Ash writes: "Nixon's motivation for The Saturday Night Massacre was simple. Nixon was no fool, he understood that forcing the firing of Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox was certain to have severe political repercussions and might likely lead ultimately to his resignation."
Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Washington D.C., 2017. (photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
This Is Going to Get Very Ugly, Very Quickly
10 April 18
ixon�s motivation for The Saturday Night Massacre was simple. Nixon was no fool, he understood that forcing the firing of Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox was certain to have severe political repercussions and might likely lead ultimately to his resignation.
He didn�t do it because he thought it was a smart move, he did it because he thought it was the only move he had left. While the final showdown between Nixon and Cox was over the White House tape recordings, the real problem for Nixon was that Cox was closing in and if allowed to continue would, Nixon was sure, force him from office or worse. It was in political terms the nuclear option, and he saved it as his last option.
The fully warranted raids on Donald Trump�s personal attorney Michael Cohen�s Manhattan office, home and hotel room were technically coordinated by the U.S. Attorney�s Office for the Southern District of New York, not by Special Counsel Robert Mueller�s team. But Mueller referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney�s Office based on evidence his investigation uncovered, and his presence in the matter is palpable.
In any case the FBI�s Cohen raids were extraordinary, both historically and legally. Normally obtaining warrants that would allow for the seizure of records from an attorney whose client was under federal investigation would draw the most rigorous scrutiny from the courts. It�s a very high threshold, a very high burden of proof for law enforcement. But this is the personal attorney for the president of the United States so the review would have been even more rigorous. Whatever evidence federal investigators presented to the courts had to have been stark, material and compelling.
But that would have been the evidence they had before the raids. Now in possession of Cohen�s devices and documents, investigators acting on behalf of U.S. Attorney�s Office would not face the same limitations Mueller�s team would. They could act on any evidence of criminality they uncovered directly under the jurisdiction U.S. Attorney�s Office or refer appropriate evidence back to the Special Counsel�s office at their discretion.
These developments are not lost on Donald Trump. In unscripted remarks after the raids were reported, Trump took direct aim at Special Counsel Robert Mueller and top officials at the Department of Justice overseeing his probe. He spoke in direct terms about firing Mueller. It was a threat thinly veiled.
When Trump is absolutely certain Mueller will win, he will do what Nixon was forced to do when his moment came. He will cynically use the powers of the presidency to save himself.
At that moment a very real and immediate constitutional crisis is inevitable. It is highly unlikely that Donald Trump will relinquish power in an orderly way. The argument that an American president is not above the law is about to be tested.
Marc Ash is the founder and former Executive Director of Truthout, and is now founder and Editor of Reader Supported News.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
the New Yorker is still so far behind the curve
of the second decade of the Bremer Brigade's
reckless predation that it's all but invisible in
smooth cosmopolitan pieces like this where,
compared to their subjects they do nothing.
David Remnick surely knows all this and much more,
so why is the New Yorker as flat as it has been since 9/11?
This is journalism as fashion. Just say what is the latest style. As we know by the logic of fashion, its truth changes very rapidly.
I'm sure the Saudis are thrilled that their boys are doing God's work. It's also interesting that Saudi Arabia takes no refugees from Syria.
All of these nations (including Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, etc.) had/have their own central banks and controlled/cont rol their own currency.
In addition, Syria is a key part of the path for cartel oil to be delivered to Europe, to counter the Russian monopoly.
The false flag in Paris, which resulted in France declaring war which they did not do after 9-ll, and which invokes certain aspects of the NATO treaty, along with Turkey's attack on a Russian jet, makes it clear that the cartel is trying to find a plausible way to keep the Russians from destroying their mercenaries, ISIS and "the Syrian opposition."
As soon as the Russian blow up the weapons that the U.S. and NATO have been supplying their mercenaries, more weapons are dropped.
http://coloradopublicbanking.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-view-from-top-of-power-pyramid.html
As an addendum, I will post Aaron Russo revealing what he says Nickolaus Rockefellar told him about one year before 9/11/2001 re an event, terrorism, RFID chips, and banking. Re interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gwcQjDhZtI
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
A little long, but necessary for all of the background.
No, it isn't, it is actually a mercenary arm of the oil companies and international banks. They are not fighting to restore the Iraq government, in any way, shape or form.