Mar 01 2020

The Breakfast Club (Traditional)

Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:30am (ET) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.

AP’s Today in History for March 1st

Lindbergh baby kidnapped; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed caught in Pakistan; Bobby Sands begins hunger strike; JFK creates Peace Corps; Ron Howard born.

Breakfast Tune White House Blues

Something to think about, Breakfast News & Blogs below

 

Dick Van Dyke Urges Fellow Way-Past-Boomers To Vote For Bernie Sanders
Mary Papenfuss

Bernie Sanders, 78, is hoping to appeal to voters of his generation ? and the one before that ? with the help of a new endorsement.

“I can’t wait to see Bernie debate Mr. Trump,” smiles legendary actor and comedian Dick Van Dyke, 94, in a new video promoted by the Vermont senator’s presidential campaign on Friday.
…

The “Mary Poppins” and “Dick Van Dyke Show” actor quipped that “somebody younger, like Bernie, is just the perfect candidate.”

…

He praised Sanders for staying true to his vision and not bowing to pressure. Bernie “stuck to who he is and what he believes in,” Van Dyke added.

Sanders has polled high in Nevada, South Carolina and several Super Tuesday contests. He scores high with young voters — but he’s lagging with older citizens.

“I can’t understand why,” said the actor.

 

 

Something to think about over coffee prozac

 
DON’T TELL CABLE PUNDITS THAT BERNIE SANDERS IS LEADING NATIONALLY AMONG BLACK VOTERS
Nausicaa Renner, Aída Chávez, Akela Lacy, The Intercept
 

AT 7 P.M. SHARP, multiple networks called South Carolina for Joe Biden, breathing a collective sigh of relief.

The results, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow said, called the viability of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s campaign into question. “If anybody knows anything about winning the Democratic nomination and about what it takes for a Democratic nominee to win a general election, it is black voters,” Maddow said. “And if Sen. Sanders continues to underperform systematically with black voters, and if we see him get shellacked — not just beaten but shellacked tonight in South Carolina — because of his performance with black voters, that’s an existential question about that nomination.”

“I want every Democrat in the country to see what that looked like tonight: That is what winning looks like,” celebrated James Carville, an old-time political operative MSNBC brings on to panic its viewers. “That is the job of a political party. Not utopian fantasies, but winning elections.”

“The single most important demographic in the Democratic Party spoke up tonight,” said Carville on MSNBC, wearing a U.S. Marine Corps baseball cap. He said Sanders needs to answer for his lack of support in the state: “We get all enamored, and tonight we were reminded of what and who the Democratic Party is.”

“We cannot win unless we prove there’s excitement in the African American community,” said former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, an ex-head of the Democratic National Committee, on CNN, going on to endorse Biden officially on air.

Maddow, McAuliffe, and Carville’s point — which became a major theme of cable coverage for the night — is, in the abstract, undeniable: A Democratic presidential candidate who can’t win the black vote can’t win the nomination. But the cable analysis carried on as if the only available information on the preferences of black voters came from South Carolina. In fact, black voters nationally have regularly been surveyed and, recently, Sanders has taken the lead among the demographic — a fact that was, at best, only mentioned in passing.

Last week, the Reuters-Ipsos poll found Sanders besting Biden by three points nationally among black voters — certainly a relevant data point when considering whether Sanders can win among black voters. An NBC-Wall Street Journal poll found Biden up two among black voters, while the Hill/HarrisX poll had Sanders up nine. A Morning Consult survey recently found Sanders beating Biden by five among all black primary voters, and thumping him by a 3-1 margin among black voters under 45.

In other words, the national picture does not exactly portend a shellacking among black voters — important context that was kept from MSNBC viewers, who would be left to conclude that the same minority-voter problem that hobbled Sanders’s campaign in 2016 remains a major obstacle. It simply isn’t true.

…

Mar 01 2020

Pondering the Pundits: Sunday Preview Edition

Pondering the Pundits: Sunday Preview Edition” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.

On Sunday mornings we present a preview of the guests on the morning talk shows so you can choose which ones to watch or some do something more worth your time on a Sunday morning.

Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt

The Sunday Talking Heads:

This Week with George Stephanopolis: The guests on Sunday’s “This Week” are: Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar; 2020 Democratic presidential candidates former Vice Pres. Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

The roundtable guests are: Former Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ); ABC News Political Analyst Matthew Dowd; former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND); and Democracy for America CEO Yvette Simpson.

Face the Nation: Host Margaret Brennan’s guests are: 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT); and former FDA Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb.

Her panel guests are: Anthony Salvanto, CBS News Elections & Surveys Director; and Ed O’Keefe, CBS News Political Correspondent.

Meet the Press with Chuck Todd: The guests on this week’s “MTP” are: Vice Pres. Mike Pence; and 2020 Democratic presidential candidates former Vice Pres. Joe Biden and former South Bend, IN Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

State of the Union with Jake Tapper: Mr. Tapper’s guests are: Vice Pres. Mike Pence; and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate former Vice Pres. Joe Biden.

His panel guests are: Rebecca Katz, progressive strategist; Van Jones, CNN commentator; Amanda Carpenter, conservative commentator; and former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), otherwise unemployable right winger.

Feb 29 2020

Health News: Facts and Myths About Coronavirus aka Covid-19

Coronaviruses (CoV) are a large family of viruses that cause illness ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS-CoV) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS-CoV). A novel coronavirus (nCoV) is a new strain that has not been previously identified in humans.

Coronaviruses are zoonotic, meaning they are transmitted between animals and people. Detailed investigations found that SARS-CoV was transmitted from civet cats to humans and MERS-CoV from dromedary camels to humans. Several known coronaviruses are circulating in animals that have not yet infected humans.

There is a lot of misinformation floating around the internet and the news media about the coronavirus, also known as Covid-19, especially about how to prevent it. The biggest myth is a mask. Regular surgical masks are useless. Unless it’s a mask known as an N-95 mask, don’t bother.

There are a lot of draw backs to the N-95 mask. The biggest is that it won’t protect you unless you wear it correctly. You should be instructed by a medical professional on how to get a proper fit. Men must be clean shaven to get a proper seal. The mask is a one time use and has a time limit for wearing it. They are also hard to breath through, so if you have a respiratory problem, Asthma, COPD, a cold or the flu, it can be difficult and may exacerbate the illness. They are also hot and uncomfortable. Did I mention the N-95 mask is expensive?

Again, the mask can protect you from getting the virus but it has to be fitted properly so the you are breathing through the filter material of the mask. Nor has it been shown to be effective protection to the general public, even during air travel.

Other myths about Covid-19 from John-Hopkins Health:

MYTH: A vaccine to cure COVID-19 is available.

FACT: There is no vaccine for the new coronavirus right now. Scientists have already begun working on one, but developing a vaccine that is safe and effective in human beings will take many months.

MYTH: You can protect yourself from COVID-19 by swallowing or gargling with bleach, taking acetic acid or steroids, or using essential oils, salt water, ethanol or other substances.

FACT: None of these recommendations protect you from getting COVID-19, and some of these practices may be dangerous.

MYTH: The new coronavirus was deliberately created or released by people.

FACT: Viruses can change over time. Occasionally, a disease outbreak happens when a virus that is common in an animal such as a pig, bat or bird undergoes changes and passes to humans. This is likely how the new coronavirus came to be.

MYTH: People are dying from COVID-19 in many countries.

FACT: As of Feb. 28, 2020, 2,791 people in China have died from COVID-19, as well as 80 people in other countries. Medical authorities will confirm any fatalities in other areas.

MYTH: Ordering or buying products shipped from China will make a person sick.

FACT: Researchers are studying the new coronavirus to learn more about how it infects people. As of this writing, scientists note that most viruses like this one do not stay alive for very long on surfaces, so it is not likely you would get COVID-19 from a package that was in transit for days or weeks. The illness is most likely transmitted by droplets from an infected person’s sneeze or cough, but more information is emerging daily.

So what should you do? This is what the Center for Disease Control (CDC) recommends:

  • Voluntary Home Isolation: Stay home when you are sick with respiratory disease symptoms. At the present time, these symptoms are more likely due to influenza or other respiratory viruses than to COVID-19-related virus.
  • Respiratory Etiquette: Cover coughs and sneezes with a tissue, then throw it in the trash can.
  • Hand Hygiene: Wash hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds; especially after going to the bathroom; before eating; and after blowing your nose, coughing, or sneezing.
  • If soap and water are not readily available, use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer with 60%-95% alcohol.
  • Environmental Health Action: Routinely clean frequently touched surfaces and objects

 
Last night, Donald McNeil, science and health reporter for the New York Times, spopke with MSNBC host Rachel Maddow about early assessments of the rate of transmission and rate of lethality of the new coronavirus. He also spoke about the staffing and equipment that may be necessary to handle an outbreak of coronavirus in the United States and where the U.S. is facing challenges in meeting those needs.

Feb 29 2020

This Is What “Winning” Looks Like

Does it ever happen to you that you express some reasonable political sentiment, say that you’re not too keen on ripping babies out of their Mother’s arms or that Russian National Interests are not identical to United States National Interests or that using the National Security apparatus of the United States Government and it’s Agencies to enrich and protect yourself and your friends and imprison and ruin your enemies is a policy you might view differently if you were not the beneficiary.

At moments like that the other Party will say something like, “I bet you can’t name one policy of his you support, you partisan parrot.’ C’mon, you know some clueless Debate Moderator is going to ask it.

I now have my stopper, and you do too.

The Taliban Peace Deal Might Have Been Had Many Years and Thousands of Lives Ago
by Spencer Ackerman, Daily Beast
Feb. 29, 202

The Trump administration, in by far its most laudable foreign-policy act, is on the verge of a peace agreement with the Taliban. Official details about the U.S.-Taliban deal, likely to be signed Saturday, are scarce. Nothing about what follows is certain, not even whether it augurs the end of the war: Defense Secretary Mark Esper said last week that the U.S. expects to draw down to 8,600 troops, around the force levels it inherited from the Obama administration, while the Taliban insist the U.S. must withdraw entirely. Arduous negotiations await an Afghan government that is deeply divided internally and was brought into these peace talks reluctantly.

Whatever emerges, Trump—to his credit and to the shame of those Trump critics who consider themselves more responsible stewards of U.S. foreign policy—has shattered the generation-long American political cowardice that inhibited negotiating an end to the war.

At least three times over the past 19 years that the U.S. could have had such a deal, on terms at least as favorable to Washington as the one reached now, and likely better.

The first was the 2001 surrender offer. Another opportunity arose in 2003. The third came amid Obama’s 2010-11 troop surge.

In the early days, the U.S. and its Afghan clients were so triumphant about their apparent victory, and the wounds of 9/11 and the Afghan civil war so fresh, that they sneered at negotiations. Later, when the Taliban insurgency showed the folly of that decision, the U.S. preferred to fight on in the similarly elusive hope that more violence would mean more leverage. Instead, over the course of 19 years, the Taliban simply strengthened their own.

“The outcomes we could have gotten a decade earlier, two decades earlier, would have been far stronger,” lamented retired Army Col. Chris Kolenda, who was part of the failed 2011-12 peace effort and has ever since urged the U.S. to negotiate with the Taliban. “It’s a missed opportunity,” assessed Ali Jalali, the former Afghan interior minister whom the Taliban contacted in 2003 to explore a deal.

All of which is another way of saying that America’s fantasies of what it could achieve in the war, even after it became a Washington cliché that the war had no military solution, consigned thousands to needless deaths.

Spencer goes on to document each of those 3 initiatives but the best deal was the first one, when the Taliban were reeling and all but wiped out. They offered Hirohito terms and W said no.

Since December 7th, 2001 the blood of every single U.S., Ally, and Afghan casualty has stained the hands of the United States Government, W and Barack, House and Senate, Republican and Democrat.

I hope you rot in Spandau.

Feb 29 2020

Cartnoon

How come ‘Black History’ Month is the shortest month? Their history is just as long as anyone’s.

Feb 29 2020

Handicapping South Carolina

There can be only one winner today and his name is Bernie Sanders.

But wait, isn’t he 20 points behind?

Sure, in one survey, the Monmouth.

Unfortunately for the Bernie hating Villagers who have doubled down on it because they want nothing more than a Biden Presidency to ensure their cushy phony baloney jobs are safe and the nepotistic Class system that led to their undeserved success and the Corrupt Corporatist Monopoly Neo Liberalism they worship with cult-like faith persists unmolested.

Sorry folks, it’s what we in the research biz call an outlier. Miles away from other contemporaneous studies and the historical trend line. The most likely result is a tepid Biden win and a stronger than expected Sanders second with the only other player of note being Tom Steyer who has certainly spent enough money on it.

What kills is the Expectation Game. A week ago any Biden victory was a victory and he desperately needs one otherwise his campaign is done.

Now he needs a 20 Point victory or he’s a failure. Bernie needs to show up.

The other part of the damage is already done. Biden has been fixated of South Carolina where it’s win or golf for him. Sanders is on a Super Tuesday Road Trip having banked enough. Even finishing 3rd to Steyer (not happening, dream on) is going to leave him well positioned to emerge with a 2 – 300 Delegate lead Wednesday morning and that ladies and gents is a front runner.

Any kind of win, even a squeaker, will keep Biden in the race until Super Tuesday next week but the more he loses the less the “electability” card comes into play and it seems to be the only one he has. Buttigieg and Klobuchar are not contesting which means they’re planning on hanging out until Super Tuesday so don’t expect them to drop.

Boomberg and Steyer aren’t going anywhere either and will probably bitter end. Oddly enough the only one left with a path to the Nomination is Warren. Biden is not getting any better and always sucked. Buttigieg and Klobuchar might manage a few finishes above the 15% viability standard neither of them will win because they are boring and have no policy except more of the same failed one. Warren is only candidate who can possibly siphon away some of Bernie’s support and maintain their Democratic Party loyalty should he happen to lose.

Which I do not predict. Super Tuesday, where only Bloomberg and Sanders have the resources to play across the board, Bernie will cruise to an insurmountable lead under the proportional representation rules. Buttigieg and Klobuchar will drop (Klobuchar and Warren could both easily lose their home State Primaries). Warren I hope hangs on because I like her (not a Bernie Bro though he bothers me less than some, he’s terribly conservative) and because, as I say, she is the last thin reed of hope for the Democratic Establishment. Not So Joltin’ Joe? He’ll hang on, probably to the end, because he and his supporters are too Rocky Balboa TBI to realize how badly they’ve been beaten.

Come back you coward. I’ll gum you to death.

So woe to you contemplating a Sanders/Trump race with trepidation and dread. First of all Bernie could have lost just as badly as Hillary in ’16, he could hardly have lost worse. Also, consider the opposition, do you think Katrina Covid 19 is going to do any favors to the side that thinks Prayer, Communion, and Magical Thinking is as effective as real medicine?

Nope. By the end Sanders will seem a paradigm of sanity and reason in comparison.

So suck it up and get ready to feel the Bern or buckle in for the Facist Funhouse Ride because that’s what will happen. I’m pre-positioning myself near a convenient border November 3rd with a full tank of gas and my Passport.

You know, in case.

Feb 29 2020

The Breakfast Club (Uninvited)

Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:00am (ET) (or whenever we get around to it) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.

This Day in History

Leap day adds additional day to calendar; Gone With The Wind wins eight oscars.

Breakfast Tunes

Something to Think about over Coffee Prozac

Whatever happens, take responsibility.

Tony Robbins

Continue reading

Feb 28 2020

2020 Democratic Primaries: Choices

Six New York Times columnists weighed in on the 2020 Democratic presidential primary candidate, each making the best case for one of the top six in the running.

Michelle Goldberg: The Case for Elizabeth Warren

She wants to purify capitalism so it works as it should.

On Tuesday night, after the latest Democratic debate, Ann Coulter tweeted, “Sen. Warren has convinced me that Bernie isn’t that worrisome. He’ll never get anything done. SHE’S the freak who will show up with 17 idiotic plans every day and keep everyone up until it gets done.” Vicious reactionary that she is, Coulter cut to the heart of Elizabeth Warren’s promise.

