Yesterday wasn’t any less difficult than I expected, just different and shorter. Escaping New York (World Headquarters of The Stars Hollow Gazette and DocuDharma) was about as hard as you might imagine a Friday Northbound Rush Hour would be, only with more accidents because it was cold.

Did I mention the cold?

Supposed to have a temperature break today and if I can flush the toilet (Buckets suck) I’ll be back at North Lake vacuuming confetti and popcorn off the rugs before Emily occupies it for the Town Meeting (you should go to one, better than a movie and free).

You rock Liz, and Bernie- keep exposing MSNBC as the DNC Trolls they are. We’ll see what happens in Nevada later on today. Meanwhile, moving from Stars Hollow to North Lake if weather permits, if only to pick up left over equipment and assure the infrastructure (aside from, perhaps, the plumbing) is set to endure until my next visit.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s not torture. No Cell (I’ll leave the reader to decide if that’s a blessing or a curse), sometimes no TV, Internet, Power, or Landline. Some days you don’t move and you have to be ready for the experience. Are you good at Monopoly by Candlelight? I’m very, very good.

Too cold to sleep, how about I teach you to play D&D? This is the first book you have to master.

It’s an Adventure! Not least because if you dare venture outside you better be wearing Safety Orange. It’s always Open Season on ‘Libruls’.

Way Stations in War Zones. I hope you enjoy the last good summer as I intend to, and position yourself and those you care about close to a convenient border.

I’d give you some tunes except at the moment my hardware is in flux so instead long format, MST3K.

I’m not as alarmed as some because the U.S. System is so screwed up that even the major native Political Parties (Democrats since 1828 and Andy Jackson, they’ve really backed some reprehensible people and policies; and Republicans since 1854 and John C. Frémont, ironic they’re the modern face of Racism) can’t get it right. I’ve been forced to take a lot of Political “Science” courses and let me tell you what it isn’t.

Dang, you already guessed.

And this is serious Academics, not blow dried idiots who can barely be trusted to read something written by others off a TelePrompter. Not that the writers aren’t idiots too.

I don’t think Russian Intervention in the 2016 cycle was decisive unless you’re contending James Comey was an “Agent of Influence”.

You love him now as a man of integrity and honor. I think he’s a low level Capo who favored a different Don and paid for the fact he was a traitor and never trusted, despite the blood on his hands and the head of Hillary in a bag. May he rot in obscurity, a footnote of weaselly ass kissing sycophancy and why it earns you no respect from the people you’re trying to suck up to. You’re both transparent and basic. A Peon. A Serf. A Slave.

But don’t doubt for a minute that Russia tried, my contention is merely that their direct action had limited effect. I’m not at all sanguine that their 2020 efforts will not be far more so with the active and open complicity of Unindicted Co-conspirator Bottomless Pinocchio and the Republican Party.

On the other hand it’s simply what they do. They can’t win without cheating because their policies are monumentally unpopular so they do it all the time without compunction or shame. Truly, in the interest of Representative Democracy as a form of Government and the National Interest of the United States of America, the Republican Party must be consigned to the Ash Heap of History along with other Fascist movements.

I don’t necessarily agree with Greg Sargent all the time but I do agree about this-

Don’t mince words. Trump is abetting an attack on our country.
By Greg Sargent, Washington Post
Feb. 21, 2020[

When the Senate acquitted President Trump of the high crimes he committed against our country, Republicans and Democrats alike fell back on a convenient fiction: No, Trump has not really placed himself beyond the law and accountability entirely — for he can always be held accountable in the next election.

Republicans adopted this fiction to obscure Trump’s crimes — that his Ukraine shakedown was all about corrupting that same election. Democrats adopted it to diffuse pressure to sustain the investigative war footing that protecting the country demands.

The news that intelligence officials warned House lawmakers that Russia is again trying to sabotage our election for Trump, and that this disclosure angered him, shatters that fiction entirely.

These revelations are already getting shrouded in euphemism. One CNN analysis insists “America” is “blundering” into another crisis of electoral legitimacy, and that the “partisan divide” is hampering the U.S. response to it.

This notion that the country writ large is stumbling helplessly into this crisis, when in fact one party is inviting it in a manner the other simply is not, and its companion idea that “partisanship” will paralyze our response to it, will be ubiquitous.

So let’s not mince words: Trump and his GOP defenders appear to be actively abetting an attack on our country. By contrast, Democrats can be accused only of passivity — a serious abdication, but not remotely comparable to what Trump and his defenders are orchestrating.

The details of this story — outlined by The Post and the New York Times — again suggest that Trump will stop at nothing to escape accountability at the hands of voters in a free and fair election, regardless of the damage done to our country along the way.

Trump is angry because our intelligence officials followed the law and informed members of both parties about what the intel indicated about new Russian efforts. Trump “berated” his acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, for allowing this heresy.

Trump was particularly angered by the presence at the briefing of Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif), who led the impeachment. Trump says Schiff and Democrats will “weaponize” these revelations.

In short: Our intelligence officials have concluded that another effort to subvert our election is underway. And Trump’s leading worry is that this could be used against him, not that our election is in grave danger of being compromised.

In the haze of euphemism that will inevitably enshroud this story, this ugly fact will be blurred with suggestions that maybe Trump doesn’t really believe this is happening, since he just can’t accept that Russia attacked our election in 2016, because he feels it delegitimizes his victory. It’s pathological!

But we must reject this interpretation. Because this conclusion was reached by intelligence officials in Trump’s own administration, by multiple agencies.

It’s theoretically possible that Trump defenders have a legitimate difference of opinion about what the intelligence shows. House Republicans, we’re told, objected by arguing that there’s no evidence Russia wants to help Trump. Some reporting indicates possible internal dissent on this point.

This strains credulity, since intelligence services concluded precisely this intention last time. But even if this is reasonably possible, it is still not exonerating in the least, and the media should not be permitted to euphemize what’s happening here.

Here’s why: Because whatever Russia’s real intentions toward Trump, this is still an attack on our democracy. The Times reports that intelligence discerns numerous concrete threats: new efforts to spread disinformation to divide the country; and possibly efforts to interfere in state voting systems.

That’s not far-fetched. A bipartisan Senate investigation concluded that such efforts got much further in 2016 than we thought.
…
There is zero doubt that Trump sees sowing such doubts as being good for him. He has already spent literally years trying to undermine public faith in our elections, and is likely laying the groundwork for declaring a tight loss illegitimate, a scenario election scholars such as Richard L. Hasen take seriously.

Let’s also note that there are potential practical consequences to Trump denying Congress (especially Democrats) information about outside electoral sabotage. It could mean less oversight on administration failures to protect the country, and less discussion with the public about these failures.

The larger context here, spelled out by Adam Serwer, is the entrenchment of Trump’s GOP as a “regime party” committed to holding power through maximal manipulation of government. Trump’s Ukraine shakedown and his subsequent coverup are the most recent conspicuous examples — and his acquittal is hastening this process.

Then there’s Trump’s success at getting the Justice Department to dial back the sentencing recommendation for confidant Roger Stone. The judge noted that Stone was prosecuted for “covering up” for Trump, i.e., for covering up Trump’s efforts to benefit from outside corruption of our election last time.

If and when Trump pardons Stone, this will be why: He does not view that as a bad thing, but as a positive for him. In a sense, Trump appears to want his intelligence agencies to function as Stone did: Not to alert Congress about outside interference that might benefit him, but instead to keep it under wraps.

So now the media scrutiny must fall heavily on what the administration is doing to mitigate the threat that its own intelligence has identified. Is Trump facilitating or hindering those efforts?

And if House Democrats thought there was an opening to “stand down,” as Brian Beutler puts it, this news shatters that illusion. There is no longer any excuse for failing to ramp up the oversight immediately.

Factio Politica Republica Delenda Est.

Just sayin’.

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.

Malcolm X assassinated; President Richard Nixon visits China; Televangelist Jimmy Swaggart makes a tearful confession; Steve Fossett is the first to fly across the Pacific Ocean in a balloon.

We have a positive vision of the future founded on the belief that the gap between the promise and reality of America can one day be finally closed. We believe that.

Barbara Jordan

Continue reading

Damn right we want a Revolution. As Atrios puts it (a bit more colorfully than I) not cutting the Entitlements you’ve been paying for your whole life in order to give the money to Billionaires is Revolutionary!

Lennon was being sincere. I think it an ironic reminder of a better time.

The Hidden History of Sanders’s Plot to Primary Obama
by Edward-Isaac Dovere, The Atlantic
February 19, 2020

Bernie Sanders got so close to running a primary challenge to President Barack Obama that Senator Harry Reid had to intervene to stop him.

It took Reid two conversations over the summer of 2011 to get Sanders to scrap the idea, according to multiple people who remember the incident, which has not been previously reported.

That summer, Sanders privately discussed a potential primary challenge to Obama with several people, including Patrick Leahy, his fellow Vermont senator. Leahy, alarmed, warned Jim Messina, Obama’s presidential reelection-campaign manager. Obama’s campaign team was “absolutely panicked” by Leahy’s report, Messina told me, since “every president who has gotten a real primary has lost a general [election].”

David Plouffe, another Obama strategist, confirmed Messina’s account, as did another person familiar with what happened. (A spokesman for Leahy did not comment when asked several times about his role in the incident.)

Messina called Reid, then the Senate majority leader, who had built a strong relationship with Sanders but was also fiercely defensive of Obama. What could you be thinking? Reid asked Sanders, according to multiple people who remember the conversations. You need to stop.

Sanders didn’t end up running against Obama. But their relationship didn’t improve in the years that followed. In another incident, in 2013, Sanders laid into Obama in a private meeting he held with Democratic senators, saying that the president was selling out to Republicans over Social Security benefits.
…
“There are millions of Americans who are deeply disappointed in the president—who believe that, with regard to Social Security and a number of other issues, he said one thing as a candidate and is doing something very much else as a president; who cannot believe how weak he has been, for whatever reason, in negotiating with Republicans; and there’s deep disappointment.” He continued: “It would be a good idea if President Obama faced some primary opposition.”

That was not the only time Sanders raised the idea publicly. Appearing on C-SPAN a few weeks later, he expanded on the point: “They want the president to stand up for the middle class, for the working class of this country, and they want him to take on big-money interests in a way that he has not done up to this point.”
…
On the rare occasions Obama White House staff thought about Sanders, it was because he was needling or annoying them, several former Obama aides recalled. Before Sanders started running for president, he had never been to see Obama in the Oval Office. And even though most of them didn’t know how far Sanders’s primary plans had gone, Obama aides took notice of his public comments. Today, the bitterness lingers.

“It’s not to say they had a bad relationship when Obama got to the White House,” one person who worked for Obama in the West Wing told me. “It’s just that they didn’t have a relationship.”

Obama and his circle tend to see Sanders’s You’re with us or you’re wrong approach as unworkable and the criticism of his own record as president overrepresented on Twitter (Obama’s approval rating among Democrats is consistently in the 90s).

The low point between the two men was a 2013 meeting with other Democratic senators. Obama had just put a chained Consumer Price Index in his budget, a proposal that would cut Social Security benefits by tying them to the rate of inflation. Many Senate Democrats were angry about it. But when they arrived for the meeting, it was Sanders who bubbled up, ripping into Obama for giving in to Republicans and not understanding the impact of the cuts.

“I don’t need a lecture,” Obama told him, according to several senators who attended the meeting.

Sanders proceeded to give him one anyway. A number of the senators there were struck by what they told me seemed like a lack of respect.

“Obama fairly forcefully pushed back and said, ‘That’s just not right—that’s not a vision that’s enactable or possible,’” one senator in the room recalled, asking for anonymity to discuss the private meeting. “‘You’re acting like I’m the enemy.’ Obama was trying to say, ‘I hear you that you want this revolution, but explain to me, how’s this going to happen? Look at the current makeup of the Senate and the House. How am I supposed to lead?’” Obama said, in this senator’s memory. The conversation quickly got testy. “It seemed the match of someone who prided himself on his cool intellect and removed analysis versus someone who was convinced with absolute ferocity with the rightness of his worldview and is not given to accepting anything from those who don’t agree with it.”

“I just remember thinking, Whoa, Bernie’s got game,” a second senator who was in the room told me. “I also remember thinking, There’s no love lost between them.”

