The testimony, which Comey is set to deliver Thursday in one of the most highly-anticipated Congressional hearing in decades, reads like a point-by-point dismissal of Trump's version of events -- casting Comey as wary from the get-go of a chief executive who seemed to presume too much and know too little.

In the wake of their first interaction, ever, on January 6, Comey decided that it was necessary to have written documentation of any time he spent with Trump.

"I felt compelled to document my first conversation with the President-Elect in a memo. To ensure accuracy, I began to type it on a laptop in an FBI vehicle outside Trump Tower the moment I walked out of the meeting. Creating written records immediately after one-on-one conversations with Mr. Trump was my practice from that point forward. This had not been my practice in the past. I spoke alone with President Obama twice in person (and never on the phone) -- once in 2015 to discuss law enforcement policy issues and a second time, briefly, for him to say goodbye in late 2016. In neither of those circumstances did I memorialize the discussions. I can recall nine one-on-one conversations with President Trump in four months -- three in person and six on the phone."

It only gets worse from there for Trump in Comey's opening statement.

Comey says that he was surprised to learn that a dinner invitation extended to him by Trump on Jan. 27 was for just the two of them ("It turned out to be just the two of us, seated at a small oval table in the center of the Green Room," Comey writes. "Two Navy stewards waited on us, only entering the room to serve food and drinks.") and that the goal of the meeting was "an effort to have me ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relationship."

Twice in that meeting Trump, recounted Comey, made a direct request for loyalty from the FBI director. "I need loyalty, I expect loyalty," Trump told Comey. Later, he returned to the subject. Here's Comey's recollection:

"He then said, 'I need loyalty.' I replied, 'You will always get honesty from me.' He paused and then said, 'That's what I want, honest loyalty.' I paused, and then said, 'You will get that from me.'"

Comey also confirmed in his written testimony that Trump directly asked him to "let go" of the investigation into deposed national security adviser Michael Flynn. Quoting Trump, Comey writes of the Feb. 14 meeting in the Oval Office: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."

I mean. Holy crap.

Then there is this, from Comey's after-action report of that meeting: "I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December."

While Comey noted that he did not believe Trump was asking for the entire Russia investigation to disappear, that the sitting FBI director did believe the sitting president was asking to have a federal investigation of any sort dropped is, well, stunning.

In their final conversation -- a phone call from Trump to Comey on April 11 -- the president again sought to secure Comey's loyalty, according to the former FBI Director's re-telling.

After Comey tells Trump that he should contact the deputy Attorney General's office in regards to his repeated request to "get out" the news that he was not a target of the federal investigation, here's how Comey remembers the president's response:

"He said he would do that and added, 'Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.' I did not reply or ask him what he meant by 'that thing.' I said only that the way to handle it was to have the White House Counsel call the Acting Deputy Attorney General. He said that was what he would do and the call ended."

"We had that thing you know."

If there is a single sentence that will become the symbol of Comey's testimony -- or even of Trump's broader interactions with the FBI director -- it's that. Trump trying to establish some rapport or, really, some sense of "you owe me" while Comey stares blankly.

The broader picture presented by Comey's testimony is deeply damaging to Trump.

That Trump and Comey had nine one-on-one conversations in the space of just over three months -- as opposed to the two one-on-one chats Comey had with Obama in eight years -- is hugely telling. And, in those conversations Trump is repeatedly cast as attempting to secure Comey's loyalty -- and, at times, suggesting his job depends on it. (FBI directors are appointed for 10 year terms but, as we know, can be fired at any time by a president.) That he asks for Comey to end the probe into Flynn is, at minimum a massive breach of protocol.

Trump and his allies will work to dismiss Comey's testimony -- and his answers in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee tomorrow -- as, at best, a "he said, he said" situation and, at worst, "fake news."

See the article here:

James Comey just went nuclear on Donald Trump - CNN International

Its Infrastructure Week at the White House. Theoretically.

On Monday, the administration announced a plan to spend $200 billion on infrastructure and overhaul U.S. air traffic control. There was a high-profile signing in the East Wing before dozens of cheering lawmakers and industry titans. It was supposed to be the beginning of a weeklong push to fix Americas roads, bridges, and airports.

