In Shocking Twist, Republicans Consider Expelling Legislator For Actual Misconduct

We're all by now familiar with the scandals in Tennessee and Montana, where Republican-controlled legislatures sought to expel or otherwise silence Democratic colleagues for the crimes of having opinions while Black and trans (respectively). Now there's news of another proposed expulsion coming from a red state -- but in a shocking twist, Republicans are experimenting with using it to address actual misconduct!

A House committee has recommended the expulsion of Republican state Rep. Bryan Slaton after finding he had engaged in inappropriate sexual conduct with an aide, then acted to thwart an investigation into the matter.

A scathing report by the House General Investigating Committee, distributed to House shortly after noon Saturday, found Slaton did not dispute allegations that he had sex with the 19-year-old woman and provided alcohol to her, nor did he express regret or remorse for his conduct. Instead, the report said, Slaton’s lawyer argued the complaints should be dismissed because the behavior occurred in Slaton’s Austin residence, not the workplace.

That summary barely scratches the surface -- the report strongly suggests that Rep. Slaton raped his aide (the aide was reportedly sufficiently intoxicated that she "could not effectively consent to intercourse and could not indicate whether [Slaton’s conduct] was welcome or unwelcome" -- the word for that is rape) and then threatened her (showing her a message reading "nothing would happen as long as her and her friends keep quiet").

Rep. Slaton entered office after ousting a more moderate Republican with backing from a pair of far-right petro billionaires. And what was his signature issue? You'll absolutely guess:

Last year, he called for a blanket ban on minors at drag shows, saying it was necessary to protect children from “perverted adults.”

Of course.

Anyway, kudos to Texas Republicans for considering using expulsion as a tool to punish actual misconduct as opposed to as a political stunt to disenfranchise minorities.

Old in Town Roundup

I've arrived in Chicago! I wouldn't characterize myself as "new in town", since I've already lived in Chicago (indeed, in this very building) before. But I am feeling very, very old as I try to unpack various boxes.

Anyway, here's a roundup:

* * *

The Antisemitism Cow finally speaks (beyond just "MOO", that is)!

A pretty big storm is developing at Ole Miss, where a tenure-track professor was summarily fired from his position after criticizing "powerful, racist donors."

Also in academic freedom, albeit garnering less attention: students at the University of Dallas trying to form a racial justice club offering "a welcoming, inclusive community" are encountering stiff resistance from the student government (and some faculty). Opponents claim -- I swear I'm not kidding -- that the club can't be accepted because it would mean conceding that the university might not already be inclusive and welcoming of all students.

Trump issues a new wave of pardons, with special focus on corrupt GOP politicos and American paramilitary operatives implicated in the murder of civilians. Utterly disgraceful.

An interesting and thoughtful interview with incoming Congressman Jamaal Bowman, with special focus on his relationship with the Jewish community (Bowman ousted longtime Rep. Eliot Engel, who is Jewish, in this year's Democratic primary).

Colorado Republican Rep. Ken Buck, who is also chair of the state party, announces he will refuse to take the COVID vaccine. The GOP has been flirting with anti-vaxx politics for awhile now, but it couldn't have picked a worse time to topple over the edge.

Duncan Hunter Screws His Wife, and Apparently Every Other Woman in His Vicinity

When Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) was charged with misusing campaign finance funds, he made headlines by quickly moving to throw his wife under the bus. It was an impressively classless move even by his standards, but now we might have some insight as to why his forever partner received such limited loyalty. Apparently, Rep. Hunter used his misappropriated campaign cash to finance five -- five -- different affairs.

His I-have-to-imagine-soon-to-be-ex- wife has already plead guilty and is apparently cooperating with the prosecution.

"Nah, You're Not Worth It"

The DOJ just announced 50 indictments in a massive bribery ring where wealthy parents paid to give their children an illicit boost in the college admissions process. The unlawful assistance included everything from falsely being "placed" on college sports teams (in sports they did not play), to falsification of test scores (or simply getting a smarter student to take the test instead). None of the students themselves are being charged, as the complaint alleges the parents were the primary actors.

Among those charged is Desperate Housewives star Felicity Huffman, and that led to this interesting little part of the story:

Huffman is accused of paying $15,000 — disguised as a charitable donation — to the Key Worldwide Foundation so her oldest daughter could participate in the scam. A confidential informant told investigators that he advised Huffman he could arrange for a third party to correct her daughter’s answers on the SAT after she took it. She ended up scoring a 1420 — 400 points higher than she had gotten on a PSAT taken a year earlier, according to court documents.

