At 10:20pm on Thursday, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway wandered in from the landscaped gardens of the British ambassador’s residence, built in the 1920s and resembling an English country house in the heart of Washington.
An Andy Warhol portrait of Queen Elizabeth II watched from above the ornate fireplace as results of the British election flashed up on a giant TV screen.
Conway could not quite escape questions about former FBI director James Comey’s testimony earlier in the day.
US President Donald Trump had “never intended to tweet” during the session, she told the Guardian, with a dismissive air that implied he had much better things to do.
However, the US president, who broke his Twitter silence less than eight hours later, might be in a similar position to British Prime Minister Theresa May. He survived for sure, but with a self-inflicted wound that could yet prove mortal.
Comey threw out a trail of clues for special counsel Robert Mueller to follow in his investigation of Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia, which looks set to shadow his presidency for years.
“History will remember it as a significant inflection point,” said Norm Eisen, former ethics czar under former US president Barack Obama. “We’ve had leaked and hearsay evidence before, but now, for the first time, we had direct evidence of obstruction of justice. It was a giant step forward towards accountability for Trump, but there will be many more giant steps necessary.”
What Comey did not say might ultimately prove as telling as what he did during his blockbuster questioning by members of the US Senate Intelligence Committee.
Although he declined to describe Trump’s plea on behalf of former US national security adviser Michael Flynn as obstruction of justice, Comey made the first public suggestion that Mueller would investigate the US president himself.
“That’s a conclusion that I’m sure the special counsel will work toward to try and understand what the intention was there and whether that’s an offense,” Eisen said.
REPUBLICAN VIEW
Republicans seized on Comey’s remark that Trump is not “literally” under a counterintelligence investigation and was content for his “satellites” to be scrutinized if necessary.
However, when the former FBI director was asked if the direction of the investigation could include the US president, he carefully replied: “As I explained, the concern of one of my senior leader colleagues was, if you’re looking at potential coordination between the campaign and Russia, the person at the head of the campaign is the candidate. So, logically, this person argued, the candidate’s knowledge, understanding, will logically become a part of your inquiry if it proceeds.”
As for the satellites, Comey implied that US Attorney General Jeff Sessions might have more links to Russia than have already been established.
Sessions announced his recusal from the investigation in March, under pressure from revelations of previously undisclosed meetings with Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak.
“Our judgement, as I recall, was that he was very close and inevitably going to recuse himself for a variety of reasons,” Comey said. “We were also aware of facts that I can’t discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a Russia-related investigation problematic.”
Sessions, already rumored to be at odds with his boss, is due to appear at a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing today, and Democrats have said they will use it as an opportunity to grill him about Russian contacts.
Comey also told the hearing that he had explained to Sessions’ deputy, Rod Rosenstein, “my serious concern about the way in which the president is interacting, especially with the FBI.”
Only days later, Rosenstein wrote a controversial memo providing Trump with reasons to fire Comey.
The former FBI director gave Mueller another lead in his recollection of a dinner at the White House in January where Trump demanded his loyalty.
“I could be wrong, but my common sense told me what’s going on here is that he’s looking to get something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job,” Comey said.
Intriguingly, Comey refused to answer a question about Vnesheconombank (Veb), a Russian government-owned development bank associated with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Jared Kushner, Trump’s adviser and son-in-law, met last year with Veb executives.
Then there was a seemingly trivial, but telling detail: Trump’s chronic incuriosity about Russia’s attack on US democracy.
Comey could not recall the US president asking about it, but gave a dire, heartfelt warning of Moscow’s aggressive intentions.
“Apart from obstruction issue, the most troubling aspect of Comey’s testimony was @POTUS evident lack of interest in Russian cyber attack,” Obama’s former campaign manager David Axelrod tweeted.
NIXONIAN PROSPECT
And with a sense of political theater, Comey also dangled the Nixonian prospect of secret tape recordings for Mueller to go after.
“I’ve seen the tweet about tapes,” he said. “Lordy, I hope there are tapes.”
In all, Comey put down some tantalizing dots for Mueller to join.
However, right-wing media were quick to make their own patterns.
They contended that Trump is not under investigation, there is no obstruction of justice and there is still no proof of Russian collusion.
They seized on Comey’s disclosure that he indirectly passed on his memos about private conversations to the media.
Trump himself tweeted, “WOW, Comey is a leaker!” and his legal team began preparing a legal complaint against him.
It was a classic Trump tactic practiced throughout his business career, throwing sand into the gears of his opponents to deflect and divert from his own troubles.
Comey’s words were weaponized by both sides and that works to his advantage.
“It was worse than it needed to be [for Trump], but not as bad as it could have been. There’s a line in the Simon and Garfunkel song The Boxer: ‘A man hears what he wants to hear/ And disregards the rest.’ If you’re a Trump fan, you think Comey broke the law by leaking documents. If you’re a Trump foe, you think there’s enough to impeach the president. There’s something here for everyone and that means everyone is hurt. It’s so bad for American democracy,” Republican consultant and pollster Frank Luntz said.
Clearly, there is a long way to go and impeachment remains a remote prospect in a Republican-controlled US House of Representatives.
“It is an enormously complex investigation. A case of this type — even without the national security dimensions, the international financial evidence, and the context of electoral politics — would ordinarily take years for federal agents to investigate,” said Lisa Kern Griffin, a law professor at Duke University. “There is some urgency to this, and no doubt the special counsel and his team will move as quickly as possible, but they also have to be especially careful. It will be months or even years before they reach any definitive conclusions.”
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS