Why Didn’t Mueller Interview Ivanka, DonJr?

An interesting segment on MSNBC’s AM Joy show touched on a growing frustration among Democrats, especially minorities, over why Special Counsel Mueller chose to end the TrumpRussia investigation without questioning Ivanka Trump or DonJr even though both of them are intricately involved in their father Donald Trump’s business and political activities.

Elie Mystal captured the people’s frustration perfectly when he told host Joy Reid, “I do not understand how we’ve investigated these people for 22 months and nobody has asked these children[Ivanka and DonJr] a question. We can’t ask them a question? We can’t put them under oath and ask them a single question about their involvement in the Trump Tower meetings, about their involvement in the hotel business? Yes I do think the SDNY is coming for them and I still do have hope for that, but I do not get how we have gotten to this place because when you look at how the criminal justice is applied to everybody else in this country, when you are the top head of an organization, people understand that when they squeeze your children, that is the way to get you to tell the truth, and as far as I can tell Mueller put no pressure on these children.” Below is the clip of the aforementioned Elie Mystal venting.

Bottom line, we are yet to find out from AG Barr exactly what Mueller put in his report and specifically, whether it will mention the roles Ivanka Trump and DonJr played in the whole scheme. However reasonable people will agree with Elie Mystal that Mueller should have at least questioned Ivanka, DonJr or their father for that matter under oath so as to straighten out the numerous inconsistent accounts they have given and continue to give to the media about their business activities and their interactions with Russians.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. 

You may reach the author via email at author@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Senate Dems Already Caving In Supreme Court Fight

In one of the most depressing segments on MSNBC’s AM Joy Show, Yours Truly was saddened, although not surprised, to find out that even before the opening bell in the fight to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has been rung, Senate Democrats are already throwing in the towel. Absolutely pathetic!

MSNBCs Joy Reid, citing a New York Times article says Senate Dems have apparently decided not to demand that Kennedy’s replacement be made after the midterms but instead are going for a “policy alternative” where they plan to build opposition to Trump’s nominee by highlighting the threat to abortion rights and healthcare. Simply put, Senate Dems have caved.

Interestingly, Joy Reid pointed out that when Republicans feared Hillary Clinton would be elected President, they vowed to block her Supreme Court nominee(s) for 4 years–her entire first term. Think about that folks and then contrast it with our weak Senate Dems who are afraid to stall for 4 months, when the GOP was willing to stall for 4 years. Grassroots Dems have always lamented the perennial weakness of Congressional Dems that has allowed people like Mitch McConnell to walk all over them and this is just the latest example. Yours Truly constantly encounters this Congressional Dem weakness complaint from grassroots Dems and as it turns out, it’s a legitimate gripe after all.

The key legal term that pops up in federal court when one is seeking an injunction is "irreversible harm". Dems have an easy case to make in federal court that once Trump's Supreme Court nominee is confirmed, their harm is irreversible(can't undo it). The court will most likely issue an injunction to let the case play out all the way to the Supreme Court, a process that will most likely last longer than 4 months.


Alternatively, Senate Dems can compell  any Trump nominee to pledge recusal on any issue dealing with TrumpRussia, something they'll either decline or if they accept, Trump would withdraw their nomination (remember Jeff Sessions). If Trump's nominee refuses to commit to recusal that gives Senate Dems a perfect excuse to stall because the conflicts of interest here are real and easily explainable to voters. The fight over TrumpRussia recusal if well played by Senate Dems could last more than 4 months. In addition to that, Senate Dems will look good in voters eyes because they will not be stalling for stalling sake, but will be seen as fighting for the integrity of the Supreme Court(removing Trump's conflicts of interest)

There are many other stalling tactics Senate Dems could employ. The only question is whether they have the guts to do  so. Bottomline Senate Dems need to get the message from grassroots Dems very clearly--If you don't put up a fight over Justice Kennedy's Supreme Court replacement, don't even bother about midterms 2018, do everybody a favor and just quit today!

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out