In the end, most of the caucus took the position that Sanders voiced, opposing the chained Consumer Price Index, and Obama relented and dropped the idea.

Real Liberals cut Social Programs so they don’t have to cut them. If that makes any kind of sense to you I think I’d go in for an evaluation

Plaid eh? Well, that’s a large piece of patterned cloth worn as a Kilt, a Cloak or Shawl, a kind of Toga like thing, or used as a blanket. You mean Tartan.

You know it’s a fiction popularized by Queen Victoria, kind of like Cowboys and Indians here in the U.S. (admittedly with more complexity about good guys and bad guys), right?

Now that we are speaking the same language, let me ask you-

Highland (Davidson, Stuart, Farquharson) or Lowland (Kincaid, Bruce, Crawford)?

I was Barr’s deputy attorney general. He did his job in the Roger Stone case.
By George J. Terwilliger III, Washington Post
February 19, 2020

Attorney General William P. Barr is under assault for what his critics decry as improper interference in the sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone. But the claim that decisions by career prosecutors should in essence be unreviewable by those appointed to leadership positions in the Justice Department is not just wrong; it is also irresponsible. Barr wasn’t intervening inappropriately. He was doing his job.

An editorial in The Post said the attorney general should “leave it to the professionals.” What a dangerous notion that is. I served in the Justice Department for 15 years, half of that time as a career prosecutor. From time to time, I was overruled on decisions involving my cases. My judgment was better for the benefit of oversight and supervision, including from the politically appointed U.S. attorney. Whether direction came from even higher authority is unknown to me, but if it did, I would see it no differently. That is how a chain of command must work.

I also served in a Republican administration as deputy attorney general and acting attorney general. In that capacity, I recall no one decrying interference when I overruled the recommendation of line prosecutors and the department’s criminal division that a then-sitting U.S. senator should be indicted. He was a Democrat. I also approved the prosecution of another sitting senator. He was a Republican. Those matters came up through the bureaucracy because they were highly visible and politically controversial.

But the exercise of my authority also flowed downhill when the circumstances merited intervention. I took control of one politically charged case — despite the risk that others would claim I was interfering for political gain — because the department was taking deserved criticism for doing a poor job. As the No. 2 official, I knew what the Justice Department did was ultimately my responsibility — full stop.

Imagine a government agency, or any organization, where there is no supervision of front-line personnel and no ultimate authority bearing responsibility for institutional decisions. That would be absurd anywhere. But that is especially true in the case of the Justice Department because all of its critical operations involve exercising judgment in the context of broad legal authority.

Should we investigate or not? If so, for what and for how long? Is there sufficient evidence to conclude that a case can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt? If we prevail, what is a just sentence? Who should we recommend be pardoned or have a sentence commuted? Such decisions in a society grounded in individual liberty are among the most intrusive possible. Thus, supervision of those career-level decisions is not only permitted but also a necessity, including review at times by the highest authority.

When I served under Barr as deputy attorney general, I would from time to time rib him by saying: “Don’t worry, Bill. There are only 6,000 lawyers out there today doing things in your name.” I did so to remind both of us of our responsibility to supervise what was going on “out there.” It is impossible to oversee everything, of course, but by becoming involved in particular cases, we maintained our authority and set parameters for decisions in innumerable other matters. The attorney general and other appointed leaders are not there to be potted plants.

The decisions of the dedicated professionals who are the heart and soul of the department merit respect and a substantial degree of deference. But those decisions must also be subject to review. The higher the profile of a case, the more deserving it is of high-level attention, because the public will measure the department by its actions in such matters.

There is no reason not to take Barr at his word that he found the Stone sentencing recommendation to be excessive and acted to correct that. In their widely cited but little analyzed letter, former Justice Department lawyers claim that “it is unheard of for the Department’s top leaders to overrule line prosecutors, who are following established policies, in order to give preferential treatment to a close associate of the President.” It is certainly not unheard of for top leaders to overrule line prosecutors. The criticism added by the next phrase is a classic example of presenting a conclusory allegation (giving preferential treatment) as if it were a fact. If that was a technique learned on the job in indictments written by these prosecutors, supervision was clearly lacking.

A more risk-averse attorney general might have let the recommendation stand and avoided a political hot potato. The American people might want to think twice before concluding that is the kind of attorney general the Justice Department should have.

