Author: John Jay

 

The Founding Fathers were often prescient regarding possible dangers facing the newly founded republic. Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist Papers, Number 68 that the “most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?”

When initial connections between the Trump campaign and Russia started surfacing last summer, they were sufficiently circumstantial to be seen as potentially harmless. Trump’s apparent admiration of Vladimir Putin (among other “strong leaders”) albeit misplaced, might have been charitably interpreted as his acknowledgment of the Russian leader’s ability to bring a crumbling and desperate former empire back to a position of influence in global affairs. However, these three things—Trump’s pro-Russia sentiments; mounting evidence of ongoing Russian connections to his campaign, Cabinet and White House staff; and unknown Russian interest or influence in his business affairs—are painting a dangerous picture of our current chief magistrate. As Hamilton also forewarned, “(f)oreign influence is truly the Grecian Horse to a republic. We cannot be too careful to exclude its entrance.”

With regard to campaign, Cabinet and White House staff, a pattern is becoming all too familiar. Claim no contacts or associations, then claim loss of memory—regarding the meeting or the content of said meeting—and, ultimately, resign or recuse yourself.

The dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, created an early flashpoint. Interestingly, Senator Sessions conversation with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak was at the height of the initial dossier controversy, but again this could be just a coincidence. What is undeniable is that President Trump and his advisers have steadfastly denied the dossier’s validity, trying to cast it off as a political conspiracy fueled by the Democratic National Committee. President Trump’s response was: “It’s all fake news…it didn’t happen.” Instead, what has been revealed is that the FBI wanted to contract with Mr. Steele to continue his investigation regarding the ties between Trump and the Kremlin after the election was over. The FBI must have thought there was a trail worth following.

General Michael Flynn, President Trump’s initial National Security Advisor, claimed no connections to Russia. Later facts regarding phone conversations with Ambassador Kislyak, accompanied by photographs of General Flynn seated at the same table as President Putin, led to his resignation. This week it was also revealed that General Flynn was on contract as an agent of the Turkish government during the campaign, another involvement he failed to mention in his vetting as National Security Advisor.

During his confirmation hearings, Attorney General Jeff Sessions failed to tell the truth about his meeting with the Russian Ambassador, Sergey Kislyak. If the meeting could have been cast aside as a temporary memory lapse, Sessions’ escape hatch closed with his denial of a meeting in written testimony regarding the same issue. Last week, the Attorney General finally decided to recuse himself from his Department’s investigations of ties between the White House and the Russian Government.

The above account does not include the activities of Paul Manafort, former Trump Campaign Advisor, or Carter Page, Mr. Trump’s foreign policy advisor. The former of these two certainly had contacts with Russia and substantial business interests in Ukraine; the latter met with Russian officials during the campaign as well. Both of these men also met with Ambassador Kislyak at a convention during the campaign.

In an ode to the tangled web of Trump associates and potential collusion with the Russian Government, Alexandra Petri’s Washington Post article satirically summarized the situation as follows:

He has spoken to Senators. He has spoken to generals, both regular and soon-to-be-attorneys. But as soon as he speaks his words vanish, as if they had never been. No one can definitely state that they were in the room with him at any time…His name is Sergey Kislyak, and he is the Most Forgettable Man in the World.

The denials proved just the beginning, however. In an onslaught of tweets last Saturday morning, President Trump accused former President Obama of wiretapping his offices in Trump Tower. Such allegations are not an issue of political correctness. He is alleging felonious actions on the part of former President Obama. This is also a misguided tactic because these allegations will either quickly be proven false or they indicate that an arduous process was undertaken to place taps on a private citizen based on substantial evidence of criminal activity. From the outset these tweets were a lose-lose proposition. In the face of White House pressure, current Director of the FBI, James Comey, encouraged the Justice Department not to divert resources into investigating this matter. Further, former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper flatly denied allegations that wiretaps of either Trump or his campaign had been authorized by the former Administration.

The Trump campaign, Trump White House and Trump Cabinet appear to have colluded with a foreign power for short-term political gains and potentially long-term financial rewards. The hacking itself and release of materials garnered through hacking were the first signs.

President Trump himself claimed he didn’t know Vladimir Putin. However, the facts present a multi-year association between these two men. And after several specific denials by the President himself regarding any meetings with Russian officials, it has now been confirmed that he met with Ambassador Kislyak on April 27, 2016.