But in the next two days, Trump spent more energy burning metaphorical bridges than trying to build literal ones. He could have stayed on message for several hours, gathered Democrats and Republicans to discuss a bipartisan agreement, and announced a timeframe. Instead he quickly turned his attention to Twitter to accuse media companies of Fake News while undermining an alliance with Qatar based on what may be, fittingly, a fake news story.

Its a microcosm of this administrations approach to public policy. A high-profile announcement, coupled with an ambitious promise, subsumed by an unrelated, self-inflicted public-relations crisis, followed by nothing.

The secret of the Trump infrastructure plan is: There is no infrastructure plan. Just like there is no White House tax plan. Just like there was no White House health care plan. More than 120 days into Trumps term in a unified Republican government, Trumps policy accomplishments have been more in the subtraction category (e.g., stripping away environmental regulations) than addition. The president has signed no major legislation and left significant portions of federal agencies unstaffed, as U.S. courts have blocked what would be his most significant policy achievement, the legally dubious immigration ban.

The simplest summary of White House economic policy to date is four words long: There is no policy.

Consider the purported focus of this week. An infrastructure plan ought to include actual proposals, like revenue-and-spending details and timetables. The Trump infrastructure plan has little of that. Even the presidents speech on Monday was devoid of specifics. (An actual line was: We have studied numerous countries, one in particular, they have a very, very good system; ours is going to top it by a lot.) The ceremonial signing on Monday was pure theater. The president, flanked by politicians and businesspeople smiling before the twinkling of camera flashes, signed a paper that merely asks Congress to work on a bill. An assistant could have done that via email. Meanwhile, Congress isnt working on infrastructure at all, according to Politico, and Republicans have shown no interest in a $200 billion spending bill.

In short, this plan is not a plan, so much as a Potemkin policy, a presentation devised to show the press and the public that the president has an economic agenda. The show continued on Wednesday, as the president delivered an infrastructure speech in Cincinnati that criticized Obamacare, hailed his Middle East trip, and offered no new details on how his plan would work. Infrastructure Week is a series of scheduled performances to make it look as if the president is hard at work on a domestic agenda that cannot move forward because it does not exist.

Journalists are beginning to catch on. The administrations policy drought has so far been obscured by a formulaic bait-and-switch strategy one could call the Two-Week Two-Step. Bloomberg has compiled several examples of the president promising major proposals or decisions on everything from climate-change policy to infrastructure in two weeks. He has missed the fortnight deadline almost every time.

The starkest false promise has been taxes. Were going to be announcing something I would say over the next two or three weeks, Trump said of tax reform in early February. Eleven weeks later, in late April, the White House finally released a tax proposal. It was hardly one page long.

Arriving nine weeks late, the document was so vague that tax analysts marveled that they couldnt even say how it would work. Even its authors are confused: Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has repeatedly declined to say whether the plan will cut taxes on the rich, even though cutting taxes on the rich is ostensibly the centerpiece. Perhaps its because he needs more help: None of the key positions for making domestic tax policy have been filled. There is no assistant secretary for tax policy, nor deputy assistant secretary for tax analysis, according to the Treasury Department.

Once again, the simplest summary of White House tax policy is: There is no plan. There isnt even a complete staff to compose one.

The story is slightly different for the White House budget, but no more favorable. The budget suffers, not from a lack of details, but from a failure of numeracy that speaks to the administrations indifference toward serious public policy. The authors double-counted a projected benefit from higher GDP growth, leading to $2 trillion math error, perhaps the largest ever in a White House proposal. The plan included hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue from the estate tax, which appears to be another mistake, since the White House has separately proposed eliminating it.

Does the presidents budget represent what the presidents policies will be? It should, after all. But asked this very question, Mick Mulvaney, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, made perhaps the strangest claim of all: I wouldnt take whats in the budget as indicative of what our proposals are, he said.

This haphazard approach extends to the repeal of Obamacare, which may yet pass the Senate, but with little help or guidance from the president. Trump has allowed House Speaker Paul Ryan to steer the Obamacare-replacement bill, even though it violates the presidents campaign promises to expand coverage and protect Medicaid. After its surprising passage in the House, he directly undercut it on Twitter by suggesting he wants to raise federal health spending. Even on the most basic question of health-care policyshould spending go up, or down?the presidents Twitter account and his favored law are irreconcilable. A law cannot raise and slash health care funding at the same time. The Trump health care plan does not exist.

