{"id":3055,"date":"2018-07-11T18:34:33","date_gmt":"2018-07-11T18:34:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/?p=3055"},"modified":"2018-07-11T18:34:33","modified_gmt":"2018-07-11T18:34:33","slug":"trump-kennedy-pact-that-goes-back-to-deutsche-bank-led-to-kavanaugh","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/?p=3055","title":{"rendered":"Trump-Kennedy pact that goes back to Deutsche Bank led to Kavanaugh"},"content":{"rendered":"

Editor’s note:<\/strong>\u00a0 This was found on the Internet and was so interesting we are sharing it here.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Legal Expert Goes Public on Trump-Kennedy: \u201cNo one is telling the full story\u2026so I\u2019m going to do so now\u201d<\/h1>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

DONALD TRUMP AND ANTHONY KENNEDY<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

By<\/p>\n

James Lyttle<\/a><\/p>\n

Published on\u00a0July 11, 2018<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

While conservatives are jumping for joy at the thought of a the most right-wing Supreme Court in history swinging even more to the right with Donald Trump\u2019s pick for the vacant seat, progressives are outraged over not only the hypocrisy from congress so eagerly confirming the pick when they refused to confirm Obama\u2019s nominee in 2016, but also because stories are emerging of some shady dealings to get Trump this pick.<\/p>\n

And the shady dealings may have come directly from retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy and Donald Trump himself, as the two have known each other for a long time.<\/p>\n

Not only have they known each other, Kennedy\u2019s son was basically Trump\u2019s banker at DeutscheBank and loaned billions of dollars to Trump.\u00a0 Oh, also, DeutscheBank was under investigation for money laundering to Russia at the same time Trump was running for President.<\/p>\n

Seth Abramson puts together the whole case\u00a0in this Twitter thread<\/a>:<\/p>\n

1\/ Trump\u2019s acceptance of a Federalist Society list of acceptable SCOTUS nominees\u2014a list (remember this) with *20 names* on it\u2014is what won him the presidency. Don\u2019t take my word for it; that\u2019s what *everyone* says about how Trump built a winning coalition. (Source<\/a>)<\/p>\n

2\/ What no one discussed in the presidential campaign\u2014and what neither Trump nor Kennedy ever spoke of, despite the fact that Kennedy was the most likely Justice to retire, so his intention and willingness to retire was nationally significant\u2014was that the two men knew each other.<\/p>\n

3\/ Strange, isn\u2019t it? That Trump made SCOTUS a major campaign issue, but never mentioned how and to what extent he knew the Justice most likely to retire? Especially given that Justices tend to choose the timing of their retirement on the basis of their view of the sitting POTUS?<\/p>\n

4\/ Well, we now know *why* Trump wouldn\u2019t have wanted to mention anything\u2014or Kennedy. And incredibly, the answer is: Russia. Kennedy\u2019s son worked for Deutsche Bank, which during the presidential campaign was being investigated for laundering Russian money. (Source<\/a>)<\/p>\n

5\/ The other problem: Kennedy\u2019s son was Trump\u2019s *banker*. He worked at Deutsche Bank, loaning Trump lots of money before\u2014possibly as\u2014Deutsche Bank began to be investigated for laundering Russian money and Russia stood accused of interfering in the US election (from June 2016 on).<\/p>\n

6\/ So *any* reference made\u2014by Kennedy *or* Trump\u2014to the fact they knew each other ran the risk of raising the DB connection at a time Trump was hiding his tax returns (through the fraudulent claim an audit precluded releasing them) and the DB-Russia scandal was political cyanide.<\/p>\n

7\/ So Trump, who has *no* filter in public speeches or debates, forewent speaking much about upcoming retirements, despite him knowing *personally* the man most likely to retire (and Trump *loves* talking about who he knows and how who he knows helps him).<\/p>\n

8\/ But now we know the *truth*\u2014Kennedy\u2019s son wasn\u2019t just Trump\u2019s banker, he actually oversaw Trump getting ONE BILLION in loans at a time American banks wouldn\u2019t loan to Trump and his overall net worth may well have been *south* of that one-billion figure. (source<\/a>)<\/p>\n

9\/ So process this: Trump\u2019s 20-person SCOTUS list was critical to his victory; he knew personally the man that list would be used to replace; he couldn\u2019t discuss how he knew that man, as it\u2019d lead to pre-election stories involving questionable loans, Russia, and money laundering.<\/p>\n

10\/ It was in this context that\u2014within his first months as president\u2014Trump began to engage in unprecedented secret negotiations with his banker\u2019s dad about what it would take to get him (Kennedy) to retire. Again, Trump\u2014who\u2019ll boast of anything and everything\u2014kept this a secret.<\/p>\n

11\/ Trump likely kept it secret for two reasons: (1) he was under more heat than ever over Russia, making news stories about questionable loans to him from a Russian-money-laundering bank incredibly dangerous; (2) he knew\u2014as did Kennedy\u2014that negotiations of this sort were wrong.<\/p>\n

12\/ It\u2019s common for SCOTUS Justices to decide\u2014privately and personally, in consultation with family and (sometimes) close friends\u2014when they\u2019ll retire on the basis of who occupies the White House. But clandestine negotiations between a Justice and sitting president are different.<\/p>\n

13\/ But here\u2019s the thing: Justice Kennedy\u2019s clandestine negotiation with Trump wasn\u2019t just politically charged collusion across two branches of government, as the arrangement the two men made, as reported today by NBC, was something quite different\u2014it was a secret *quid pro quo*.<\/p>\n

14\/ Kennedy gave Trump a list of 5 names\u2014*none of whom were on the list Trump promised voters he\u2019d select Justices from*\u2014and apparently said he\u2019d only retire if Trump nominated someone on the list. As Trump\u2019s original list was political, Kennedy\u2019s demands were likewise political.<\/p>\n

15\/ What Justice Kennedy was doing was inserting himself directly into a hot-button political issue that had been at the center of Trump\u2019s presidential campaign\u2014and he was doing so as part of a negotiation both he and the White House were keeping a secret from American voters.<\/p>\n

16\/ By the time Trump had been in office nine months, he was ready to *violate his campaign promise* of picking from the Federalist Society list\u2014though again, he had to hide from the media and voters what he was going to do and why. So he went to Fox News.<\/p>\n

17\/ Fox News got the exclusive via the White House, and dutifully reported the *false story* that \u201cno one\u201d in or outside the White House knew when Kennedy would retire but it was \u201cwidely\u201d expected he would, perhaps as soon as Thanksgiving\u2014an overstatement *very* helpful to Trump.<\/p>\n

18\/ It\u2019s important to note that all Trump told even FNC was that he was expanding the Federalist Society list\u2014*not* that he was now obligated by a pact with Kennedy to *only* select from the additions, none of had been originally selected (pre-election) by the Federalist Society.<\/p>\n

19\/ This is why one detail in the FNC story is key: Trump sent White House Counsel Don McGahn to the Federalist Society to talk to them. What was said at that meeting? What was said or done to ensure the Federalist Society would *keep quiet* about Trump\u2019s broken campaign promise?<\/p>\n

20\/ We don\u2019t know what the Federalist Society knew about the unethical Trump-Kennedy pact. But here\u2019s the more important point: we don\u2019t know what former Kennedy clerk Brett Kavanaugh knew about the existence of Kennedy\u2019s secret list. Did he know what Kennedy and Trump had done?<\/p>\n

21\/ What\u2019s clear is that\u2014*though Kennedy told Trump he had to name one of the 5 names on the list to get Kennedy to retire*\u2014Trump *rejected* 4 of the 5 names. NBC reported today that Trump rejected the four because they weren\u2019t conservative enough\u2014but there\u2019s a problem with that.<\/p>\n

22\/ Keep in mind\u2014before I point out the blindingly obvious problem with today\u2019s NBC report\u2014that Trump knew what he was doing was extraordinary, unethical, had to remain secret, and could define his presidency. So rejecting 4 of the 5 names Kennedy gave him was *very* headstrong.<\/p>\n

23\/ But even more bizarre than Trump rejecting 4 of the 5 names early on\u2014and thus risking Kennedy\u2019s ire\u2014was that his administration would *lie to the American people yet again* by saying that the four names rejected weren\u2019t conservative enough. Because that lie\u2019s *easily* caught.<\/p>\n

24\/ One of the names Kennedy gave Trump\u2014in addition to \u2019s\u2014was apparently Amy Coney Barrett, who is so clearly more conservative than Kavanaugh that only *every single conservative commentator* has said so, as well as every GOP pol willing to speak on the record about it.<\/p>\n

25\/ So why would the Trump administration put out the story that it considered Barrett not conservative enough\u2014when that\u2019s clearly untrue? The answer to that question is the answer to this entire mystery, but before I get there I need to make a note about Senator Mitch McConnell.<\/p>\n

26\/ Trump\u2019s pact with Kennedy was *so* secretive he even kept it from the Senate Majority Leader\u2014underscoring how wrong Trump (and we can be sure\u2014given his superior moral standing\u2014Kennedy) knew it was. We know McConnell was in the dark due to something he recently said to Trump.<\/p>\n

27\/ Just before Trump announced Kavanaugh, McConnell said to him that he couldn\u2019t guarantee there were enough votes in the Senate to confirm Kavanaugh\u2014though he believed there were enough to confirm Kethledge or Hardiman. McConnell\u2019s statement is now *historically* extraordinary.<\/p>\n

28\/ McConnell\u2014a deal-maker who can get anything done, but who oversees a 50-49 Congress where 50 votes are needed to confirm a SCOTUS nominee\u2014was telling Trump that he couldn\u2019t hold his caucus together to get Kavanaugh confirmed. And Trump *ignored him*. It may be unprecedented.<\/p>\n

29\/ So Trump lies about Barrett; ignores McConnell; lies to America by saying he\u2019s going through a vetting process when he\u2019s actually not; and keeps his clandestine negotiations with Kennedy a secret from everyone except\u2014perhaps\u2014higher-ups at the Federalist Society and Kavanaugh.<\/p>\n

30\/ What explains this *bizarre* behavior? These risky lies? Violating a core campaign promise? Exposing Kennedy to accusations of unethical conduct? It\u2019s simple: Brett Kavanaugh had written in 2009 that a president should be exempt from *civil suits and criminal investigations*.<\/p>\n

31\/ We know from major-media reports that Team Trump was focused on Kavanaugh\u2019s 2009 article in the Minnesota Law Review. And we know from his personal and political history that Trump actually doesn\u2019t care about abortions\u2014he cares about not being impeached or indicted in office.<\/p>\n

32\/ Donald Trump is 72 years old and in poor health\u2014however he got the White House doctor to spin it. If he can evade criminal investigation for the entirety of his presidency, he has a chance to be \u201csafe\u201d until January 20, 2025. He\u2019ll be pushing 79 by then\u2014and that fact matters.<\/p>\n

33\/ Any prosecution of a former president will take years, during which we could assume Trump\u2014given his money and inability to melt into a populace at home or abroad\u2014would be free. So if he can forestall a criminal probe until his post-presidency, he\u2019s certain to die a free man.<\/p>\n

34\/ To some of you, that last tweet sounds bizarre. And I\u2019m no more comfortable than you are trying to imagine\u2014and it\u2019s hard\u2014a former president on *bail*, even if that\u2019s what would\u2019ve happened to Nixon had Ford not pardoned him. But it\u2019s simple math, and Trump is doing that math.<\/p>\n

35\/ So there\u2019s every reason to believe\u2014as the Senate Minority Leader said today\u2014the Kavanaugh nomination is the culmination of a months-long process whose destination has been wholly governed by Trump\u2019s desire to evade responsibility for things over half of America thinks he did.<\/p>\n

36\/ Under normal circumstances, everything I\u2019ve discussed here would be the subject of a massive Congressional investigation. But we all know that won\u2019t happen due to the \u201claw-and-order\u201d Republican Party becoming suddenly lawless once they seized all three branches of government.<\/p>\n

37\/ But there\u2019s *one thread* of the Trump-Kennedy pact that *can* be pulled on\u2014hard. It\u2019s a loose end\u2014a loose thread\u2014that Kennedy was surely hoping would never be discovered, but that was produced *by Trump* because he is, at base, to speak plainly, a stupid-ass career criminal.<\/p>\n

38\/ Per usual, Kavanaugh\u2019s speech at the time of his nomination had to be vetted by the White House\u2014though the assumption is that the words were his. In trying to determine whether Kavanaugh knew about all the lies Trump told to achieve his nomination, his speech is key evidence.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

0\/ If Kavanaugh knew he was on Kennedy\u2019s list\u2014and chances are good he did\u2014he knows his nomination process was rigged *so hard* even the Senate Majority Leader didn\u2019t know about it and couldn\u2019t stop it. But he said the words anyway. If he knew them false, he colluded in the pact.<\/p>\n

CONCLUSION\/ Under the circumstances, Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats are entitled to call both Kennedy and his son to testify; to demand any documents related to the secret Trump-Kennedy negotiations; and to question Kavanaugh under oath about his knowledge of the pact. \/end<\/p>\n

PS\/ Best-case scenario: Trump broke a campaign promise; used domestic disinformation; struck a highly unethical pact; and lied to America repeatedly to avoid getting caught for crimes he committed during\/after the campaign. Worst-case\u2014Kavanaugh knew of the whole thing and hid it.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Editor’s note:\u00a0 This was found on the Internet and was so interesting we are sharing it here.   Legal Expert…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":3056,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3055","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-top-stories"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3055","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3055"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3055\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3057,"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3055\/revisions\/3057"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/3056"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3055"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3055"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.sportspaper.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3055"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}