What the Republican senator has asked Americans to do

The data at the Trump Twitter Archive show that President Trump tweeted:

• “no collusion” five times in 2017, fifty-three times in 2018, and ninety-five times in 2019.
• “no obstruction” once in 2017, twelve times in 2018, and fifty-two times in 2019.
• “no quid pro quo” eighteen times between Sept 24 and Dec 12, 2019.
• “no bribery” and “no extortion” four times each in late 2019.

Nixon said "I am not a crook" only once on television, and everyone immediately knew he was a crook.

Trump's repetition wears down people's skepticism. It shouldn't. It's the same kind of transparently false defense as Nixon's. Trump denies committing these offenses because he knows he committed them, and he knows we know he committed them, and he knows that a lie can replace the truth if he repeats it enough. The disinformation has taken root, but we mustn't let it grow any further.

Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Republican who isn't seeking reelection, said he would vote against calling witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial. Nonetheless, he acknowledged that Trump had indeed done something wrong. Witnesses are not required at the trial, in his view, only because "there is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven." After all, as he wrote in his January 30, 2020 a statement: "the president asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter; he said this on television on October 3, 2019, and during his July 25, 2019, telephone call with the president of Ukraine. There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a 'mountain of overwhelming evidence.'" What Trump did was "inappropriate" and "undermines the principle of equal justice under the law," Alexander said. There is no question "whether the president did it."

Sen. Lamar Alexander on NBC: "If you have eight witnesses who say someone left the scene of an accident, why do you need nine? I mean, the question for me was: Do I need more evidence to conclude that the president did what he did? And I concluded no."

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) February 2, 2020

The Republican senator is telling us: When the president says there was "no quid pro quo," the president is lying to the public.

The Republican senator only denies that it is his responsibility to remove the president from office (at least for this particular offense, or perhaps at all, ever). Instead, he wants American voters to remedy this problem in the 2020 election.

Oh, sure, he still says he supports Trump's reelection. Except that's not what his latest statement entails. Figure it out for yourself what you believe, and —

Register to Vote

---

Sen. Marco Rubio, too, also a Republican, wrote on January 31 that even if Trump did commit "abuse of power," he still won't vote to remove the president from office. This provides a convenient way to avoid the question of whether Trump is guilty and whether Trump lies about his guilt. It also provides an excuse not to vote for witnesses: because even if the witnesses were to confirm Trump's guilt, Rubio will never vote to convict Trump, so the entire trial may as well simply end.

---

CNN reports that the Trump administration has made its "first official acknowledgment...that emails about the President's thinking related to the aid exist, and that he was directly involved in asking about and deciding on the aid as early as June." The revelation came from the Department of Justice, which admitted in a January 31, 2020 court filing that it has 24 emails which, in CNN's description, "related to the President Donald Trump's involvement in the withholding of millions in security assistance to Ukraine — a disclosure that came just hours after the Senate voted against subpoenaing additional documents and witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial, paving the way for his acquittal." The Office of Management and Budget argues that the emails cannot be revealed to the public nor even to Congress precisely because they reveal "Presidential decision-making about the scope, duration, and purpose of the hold on military assistance to Ukraine." (Which is funny reasoning, since that is exactly the subject of the impeachment trial that has not yet officially concluded.) The DOJ's admission that it has relevant evidence "came just hours after the Senate voted against subpoenaing additional documents and witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial, paving the way for his acquittal."

Jay Sekulow, one of Trump's defense attorneys, receives $65 million in charitable funds

Yesterday the Associated Press published a most interesting article by Michael Biesecker. It is long. Here, I've summarized and reorganized the information.

---

Although the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), "as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization, is barred under IRS rules from engaging in partisan political activities," nevertheless a half-dozen ACLJ lawyers, including its chief counsel Jay Sekulow and his son, are part of Trump's legal defense team in the impeachment. "Charity watchdogs for years have raised concerns," the AP story explains, "about the blurred lines between for-profit businesses tied to Sekulow and the complex web of non-profit entities he and his family control."

