Nina's Reading Blog

Comments on books I am reading/listening to

Posts Tagged ‘Donald Trump’

Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election

Posted by nliakos on July 10, 2019

by Robert Mueller (and presumably other unnamed writers from the investigation staff) (The Washington Post, 2019)

I read the Washington Post e-book, which includes an introduction by Post writers Rosalind S. Helderman and Matt Zapotosky and concludes with Marc Fisher and Sari Hornstein’s Feb. 2018 article comparing and contrasting Mueller and Trump. In between is over 500 pages of report: Volume I, on the actual Russian interference (brazen and well-documented), and Volume II, on Obstruction of Justice, on the various ways Trump and his underlings sought to fire the Special Counsel, impede the investigation, and keep what was done from seeing the light of day. Each volume has its own Executive Summary, and there are lots and lots of notes, timelines, lists of characters, legal explanations, glossaries, transcripts of interviews, emails, and letters, etc. There are also lots of redacted parts, sometimes just a few words, and sometimes several pages in a row. We don’t know what we don’t know, and I wondered as I read whether other, more knowledgeable readers can make educated guesses as to what is hidden underneath.

The prose is lawyerly, clear and precise, but not scintillating, and often repetitive. (What did I expect?) There was not much that did not have a familiar ring to it; I’ve been paying attention (listening to the news, reading the newspaper), and most of this stuff has come out in one way or another. But the report puts it in chronological order, relates actions to other actions, and in so doing, makes its case. It does not come out and say that Donald Trump masterminded a conspiracy with Russian bad actors to rig the 2016 election in his favor; Mueller and his staff were unable to prove conspiracy on the part of any Americans (only that they were eager to get “dirt” on Hillary Clinton and didn’t care who was offering it to them). But the case for obstruction of justice is clearer. In each case, Mueller presents the evidence and then analyzes it in terms of three requirements: Was there an obstructive act? Was there a connection (nexus) to an official proceeding? And was there an intent to obstruct justice? Intent is the most difficult to show. Mueller often confesses that the investigators were unable to establish intent. Trump’s refusal to be interviewed or to give real answers to Mueller’s written questions made this more difficult. Mueller was working under very difficult conditions. He did the best he could, and then handed the baton to Congress, which continues to dilly-dally when it should be firing up an inquiry into the case for impeachment of this President.

Every American should read this book. But it’s long and tedious, so for Vol. II, I recommend watching The Investigation: A Search for the Truth in Ten Acts, written by Robert Schenkkan and produced by Law Works. It is also very helpful to watch the videos at the Mueller Book Club, which feature interviews with major players, like Rep. Jerrold Nadler of the House Judiciary Committee and former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, who served on the Judiciary Committee during the Nixon impeachment inquiry.

You can buy it (amazon.com, barnesandnoble.com), download it (https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/18/politics/full-mueller-report-pdf/index.html), donate a copy (or several) to your local library, community center or senior center, do group readings or watch parties of The Investigation with friends or family, or watch Robert Mueller’s live public testimony before Congress on July 17. Then call your Member of Congress and tell him or her that the Mueller Report is just the beginning, and that it is past time to launch an impeachment inquiry into the unprecedented corruption of this administration and this president.

Robert Mueller ended his report with the words,”While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”  Mueller was unable to reach that conclusion because it is Congress alone that can hold a rogue president accountable for high crimes and misdemeanors like corruption, nepotism, and abuse of power. Congress must act, but they won’t, unless and until enough constituents demand it of them.

Posted in History, Non-fiction, Politics | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fear: Trump in the White House

Posted by nliakos on October 7, 2018

by Bob Woodward (Simon and Schuster 2018; Nook format)

By the time I read this, there were no surprises, but Woodward includes minute details from conversations (via extensive interviews) between with a conversation between David Bossie and Steve Bannon about the possibility of Donald Trump running for President (Bannon scoffed: “Of what country?”), jumping six years ahead to 2016 and the campaign and election, and ending up several months into 2017 , for no particular reason that I can see except that while every single day has brought new horrors from this White House, Woodward had to stop writing and publish the book at some point, or he would still be writing. He probably is still writing (Volume II).

I am quite put off by the frequent use of fucking as both an adjective and adverb. It’s as if the English language has no other modifiers. Just a few examples: Bannon: “I don’t have time for fucking nonsense.” (adjective) Bannon again: “Twelve million fucking dollars in cash out of the Ukraine!” (adjective) and: “Fucking absurd” (adverb).   Trump : “That was the biggest fucking mistake I’ve made.” (adjective) and: “I always knew Gary was a fucking globalist. I didn’t know you were such a fucking globalist, Rob.” (adjective) and: “If it weren’t Sunday, you’d shut the markets down, that’s how fucking hard you fucking go!” (adverbs)  Well, you get the idea. Just the men. Do they really talk like that? Woodward dutifully records every “fucking” that was ostensibly uttered. . . . It reminds me of the Nixon tapes. Presidents and their staffs, unedited.

In fact, I have somewhat more respect for Trump than I did before I read the book. In the reported conversations, he often seems more aware of keeping his campaign promises and the potential consequences of various actions than I gave him credit for. Not all the time, but sometimes.

The book is about 100 pages shorter than one expects, with the last 80 pages or so given over to voluminous notes and an index. I thought I had a few more days of reading, but then suddenly, it was over. The final sentence: ” . . . (John) Dowd had seen the tragic flaw. In the political back-and-forth, the evasions, the denials, the tweeting, the obscuring, crying ‘Fake News,’ the indignation, Trump had one overriding problem that Dowd knew but could not bring himself to say to the president: ‘You’re a fucking liar.'”

As the future unfolds, we will see if this “tragic flaw” will be the undoing of this president. One can only hope.

Posted in Biography, History, Memoir, Politics | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »