Connect with us


Trump Staffers Are Plotting Their Exits: White House is a ‘Toxic’ Work Environment Now



The number of staffers at all levels planning to leave President Donald Trump‘s White House is growing by the day — and some of them are starting to speak out.

Multiple sources inside and outside the White House cited a variety of reasons for the exodus already underway, ranging from the urgent need for employment to a palpable disgust with Trump’s ill-fated election challenges, according to CNN.

One senior administration official described Trump’s White House as a “toxic” place to work.

“I think people are moving on because they have families or livelihoods to support,” the official said. “That, and the place is becoming more toxic by the day … people turning on each other, trying to settle scores while they can.”

“Some are moving on,” another White House adviser said. “It’s time.”

Except for Trump.

“No one expects him to concede. No one!” the adviser said.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


Democrats Launch ‘Wide-Ranging Investigation’ Into Trump Administration’s ‘Grave Breaches of National Security’



Jared Kushner Expected to Be a Top Target

Rep. Elijah Cummings, the Chairman of the powerful House Oversight Committee, has just announced a “wide-ranging investigation” into what he says are “grave breaches of national security at the highest levels of the Trump Administration.” Cummings has sent the White House an 11-page letter informing them of the investigation into how the White House handles classified information.

The focus will be the White House security clearance process, which will include President Donald Trump’s senior advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner.

NBC News reports “more than 130 political appointees working in the Executive Office of the President did not have permanent security clearances as of November 2017, including the president’s daughter, son-in-law and his top legal counsel. Son-in-law Jared Kushner has since obtained a clearance, according to his lawyer, despite reports that he has been targeted for manipulation by foreign governments.”


Image via Wikimedia

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.


Continue Reading


Mike Pence Must Also Be Impeached if Trump Goes Down Says Constitutional Law Expert



Two of the impeachable offenses of which President Donald Trump has been accused — colluding with Russian political interference and working with Michael Cohen to violate campaign finance laws — would directly imply that he was elected as a result of fraud. And according to law professor Michael Glennon of Tufts University, this means that if Trump does get impeached for these alleged high crimes, Vice President Mike Pence must go down as well.

This isn’t just hopeful speculation on Glennon’s part, though it is controversial. He argued in a new Washington Post op-ed that the Constitution should be interpreted to see the vice president and president as a unit when it comes to impeachment based on election fraud.

He noted that, since the time the Constitution’s impeachment provisions were written and ratified, the role of the vice president has been radically altered — particularly because the founding fathers didn’t anticipate the importance of political parties.

“The initial system was designed to select as president and vice president the two individuals most qualified to lead the nation, whatever their political philosophy,” Glennon explained. “It did this by permitting members of the electoral college to cast two votes for the office of president. The individual who received the most votes would be president, and the runner-up, vice president.”

But this led to problems — most notably when Aaron Burr was elected to be Thomas Jefferson’s vice president in 1800 after a fierce campaign.

Glennon said that the 12th Amendment sought to fix this by requiring electors to cast separate ballots for president and vice president. This made unified administrations the most likely electoral outcome, but the change created an overlooked flaw:

Yet the change had critically important — and unnoticed — implications for impeachment. The election of a two-person ticket, rather than an individual, had the potential effect of permitting a vice president and his political party to benefit from electoral fraud by the presidential candidate so long as the vice president himself avoided committing an impeachable offense. A party’s ill-gotten gains — the presidency and all its appointments and prerogatives — would then remain in its hands even though its leader, the president, had been impeached and removed from office. Electoral corruption would still be rewarded.

And punishing election fraud was one of the main purposes of the impeachment provision in the first place, Glennon explained. So, he argued, there is “every reason to believe that after the amendment’s adoption, the Constitution has in this respect continued to mean what it did in 1787: that the presidency ought not be occupied by someone who attains it as the result of a stolen election.”

That means that if Trump’s impeachable crimes helped get him elected, then Pence must be ousted as well. In other words: Say hello to President Nancy Pelosi.

Lawrence Tribe, a Harvard constitutional scholar, was not impressed with this argument.

“This is just wrong as a matter of constitutional law,” he tweeted in response. “There’s a lot to commend Glennon’s reasoning now that vice presidents and presidents are chosen as a team, but as a basis for amending rather than enforcing the Constitution that we currently have.”

While legal scholars debate the constitutional merit of the argument, as a practical matter, observers should recognize that Glennon’s proposed scenario is one of the closest things to a political impossibility that there is. Even assuming that Special Counsel Robert Mueller reveals damning evidence about Trump, it’s still an open question whether enough Republicans in the Senate would ever be willing to vote to remove him.

The idea that Senate Republicans would vote to not only remove Trump but also Pence, thereby making Pelosi president, is even more laughable — especially if the only reason for doing so is a controversial constitutional argument.

Indeed, if we suppose that damning evidence comes out about both Pence and Trump with regard to election-related crimes, this might actually make impeachment less likely, not more. Because if Republicans admitted that Trump’s crimes were impeachable, they’d also have to admit that Pence’s actions were. And that, again, would lead to President Pelosi, a result Senate Republicans absolutely cannot abide. Resistance to the idea of promoting the speaker of the House could force them to excuse both Trump and Pence.

None of this should be taken to diminish Glennon’s well-argued point: Whether the Constitution requires it or not, it does seem perverse to remove a president for election fraud only to leave in place his hand-picked successor. If we have the opportunity to revise the Constitution, fixing this lacuna would be worth considering.

Continue Reading


Mike Flynn Sentencing Delayed After Judge Blasts Former Trump Security Advisor



‘You Sold Your Country Out’ Judge Tells Flynn

Sentencing for disgraced former National Security Advisor to President Donald Trump, Michael Flynn, has just been delayed.

Judge Emmet Sullivan blasted Flynn, telling him he had sold his country out, and even asked prosecutors if they had considered charging him with treason.

The judge then asked Flynn if he wanted a recess to confer with his attorneys. Flynn said yes. After almost an hour all parties returned and Flynn’s lawyers asked for a sentencing delay, which the judge granted.

Judge Sullivan earlier in the hearting had gone to great lengths to ensure Flynn has no wiggle room to later claim he wasn’t guilty, or the FBI railroaded him, or any other post-sentencing statements, after Flynn had suggested just that.

Statement during sentencing from the Judge via Vox politics reporter:


In a stunning and dramatic development before he sentenced Flynn Judge Sullivan asked prosecutors if they had considered charging him with treason.

He later walked back that question.

Flynn is potentially guilty of other acts not yet charged.

UPDATE: 1:18 PM ET –
Flynn will have several more months without being sentenced. A hearing is now scheduled for March 13, 2019.





Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.