An AP investigation "of tax returns for the ACLJ and other charities tied to Sekulow" found that between "2008 to 2017, the most recent year available, show that more than $65 million in charitable funds were paid to Sekulow, his wife, his sons, his brother, his sister-in-law, his nephew and corporations they own." The American Institute of Philanthropy's CharityWatch website placed a “Donor Alert” about the ACLJ.

One problem is with the way the charities are structured and led. In 1988, "Sekulow founded the non-profit Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism (CASE)," which fundraises over $50 million each year, "more than $12 million was paid in direct salary and benefits to Sekulow and his family members." Furthermore, "ACLJ now receives the bulk of its $23 million annual budget from CASE. All six of the [ACLJ] charity’s paid board members share the last name Sekulow, including Jay’s wife, Pam, and their sons, Jordon and Logan." This runs afoul of the Better Business Bureau's recommendation for the independence of board members; accordingly, the BBB Wise Giving Alliance has an advisory about ACLJ. Similarly, the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability requires independent boards, and "CASE and ACLJ are not listed among the council’s 2,400 members."

Another problem is with their connection to political work. Money for the Trump defense is being paid to the Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group (CLA Group), a for-profit "phantom law firm" whose contact information is a virtual or "flex-space" rented location. It is co-owned by Jay Sekulow, chief counsel at ACLJ, and Stuart J. Roth, senior counsel at ACLJ, both of who are Trump's defense lawyers. When contacted by the Associated Press, a PR professional paid by the ACLJ claimed that Sekulow's work for the president is done in Sekulow's "personal capacity" and has nothing to do with the ACLJ. (However, between 2008 and 2017, as the AP notes, "nearly $37 million in charitable funds were paid by ACLJ to the CLA Group." Of that, $5.8 million was paid in 2017 alone.) This same PR professional would not say "whether Sekulow was doing his legal work for Trump in the non-profit group’s office" nor whether ACLJ was being reimbursed by the CLA Group for anything related to the Trump defense.

These problems are related. The combined problem is that Jay Sekulow does political work, and the charities' money goes to Jay Sekulow and his colleagues. In 2017, ACLJ paid $1.4 million to Regency Productions, which receives Sekulow's fees for radio and television appearances. "Over the 10-year period reviewed by AP, CLA Group and Regency were paid a combined $46 million in charitable funds by ACLJ and CASE. Millions more were paid by the charities for 'airtime,' though the recipients of that money were not detailed in the tax records." The charities spent $1.2 million on private jets, plus millions of dollars "routed into numerous non-profit and for-profit entities, which makes it challenging to determine who is really getting the money." Some money was funneled to corporations headed by evangelical television personality Pat Robertson and former U.S. attorney general John Ashcroft.

From the AP story:

A 2005 investigation by the publication Legal Times reported about questionable spending at ACLJ, quoting former employees describing millions in charity funds being spent to support the Sekulows’ lavish lifestyle, which included multiple homes, golf junkets, chauffeur-driven cars and a private jet used to ferry then-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The Guardian and The Washington Post reported additional details in 2017, shortly after Sekulow was named as Trump’s lawyer.

Sekulow joined Trump's legal team during the Mueller investigation in 2017. Since that time, his CLA Group has received over $250,000 from the Republican National Committee. Also since 2017, North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein has been investigating the abuse of charitable funds related to Sekulow.

Trump, of course, is also under scrutiny for his own corruption. From the AP story:

Trump, Sekulow’s star client, has faced similar legal questions. Trump agreed to pay $2 million as part of a settlement with the state of New York in which he was forced to admit he misused charitable funds from the Donald J. Trump Foundation to promote his 2016 presidential campaign, pay off business debts and buy a $10,000 portrait of himself hung at one of his Florida resorts. Trump’s charity also cut an illegal $25,000 check to support the reelection of then-Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who now works with Sekulow as a member of the president’s defense team.