Huffman also contemplated running a similar scam to help her younger daughter but ultimately did not pursue it, the complaint alleges.

So I have to ask -- who comes out feel worse here? The older daughter, who now everyone knows had her college admission purchased by mommy and daddy? Or the younger daughter, who mom and dad considered "helping" in the same way but ultimately decided she wasn't worth the effort (hopefully -- hopefully -- because she was smart and talented enough on her own to not need it)?

Anyway, this is a massive abuse of the educational system by people already incredibly advantaged by their wealth and privilege, and I look forward to the results of the criminal process here.

Conservatives No Longer Can Conceive of Non-Partisan Motives, Part II

The Mueller investigation is not going to turn out well for the Trump administration.

One would think that's uncontroversial, given that it's already secured guilty pleas from several Trump associates and indictments against several more. "How bad" is an open question, but "bad" surely isn't.

In the wake of indictments against several Russian nationals for interfering in Election 2016, Democratic Senator Bob Casey (PA) suggested that Mueller not release any final report on his investigation immediately before the 2018 midterms.

Casey said he couldn't make any assumptions about where the Mueller investigation is going in light of indictments issued on Friday. But he added that he would recommend Mueller not release a report on his findings near the midterms, when it would distract from elections or cause people to question the election's integrity.

One can agree with this analysis or disagree. The case for disagreement is that the Russia scandal is a valid and important issue that voters should have full information on when making their choice come 2018. The case for agreement is that Russian interference has already badly frayed our collective faith in the integrity of our democratic system and a last-minute FBI report would only further their goal of sowing chaos.

But Glenn Reynolds reacted to the news somewhat differently:

Weird I thought it was going to be bad for the GOP. https://t.co/Qf7d7kSvaa

— Instapundit.com (@instapundit) February 18, 2018

Oy.

But seriously -- remember last year when (talking about the Russia investigation!) I wrote that conservatives can no longer conceive of non-partisan motives? Great example right here. The only possible motivation of anyone talking about the FBI probe into Russian interference in our elections is a partisan one. Hence, if a Democrat -- one in no position to know what Mueller will end up finding, but one who (like the rest of us) already see it ensnaring Trump associates -- says that he doesn't want a bombshell release right before the election, the only possible motive is ... the report will somehow hurt Democrats. The proffered rationale -- "bombshell revelations of foreign electoral interference right before an election where voters are already mistrustful of each other and on edge is a bad idea" -- doesn't even register. It's like the very concept of being a good civic citizen is just beyond comprehension.

And Now Your Troubles Begin

I feel bad for Trump-critical congressional Republicans. Really, I do. They thought that their efforts would be over after election day. In a Hillary Clinton administration, never Trump Republicans could go back to being regular Republicans. They could be a normal opposition party. To be sure, had they done this I think they'd have missed the lesson of their own experience -- Donald Trump was the fruit of "regular" Republican activity over the past eight years -- but it would have been understandable. Their labors would have been done.

Instead, they have four years of Donald Trump. Four years where "opposition" no longer is just tongue-clucking in the New York Times, but actually will involve taking concrete action on the House and Senate floor. That's a very different animal.

I'm not asking that Republicans suddenly become NARAL backers just because Trump is in office. But basic good governance regulations (such as reigning in Trump's conflicts of interest)? Those can't be allowed to slide. And, with Democrats in a state of rout, it is up to the Republicans in Congress. They can't fob it off on others..

Unfortunately, many congressional Republicans are indicating they have no interest in rising to the occasion. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) has miraculously lost all interest in investigating the President after promising two straight years of investigation into Hillary Clinton had she won the Oval Office. Other Republicans literally run for the elevators when asked to discuss Trump's unprecedented ethical conflicts. It is an unacceptable abdication of duty. And it unfortunately betrays, yet again, the fundamental unwillingness of the modern conservative movement to take responsibility for itself.

[M]any other Republicans downplayed the ethical concerns, noting Trump was still some two months from Inauguration Day. Many said they had faith in Trump and his family to make the right moves, and they insisted any problems that emerge would come out in the normal course of Washington’s checks-and-balances.

“The republic’s been around 240 years. We didn’t say George Washington couldn’t have any interest in the affairs of Mount Vernon,” said Oklahoma GOP Rep. Tom Cole said. “These are real problems but there are lots of ethics rules and regulation. And there’s lots of scrutiny, more scrutiny with the presidency of the United States than any other position in the world, from the media to your friends to your enemies.”

“Let’s give the guy a chance to work through this and set up some sort of system,” he added. “We’ll see if it works or not. I hope it does. I trust it will. But if it didn’t, he’ll pay a horrific political price.”

"Hope" and "trust" are not part of the checks-and-balances schema. Our system of government is not based on "trusting" people in power to do right. It's based on the different branches of government taking it upon themselves to actively check one another, exercising their oversight powers fairly but aggressively. Seriously, read Federalist #51.

In any event, while Democrats can do little things to hold Donald Trump accountable, it's ultimately up to the Republican Party to keep him in check -- or not. It won't be easy for them. It will involve constantly and aggressively tackling the leader of their own Party -- never a fun endeavor. Those GOP members who recognize how dangerous Donald Trump is may have thought they'd have earned a reprieve on Election Day. But in reality, their troubles -- like ours -- have only just begun.

Things People Blame the Jews For, Volume XIX: FIFA Arrests

Like most people, I was shocked, just shocked to find out that over a dozen FIFA officials were arrested on suspicion of corruption. One explanation for the arrests is that FIFA is notoriously corrupt. Another explanation is, as always, more plausible (both tweets via Adam Holland).

The most #corrupt nation on earth #worldpolice calling the shots , what Zionist did fifa upset? #FIFAarrests #coverup

— Edinburgh festival (@Edinburghcentre) May 27, 2015

Zionist hasbara : @nytimes saying "it's time for Blatter to go" after calls to @FIFA to suspend #apartheid #Israel https://t.co/QMMjex99So

— Hamzaoui Kallas (@Hamzaoui_Kallas) May 27, 2015

The latter tweet, of course, refers to an upcoming vote by FIFA to suspend Israel's membership. Now one might wonder why would a noted "Zionist hasbara" organ like the New York Times turn on Sepp Blatter when he's been trying to head off the suspension vote. Indeed, I actually think news of these arrests makes the suspension vote far, far more likely to pass. If there's one thing FIFA needs right now, it's a distraction. And there is no better distraction that a high-profile dose of Israel-bashing guaranteed to set off an international firestorm. It might be bad publicity, but from FIFA's vantage that's a relative term, and it's better bad publicity than "we're basically a racketeering organization." (Maybe we can call this "BDS-washing"!).

But I suspect there's no use trying to plumb the logic of those devious Jews. The important thing is that any one who thinks that these FIFA arrests are a good thing for soccer or for public integrity is a puppet of the grand Zionist conspiracy and should be called out as such.

UPDATE: Apparently this has been part of a long game -- see this 2011 article where a disgraced FIFA official from Trinidad and Tobago blamed "Zionism" for his downfall.

Gingrich Scores the Coveted Duke Cunningham Endorsement

Newt Gingrich -- who, let us recall, was forced to resign from Congress in disgrace after a slew of ethics scandals -- has just won the endorsement of a prominent former Congressman. Unfortunately, both the reason he's "prominent" and the reason he's "former" is because ex-Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA) is currently in prison after being convicted of bribery.

Cunningham also said Gingrich enjoyed the support of "80%" of the inmates who watched the debate. And while they can't themselves vote (being in jail and all), Cunningham thinks they might be able to sway their extended families.

(Note: This post does not reflect a change in my underlying belief that prisoners probably should be allowed to vote).

The Not Good News and the Bad News

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) is retiring, and that's not good news. Rep. Frank has been one of the more vocal and passionate voices for financial sector reform, and his vigor and assertiveness will be sorely missed in the chamber.

In line to be Frank's replacement as ranking member of the Financial Services Committee is Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA). And that's bad news -- Waters not only has a ton of corruption allegations swirling around her, but those corruption allegations are specifically tied to banks. To be sure, while Waters is next in line on a seniority basis, no decision has been made on this question as of yet.

Worse Than My Lai

Former Bush administration official John Yoo has finally found a limit on executive power: Forcing federal contractors to disclose contributions to government officials. He says the "only" purpose for such a law is to pave the way for harassment and retaliation (not, apparently, transparency and fighting corruption).

TPM confirms that the editorial is silent as to whether "the President has the executive power to torture executives to force them to disclose their political donations."

Two Wrongs....

It is fortunate that Israel's worst foreign minister in recent memory is also likely a criminal, since, amazingly, the current government is too weak to get rid of him merely because of his rank incompetence. Of course, rather than seizing the gift placed in front of him, PM Netanyahu has instead declared his belief in Lieberman's innocence. But if Lieberman is actually formally charged (money laundering and bribery, among other alleged misdeeds), it might not matter.

How tragic is it that I think the best thing that could happen to Israel right now would be for its Foreign Minister to get indicted?

Overruled: Nine Months Later

Last April, I wrote a brief blurb on the plight of a Veneuzelan judge who released a prisoner Hugo Chavez wanted to remain incarcerated, and was arrested and thrown in jail 15 minutes later. The man in question had been held in jail for three years without trial, beyond legal limitations, hence the judge's ruling.

Anyway, Judge Maria Lourdes Afiuni remains in prison and is facing a 30 year sentence. Prosecutors admit they can find no evidence of any illicit payments to Judge Afiuni, but have accused her of (I kid you not) "spiritual corruption" (presumably, that provision is Article 2, Sec. 128 of Venezuelan national code, right next to the provision that prohibits violating "everything that we [the Venezuelan government] have been doing.").

Justice DeLayed....

Disgraced former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), found guilty on money laundering charges, was sentenced to three years in prison, plus ten years probation today.

Who Could It Be?

I saw the headline: "GOPer calls Obama administration 'corrupt'", and immediately guessed "Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)!"

And, no surprise, I was right!

Apparently, Issa realized he might of stepped too far when he said Obama himself was "corrupt", but still -- let the witch-hunts begin!

DeLay Found Guilty

Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) has been found guilty of all counts by a Texas jury. He faces five years to life in prison for money laundering charge, plus two to 20 years for conspiring to illegally funnel corporate money to various Texas Republican candidates. He could also get probation.

This case was very messy, with allegations that even some of the judges involved were in the pocket of the DeLay machine. But the indictment was a beautiful day in my life. And the conviction is no less sweet.

DeLay maintains his innocence and is expected to appeal.

The Anti-Obama

Haley Barbour makes the pitch:

Haley Barbour, the chairman of the Republican Governors Association and one of the most powerful Republicans said to be considering a run for president, is making the case that his southern accent and lobbying career might make him exactly the kind of candidate who can mount a successful campaign against President Obama.
[...]
"As far as southern accents and Mississippi, this country may be looking for the anti-Obama in 2012. Don't know. Could be," Barbour continued.

A corrupt lobbyist with ties to White supremacists? Yeah, that's the anti-Obama alright.

War on Law

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio ("America's toughest sheriff") continues his brazen assault on the rule of law, including indicting their political enemies on trumped up charges, publishing personal information, and ignoring valid court orders.

I have to think they've finally stepped too far. It's only a shame that it got to this point.

The 800

I just hope none of these kids ever has an ill word for affirmative action.

Stevens Prosecutors to be Investigated

The Federal judge who presided over ex-Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) trial has set aside the verdict and will pursue contempt charges against the prosecution team.

“In nearly 25 years on the bench, I have never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I have seen in this case,” Sullivan said. “Again and again, both before and during the trial in this case, the government was caught making false representations and not meeting its discovery obligations.”

No objection from my end. It was clear from the start that this prosecution team was the gang that couldn't shoot straight, and I'm as pissed as anyone given that it cost the United States the conviction of a man who I remain convinced is guilty of corruption. The only thing I find unfortunate is that I doubt this precedent will extend to cases of prosecutorial misconduct in situations where the defendant is not politically well-connected. Ted Stevens deserves justice and a fair trial just as much as any other accused criminal, but I worry the upshot of this move will not be to increase fairness but persuade DOJ attorneys to focus their shenanigans on defendants who don't have the pull to fight back.

Stevens Is Out of the Fire

Citing major prosecutorial misconduct by the Justice Department attorneys who led the case, the Obama administration has announced it is dropping all charges against former Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) and will not seek a new trial. Unfortunately, this is hardly surprising given the rather relaxed standards of competence the Justice Department enjoyed over the last eight years.

Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), of course, couldn't stop talking out of both sides of her mouth even if one was glued shut, released a statement bemoaning Stevens' treatment and the "frightening" misconduct he was forced to endure. "It is unfortunate that, as a result of the questionable proceedings which led to Senator Stevens' conviction days before the election, Alaskans lost an esteemed statesman on Capitol Hill. His presence is missed." Of course, after his conviction she was singing a different tune, criticizing him for failing to resign his seat and saying "Even if elected on Tuesday, Senator Stevens should step aside to allow a special election to give Alaskans a real choice of who will serve them in Congress."