“Lordy, I hope there are tapes!”

June 26, 2023

          I am publishing a shorter newsletter tonight due to the fact my Managing Editor and I attended the MLB game between the Angels and the White Sox.

“Lordy, I hope there are tapes!”

          So said former FBI Director James Comey when Trump suggested that Comey was lying about a private conversation between the two of them—and that there might be tapes of the conversation. Since Comey knew he was telling the truth and Trump was lying, Comey was expressing his fervent hope that Trump secretly recorded the conversation.

          The indictment against Trump for unlawful retention of defense secrets refers to an audio tape made by biographers of former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. Per the indictment, the audio appears to show Trump disclosing classified documents containing defense secrets to persons not authorized to see those secrets. In a speech last week, Trump falsely denied that he was referring to classified documents in the audio recording but was instead referring to newspaper articles. See NYTimes, Donald Trump Says ‘Secret’ Document He Described on Tape Referred to News Clippings.

          CNN released the audio recording on Monday evening. You should listen to the short audio recording in its entirety, here: CNN, Exclusive: CNN obtains the tape of Trump's 2021 conversation about classified documents.

          Any fair-minded person would conclude that Trump was holding classified documents in his hands and that he showed those documents to the biographers. The classified documents related to defense secrets—i.e., a US plan of attack against Iran.

          Why does the audio recording matter? After all, Trump has not been charged with disclosing defense secrets. Rather, he has been charged with refusing to return them to the National Archives. The audio recording matters because the statute that prohibits the unlawful retention of defense secrets specifies that the person who retains the documents must have “reason to believe [the documents] could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.” A secret document describing the plan of attack on a foreign nation clearly satisfies that prerequisite. Moreover, Trump acknowledges on the recording that he understands the documents are classified and he has no power to declassify them as a former president.

          Any rational defendant faced with such evidence would enter into a plea deal to reduce their prison time. For Trump, the audio recording only heightens his desperation for a victory in 2024—which is the only way he might stay out of prison for unlawfully retaining defense secrets.

Commentary on the rebellion in Russia.

          Dozens of readers recommended this superb essay by Professor Timothy Snyder in his Substack blog, Thinking About, Prigozhin's March on Moscow (corrected). The essay is subtitled “Ten lessons from a mutiny.” If you only read one commentary about the failed rebellion, read Snyder’s analysis. It is brilliant because he distills a complicated situation to ten essential truths—which serve as the topic sentences for each section of his analysis. The teacher of his high-school writing class would be proud—and I mean that with all sincerity as a high compliment. We could all learn a lesson from Tim Snyder’s economical writing style.

          But there is more good commentary. Readers also recommended Robert Reich’s excellent analysis drawing parallels between Putin and Trump. See Robert Reich, Putin, Trump, and the privatization of tyranny (substack.com).

          And as long as I am recommending other writers on Substack, one reader recommended Diane Francis, Russia's Sopranos. I was not familiar with Diane Francis previously, but her writing packs a punch:

“But the country is run by gangsters who have upended the world order. Only “100 beneficiaries and several thousand accomplices” own everything, said Mikhail Kodorovsky, an oligarch jailed by Putin in 2005 on trumped-up charges. “Most of these people began their careers in the criminal underworld of St. Petersburg. Despite having now taken control of the Presidency, the group retains every aspect of the criminal ilk from which they came.”

“Putin’s Russia is a criminal organization that must be overthrown. And finally, one of its own has told the world, and Russian people, why it must disappear.”

          Dennis Aftergut writes in The Messenger about the tendency of autocrats to surround themselves with sycophants who allow the autocrat to live in a world of self-reflected glory that becomes unmoored from reality. Sound familiar? See Dennis Aftergut, The Wagner Group’s Warning for America - The Messenger. Aftergut writes,

“Autocracies and dictatorships are inherently unstable because self-serving leaders tune out reality by surrounding themselves with “yes-men.” That insulation spells doom. The head of state fails to see real risks and threats coming.

