far "has not changed the calculus or the behavior on behalf of the Russians. . . .  They have not paid a price that is sufficient to change their behavior."

Well, yes, that is the point.   By a near unanimous vote, Congress passed pretty stiff sanctions on Russians for the election meddling, but so far the president has refused to implement that law in that he has refused to impose the sanctions Congress authorized.

Nor, we now know, has he authorized our Cyber Command to take any action against Russia's continuing cyber activity against us.

Do we need any further proof that Donald Trump, the 45th president of the United States, is under some sort of control -- blackmail or otherwise -- by the Russians, to the detriment of the American people and our government?

*     *     *

In a related story last week, the term of the current chairman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, Matthew Masterson, is coming to an end.  He is the one who has been working most actively with states to be proactive in fixing their election systems to prevent Russian interference in the 2018 midterm election, just about 8 months from now.    Wouldn't this be a good time for Paul Ryan to recommend that he have a second term, and then for President Trump to take that advise and re-appoint Mr. Masterson?

It's not like Masterson is a dud, and they've got some hot-shot replacement that's going to come in and magically solve all the problems and keep the Russians out.  In truth, everyone thought Masterson was doing a good job, and he is particularly well-liked by the state elections boards.   And no names have even been floated as a replacement.

So, yes, his reappointment makes sense;  but it's not going to happen.   Sources in Ryan's office have declined to give any reason, but it is clear that he is being passed over for a second term, although he will remain on the commission, which was established by Congress in 2002 to assist states in complying with federal election standards.

It also remains one of the few resources to assist states in preparing to resist further Russian hacking attempts.  By the time a replacement is chosen, gets confirmed by the Senate, and gets on the job -- the election will be well nigh upon us.   Crucial months will have been wasted.

Trump has the final call.   Don't be surprised when the 2018 elections have some quirks we failed to anticipate and won't like.

Ralph

Conservatives boo one of their own for calling out their hypocrisy on sexual harassment charges against Trump

The Hill reporter Josh Delk wrote that conservative political analyst Mona Charen was booed at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) last weekend in Washington for calling out President Trump over his multiple sexual harassment allegations -- and for calling conservatives as a group hypocrits for giving him a pass, when similar charges have resulted in public denunciations and loss of jobs for dozens of men in media and entertainment, as well as politicians and businessmen.

Charen, on a panel at CPAC, said:  "I am disappointed in people on our side for being hypocrites about sexual harassers and abusers of women who are in our party, who are sitting in the White House, who brag about their extramarital affairs, who brag about mistreating women.   And, because he happens to have an 'R' after his name, we look the other way."

She added:  "You cannot claim that you stand for women and put up with that," a comment that led to loud jeering from the audience.   According to reporters at the event, Charen had to be escorted out by security for her own safety after the panel concluded.

CPAC audiences give Trump their adulation

When President Trump made his appearance at the annual CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) outside Washington last weekend, he certainly got what he craves:   a sense of being adored by the crowd.    My, what a tax cut will do for a conservative crowd!

New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters wrote that most audience members were ready with their answers to what he has accomplished:  "$1,5 trillion tax cut.  Sweeping deregulation.  Increased military spending.  Conservative judges."

Ben Damenech, publisher of "The Federalist" and  speaker at the conference, rattled it off and then said,  "Everybody knows that list."

But then the reporter added:  "Sure, there was another -- and far longer -- list that left many shaking their heads.  The tweeting.  The West Wing's high turnover and constant turmoil.  The hush money paid to a pornographic film actress.  The indictments.  

"But all that seemed quite incidental because, as Mr. Damenech added, conservatives have been pleasantly surprised by the president's policies, if not by him.  They feel very confident that he's going to be a bully for them on judicial nominations, tax cuts, military spending, and all these other things."

When it came time for Trump's address to the conference, he dramatically cast aside his prepared (teleprompter) speech, saying it was "boring."   And then he just riffed and worked the crowd, like it was one of his rallies.   It wasn't long before they were chanting "Lock her up."

Trump ran through his litanies of things he claims extraordinary success on -- the greatest number of regulations overturned;  the most accomplishments in a first year term, ever;   and more and more vapid braggadocio.  None of it true.

He claimed that the just-released Democratic response to the Nunes memo proved that the Nunes memo was correct. [That is crazy nonsense.]   He went even further, saying that it showed that it was the Democrats who had colluded with Russia, not the Republicans.   And he called again for the FBI to investigate Clinton and the Dems.

He even called the Democrats "crazed" and said that his opponents had "committed a lot of atrocities."   At this point, reportedly, (New York Times) "His remarks were met with rapturous applause."

It was at a different time during the conference, without Trump present, that the above-mentioned panel took place. where Mona Charen dared to call her colleagues hypocrits for ignoring allegations of sexual harassment against him -- and she was met with jeers from her own party members and required police escort when she left the building.

It has begun to feel to me that we're in a furious race between (1) the Mueller and journalistic investigations uncovering the damning truth about Trump and his associates;  and (2) the teflon bombast that's building Trump into some larger than life, unassailable -- but at the same time completely empty and vapid -- icon.  The metaphor that leaped to my mind was the huge balloons of various politicos or media icons that float above the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade in New York, including Mickey Mouse.

The frightening part is the growing number for whom Trump seemingly can do no wrong.   Will that crowd be so large that, no matter what crimes Mueller may uncover that implicate Trump himself, nothing will be done?

The best way to combat this is to vote.   Put the Democrats back in charge of congress in 2018 -- and the White House too in 2020.

Ralph

Dems response to Nunes memo released

A redacted version of the Democratic response to the House Intelligence Committee's Republican "Nunes memo" has been released -- some three weeks after the Nunes' memo was made public with much partisan fanfare and hype.

Of course, that was all a political stunt by the White House's favorite toadie, Devin Nunes, who was part of the Trump transition team and also chairs the House Intelligence Committee.   He was forced to recuse himself from the committee's investigation into the Russian hacking into our election because of his very partisan activities.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is the ranking Democrat on the committee, and it was he who wrote the response, which debunks the premise and the distortions in the Nunes memo.   The Democrats wanted their memo to be released at the same time as the Republican (Nunes) version so that the public would have both sides of the controversy.

But that wasn't allowed by President Trump, who had been willing to release the Nunes memo, sight unseen, and despite anguished pleas from the DoJ and FBI that it was both misleadingly incomplete and that it would betray secrets about our own surveillance methods and possibly expose individuals.    Trump didn't care about that.

But, when it came to the Dems' memo -- which refuted and exposed the falsity of Nunes' memo -- Trump punted to the FBI and said they had to redact sensitive information, and then he would consider releasing it.    With the foot-dragging in the White House, that took two weeks -- as intended by the Republicans -- giving them time to spread their false narrative and have it fixed in the minds of the public before the exposure of their duplicity was revealed.

This would have been far more important two weeks ago.   But all the indictments that Mueller has filed in the meantime have taken over the story and proven that there is plenty of "there," there.   So these memos about an obscure point in the FISA application from October 2016 are now relatively unimportant, except for how they expose the Republicans' perfidity.

Other than a marker of the Republicans' efforts to obstruct justice, we can put this aside as a political stunt that has not derailed the Mueller investigation.   The professionals at the FBI and Justice Department have had their reputations restored by the professionalism and by the outcome of this stunt.

So, now it feels like things are back on track -- and the Republicans and Trumpsters are looking worse all the time.   There chants of "witch hunt" and "fake news" are like the after-echoes of a rally that's now over.

Trump's misstatements about it all are so distorted as to make him look silly to anyone who has even the basic knowledge of what has transpired.   He's operating at a childish level -- and his base simply does not care.

BTW:   A new SSRS poll conducted for CNN shows Trump's January approval bump having slid back 5 points to equal the lowest level of his presidency at 35% overall.   The partisan split is enormous:   80% of Republicans approve;  but only 5% of Democrats and 35% of Independents approve.

A separate poll conducted for USA Today by Suffolk University showed Trump with an approval rating of 38% with 60% disapproving.

Ralph

Gun lobby attacks school massacre teens

We first heard it from former GA congressman Jack Kingston several days ago:  these Florida 17 year olds couldn't possibly organize a national rally, so George Soros must be manipulating them with his "instant rally" plans and left-wing agenda.  (See ShrinkRap, Feb. 21).

Then the crazies began constructing conspiracy theories for real.   They aren't really students, they're "crisis actors" that go wherever something like this happens and pretend to be student survivors.   Someone even put together a video that went viral, purporting to show David Hogg -- the astute, articulate student journalist and Parkland massacre survivor --  as just an actor who's made previous videos.   

Come on.  David is a budding journalist.  He makes videos of news events.  He's also an 18 year old senior at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL.   He was hiding along with classmates in a darkened classroom while the shooting was going on;  and he began recording what it was like on his phone.

No, you crazy guys.   You're just gonna have to accept it as fact that these are smart, sophisticated, well-educated kids you're messing with.   They will expose you as the sniveling beggars at the NRA door that you really are (take note, Marco.  You failed miserably in your town hall with these kids.)

Ryan Cooper, writing for "The Week," calls these attacks on the kids "a dizzying demonstration of the moral abomination the conservative propaganda machine has become."   He was referring to the far-right "Gateway Pundit," Lucian Wintrich, who cooked up the idea that, because David Hogg's father is a retired FBI agent, he must have coached his son on "anti-Trump lines" because this kid speaks far too smoothly and articulately to have come up with it by himself. 

Further, these kids are aware enough of the political climate that they know when to drop the protest-rally mode and address politicians with respectful confrontation.   This was superbly evident in the ones who spoke in the meeting with President Trump.

Cooper explains further why these conspiracy theories link the FBI and these Parkland kids:  
"Republican propagandists don't like the FBI now due to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation turning up alleged jaw-dropping corruption and crimes among President Trump's inner circle, and a Russian campaign to influence the election that, at a minimum, the Trump campaign embraced with open arms.

"Movement conservatives dealt with this the same way they deal with everything: by dreaming up an unhinged conspiracy theory. Suddenly, conservatives from Sean Hannity on down began braying that the FBI is part of a Deep State conspiracy to undermine the president.

[Cooper digresses to raise the irony of the FBI -- "composed overwhelmingly of middle-aged Republican men who furiously despised Hillary Clinton, and whose major significant electoral action was then-director James Comey giving Trump a huge leg up a week before election day" — as now their enemy in its supposed political vendetta against Trump.]

"Now comes yet another gun massacre at a high school, only this time it turned out some of the people who survived were smart theater kids, who could speak eloquently in front of a camera . . . . Naturally enough, they advocated for gun control, stoking instant conservative fury. . . . 

"But slavish hero-worship of Trump and furious pummeling of anyone who criticizes him are now the basic operating principles of conservative politics. So like some truth-resistant outbreak of flesh-eating mold, conservatives started attacking the kids by invoking their previous conspiracy theory about the FBI. . . .

"That's the modern conservative movement for you. Every political faction has its blind spots, its hypocrisies, and its inconvenient facts . . .  But the Republican Party is far and away the most intellectually diseased of any major party in the industrialized world. Any political problem they face is immediately deluged with a frenzy of unhinged nutcase brain slop. Climate change? Hoax. Inflation staying stubbornly low? Hoax. Polls looking bad? Unskew! President breathtakingly corrupt? FBI hoax. . . .  

"Indeed, the conservative fever swamps now routinely belch up stuff literally out of nothing, as seen with the Pizzagate conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton and John Podesta were running a child sex dungeon out of a pizza restaurant.

". . . Only one thing is for sure: You'd be a fool to think there are any depths to which the conservative movement will not sink."

*     *     *     *     *

Remember the old adage:    "When your opponent is in the process of shooting himself in the foot, don't get in the way."

I'd say just ignore these fools and madmen.   Let these kids' voices be heard.  Just clear their way to platforms all over this country.   We are seeing a movement building.   Combine it with the energy of the Women's Movement -- and we've got dynamite.   The November mid-term is barely seven months hence.

Ralph

PS:   And watch out for the Russians trying to mess with the process.