This issue goes to the heart of American security. The Trump-Putin connection is undeniable, by all except our Commander-in-Tweet. We need a full-scope, fully independent investigation of all these matters, not a whitewashing or diversion into another Presidential delusion.

“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, (I conjure you to believe me fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.” – George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

Abigail Adams

 

On Monday, March 6, 2017, the Trump administration rolled out “a down scaled, but still pernicious” version of the Muslim ban. Of the original seven countries under the first Muslim Ban, the new executive order targets refugees and travelers from six majority Muslim nations, excluding Iraq. They include: Syria, Iran, Libya, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia. Though the new order may disrupt fewer lives, it still carries the same false message as the first order: one of targeted religious discrimination built on a baseless claim of heightened security. As the New York Times concluded its editorial referring to what it called the “Muslim Ban Lite“, “Resorting to these bunker mentality tactics, which are being peddled with plenty of innuendo and little convincing evidence, will do lasting damage to America’s standing in the world and erode its proud tradition of welcoming people fleeing strife. While these steps are being sold to make the nation safer, they stand to do the opposite.”

Indeed, the United States has a long standing tradition of welcoming immigrants who flee persecution, as the inscription on the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor makes clear:

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free, the wretched refugees of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I left my lamp beside the golden door.”

This Muslim ban imperils American standing in the world, but also our perennial commitment to religious freedom. As a result, the new executive order was immediately challenged by the State of Washington, with other states joining in. On March 16th, Federal Courts in Hawaii and Maryland issued orders temporarily blocking the implementation of what they correctly saw as a revised executive order but still a ban on Muslim immigration which they declared to be unconstitutional.

These challenges followed a harrowing report by the New York Times portraying the struggle of an immigrant family attempting to flee the United States near Champlain, NY, seeking asylum in Canada. Apparently, families, many with young children are traveling across the country to make this escape, fearing that their legal status in the country may change. Some have been refugees from Yemen and Turkey who fled their original countries in the hope of a better future and now believe they have become targets in their adopted country, the United Sates. A taxi driver who has taken many from Plattsburg Airport, to a point near the Canadian border was quoted as saying, “People just want to live their life and not be scared.”

But America is supposed to be a country to which refugees flee, not a country from which refugees flee. Others who have commented on this have said:

“The bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respectable stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privilege, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.”
– George Washington, 1783

” I never will, by any will or act, vow to the shame of intolerance, or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others. ” – Thomas Jefferson, 1803

And the fundamental qualification of an American citizen, an American patriot, after all, is that he or she subscribe to a principle written down in 1776 by Thomas Jefferson for all America: “We take these truths to be self-evident, that all men (women) are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

But some have suggested as did Professor Jack Goldsmith, the former head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, under George W. Bush, and now a professor at Harvard Law School,  that President Trump is in effect playing a game with the judiciary to weaken the courts and set them up to blame for the next international terror attack in the United States: “Trump is setting the scene to blame judges after an attack that has a conceivable connection to immigration” (with respect to the first immigration order).

“If Trump loses in court, he credibly will say to the American people that he tried and failed to create tighter immigration controls. This will deflect blame for the attack and it will also help Trump to enhance his power after the attack. (nevertheless with respect to the first order, the courts did their duty and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the order.)

This outcome was despite Trump’s attack on the courts quoted by Danner, “Just cannot believe that a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system.” But this was the right thing for our independent judiciary to have done as was said long ago:

“The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited constitution.”
– Alexander Hamilton, 1788

“A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning.”
– Alexander Hamilton, 1788

And if someone in the White House should actually harbor thoughts such as those expressed by Professor Goldsmith, then shame on him, her or them, but the courts should do their duty and if after some international terrorist act against the United States – which hopefully will never come – someone in the White House, actually should seek to use such a tragedy to enhance the power of the President beyond its Constitutional limits then some words of Samuel Adams, later know as “Uncle Sam”, expressed long ago are relevant:

“If ever the time should come, when vain & aspiring Men shall posses the highest Seats in government, our Country will stand in Need of its experienced Patriots to prevent its Ruin.”
– Samuel Adams, 1780

John Jay

Recently much concern has been expressed about the possibility of an improper, perhaps illegal, relationship between the Trump campaign organization during the 2016 presidential campaign (and thereafter the Trump administration) and the Russian Government, including its intelligence services.