Warren has an almost supernatural ability to identify problems before anyone else, and to work relentlessly to solve them. Of all the Democratic candidates, she would make the most effective president. (Full disclosure: My husband, a graphic designer and creative director, works as a consultant for her.)

In 2007, Warren, then a Harvard law professor, wrote an article in the journal Democracy calling for the creation of what she called a Financial Product Safety Commission. “It is impossible to buy a toaster that has a one-in-five chance of bursting into flames and burning down your house,” she wrote. “But it is possible to finance an existing home with a mortgage that has the same one-in-five chance of putting the family out on the street.” This was before a cascade of mortgage failures set off the financial crisis, which she foresaw.

David Brooks: The Case for Mike Bloomberg

He’s a practical manager who can get things done.

The best case for Mike Bloomberg is that he’s a brilliant debater who has a witty riposte for every line of attack.

OK. Let me start over. The best case for Mike Bloomberg is that he is not a brilliant debater. He can’t whip a rally crowd into an ideological frenzy. The best case for Bloomberg is that we’ve already elected a reality TV star to the White House. We need somebody who can actually run things.

We need somebody who can actually lead a government, staff an administration with talented professionals and do the mundane but essential tasks of pushing legislation and executing laws. We need somebody who will turn down the ideological temperature, so we don’t rip ourselves apart as a nation. We have enough politicians who cater to people who treat politics as the place they go to get self-indulgent moral affirmation baths. We need someone who can improve the lives of actual Americans.

Bloomberg was one of the most successful mayors of this century. He was a Republican who left office with two-thirds of New Yorkers saying he made their city a better place.

Jamelle Bouie: The Case for Bernie Sanders

Despite his age, he promises a true break with the past.

If he wins the nomination, whether outright or at the Democratic Party convention this summer, Senator Bernie Sanders will be the most left-wing politician ever nominated for president and the only self-described “socialist” to ever run on the ballot line for either of the two major parties.

Many Democrats, especially moderates, think this is a disaster in waiting. They look back to 1972, when a different left-wing senator, George McGovern of South Dakota, was crushed by Richard Nixon, losing his home state and 48 others. They see a winnable election against a vulnerable incumbent potentially squandered by a candidate with radical views. They think Sanders will not only give Trump a victory, but a decisive one.

This could happen, but it probably won’t. The persistent belief that Sanders is unelectable is unfounded. The evidence says he can win.

Ross Douthat: The Case for Joe Biden

The promise of victory, and then the promise of (relative) calm.

The Democratic Party has an opportunity: Donald Trump’s chronic unpopularity, even in the midst of solid economic growth, means that 2020 is a once-in-a-generation chance to really go for it — to nominate the leftward-most candidate, reverse Ronald Reagan’s 1980s revolution and pull the whole political system decisively toward social democracy.

To nominate Joe Biden is to pass up that opportunity.

The Democratic Party has a choice: to root itself anew in working-class politics, trying to weld together the interests of younger Americans with downscale and service-sector voters, or to lean into its emerging identity as an upper-middle-class coalition, a party of progressivism and technocratic competence.

To nominate Joe Biden is to duck that choice.

This combination — plus, let’s be frank, Biden’s fumbling, wavering, I’m-too-old-for-this persona — explains why it’s so hard to find passionate supporters of the former vice president among pundits and commentators, real-world activists and Twitter agitators. To choose Biden over the more interesting options, over Bernie Sanders and Mike Bloomberg and Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg, is to choose the past over the future, sustainable decadence over dynamism and drama, the same old ineffective establishment over a more decisive break.

David Leonhardt: The Case for Amy Klobuchar

She can win over the voters that Democrats need.

Since President Trump took office, Democrats have been having a passionate debate about what matters more: increasing progressive turnout or winning over swing voters. And there is no doubt that both tactics help Democrats win elections. But the evidence about which tactic matters more is pretty overwhelming. Persuasion does.

Take one stark pattern: In the 2018 midterms, many Democratic candidates who ran persuasion campaigns flipped areas that had gone for President Trump in 2016. Not a single Democrat won a competitive state or House district with an unabashedly progressive campaign. [..]

