Updated 9/5/2018 10:37 AM PDT
1/ Trump suggested that protesting should be illegal after Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing was disrupted by protesters. Trump called it "embarrassing for the country to allow protesters. You don't even know what side the protesters are on." (Washington Post)
Manafort’s defense team is denied yet another motion.
If you’re a Manafort Trial Junkie, this makes a good read. There’s lots of interesting background information, for example, the pros and cons of calling Gates as a witness. Prosecutors have not yet announced whether or not they will call him. The judge ruled that the defense would be allowed to introduce Gates’ extramarital affair which first made news during his previous trial. This could prejudice the jury against him. Also, one of the jurors in that trial said that the jurors discounted Gates’ testimony – so prosecutors are faced with a tough call here.
And there’s this:
The charges do not relate to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, and jurors are expected to only hear limited references to Manafort’s role in the campaign. Jackson is allowing prosecutors to mention that Manafort was campaign chairman in August 2016 when press reports, including articles by The Associated Press , called attention to his lobbying work on behalf of former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and the pro-Russian Party of Regions.
Prosecutors say Manafort’s campaign position is relevant to the case because in response to the press coverage, he and Gates developed a false cover story that was later the basis for false statements made to the Justice Department’s Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, unit.
So the judge has established that mentioning any allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia will be out of bounds in this trial. However, evidence of the following will be introduced:
Manafort was Trump’s campaign chairman at a time he was also an unregistered lobbyist being paid by a foreign, pro-Russian political party and
He and Gates lied about this in a cover-up attempt.
These two facts, in and of themselves are very telling, and they will be well documented in this trial. They will undoubtedly serve as a fitting and compelling introduction to future trials involving Russian collusion – and these may be just around the corner. 
Kavanaugh not going to change the gun laws and supports the 2nd Amendment. 
On Wednesday, the second day of Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing to join the Supreme Court, this dissent was front and center as he faced sharp questioning from the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) grilled the nominee about his view that assault weapons couldn’t be regulated, asking what evidence he used to justify his position that assault weapons were “in common use” and thus their ownership was protected by the Second Amendment.
Kavanaugh dodged the question, saying, “Machine guns can be prohibited.” Feinstein responded, “I think we’re on totally different wavelengths.” She noted that machine guns had long been prohibited and went on to press him on assault weapons, highlighting their use in multiple school shootings in recent years. Feinstein wanted to know what evidence or research he’d drawn on to support his assertion that assault weapons were “common.” Kavanaugh insisted that “millions and millions” of assault weapons were owned in the United States, to which Feinstein replied, “You’re saying numbers define common use?” She expressed skepticism that an assault weapon was something lots of ordinary Americans toted around on a daily basis.
> Kavanaugh claimed sympathy to the problem of gun violence, noting that he’d grown up around Washington, DC, which was once known as the murder capital of America. None of that changed his views on gun regulation, though. “This is all about precedent for me,” Kavanaugh told Feinstein,
Some of us would argue that the common use of assault weapons is the problem.
Hmmm…coincidence that Mattis’ name is being touted now. (His T quotes in Woodward book, the anonymous NYT Opinion piece?) But another destabilizing factor.
Subpoena for Roger Stone’s ex-aide, Jerome Corsi from Mueller.
Jerome Corsi, a conspiracy theorist with links to both ex-Trump aide Roger Stone and Infowars host Alex Jones, has been subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., Friday as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, his attorney says.
Corsi, who has written such books as “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” and “Killing the Deep State: The Fight to Save President Trump” will fully comply with the Mueller team’s subpoena, according to attorney David Gray.
The president of crazy town
A lot of fall out after reading the NYT’s article today - John Dean calls it like “dynamite.” (CNN - John Lemmon show)
Another response to today’s OP ED NYT NYT Op Editorial - I am Part of the Resistance
The column, which published midafternoon Wednesday, sent tremors through the West Wing and launched a frantic guessing game. Startled aides canceled meetings and huddled behind closed doors to strategize a response. Aides were analyzing language patterns to try to discern the author’s identity or at a minimum the part of the administration where the author works.
> “The problem for the president is it could be so many people,” said one administration official, who like many others interviewed for this story spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid. “You can’t rule it down to one person. Everyone is trying, but it’s impossible.”
The phrase “The sleeper cells have awoken” circulated on text messages among aides and outside allies.
“It’s like the horror movies when everyone realizes the call is coming from inside the house,” said one former White House official in close contact with former co-workers.
The stark and anonymous warning was a breathtaking event without precedent in modern presidential history.
“For somebody within the belly of the White House to be saying there are a group of us running a resistance, making sure the president of the United States doesn’t do irrational and dangerous things, it is a mind-boggling moment,” historian Douglas Brinkley said.
The column added to the evolving narrative of Trump’s presidency, based on daily news reporting and books like Woodward’s that rely on candid accounts of anonymous adminÂistration officials.