It would be a mistake to call this a policy-free presidency. Trump has signed several executive orders undoing Obama-era regulations, removing environmental protections, and banning travel from several Muslim-majority countries. He has challenged NATO and pulled out of the Paris Accords. But these accomplishments all have one thing in common: Trump was able to do them alone. Signing executive orders and making a speech dont require the participation of anybody in government except for the president.

Its no surprise that a former chief executive of a private company would be more familiar with the presumption of omnipotence than the reality of divided powers. As the head of his own organization, Trump could make unilateral orders that subordinates would have to follow. But passing a law requires tireless persuasion and the cooperation of hundreds of representatives in the House and Senate who cannot be fired for insubordination. Being the president of the United States is nothing like being a CEO, especially not one of an eponymous family company.

Republicans in the House and Senate dont need the presidents permission to write laws, either. Still, they too have struggled to get anything done. Several GOP senators say they may not repeal Obamacare this yearor ever. It is as if, after seven years of protesting Obamacare, the party lost the muscle memory to publicly defend and enact legislation.

In this respect, Trump and his party are alikeunited in their antagonism toward Obama-era policies and united in their inability to articulate what should come next. Republicans are trapped by campaign promises that they cannot fulfill. The White House is trapped inside of the presidents perpetual campaign, a cavalcade of economic promises divorced from any effort to detail, advocate, or enact major economic legislation. With an administration that uses public policy as little more than a photo op, get ready for many sequels to this summers Infrastructure Week.

See the article here:

The Potemkin Policies of Donald Trump - The Atlantic

No more.

Why? It's simple: Sessions admitted he did something wrong. He made a concession that, in Trump's mind, is the root of many of the Russia-related problems he is now dealing with.

Apparently his decision caught Trump by surprise. And the President was not happy. You can tell that by reading the statement he put out at the time. Here it is:

"Jeff Sessions is an honest man. He did not say anything wrong. He could have stated his response more accurately, but it was clearly not intentional. This whole narrative is a way of saving face for Democrats losing an election that everyone thought they were supposed to win. The Democrats are overplaying their hand. They lost the election and now, they have lost their grip on reality. The real story is all of the illegal leaks of classified and other information. It is a total witch hunt!"

Remember -- because Jeff Sessions apparently didn't -- that one of the cardinal rules of Trumpism is that you never ever apologize or concede anything. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile -- and all that.

To Trump's mind, you can draw a straight line between what he believes was Sessions' very dumb decision to recuse himself and the fact that former FBI Director Robert Mueller is now leading a special counsel investigation into Russia's meddling and the possibility of collusion between the Russians and elements of the Trump campaign.

Sessions' recusal, in Trump's mind, led to then-FBI Director James Comey leading the investigation. Comey's aggressiveness on the Russia probe -- wholly misguided to Trump's mind -- led the President to fire him using the pretext of a memo bashing Comey written by deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. And, because Rosenstein wrote that memo, he felt the need to appoint a special counsel to oversee the investigation for fear his reputation was on the line. Hence, Mueller.

See? It all makes sense! Right? Right???

Donald Trump is big on scapegoats. Usually the media fills that role nicely. But, as it relates to the trouble he finds himself in on Russia, it's Sessions who has become the fall guy for Trump.

The truth, of course, is that a large chunk of Trump's Russia problems are his own fault. Had he, from the start, welcomed the investigation with open arms or, I don't know, not fired the guy leading it, he would be in a much better place than he finds himself today.

It's a self-inflicted wound that Trump is blaming someone else for inflicting. Which, come to think of it, is the story of his presidency to date.

View original post here:

Jeff Sessions committed the one sin Donald Trump can't forgive - CNN

He came of age in the "Bright Lights, Big City" Manhattan. He was covered as a sort of bad boy of New York City gossip -- his every move consumed by the tabloids. He spent his last decade-plus creating "reality" TV in which he and his producers made extremely watchable TV out of human emotions and foibles.