The best case for Amy Klobuchar is that she’s the only remaining candidate with a track record of winning over the kind of voters that the Democrats will need to beat Trump. She has built her career on a middle-class image that avoids the leftism of Sanders or Warren and the elitism of Buttigieg or Bloomberg. As for Biden, Klobuchar looks sharper than he does — and she has a much more impressive electoral history.

Frank Bruni: The Case for Pete Buttigieg

He could heal a fragmented nation.

In different circles at different points over the past year, it has been fashionable to hate Pete Buttigieg: He’s too clearly full of himself. He’s too far ahead of himself. What business does the 38-year-old former mayor of a relatively small city have running for president? What real claim to the job?

How about this: He has drawn closer to it than prominent senators who came out of the gate with much more heat on them and were gone even before Iowans caucused. He outpaced and outlasted seasoned governors whose popularity across a broad section of the political spectrum was supposed to be electoral magic. Before hitting a snag in Nevada, he had more delegates from Iowa and New Hampshire than any of his rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination, including Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden, who began building their political bases and growing their political careers before Buttigieg was born. His surname is a nearly impenetrable thicket of consonants (BOOT-edge-edge), and yet tens of millions of Americans can now pronounce it just fine.

You cannot chalk that up to novelty. You cannot call it a fluke. It’s a powerful testament to his knack for fashioning a message that resonates with Americans, delivering it clearly, avoiding unnecessary trouble and mobilizing support. Those talents are precisely the ones that the person sitting at the Resolute Desk needs most. Buttigieg’s campaign is his credential, and it’s a compelling one.

Feb 28 2020

Obama Proximity Value

If all you know about Black people is what you see on TV, despite Coronavirus you need to get out more.

Fingering The Pulse with Jordan Klepper and Roy Wood Jr.

Trevor

Your Moment Of Zen

Stephen

Seth

Tom Steyer Rulz!

Feb 28 2020

“Gym” Jordan

If you’ve ever been to the Land of Cleves in the Western Reserve of Connecticut you have my sympathies. There’s really not a lot to reccomend it.

They have this Paper they call the Plain Dealer and they’ve decided that as bad as their reputation is it doesn’t deserve to be sullied by someone like “Gym” Jordan

Jim Jordan’s role as enabler-in-chief poses a particular danger in the age of Trump
By Brent Larkin, The Cleveland Plain Dealer
2/27/20

President Donald Trump calls his opponents “sleazebags” and Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan a “warrior.”

He’s got the nametags mixed up.

Facts seem to argue that Jordan, a southwest Ohio Republican whose gerrymandered district winds its way nearly 200 miles north into Greater Cleveland, is far from the worst congressman the state’s voters ever sent to Washington.

Youngstown’s Jim Traficant served 17 years before he was expelled from the House in 2002 following the Democrat’s conviction on 10 felony charges related to racketeering, tax evasion and bribe-taking.

The 27-year congressional reign of the late Belmont County Democrat Wayne Hayes crashed and burned in 1976, as high-profile sex scandal involving a woman he put on his congressional payroll (Elizabeth Ray) brought an abrupt end to the congressional career of one of the most powerful members ever to serve there.

And in 1990, a conviction related to paying a 14-year-old girl for sex ended the congressional career of Republican Donald “Buz” Lukens after less than four years. In the midst of the scandal, Lukens was defeated for re-election in the GOP primary by then-State Rep. John Boehner, who would later become U.S. House speaker.

But appearances might just be deceiving.

Jordan’s crimes don’t involve felonies, but they inflict far more harm. They are crimes against America, crimes involving total disregard for the principles of democracy, trampling the truth on behalf of a corrupt president who revels in his inhumanity.

Watching Jordan interrogate honorable truth-tellers during House Intelligence Committee hearings late last year — hearings that served as a run-up to Trump’s impeachment — was to view a man who acted like he spent his childhood gleefully ripping wings off flies.

After Jordan’s career reaches its merciful conclusion, my belief is he will come to be remembered as the most wicked human being ever to represent Greater Cleveland in Congress.

But, for President Trump, Jordan checks all the right boxes. He is unquestioningly loyal. His voting record shows utter disdain for the rights of others — last year, Jordan voted against reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act and last May he voted against a bill to amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation among its protections.

Indeed, Jordan comes off as proud of his bigotry.

But thinking the seven-term incumbent is somehow vulnerable in his congressional district next year is mining for fool’s gold.

In 2024, Jordan wants to run for president as the inheritor of the Trump-Putin mantle. But what he cannot escape is the closetful of ethical baggage that tarnishes what’s left of his reputation.

Jordan continues to be haunted by credible witnesses who insist he willingly ignored warnings that a predator doctor at Ohio State University was in the process of sexually abusing at least 177 young men between 1978 and 1998.

From 1987 to 1995, Jordan was assistant wrestling coach at OSU. Three former wrestlers and a referee have publicly stated they told Jordan that wrestling team doctor Richard Strauss, who killed himself in 2005, was sexually abusing young men and that Jordan did nothing to stop it.

One of those wrestlers, Adam DiSabato reiterated his allegations against Jordan before an Ohio House committee considering a bill that would allow Strauss’ victims to sue OSU for damages. DiSabato testified Jordan called him in July 2018 begging for help in covering up allegations Jordan knew wrestlers were being sexually abused.

Later, during an appearance on MSNBC, DiSabato described Jordan as a “coward” who was “groveling” during their conversation. DiSabato also warned it is “going to get worse” for the congressman.

Asked about DeSabato’s accusation, a Jordan spokesman described it as “another lie.”

That’s right out of the Trump playbook. The president, who lies more in a weekend than most people do in a lifetime, wants us to believe that the more than 20 women who have accused him of sexual misconduct are all liars.

Three months ago, I wrote about the bipartisan betrayal involved in the redistricting process that brought Jordan’s district into Greater Cleveland prior to the 2012 election. The piece labeled Jordan “the second most contemptible human being in the entire U.S. government.”

My reward was about 1,000 emails from almost every state and four countries.

At least 60 percent of those emails agreed with my assessment. Many others suggested I would rot in hell for criticizing a great American. And those were the polite ones.

Since then, Trump and Jordan have spent every day of their lives proving me right.

It is worth repeating that no one has ever defined Jordan better than Michael Gerson, a former chief speechwriter to President George W. Bush and lifelong Republican, who described the Ohio congressman as “the Truly Trumpian man – guided by bigotry, seized by conspiracy theories, dismissive of facts and truth, indifferent to ethics, contemptuous of institutional norms and ruthlessly dedicated to the success of a demagogue.”

Trump brings out the worst in people because his only way to win re-election is to tear the country apart. No one is more devoted to Trump’s cause than Jim Jordan.

Jordan is a dangerous bully, someone willing to destroy the lives and reputations of decent Americans in service of the reprobate who leads this country and poses the greatest threat to the republic in 160 years.

Voice of the Heartland, Flyover Country.

Doesn’t mean I want them in Acela.

Feb 28 2020

The Breakfast Club (No Way Out)

Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:00am (ET) (or whenever we get around to it) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.

This Day in History

Scientists discover DNA’s double-helix structure; The Branch Davidian standoff begins in Waco, Texas; Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme assassinated; U2 releases its ‘War’ album.

Breakfast Tunes

Something to Think about over Coffee Prozac

I think people should be angry at things that are worthy of anger. Injustice is outrageous and deserves outrage.

Chris Hayes

Continue reading

Feb 27 2020

Impeachment Is Forever

The Democratic Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has said it several times, before and after, Donald trump’s Senate trial, “impeachment is forever.” One of the consequences of this, even though he wasn’t removed from office, is that Trtump can’t parson anyone who connected to his impeachment, even Roger Stone. Corey Brettschneider, a professor of political science at Brown University and visiting professor of law at Fordham Law School, writes at Politico that the Constitution makes this very clear.

Speculation that President Donald Trump might pardon Roger Stone has reached a fever pitch after Stone’s sentencing by a federal judge and the president’s repeated hints that he thinks the verdict unfair. But fortunately, the Constitution’s framers imagined this nightmare scenario—a suspected criminal president pardoning a co-conspirator—and they put in the Constitution language to legally prohibit the pardon power in exactly this kind of case.

