RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://thefederalist.com/2018/09/04/papadopouloss-court-docs-provide-evidence-russiagate-setup-get-trump/

Late Friday, attorneys for former Donald Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos filed their client’s sentencing memorandum in preparation for his September 7, 2018 sentencing hearing before federal judge Randolph Moss.

Papadopoulos pleaded guilty in October 2017 to making a false statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a crime that carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Special Counsel Robert Mueller previously argued that a sentence of up to 6 months imprisonment would be appropriate, but in Friday’s filing Papadopoulos’s attorneys argued for a sentence of probation.

In reporting the latest developments in the case, the mainstream media quickly latched onto two sentences in Papadopoulos’ memo to push the dying Russia narrative. The language the press proffered as supposed evidence of collusion came in a passage in which Papadopoulos’ attorneys sought to portray the Trump advisor as out of his depth.

As his legal team explained to the court, at a March 31, 2016 “National Security Meeting” with Trump and Jeff Sessions, “eager to show his value to the campaign, George announced at the meeting that he had connections that could facilitate a foreign policy meeting between Mr. Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. While some in the room rebuffed George’s offer, Mr. Trump nodded with approval and deferred to Mr. Sessions who appeared to like the idea and stated that the campaign should look into it.”

The press predictably played up this exchange as a gotcha moment, while it was nothing of the sort. There is nothing nefarious about this discussion, and it has absolutely no bearing on the question of whether anyone in the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to interfere in the presidential election.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/trump-fisa-warrant-comments-lack-of-hearings-not-problem/

Don’t undermine good causes with bad arguments.

‘So, you’re now the patron saint of FISA warrants!”

That’s from a text I got first thing Tuesday morning from a friend who had seen me favorably quoted on a cable-news show. Such is the vertiginous age of Trump that, overnight, a 30-year detractor of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act can become its guardian.

What I’d like to be is the patron saint of caution against undermining good causes with bad arguments.

Over the holiday weekend, I happened to be flipping through the newspapers — if you can “flip” on an iPad — and learned that President Trump was complaining that the FISA court (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, created by FISA in 1978) had not held evidentiary hearings before issuing the controversial warrants to eavesdrop on Carter Page, a former Trump-campaign adviser.

As is his wont, the president lodged his protest on Twitter, on this occasion quoting my friend Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch:

Report: There were no FISA hearings held over Spy documents.” [sic]It is astonishing that the FISA courts couldn’t hold hearings on Spy Warrants targeting Donald Trump. It isn’t about Carter Page, it’s about the Trump Campaign….

Before we get to FISA, let’s pause to note that the president is right about the last point. Many apologists for the FBI, including some congressional Republicans, continue to claim that the Obama administration (and its Justice Department holdovers after Trump’s inauguration) did not engage in political spying on the Trump campaign. The FISA warrants, they maintain, were directed solely at Page, who had disengaged from the campaign before the surveillance commenced. That’s nonsense.

PLEASE READ BELOW ABOUT SENATOR JEREMIAH DENTON (R-ALABAMA) WHO DIED IN 2014

SENATOR TAMMY DUCKWORTH (D-ILLINOIS)- An Iraq War veteran, Duckworth served as a U.S. Army helicopter pilot and suffered severe combat wounds, losing both of her legs and damaging her right arm. Having received a medical waiver, she continued to serve as a lieutenant colonel in the Illinois Army National Guard along with her husband, Major Bryan W. Bowlsbey, a signal officer and fellow Iraq War veteran, until her retirement from the Army in October 2014.

SENATOR ROBERT DOLE (R-KANSAS)- represented Kansas in Congress from 1961 to 1996 and served as the Republican Leader of the United States Senate from 1985 until 1996. He was the Republican presidential nominee in the 1996 presidential election and the party’s vice presidential nominee in the 1976 presidential election. He served with distinction in World War 2. In 1942, Dole joined the United States Army’s Enlisted Reserve Corps to fight in World War II, becoming a second lieutenant in the Army’s 10th Mountain Division. In April 1945, while engaged in combat near Castel d’Aiano in the Apennine mountains southwest of Bologna, Italy, Dole was badly wounded by German machine gun fire, being hit in his upper back and right arm. As Lee Sandlin describes, when fellow soldiers saw the extent of his injuries, all they thought they could do was to “give him the largest dose of morphine they dared and write an ‘M’ for ‘morphine’ on his forehead in his own blood, so that nobody else who found him would give him a second, fatal dose.”

SENATOR JOSEPH CLELAN (D-GEORGIA 1997-2003) is a disabled US Army veteran of the Vietnam War, a recipient of the Silver Star and the Bronze Star for valorous actions in combat, and a former United States Senator.

On April 8, with a month left in his tour, Cleland was ordered to set up a radio relay station on a nearby hill. A helicopter flew him and two soldiers to the treeless top of Hill 471, east of Khe Sanh. Cleland knew some of the soldiers camped there from Operation Pegasus. He told the pilot he was going to stay a while with friends.When the helicopter landed, Cleland jumped out, followed by the two soldiers. They ducked beneath the rotors and turned to watch the liftoff. Cleland reached down to pick up a grenade that he believed had popped off his flak jacket. It exploded and the blast slammed him backward, shredding both his legs and one arm.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/kavanaugh-and-the-ginsburg-standard-15360

Don’t blame Brett Kavanaugh when he demurs at his confirmation hearing from answering questions on legal issues that might come before the Supreme Court. It’s the senators who will be in the wrong, for demanding commitments that no judicious nominee could provide. To answer “direct questions on stare decisis on many other matters, including Roe and health care”—as Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has called for—would itself be disqualifying.

That principle has come to be called the Ginsburg Standard, after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As she explained in the opening statement of her 1993 confirmation hearing: “A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecasts, no hints, for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case—it would display disdain for the entire judicial process.” Or, as she later responded to a question about constitutional protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation: “No hints, no forecasts, no previews.”

It would be a mistake to associate the rule too closely with Justice Ginsburg, who honored it inconsistently at her hearing, or to view it as driven only by policy considerations. In fact, the standard has deep roots in the law and history. CONTINUE AT SITE