It is impossible to see the move as anything other than Trump throwing some chum to the news gods -- and some news that tells a much more positive story for this White House than the testimony expected later today from deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and, especially, from Comey on Thursday.

Trump has backed himself into a major corner with his full-scale denials about the reporting coming out of his conversations with Comey. And, when backed into a corner, Trump is doing what he has spent a lifetime doing: Try like hell to change the subject and focus of the media lens.

It's transparent -- and far from foolproof. But, it is working, at least somewhat.

But nominating Wray gives Trump a temporary respite from the relentless -- and negative -- coverage about Russia, Comey and the rest. It also gives him something to talk about in which he doesn't appear angry and defensive. (By the way, that's the same motivation behind Trump's speech bashing Obamacare in Cincinnati this afternoon.)

Manipulating media coverage -- and perceptions about him more generally -- is in Trump's DNA. It's who he is. It's what he does. Hence, the Wray nomination on the verge of what almost certainly will be one of the roughest two-day patches of his presidency to date.

Here is the original post:

Donald Trump will do whatever it takes to distract you from the Comey hearing - CNN

President Donald Trump's approval rating has sunk to a new low at 34%, according to a recent poll.

According to a poll by Quinnipiac University , 34% of voters approve of Trump, while 57% disapprove, a dip from the university's previous survey on May 24, which found that the President had a 37% approval rating. The latest poll results are Trump's lowest scores so far in April, he hovered around 35% approval, according to Quinnipiac.

The poll found that 31% of voters think Trump did something illegal in his relationship with Russia, while 29% say that the president did something unethical, not illegal. About 32% of voters think Trump did nothing wrong. A majority of voters see Trump's general relationship with Russia as concerning 68% said they are "very concerned" or "somewhat concerned," while 54% said he is too friendly with the country.

Quinnipiac University polled 1,361 voters from May 31 to June 6. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.

See more here:

President Trump's Approval Rating Hit Another New Low - TIME

Trump "joked" that Kushner, who is married to Ivanka Trump and also serves as a White House strategist, has "become much more famous than me," adding: "I'm a little bit upset about that."

Ah ha ha ha. Ha. Ahem. Cough.

That's not to say Kushner will follow Comey's trajectory. He almost certainly won't -- because Trump values nothing as much as he values loyalty to family.

But even though Kushner isn't on his way out of the White House anytime soon, Trump's aside about his fame is revealing -- in two ways.

1. Trump views the entire world through the lens of fame and notoriety: Trump's measure of success is money, sure. But, even more importantly, it's fame. Lots of people are rich. Not all of those people are also cultural figures. He is. And he uses himself as a measuring stick by which to gauge others and his interactions with them.

Trump is a public figure who embraces that status with both arms. Fame is the way you can tell the winners from the losers in life.

2. Trump makes very little distinction between good press and bad press: Like most people who crave and court the spotlight, Trump isn't someone to split hairs about how positive or negative the coverage of him is.

Sure, he will thunder about how the media is so against him. But true defeat in Trumpworld is not bad press, it's no press.

Trump's asides and "jokes" -- not to mention his tweets -- are almost always more revealing than his formal speeches and statements. This "famous" comment is no exception.

Here is the original post:

Donald Trump has a lot of feelings about fame - CNN

New York Times

Donald Trump Is Never to Blame New York Times Poor Donald Trump, so late to the lesson that so many plutocrats before him learned: You can't find good help. Jeff Sessions? What a bust. True, he was never the nimblest newt in the swamp and had all that racial muck in his past. But he mirrored his ...

Link:

Donald Trump Is Never to Blame - New York Times

London Mayor Sadiq Khan, the first Muslim to lead the United Kingdom'smost populous city, is used to political opponents taking potshots at his faith.

But recently, as his city has dealt with a wave of terrorist attacks, he's also had to contend with a different kind of onslaught: the full fire hose of PresidentTrump's Twitter feed.

[Trumps fight with London mayor baffles his critics]

So how does it feel to be trolled by the most powerful man in the world?

His answer, according to the Associated Press: I don't know how to tell you this, but I really don't care I really couldn't be bothered about what Donald Trump tweets.

Here's the history of their very public conflict.

May 9, 2016 Khan takes office.