I understand medication works wonders for some people.

There is a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it?

Yes I will.

Somewhere outside of Barstow…

Still in my snowy advance base (-9 where I am, how ’bout you?) I hit the road today for a meeting in the balmy southern climes where I will overnight and then run some errands before returning with supplies. I’ll be a digital wayfarer with only my micro setup so it’s entirely possible I’ll post nothing but silliness and static until Saturday.

I might have some pre-programmed stuff but that feature has been cranky so who knows?

My prediction is you’ll be seeing the bats soon enough, you poor bastards.

Every now and then when your life gets complicated and the weasels start closing in, the only cure is to load up on heinous chemicals and then drive like a bastard from Hollywood to Las Vegas with the music at top volume and at least a pint of ether.

Two Winners, Four Losers

One more than the other to be sure. Liz Warren was great and if this doesn’t shift things a little bit her way you were just not watching the same Debate I was.

Sanders was ok, good in spots, I don’t know what people expect him to say about trolling- it’s as old as RBBS and UseNet. You want some blood? You want to see someone fired? Who? Why?

And outside of Communists tending to exaggerate their abilities as Revolutionaries and the Collectivization and State Economy and Gulag and Purges (more Leninist/Stalinist than Marxist) I really don’t have much quarrel with them even if Bernie was one which he’s not by a long shot.

His ideas? 60%+ Support you DLC Blue Dog Third Way Establishment ConservaDems. You’ve done nothing for 40 years except lose. Get it through your thick heads Medicare for All means Medical, Dental, Eye, and Mental Health Care (may have left a few Cares out) is FREE when you receive the Service AND NOT ONLY IS THE INCREASE IN TAXES CHEAPER THAN YOUR CURRENT PREMIUM (which you don’t pay anymore, duh) THIS PLAN IS BETTER! It covers more stuff.

And speaking of losers. I hadn’t quite considered this before, or at least not in the same light, but the naked Racism on display was appalling.

I admit I didn’t think much of it when Harris and Booker dropped out, they were both Corporatists with the usual terrible NeoLib Policies, but wow! Klobuchar defending the fact she never prosecuted a Police Murderer (I mean a Cop who shoots someone dead, not one that gets shot) ever and she threw the book at that young black kid based on questionable testimony and the fact that he was a young black male in Minnesota?

I mean, we knew Buttigieg was a racist when he fired that Black Police Commissioner over… what again? And Not So Joltin’ Joe Biden has been stone cold since Bussing no matter how many times he kissed Obama’s butt. Bloomberg?

Bloomberg!?

Hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah.

Wait a second.

Hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah.

There, I think that does it for the moment.

The only reason “Stop and Frisk” was halted is not because Michael Bloomberg had some kind of Road to Damascus Epiphany, he got his ass kicked in Court after exhausting his appeals.

If there was one loser who stood head and shoulders… above? below? hard to say, the rest of the Institutional ConservaDems who represent a mere 56% and shrinking of the Party it was Bloomberg whom Sanders crushed on Communism (sorry, it was the Wolverhampton Wanderers, the Wanderers). and Liz crushed on things like his racism (“This isn’t about how it turned out; this is about what it was designed to do to begin with. It’s targeted black and brown men from the beginning.”), also the NDAs for Sexual Harassment (“fat broads” and “horse-faced lesbians” indeed, oh “And I hope you heard what his defense was: ‘I’ve been nice to some women.’”).

Buttigieg and Klobuchar, unable to lay a glove on Sanders though they did ok against Bloomberg who was everyone’s Piñata, settled for bashing the crap out of each other which I was just as happy to see. Biden was an utter non-factor, standing on stage like a Bug-Eyed Goldfish watching the water in their bowl spiral down a maelstrom.

All in all not a bad night. We’ll see what happens Saturday.

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.

Astronaut John Glenn becomes the first American in orbit; the Rhode Island nightclub fire; Actor Sydney Poitier born; Tara Lipinski becomes the youngest gold medalist in the Winter Olympics.

There is a thin line that separates laughter and pain, comedy and tragedy, humor and hurt.

Erma Bombeck

Continue reading

You heard the lady, Nuke it from Orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.