It is widely known that Russian hackers targeted the Democratic party and its campaign organization, subsequently releasing thousands of emails to WikiLeaks in a alleged effort to interfere with the 2016 election and aid then candidate Trump. Nicholas Kristoff, in his column in the New York Times on March 9, 2017 noted that “the most towering suspicion of all (is): that Trump’s Team colluded in some way with Russia to interfere with the US election. This is the central issue that we must remain focused on.”

In an earlier column on March 6th, Charles Blow reported that a strong majority of the American people wanted a Congressional investigation of the Russia issue and indicated that this matter potentially has the “profoundest of consequences” and could be “nearly unfathomable in its ability to injure our democracy.”

On March 20, 2017, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation told the House Intelligence Committee in public session that the agency is conducting an ongoing investigation into whether members of  the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election. When asked by one of the members of the committee to explain to the American people why they should care about this, Director Comey said in part, “One of the things we radiate to the world is the importance of our wonderful, often messy, free and fair democratic system and the elections that undergird it. So when there is an effort by a foreign nation – state to mess with that, to destroy that, to corrupt that, it is very, very serious. It threatens what is America. And if any Americans are part of that effort it is a very serious matter. And so you would expect the F.B.I. to want to understand, is that so? And, if so, who did what?”

Comey’s words seem inspired by a passage by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Papers #68, written in 1787, in addressing the question of the care and importance invested in developing the provisions in the Constitution providing for the choosing of the President: “Nothing was more to be desired than that every practical obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally be expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union.”

As indicated by Hamilton this concern is not a new one.

“The public cannot be too curious concerning the character of public men.”
– Samuel Adams, 1775

“(The people) have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers.”
– John Adams, 1765

“Foreign intrigues and machinations, are among the most formidable enemies which republics have to encounter. These however narrowed or watched, are always likely to have too much influence upon their affairs. If it should be permitted to the agents of foreign powers to insert themselves in popular societies-to mingle openly and directly in the parties, which will never fail, more or less, to divide a free country, the fruits cannot fail to be dissension, commotion, and in the end, loss of liberty.”
– Alexander Hamilton , 1793

“We should be unfaithful to ourselves, if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties, if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous and independent elections. If an election is to be determined by a majority of a single vote, and that, can be procured by a party, through artifice or corruption, the government may be the choice of a party for its own ends, not the nation, for the national good. If that solitary suffrage can be obtained by foreign nations by flattery or violence, by terror, intrigue or venality, the government may not be the choice of the American people but of foreign nations. It may be foreign nations who govern us, and not We The People who govern ourselves.”
– John Adams, 1797

“There is a danger from all men, the only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.”
– John Adams, 1772

John Jay

Democracy can lead to strength but it is also fragile. It must be defended by all of its citizens. The President of the United States in his Constitution provided oath of office solemnly swears that he will “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” This is the obligation not only of the President but also of all citizens.
President Obama stated in his farewell address on January 11, 2017, “Our democracy is threatened whenever we take it for granted. All of us, regardless of party, should be throwing ourselves into the task of rebuilding our democratic institutions.”
Mr. Obama in his address quoted the first President in this regard. Washington wrote in his 32 page handwritten farewell document, Mr. Obama notes, that self government is the underpinning of America’s safety, prosperity and liberty however, Washington said “from different causes and from different quarters much pains will be taken… to weaken in your minds the conviction of this Truth” and so Americans, says Mr. Obama, have to preserve this truth, as Washington described it, with “jealous anxiety” and therefore should reject every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest or to enfeeble the sacred ties” that make them one.
Other comments from President Washington and his successor to consider at this time:
“There is a danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with the power to endanger the public safety.” – John Adams
“But if the laws are to be trampled upon with impunity, and a ministry to dictate to this majority, there is an end put at one stroke to republican government, and nothing but anarchy and confusion is to be expected thereafter.” – George Washington
“A Constituion of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost, is lost forever.” – John Adams
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true in fact and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence and cruelty.” – John Adams
Signed,
Abigail Adams
John Jay