When Khan took office, it was clear that he differed significantly from Trump, then a presidential candidate.

He was a Muslim and the first ethnic minority to be mayor in London, and he had beaten back Conservative Party efforts to connect him to alleged Muslim extremists. In the United States, Trump was floating the idea of a travel ban against Muslims.

Khan toldTime magazinethat if Trump wonthe U.S. presidential election, Ill be stopped from going there by virtue of my faith.

He also said Trump's stances on the issues meant the candidate was destined to fail.

Conservative tacticians thought those sort of tactics would win London, and they were wrong, he said. Im confident that Donald Trumps approach to politics wont win in America.

Trump responded by calling Khan rude and ignorant on Good Morning Britain.

He doesn't know me, never met me, doesn't know what I'm all about, he said. I think they're very rude statements, and, frankly, tell him I will remember those statements.

Jan. 20 Trump is inaugurated.

Although those politics did win in America, Trump remained unpopular across the pond.

Brits engaged in a debate about whether Prime Minister Theresa May should rescind the offer to have Trump come for an official state dinner.

[World leaders call for unity after London attack. Trump tweets the complete opposite.]

Khan is among those who have asked the government to reconsider the invitation, describing the state visit as inappropriate given the presidents travel ban for passengers from several Muslim-majority nations.

I love America, I love Americans, and I believe the special relationship is a good one and one thats here to stay, he said on ITV. I think this ban on people from seven Muslim-majority countries, ending the refugee program is cruel, and its shameful. In those circumstances, we shouldnt be rolling out the red carpet.

March 22 Trump Jr. goes on the offensive

Four people were killed including a police officer and another 40 were injured when a terrorist plowed a vehicle through a landmark bridge, then got out of his car and started stabbing people.

Hours after the attack, Donald Trump Jr. tweeted a story from September in which Khan talks about Londoners and terrorism. The mayor said large cities such asLondon are terrorist targets and that Brits should be vigilant. He also said the terrorists would not win.

But Trump Jr. gave the mayor's statement a defeatist twinge, implying that Khan thought terrorist attacks were just part and parcel of living in a big city.

June, 3 AnotherLondon attack, and the feud intensifies

Khan had a very public presence after a terrorist attack on London Bridge that killed seven and injured dozens.

Following the June 3 London terror attack, the city's mayor Sadiq Khan tweeted this video message saying, "We are all shocked and angry today - but this is our city. We will never let these cowards win and we will never be cowed by terrorism." (Sadiq Khan/Twitter)

There can be no justification for the acts of these terrorists, and I am quite clear that we will never let them win, nor will we allow them to cower our city or Londoners, the mayor said in the interview.

He also gave pragmatic advice, telling Londoners they would see an increased police presence today and over the course of the next few days. There's no reason to be alarmed.

Trump took the last four words of that message and turned it into an incredulous tweet.

Khan's spokesman dismissed the U.S. president's comments, according to BuzzFeed News:

The mayor is busy working with the police, emergency services and the government to coordinate the response to this horrific and cowardly terrorist attack and provide leadership and reassurance to Londoners and visitors to our city.

He has more important things to do than respond to Donald Trump's ill-informed tweet that deliberately takes out of context his remarks urging Londoners not to be alarmed when they saw more police including armed officers on the streets.

But Trump lobbed another criticism across the Atlantic.

So Khan told the Independent that Trump wasn't helping the situation and was instead trying to divide communities.

I just haven't got time to respond to tweets from Donald Trump, he said. Honestly I've got better and more important things to focus on.

Speaking to Channel 4 News, Khan said Trump had been wrong about many things and that the government should cancel his state visit to the United Kingdom.

I dont think we should roll out the red carpet to the president of the USA in the circumstances where his policies go against everything we stand for, he said.

Read more:

He broke me: A defiant, tearful Kathy Griffin slams attacks by Trump and his family

Arnold Schwarzenegger slams Donald Trump over Paris accord decision

Donald Trump interrupted a screening of Rogue One. Mark Hamill had a forceful response.

Tiger mauls British zookeeper to death in freak accident

See more here:

A brief history of Donald Trump's feud with Sadiq Khan, London's first Muslim mayor - Washington Post