Both the plain meaning of the Constitution’s text and the historical evidence show that once a president has been impeached, he or she loses the power to pardon anyone for criminal offenses connected to the articles of impeachment — and that even after the Senate’s failure to convict the president, he or she does not regain this power.

Under Article II, Section II of the Constitution, the president is given the “power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” Pardons are supposed to be used as acts of mercy. The framers thought of the pardon power as a “benign prerogative”—prerogative because it was mostly unchecked by courts or Congress, but benign because presidents would use it for the public good.

But the framers knew not to place blind trust in the president to wield the power justly. That’s why they explicitly forbade a president from exercising the pardon power in “cases of impeachment.” The clause prevents the worst abuse of the pardon power: a president’s protecting cronies who have been convicted of crimes related to the president’s own wrongdoing. [..]

The limit on pardons for co-conspirators wouldn’t affect many of the president’s pardons. Pardoning convicted criminals like former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich might be ill-advised, but it is still permitted. By contrast, pardoning longtime adviser Roger Stone would not be permitted, as his crimes relate directly to the impeachment case.

Stone was convicted on seven criminal counts centered around allegations that he had lied to Congress during his September 2017 testimony to the House Intelligence Committee as part of the Mueller investigation. The investigation of Stone relates to the charges that the president abused power by soliciting foreign intervention into our election and that he obstructed justice in trying to hide that “high crime and misdemeanor.” The best evidence that Stone is tied to those charges is his own self-described role as a protector of the president. “I will never roll on [Trump],” Stone declared in one of many statements. That makes him exactly the type of person Madison had envisioned while limiting the president’s pardon power.

It is true that the Stone investigation concerned Russian involvement in the election and that the House charges focused on the more recent Ukraine accusation. But the articles of impeachment focused on the accusation of “abuse of power,” and it is that general high crime at play in Ukraine and elsewhere that links the impeachment and Stone. [..]

The framers deliberately used the phrase “cases of impeachment,” not “conviction.” One reason why is simple: A president convicted by the Senate would be removed from office, and thus unable to pardon anyone. As such, there would be no reason for the Constitution to curb a convicted president’s pardon power. No exception to the pardon power needs to be granted, because no such power exists.

Moreover, the framers provided no explicit avenue for him to regain the power they took away after a House impeachment vote. Time limits are common in the Constitution—think of the president’s four-year term—and the absence of one connected to the pardon power suggests that the power is not in fact lost for a limited duration. In the absence of an explicit reinstatement of pardon power in the text, the strong presumption has to be that it is still lost. [..]

The argument for a constitutional limit on the power to pardon co-conspirators is strengthened by the widely acknowledged implicit limit on “self-pardons.” The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, prompted by the possibility that President Richard Nixon would try to grant clemency to himself for his role in Watergate, argued that a president could not pardon himself. According to that office, no person should be a “judge in his own case”; therefore, no president could self-pardon. Although not technically a self-pardon, pardons for co-conspirators are similarly aimed at self-protection, so should also be barred.

The dangers of Trump’s pardoning someone “connected” to his own alleged high crimes in a “suspicious manner” have not abated after the Senate vote. They have, if anything, been amplified because he appears to have interpreted the failure of the Senate to convict him as evidence that he is unchecked in his power. Both constitutional law and common sense suggest that he loses the pardon power forever in cases related to the impeachment. But the Constitution requires people to enforce it. If the president attempts to pardon Stone, his own lawyers and those in the Department of Justice should inform him that such a pardon would exceed his powers as president, just as Nixon’s Office of Legal Counsel told Nixon he could not self-pardon. [..}

If Trump’s lawyers and advisers fail to stop him, and the president moves ahead with a pardon for Stone, it is incumbent upon any judge asked to enforce that pardon to deny it on constitutional grounds. The Supreme Court has never ruled on the meaning of the impeachment exception to the pardon power because such a pardon of a co-conspirator by a president who has been impeached is unprecedented. But the need to stop it is dire. Otherwise, the original purpose of the pardon power—to show mercy to others—will be turned on its head. Instead, the pardon power will be converted into a self-serving tool of an aspiring despot, precisely the danger Mason warned against.

Keep in mind, Trump has repeatedly said he can do whatever he wants according to Article II. He obviously hasn’t read it.

Load more