Yes Collusion

Merriam-Webster defines collusion as a secret agreement or cooperation.  Despite the seemingly transfinite statements to the contrary from the current Administration, that definition works.

Page 184 of the Mueller Report tells us:

The United States has a compelling interest ... in limiting the participation of foreign citizens in activities of democratic self-government, and in thereby preventing foreign influence over the U.S. political process.  ...  To that end, federal campaign finance law broadly prohibits foreign nationals from making contributions, donations, expenditures, or other disbursements in connection with federal, state, or local candidate elections, and prohibits anyone from soliciting, accepting, or receiving such contributions or donations. As relevant here, foreign nationals may not make, and no one may solicit, accept, or receive from them, a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value or an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation.

The term contribution, used throughout campaign-finance law, includes any gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit of money or any other thing of value made by any person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office.

But don't take my word for it.  Just keep these two things in mind:

Donald Trump Jr.'s statement that he'd love dirt on Hillary Clinton from Russia
the actual text of the law in question (52 USC)

Oliver and Kellyanne

Oliver Wendell Holmes (1841 - 1935) was known as The Great Dissenter.  In his 29 years on the Supreme Court, Holmes delivered many opinions that disagreed with the majority of the Court.  Perhaps best known among these was  Schenck v United States.  In this ruling, Holmes posited that the First Amendment does not provide an absolute right, and cannot, as an example, protect a person falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic.

Fast-forward to today, and to Donald Trump's defense of Kellyanne Conway.  In the face of serious criticisms from the head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, Mr. Trump accused, not Ms. Conway, but rather the OLC  - of interfering with Conway's freedom of speech.  How so?  The Federal watchdog pointed out in detail the numerous occasions of Conway's violation of the Hatch Act.

Nancy Is the New Hillary

This morning, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi acted, as she always does, with dignity and professionalism.  She did so while still making it clear that she found Donald Trump's statements yesterday, regarding accepting campaign help from a foreign government, appalling.

In less than an hour, Kevin McCarthy (R - CA) , minority leader in the House of Representatives, responded to Pelosi with something right out of the 2016 playbook.  McCarthy accused the Clinton campaign and the Democrat [sic] Party of several instances of - wait for it - collusion with Russia, and with the intelligence community of foreign powers.

Even Lindsay Graham objected to equating foreign intervention in our election process with oppo research.

Nada; Nichevo; Rien; Dim Byd; Nto

That's how Rep. Elijah Cummings (D - MD), chair of the Oversight Committee in the House of Representatives, described the current Administration's response to requests, from his and other Committees, for documentary evidence. Rep. Cummings didn't speak in Spanish as shown above, nor in the Ukranian, French, Welsh, or Xhosa that follow it.  In English and plainly, Rep. Cummings said the  current Administration had turned over nothing.

Cummings said further that Trump's basing his plethora of refusals on executive privilege makes them flimsy at best.

A Thing of Beauty

One of my favorites of Joe Biden's quotes was his assessment of Rudy Giuliani's public speaking style - a noun, a verb, and 9-11.  Today in Iowa, the former Vice President outdid himself.

During a rally, one in his audience peppered him with questions in what can only be called an aggressive manner.  The rest of the attendees responded with shouts and efforts to usher the man out.  To which the candidate had an eminently illustrative response.  Mr. Biden said No - no.  that's okay.  This isn't a Trump rally - let him go.

No problem there - no existential threat to the principles upon which the United States is founded ...

Economic Growth

If the old saw - that most folks vote their pocketbooks - is true, then we can look forward to a Democratic landslide in 2020.

First of all, the economic growth of which Donald Trump is so enamored and for which he claims almost exclusive credit began well before he took office,  And even his top economic advisor admits that U. S. consumers, not the governments of China or Mexico, will ultimately pay for tariffs.

And while it has nothing to do with the economic policies of the current Administration, I couldn't resist this tidbit; the irony of it is awesome.

Pants on Fire

I'm not breaking my promise.  I haven't, and won't, bash Donald Trump.  But I have and always will defend the public's right to correct and timely information.  And once again, the current occupant of the Oval Office has failed us in that regard.

Mr. Trump touted his tariffs on Mexico.  He denies that those excises will be a de facto tax increase on American consumers.   (Far be it from merriam-webster's online thesaurus to disagree with him.)  More germane to this post, Trump claims his threat of tariffs motivated the Mexican government to use their (newly-minted) National Guard to manage the flow of refugees from Guatemala.

That last is almost true.  But what the current Administration neglects to tell us is that Mexico, as early as February just past,  had already formed a National Guard,

• part of whose stated purpose was to monitor refugees
• whose management is in civilian, not military, hands
• which is made up of individuals transferred from police forces