Who is @aliasvaughn? There are at least two views, one very flattering, one less so, and others. For my mileage, I’ve come to regard the handle on Twitter as a gossip columnist on the Trump administration troubles with criminal law.
That’s not to dismiss the work at all. Jack Anderson took over a Washington gossip column, and became an investigative powerhouse during the Watergate years.
We could use another Jack Anderson now, to present what is known about scandals in the White House, with assured publication in 1,000 local newspapers that right now get almost none of that news.
Plus, as anyone who heard me talk to corporations, an organization’s gossip reveals information vacuums that great leaders will fill with good, accurate information, and often reveals details about events that do not appear in the official versions of a story, but which can make all the difference in the world in properly dealing with a situation. Leaders listen to gossip, and answer it.
In any case, today Ale (@aliasvaughn) offers a lengthy-for-Twitter explanation of why Donald Trump lashes out at Bruce Ohr, who you and I don’t know from Adam nor Adam’s off-ox. The explanation has a lot of hyperbole in it — but it also offers information you can’t get from the Trump echo chambers, and a lot of connections today’s newspaper doesn’t have time to explain.
Former Associate Deputy Attorney General and past champion Russian organized crime fighter Bruce Ohr.
So I saved the thread here, and offer it for your edification and entertainment, and to convince you to go vote the bums out in November.
Who is Bruce Ohr?
1. Bruce Ohr is the Justice Department lawyer who was told by Christopher Steele that Russian intelligence believed it had Trump "over a barrel". Start seeing why Trump is going after him? https://t.co/9zDD0QTBk7
2. These details pertain to a breakfast that happened on July 30, 2016. Ohr described the breakfast to CONGRESS this week in a private interview. And that's how the GOP Trump lackeys went to tell Trump, he found out and decided he can't have a witness at DoJ.
4. An unnamed former Ru intelligence official said that Russian intelligence believed "they had Trump over a barrel", that's the quote that was reported. Steele and Ohr have known each other for over a decade. They shared interest in international organized crime.
6. Attacking them publicly is meant to discredit them as witnesses. It doesn't matter that it won't work as they will testify against him anyway, it's witness tampering at a minimum. This influences public perception, on top of the previous point I made about obstruction.
8. Ohr also told Congress that Steele said Carter Page had met with more senior Russian officials than he had acknowledged meeting with. (meantime, Page has been forced to acknowledge meeting with at least a couple of them.)
10. Ohr told Congress he couldn't vouch for the accuracy of Steele's information (bc duh, he wasn't there) BUT said he considers him a reliable FBI informant who delivered "credible and actionable intelligence, including his probe into corruption at FIFA".
12. All of the above literally DESTROYS Trump and the Trump lackey wagon conspiracy theory about the FBI being biased, or the Steele dossier being the reason why the Russia investigation started. And THIS is why Trump detests Ohr and knows he's his sworn enemy.
14. AP truth: " If the FBI’s investigations turn toward Trump’s ties to Russian organized crime, which is entirely foreseeable, Trump may be interested in trying to delegitimize those efforts as he has attempted with other aspects of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe."
16. "Over the years, no fewer than 1,300 Trump-branded condos were sold in all cash purchases to anonymous shell companies—the two criteria that set off alarm bells among anti-money laundering authorities." You don't say? The only thing Trump is capable of actually loving? MONEY
18. AP correctly notes: "little attention was paid to what may well be the most interesting item on Page's resume — her considerable experience prosecuting money laundering cases involving Russian organized crime." Page worked with FBI task force in Budapest vs? DMITRY FIRTASH.
20. This excellent AP story goes on asking an essential question: "Why does Trump risk so much politically by even threatening to pull the security clearances of an active DoJ official without any of the ordinary procedures for doing so?"
22. The above from the AP is the best succinct explanation you'll find for how Russian mafia operates and WHY Trump is frantic to keep his ties to Mogilevich hidden. Bc once they surface, they're like direct ties to PUTIN, so the jig is up. That's why he went after Ohr AND Page.
24. Trump of course (like other criminals) doesn't count on the fact that we figure out the puzzle MUCH faster than he can imagine, and he didn't count on the fact his ties to Mogilevich and Firtash would become obvious via MANAFORT as well. He's got CRS, Cornered Rat Syndrome.
26. Manafort can't even think of lying, bc he'll go to jail, and he can't even think of NOT giving the interview, bc he can be held in contempt and put in jail until he complies with the request. So, there's no pardon coming. Not to mention: there are STATE CRIMES awating.
28. So watch the Manafort trial VERY closely. Watch what happens there. Because this trial? Merely the beginning. Manafort WILL be indicted for NatSec crimes as well. And he holds the financial key to them, bc he's the one who dealt with oligarchs and Firtash.
30. So this is also why Mueller's move to give the Cohen case to SDNY was GENIUS. Bc now BOTH him AND SDNY have a direct avenue to get to Firtash, and thus money laundering for Trump, with direct connection to Manafort., and thus conspiracy. Rest assured: #MuellerIsComing /END.
Caption from Foreign Policy Magazine: ARLINGTON, VA – SEPTEMBER 11: In this U.S. Navy handout, sunrise at the Pentagon prior to a ceremony to commemorate the 2016 anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. The American flag is draped over the site of impact at the Pentagon. Photo by Damon J. Moritz
September features few dates to fly the U.S. flag in an average year. Labor Day is the only national holiday. Only California joined the union in a past September, so that’s the only statehood date. Gold Star Mothers Day had fallen out of regular honors, until our two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
School reform efforts after 2000 turned to adding patriotism to the curriculum. Most states now require something be said about the Constitution in social studies classes, and that has increased focus on Constitution Day on September 17. On September 17, 1787, the convention in Philadelphia signed and formally transmitted the proposed Constitution to the 2nd Continental Congress, with a plan that each state would call a convention of citizens to ratify the document; when citizens of at least 9 states ratified, the document entered into force.
Attacks on the U.S. on September 11, 2001, led to a new day honoring patriots, on that day of the month every year.
The dates are few, but the sobriety and somberness are great.
Here are the dates to fly the U.S. flag in September 2018. In order:
Labor Day, first Monday in September, September 3 in 2018
California statehood, September 9 (1850, the 31st state)
The largest free-flying American flag in the world flew over the George Washington Bridge Monday, Sept. 2, 2013, in Fort Lee, New Jersey, for Labor Day. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said the flag flew on Labor Day under the upper arch of the bridge’s New Jersey tower, to honor working men and women across the country. The flag is 90 feet long by 60 feet wide, with stripes measuring about five feet wide and stars about four feet in diameter. (AP Photo/Mel Evans) (via Mowry Journal)
Save
Save
Save
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas (El Paso) in a House committee hearing room. Relevant Magazine image.
U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke reaches out to every Texan in his campaign for the U.S. Senate seat occupied by Ted Cruz. O’Rourke already visited all 254 Texas counties, listening to Texans tell him what is important in their lives.
Now Beto conducts town hall meetings.
Recently a Texan asked him about NFL players’ kneeling during the national anthem.
Does his answer surprise you? It reveals the thought he’s put into issues.
Here is the entire, short thread, extracted from Tweets from “BumbleBee.” I hope to come back and add links; please feel fee to offer links to confirmation, in comments. Or, if you know of other effects not lusted here, please show those links.
[President Trump’s] tariffs are having a real impact on U.S. businesses, for example:
CaseLogic – closing
Element Electronics – closing
Harley Davidson – going overseas
Mid-Continental Nail – laid off 60 employees, lost 50% of orders, may close by Labor Day
REC Silicon – cut production by 25%
Trans-matic – cut production by 25%
Toyota – added $3k to cost of each car
Multiple companies are also asking for exemptions from the 25% tariffs. Here are just two examples: Batesville Tool & Die, or will shift manufacturing to Mexico as well as Qualtek Mfg, because tariffs have driven annual costs up by $300k. They couldn’t hire add’l 14 employees, [have] delayed shipments, and customers have diverted orders to others suppliers. Says tariffs have “cut us off at the knees.”
It is also affecting U.S. farmers drastically. One farmer in Illinois says he is losing $8 a head on pork, and he is losing money on everything he grows. Says that 95% of everything he produces was shipped outside U.S. borders.
The Senior Director of Commodities says there will be long term indications because of the tariffs. Says that it took 20 years to get the markets back to normal after the last trade wars, and farmers will be relying heavily on the government for a long time.
Anyone who supports Trump’s idiotic tariffs and believes “trade wars are easy to win” have no idea what they are talking about, and no clue how they affect people down the line. I have friends trying to sell their farms in both Kansas and Nebraska.
Trump, you’re an idiot.
And what’s your mileage on the trade wars?
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
It’s been 59 years since the youngest state entered the union — the longest stretch in which the U.S. has not added another state.
“On June 14, 1959, Boy Scout Milton Motooka helped get the word out for Hawaii’s statehood plebiscite to be held 13 days later. A new documentary will focus on Hawaii’s statehood.” Hawaiians voted yes in the plebiscite, and statehood was declared two months later. (Whatever became of Scout Motooka? See comments on last year’s post.)
June’s plebiscite smoothed the path for statehood, declared two months later.
13-year-old paperboy Chester Kahapea happily hawks a commemorative edition of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin with the headline showing the state had achieved statehood after the U.S. House of Representatives passed the law authorizing Hawaii as a state. Star-Bulletin photo by Murray Befeler
Hawaii formally celebrates the day on the third Friday in August, this year on the 19th. I hope you joined in the festivities (it’s a holiday in Hawaii) — but under the U.S. Flag Code, you may certainly fly your flags on August 21, regardless which day of the week that is.
Specimen copy of the ballot used by Hawaiians in a June 27, 1959, plebiscite to approve conditions of statehood. Image from Hawaii Magazine, 2009
After the U.S. annexed Hawaii in 1898 (in action separate from the Spanish-American War) attempts at getting Hawaii admitted as a state got rolling. After World War II, with the strategic importance of the islands firmly implanted in Americans’ minds, the project picked up some steam. Still, it was 14 years after the end of the war that agreements were worked out between the people of Hawaii, the Hawaiian royal family, Congress and the executive branch. The deal passed into law had to be ratified by a plebiscite among Hawaiian citizens. The proposition won approval with 94% of votes in favor.
Other than the tiny handful of loudmouth birthers, most Americans today are happy to have Hawaii as a state, the fifth richest in the U.S. by personal income. The nation has a lot of good and great beaches, but the idea of catching sun and surf in Hawaii on vacation might be considered an idealized part of the American dream.
“Loudmouth birthers?” Yeah, Barack Obama, our 45th President, was born in Hawaii in 1961. Some whiners think that, but for statehood, Obama would not have been a citizen eligible to be president. Hawaii is not good ground for growing sour grapes, though. Birth in a territory would probably be enough to make him eligible. Water under the bridge: Hawaii was a state in 1961. President Obama remains president.
NASA’s poster for National Aviation Day 2016. A young girl looks up at some of the experimental ideas for future aviation. NASA said: “It’s an exciting time for aviation, with potential NASA X-planes on the horizon and a lot of new technologies that are making airplanes much more Earth friendly. Use National Aviation Day to excite and inspire the young people you know about exploring aeronautics as a future career. Credits: NASA / Maria C. Werries”
August 19 is National Aviation Day. In federal law, the day is designated for flying the flag (36 USC 1 § 118).
August 19 is the anniversary of the birth of Orville Wright, usually credited with being on the team with his brother Wilbur who successfully built and flew the first heavier-than-air flying machine.
Celebrate? The White House issued no proclamation for 2018. but you may fly your flag anyway.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
March of Dimes Foundation photo: “Nurses tended to polio patients in iron lung respirators at the Robert B. Green Memorial Hospital polio ward in San Antonio in 1950. It was a common scene throughout the polio crisis that swept Texas.” From the San Antonio Express-News article on the history of polio in the city.
It didn’t work.
In a desperate move to stop polio epidemics, after World War II but before the Salk polio vaccine was available, some American towns authorized aerial spraying of DDT over their cities.
Of course, DDT doesn’t stop viruses, and polio is a virus. Polio virus is not spread by a vector, an insect or other creature which might have been stopped by DDT, as mosquitoes spread malaria parasites and West Nile virus.
Aerial spraying of DDT against polio did not one thing.
A podcast from the Science History Institute discussed these misdirected events recently, and someone there did a sharp, short video to explain the issue.
YouTube explanation:
An animation drawn from episode 207 of Distillations podcast, DDT: The Britney Spears of Chemicals.
Americans have had a long, complicated relationship with the pesticide DDT, or dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane, if you want to get fancy. First we loved it, then we hated it, then we realized it might not be as bad as we thought. But we’ll never restore it to its former glory. And couldn’t you say the same about America’s once-favorite pop star?
We had a hunch that the usual narrative about DDT’s rise and fall left a few things out, so we talked to historian and CHF fellow Elena Conis. She has been discovering little-known pieces of this story one dusty letter at a time.
But first our associate producer Rigoberto Hernandez checks out some of CHF’s own DDT cans—that’s right, we have a DDT collection—and talks to the retired exterminator who donated them.
I bring it up here because in recent weeks there’s been a little surge on Twitter, and probably on Facebook and other places, in people claiming DDT causes polio, or causes symptoms so close to polio that physicians could never tell the difference. A lot of anti-vaccine advocates pile on, claiming that this would prove that the polio vaccine doesn’t work.
That’s all quite hooey-licious, off course. Polio’s paralysis of muscles in almost no way resembles acute DDT poisoning, which causes muscle misfiring instead of paralysis. As with almost every other disease, acute DDT poisoning can cause nausea; but DDT poisoning either kills its victim rather quickly, or goes away after a couple of weeks.
Polio doesn’t do that.
In the podcast, you’ll hear the common story of kids running behind DDT fogging trucks, because people thought DDT was harmless. In the concentrations in the DDT fogs, it would be almost impossible to ingest the 4 ounces or so of DDT required to get acute poisoning.
In any case, it’s one more odd facet of a long story of human relations to DDT and diseases. It’s worth a listen for history’s sake. But in this case, it’s entertaining, too. You’ll hear stories of people who opposed government actions to spray DDT, and who thought the government was too lax in its regulation and use of DDT.
How Congress voted on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, broken down by party and with a few more details; chart by Kevin M. Kruse; from Kruse’s Twitter account.
Not sure if everybody got their Bogus History from Dinesh D’Souza, but a lot of people have the same wrong ideas about what party supported civil rights in the post-World War II era. These crappy distortions of history are showing up on Facebook and all over Twitter. Worse, people believe them.
The crappy claim is that Democrats are the party of racism and support for the Ku Klux Klan. Historically, that was once so; but it has not been so since 1948 as the two main parties in the U.S. switched positions, with Democrats taking on civil rights as a key cause for Democratic constituencies, and the Republican Party retreating from Abraham Lincoln’s work in the Civil War and immediate aftermath, and instead welcoming in racists fleeing the Democratic Party.
Think Strom Thurmond, vs. Mike Mansfield and Lyndon Johnson.
Kevin Kruse corrected D’Souza in a series of Tweets, and you ought to read them and follow the notes. Kruse is good, and better, he is armed with accurate information.
This is solid history, delivered by Kruse in a medium difficult for careful explanations longer than a bumper sticker.
I keep seeing this talking point in my mentions so, sure, let's address it.https://t.co/AxuVqDHwVq
First of all, the central point in the original tweet stands. If you have to go back to the 1860s or even the 1960s to claim the “party of civil rights” mantle — while ignoring legislative votes and executive actions taken in *this* decade — you’re clearly grasping at straws.
Anyone who reads newspapers would know that. Alas, one of the campaigns of conservatives over the past 40 years has been to kill off newspapers. They’ve been way too successful at it.
I’ll include mostly the Tweets for the rest of this post.
First of all, the central point in the original tweet stands.
If you have to go back to the 1860s or even the 1960s to claim the "party of civil rights" mantle — while ignoring legislative votes and executive actions taken in *this* decade — you're clearly grasping at straws.
Second, this fact — that GOP votes were needed to overcome the opposition of Southerners in Congress (Democrats *and* Republicans) — is weirdly trotted out as if it's a hidden secret and not, you know, a central part of historians' narrative of the civil rights era.
This is a constant thing with D'Souza, by the way, claiming "historians won't tell you this" or "they don't lecture about that" when, in fact, we do constantly.
It's a fairly big tell that he hasn't read much in the field and probably never even took a class in US history.
Democrats were the dominant party, but had become increasingly divided over civil rights, with northern white liberals and African-Americans steadily gaining on the southern conservative segregationists who had long controlled the party.
Because Democrats had such overwhelming margins in Congress but were divided internally on civil rights, the fight over the CRA and VRA were at heart fights *within* the Democratic Party.
Liberal Dems fought for these bills; conservative Dems worked to stop them.
Look at the history behind both bills, before the final votes.
Both were introduced by Democratic presidents, ushered through Congress by Democratic committee chairs and leaders, given more votes in the end by Democrats than the GOP, and then signed by Democratic president.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964: proposed by JFK, passed by Democratic-led House (152 Dem votes for, 138 Rep votes for) and Democratic-led Senate (46 Dem votes for, 27 Rep votes for). LBJ signed it with MLK at his side.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965: advanced by LBJ and passed by Democratic-led House (221 Dem votes for, 112 Rep votes for) and Democratic-led Senate (49 Dem votes for, 30 Rep votes for), LBJ signed it.
In comparison, Senator Barry Goldwater — the conservative GOP presidential candidate who ran against LBJ in 1964 — voted against the Civil Rights Act and campaigned on the vote.
Conservatives in both parties *hated* the civil rights bill, denounced as "socialist" in this ad: pic.twitter.com/uRg4rmEVi7
Back up and look at those vote totals for the bills. You can see Democrats and Republicans on both sides.
Yes, Southern Democrats in the Senate filibustered the CRA. But the only Southern Republican senator filibustered too, and the filibuster's leader soon switched to the GOP.
As I showed in great detail in this thread, the new Southern Republicans in the House and Senate in the 1960s were basically indistinguishable from old Southern Democrats on matters of civil rights and segregation: https://t.co/UD83C8BErw
On the flip side, yes, liberal and moderate Republicans did side with the majority of Democrats to pass the bills, after Dem leaders recruited them.
Again, though, the real distinction is region, not party. Southern conservatives in both parties resisted it. Here's the CRA vote: pic.twitter.com/4N9SlbrSVy
D'Souza and those like him point to the yes votes of liberal & moderate Republicans — deliberately ignoring the no votes of conservatives like Goldwater — to claim that today's *conservative* GOP is the party of civil rights.
Moreover, as noted in this thread, National Review — which still has D'Souza on its masthead — led the charge against these liberal and moderate Republicans over the course of the 1960s.https://t.co/TIDUZT2a3F
So, no, the GOP was not "the party of civil rights" in the 1960s.
There were, to be sure, moderates in the GOP like Romney and Rockefeller who stood up for civil rights. But Goldwater Republicans fought them for control of the party and ultimately won: https://t.co/292BtVZi87
In the end, it's insane that conservatives now try to reach back to reclaim votes of moderate and liberal Republicans — whom conservatives *hated* at the time — to provide cover for today's conservative GOP.
Sorry, you didn't want them then. You don't get to claim them now.
You can view the entire thread in one unroll, which I find difficult to translate to this blog platform — but you may find it easier to disseminate:
Hi! please find the unroll here: Thread by @KevinMKruse: "I keep seeing this talking point in my mentions so, sure, let's address it. First of all, the central point in the origi […]" https://t.co/MRYiSGQ6xN Talk to you soon. 🤖
— Thread Reader App (@threadreaderapp) July 27, 2018
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Or, until that account is unsuspended by the forces supporting Donald Trump: Follow @FillmoreWhite, the account of the Millard Fillmore White House Library
We've been soaking in the Bathtub for several months, long enough that some of the links we've used have gone to the Great Internet in the Sky.
If you find a dead link, please leave a comment to that post, and tell us what link has expired.
Thanks!
Retired teacher of law, economics, history, AP government, psychology and science. Former speechwriter, press guy and legislative aide in U.S. Senate. Former Department of Education. Former airline real estate, telecom towers, Big 6 (that old!) consultant. Lab and field research in air pollution control.
My blog, Millard Fillmore's Bathtub, is a continuing experiment to test how to use blogs to improve and speed up learning processes for students, perhaps by making some of the courses actually interesting. It is a blog for teachers, to see if we can use blogs. It is for people interested in social studies and social studies education, to see if we can learn to get it right. It's a blog for science fans, to promote good science and good science policy. It's a blog for people interested in good government and how to achieve it.
BS in Mass Communication, University of Utah
Graduate study in Rhetoric and Speech Communication, University of Arizona
JD from the National Law Center, George Washington University
Posted by Ed Darrell 
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 