“This is what all of us have understood to be the situation from Day One,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told reporters. He added, “That’s why I think all of us encourage the good people around the president to stay.”
Sen Harris asking Kavanaugh if he’d spoken w/ T’s lawyer on Mueller’s investigation…he has trouble answering.
A pair of stories that show how important it is for our country to mobilize resources to ensure that our voting systems are competently administered.
Thank you for drawing attention to this portion of the hearing.
Two things that struck me:
It seems like Harris knows something damaging about Kavanaugh. She appears to be implying (and, yes, I’m reading between the lines here) that there was a lawyer at the firm in question who was acting as an intermediary between Trump’s legal team and Kavanaugh – and that the topic they were communicating about was the Mueller investigation. However, it also appears she wants to hold this card close for now – perhaps as a way of catching Kavanaugh in a lie.
Kavanaugh is really sweating it while being asked these questions by Harris – he looks like a deer caught in the headlights.
This is something to put a pin in. 
. . . I wonder if we’ll be hearing more.
Has anyone on the panel asked Kavanaugh about this?
It seemed really fishy at the time it was reported in July, but I haven’t heard anything more about it.
Yes, do not think so. Watched half the hearings today…and many controversial issues were talked (or not) about but had not heard any feedback on it.
Yes very fishy…he has trouble answering. I found this article…sounds like she does have an ace up her sleeve. Hoping for a 
Article
As the Kavanaugh hearings dragged into the night, Kamala Harris delivered another one of those withering prosecutorial beatdowns just like the one she dropped on Neil Gorsuch that catapulted her into the 2020 frontrunner discussion. But this time she kicked it off with a curious interlude.
Right off the bat, Harris dropped an entirely general inquiry: had Kavanaugh ever discussed the Mueller investigation with anyone. Obviously, he had generally discussed it… he lives in the real world, not a bubble as he’d quipped earlier in the day. Was this another line of questions, like those Senator Blumenthal asked earlier, trying to pin Kavanaugh into recusing himself from a future Mueller-related case?
Then… this all happened:
Harris didn’t confront him with a document, so whatever this is, her sources for this conversation are outside of the paltry email dump the committee got. She continues to press him on whether or not he’s spoken with anyone at Kasowitz about the Mueller investigation and he keeps asking her to identify who she’s thinking of. She delivers a remarkably cold: “I think you’re thinking of someone and you don’t want to tell us.”
What in the hell was all that?!? Was Kavanaugh covertly counseling Kasowitz on Trump’s defense? It would seem as though she could have dropped the hammer and gotten more specific. Not for nothing, but my immediate reaction was this may have had nothing to do with Mueller at all. Harris seemed less interested in building a case for recusal than making sure Kavanaugh knew that she knew that he knew someone at Kasowitz and that she could introduce that fact into the record at any given moment between now and the final vote on the floor.
At this point, it’s up to our imaginations what that could mean, but a seasoned prosecutor leaning on someone based on their acquaintances doesn’t generally bode well for the witness. Certainly felt like the prosecutorial equivalent of “nice little nomination you got here — shame if anything happened to it” that defendants hear all the time. Except instead of getting him to flip, she’s giving him a chance to walk away unscathed by whatever she thinks she has.
Could she be bluffing? Looks like we’ll get a chance to find out. This mystery is going to be far, far more exciting than anything else we’re likely to see on Day 3 when a cavalcade of witnesses will praise and condemn him in entirely predictable ways.
Off to a start
…Sen Booker (NJ-D) is falling on his “sword” over getting to release some confidential email about racial profiling. And will subject his position as Senator to any consequence.
Sen Whitehouse (RI- D) - also objects to the rule of confidential documents that were determined by a biased source.
More protests coming.
NBC News
‏ @NBCNews
JUST IN: At Kavanaugh hearing, Sen. Booker says he’s releasing a “committee confidential” email “about racial profiling” and that he understands that "the penalty comes with potential ousting from the Senate.
@charlie_savage
The NYT has obtained some of the secret “committee confidential” Kavanaugh emails Republicans have kept secret, including one in which he challenges a description of Roe v Wade as the “settled law of the land.”
@AriMelber (MSNBC)
If Brett Kavanaugh privately asserts Roe is not settled law and can always be overruled, but publicly asserts it is a “double precedent” — that is huge for the Senate to consider.
8:13 AM - 6 Sep 2018
See email release (repeat from above)
Kavanaugh email from Bush WH - on Roe v Wade
Some tidbits here and there… suggesting gambling w/ dice.
A few links to renting a boat with the guys - and having a travel weekend too (continue with links)
@brianbeutler - (Crooked Media)
Brian Beutler Retweeted Lori LodesWho among us hasn’t grown "aggressive after blowing yet another game of dice” then sworn everyone to silence—"be very very vigilant w/r/t confidentiality on all issues and all fronts, including with spouses.”
One more link…
ProPublica is taking this seriously…and doing their own investigation on it.
Suggests it could not have been for Baseball tix…and how it got paid off in one year.