“We saw something of a similar pattern during Donald Trump’s presidency. . . . Now, as Trump again seeks the presidency, he’s escalated his rhetoric about purging straight-talkers from the nonpartisan civil service. In March, he said that if reelected, "I will immediately re-issue my 2020 executive order restoring the president's authority to remove rogue bureaucrats.”

Other topics.

          If you are overwhelmed by the analysis of the rebellion in Russia, here are other topics to consider.

          Nicholas Kristoff on Hunter Biden in the NYTimes, Opinion | The Meaning of Hunter Biden - The New York Times. (This article in accessible to everyone.) If you are not familiar with Joe Biden’s love and support for his son through the tragedy of drug addiction, Kristoff’s article is a lovely reflection on a difficult situation. A sampling:

“On another occasion, the Biden family staged an intervention, and Hunter stormed out of the house. Biden ran down the driveway after his son. “He grabbed me, swung me around and hugged me,” Hunter wrote. “He held me tight in the dark and cried for the longest time.”

“Last year Sean Hannity broadcast an audio recording of a voice mail message that President Biden left for Hunter. Hannity thought it reflected badly on the president; my reaction was that if more parents showed this kind of support for children in crisis, our national addiction nightmare might be easier to overcome.

“It’s Dad,” the president says in the message, and he sounds near tears. “I’m calling to tell you I love you. I love you more than the whole world, pal. You gotta get some help. I don’t know what to do. I know you don’t, either. But I’m here, no matter what you need. No matter what you need. I love you.”

Joe Biden is a decent man and a loving father trying to help a struggling son.

          Philip Rotner recalls the horrific damage inflicted by well-meaning third-party candidates in the past. He extends those lessons to No Labels and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. See Philip Rotner, The Toxic Good Intentions of Third-Party Candidates. Rotner writes,

The “dangerous illusion” of a third-party presidential candidacy may be all the help [Trump] needs [to win]. It is coming not from larger-than-life figures who have cast big shadows on the American political landscape, but from bit players, moderately accomplished but not “great” men and women of good intentions.

Concluding Thoughts.

          I continue to be befuddled by what happened in Russia. Despite the excellent analyses cited above, it appears to me that commentators are guessing about some of the most basic and important facts: What was the “deal”—if any—between Putin and Prigozhin? Between Putin and Lukashenko? Between Putin and his security services? Where are Prigozhin’s troops? Will they disband? Entirely or partially? Will they rejoin the fight in Ukraine? How did Prigozhin manage to shoot down some of Russia’s most sophisticated reconnaissance aircraft? (Assuming he did.)

          From my perspective, the biggest event of the day was Putin’s five-minute rebuttal speech to Prigozhin’s twenty-minute ramble. I listened to a real-time translation on MSNBC. I was stunned by the seeming weakness and defensiveness of the speech. Putin may be playing four-dimensional chess, but he certainly seemed to be conveying to the Russian people that Prigozhin’s rebellion was an existential crisis for Russia (and, therefore, Putin).

          Putin seemed small and pathetic when he “thanked” the Wagner Group mercenaries who turned around after advancing 500-miles toward Moscow and shooting down six Russian helicopters. And he seemed diminished when he thanked Lukashenko for brokering a deal that likely saved Putin’s regime (and possibly his life).

          I hold no expertise in Russian affairs, so my reactions are purely personal observations. But I am left with the nagging sense that the entire affair does not make sense. And when things don’t make sense to casual observers, it usually means that they are missing important information. That’s where I feel we are with the Russian rebellion—trying to figure out what we don’t know. I hope that President Biden and the US intelligence community know much more than they are saying in public.

          As usual, Biden’s discipline in maintaining silence and exercising reserve in the face of crises and criticism is a strength developed through decades experience. I am willing wait for the complete picture if doing so means that the situation is more likely to resolve to the benefit of the US and its allies.

          Talk to you tomorrow!