Friends,
I wanted to catch you before Thanksgiving because if you intend to have fruitful conversations with your relatives about politics you’ll want to read this beforehand. Although, I may be taking a year off from political discourse at family gatherings after calling several loved ones uneducated and ignorant…. they left shortly thereafter. Anyways… let’s get after it.
Jamal Khashoggi
You may have heard of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi journalist and critic of the Saudi ruling family. In 2017 Khashoggi left Saudi Arabia and moved to the United States where he obtained temporary resident status and wrote for the Washington Post.
Spoiler alert: He was murdered. CIA knows who did it (ordered by Crown Prince). Trump sided with foreign government. Administration abandons American commitment to human rights .
That’s the short version. But I think it’s important to walk through the timeline.
October 2nd: Khashoggi walks into the Saudi Consulate. He never comes out.
October 14: Reports begin to leak that Saudi agents murdered Khashoggi and cut his bodies into pieces (dark….)
October 15: Investigation by the Consulate and Turkey commences
**From October 3rd onward the Saudi government maintained Khashoggi left alive**
October 20: Saudis admit he was killed inside the consulate. Site “rouge agents”…. Jason Bourne? Apparently they wrapped his body in a rug and gave to a local “co-operator” to be disposed of. A Saudi operative then reportedly donned his clothes and left the premises (the classic dress up as the dude you just dismembered trick).
October 25 – Saudi attorney general admits Khashoggi was murdered.
November 11 – Turkey provides intelligence recording to Saudi Arabia, US, and Britain implicating the Crown Prince.
November 15 – The Saudi public prosecutor said that Khashoggi was given a lethal injection after a struggle and his body was dismembered inside the consulate after his death. Denies any involvement of the Crown Prince
November 16 – Central Intelligence Agency concludes the Crown Prince Ordered the killing and informs President Trump.
November 20 – Trump issues statement saying “maybe they did… maybe they didn’t” and added he doesn’t want risk arms sales and oil prices for the sake of being burdened by a moral conscious.
Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress have condemned the President for not imposing sanctions on the Saudi regime and for not demanding the removal of the Crown Prince. Trump is unwilling to do so. He sites massive arms deals and oil imports as reasons for not disciplining the regime.
This evoliving episode underscores two classic Trumpian characteristics
- Trump trusts personal denial from authoritarian leaders over his own intelligence communities (reminder: he still doesn’t acknowledge Russian interference in the 2016 election even though CIA, FBI, NSA all told him its true)
- “America First” means money over morals. He is willing to overlook human rights violations if it benefits the United States (and his?) bottom line. Reminder: Trump once praised the Saudis for buying millions of dollars of his real estate.
Update next week.
Pelosi Leadership Fight
Nancy Pelosi is (still) campaigning to return as Speaker of the United States House of Representatives (again!). Pelosi needs a majority (218) of votes in the house to return as speaker. She can only lose 16 votes.
Bad news (for Pelosi): 16 Democrats released a letter on Monday vowing to oppose her leadership
Good news (for Pelosi): On Tuesday Marcia Fudge, who was planning on running against her, decided to back Pelosi after a closed door meeting between the two.
Democrats are expected to have 234 seats after Utah Republican Incumbent Mia Love lost to her Democratic Candidate Ben McAdams
Mueller Investigation
Trump submitted written answers to questions provided by the Mueller team this past week. However, some believe Mueller may still pursue an in person interview which could require a subpoena. The legality of requiring a President to testify is disputed.
In other (“breaking”) news…
NYT got a hold of a Don McGahn memo in which the white house counsel is explaining to the President why he shouldn’t order the Justice Department to investigate Hillary Clinton and James Comey, as if that needs explanation.
Such an action would amount to using the federal government to prosecute political rivals. More likely to see that in Russia than the USA.
Unfortunately for MSNBC this is not breaking news. Trump frequently said on the campaign trail he’d order an investigation into Clinton if he was elected.
Criminal Justice Reform
If you’re looking for common ground with your Trump supporting relatives this holiday season I’ve got just the thing. Criminal Justice Reform (one of my favs)!
The FIRST STEP Act (endorsed by Trump) would be the biggest rewrite of federal prison and sentencing laws in more than 10 years and is backed by both Democrats and Republicans… yes you read that correctly. Both sides want to vote during the lame duck session.
Legislators on both sides of the aisle believe the legislation will get 70-80 votes. So what’s standing in the way.
Turtle man Mitch McConnell is refusing to bring the bill to the floor.
And because I know you are dying to know what the bill does…
- Reforms mandatory minimum sentences
- Rectifies disparities in criminal penalties for crack (disproportionately used by minorities) versus powder cocaine (disproportionately used by whites)
- Tackles recidivism among federal inmates through
- Risk assessment
- Earned-time-credit incentive structures
- Reentry programs
- Transitional housing.
This has been a long time coming our criminal justice reform is highly discriminatory. This is a step in the right direction.
University Sexual Assault Overhaul
Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is overhauling the way universities deal with sexual assault. Here are some of the changes:
- Allows for victims to be cross examined by the accused
- Raises the standard of proof in assault cases
- Allows schools to offer mediation
- Narrows definition of sexual harassment to unwanted conduct that is “severe, pervasive and objectively offensive”
- Requires schools to respond meaningfully to all complaints and encourages so-called supportive measures – changes in dorms, schedules etc – even if not formal complaint is filed
DeVos wants to institute, in her words “clear politics and fair processes that every student can rely on” she went on to say “Every survivor of sexual assault must be taken seriously, and every student accused of sexual misconduct must know that guilt is not predetermined”
*Disclaimer* The following is my opinion:
According to Stanford only 40% of assault are reported and only about 2% of accusations are proven false. Now, call me crazy, but it seems to me in an environment where women face incredible barriers to obtaining justice; complicating the process even further, narrowing the definition of assault, and allowing for re-traumatization through direct accused to victim cross-examination strikes me as immoral, baseless, and in short, wrong.
Thanks,
Crawford
The Lens 