About Damn Time

Up Date 19:30 3/6: Via Raw Story:

After the recent reports that Fox News has openly become an extension of President Donald Trump‘s White House, the Democratic National Committee announced it would not partner with the network for any primary debates.

Trump responded to the news by saying that he might refuse to go to a debate for a network if he doesn’t like it.

Trump might think that he’s being clever, but not showing up to official debates might make him appear as if he’s afraid of his challenger or doesn’t think he could win the debate.

 

The Democratic National Committee has decided to bar Fox News from participating in the 2019 – 2020 debate cycle based on Jane Mayers article in The New Yorker, titles “The Making of the Fox News White House.”

In a statement, Perez said, “I believe that a key pathway to victory is to continue to expand our electorate and reach all voters. That is why I have made it a priority to talk to a broad array of potential media partners, including Fox News. Recent reporting in the New Yorker on the inappropriate relationship between President Trump, his administration and Fox News has led me to conclude that the network is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates. Therefore, Fox News will not serve as a media partner for the 2020 Democratic primary debates.”

Tom Perez hit on a very important point. Fox News is a small niche that does not represent America. The roughly 2-3 million who watch Fox News each day represent less than 1% of the United States population. Fox has been given an outsized influence through their masterful complaining about “mainstream media bias.” [..]

When Perez talked about reaching all voters what he likely meant by that is that the debates will try to reach the biggest audience possible, which means that you should expect to debates on network TV and perhaps even with large digital and online partners.

Yes, it’s about damn time and I agree with John Cole at Balloon Juice that other media organizations should be included in the ban.

The attitude of Democrats to Fox News, the NY Post, the Washington Examiner, the National Review, the Daily Caller, you name it, should be to completely starve them of oxygen. They get nothing. Nada. There is literally no point in engaging them, just like there is ZERO point in trying to tailor policies or massage messaging to the rotten 30% of the voting age public who supports Trump

The members of the cult of Trump are not persuadable and Democrats just need to stop wasting energy, time and money trying.

Agnew, Nixon, and Trump

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow looks back at the context of the 1973 Department of Justice memo that serves as part of the basis for the conventional wisdom that a sitting president cannot be indicted, and shares insights from former Justice Department official J.T. Smith, who says the matter should be reconsidered.

Walter Dellinger is a partner at the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers and the Douglas Maggs Emeritus Professor of Law at Duke University. He was assistant attorney general and head of the Office of Legal Counsel from 1993 to 1996 and acting solicitor general of the United States from 1996 to 1997. Mr. Dellinger examined whether a sitting president can be indicted in an article written for Lawfare.

Can a sitting president be indicted? Often, in answering this question, commentators point to Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinions answering in the contrary. To whatever extent the writer agrees or disagrees with the opinions’ conclusion, the government’s position on the matter is usually presented as a long-standing and clear “no.”

The reality is more complicated. The United States has addressed this question six times in both internal memos and briefs filed in litigation. And a review of these documents shows that it is far from clear what criminal prosecution steps are (or should be) precluded—and that there is no “longstanding policy” against indictment of the president. Consider the 1973 OLC memo stating that a sitting president should not be indicted. Far from being authoritative, it was essentially repudiated within months by the Justice Department in the United States’ filing in the Supreme Court in United States v. Nixon.

Likewise, the most recent opinion—an OLC memo written in 2000—includes brief statements that a sitting president should not be indicted even if all further proceedings are postponed. But far from being definitive, this is a matter that could be reconsidered by the department. Moreover, of course, OLC opinions are not binding on state prosecutors (though state charges could raise federalism questions as well). The complex history of criminal proceedings against presidents and vice presidents suggests that these issues are not foreclosed.

Perhaps the most important point that emerges from a review of all the opinions is this: only once has the United States addressed the question of whether a president can be an unindicted co-conspirator. The conclusion was an unequivocal yes. Richard Nixon was so named in the Watergate indictment, and that inclusion was sustained by Judge John Sirica and defended by the United States in United States v. Nixon. (The Supreme Court did not resolve the question.) No department opinion or filing has ever contradicted that position. The fact that it is permissible to name a sitting president as unindicted co-conspirator, moreover, tends significantly to undermine the only argument against indicting a sitting president. [..]

Here I want to review each of the half-dozen times that the executive branch has addressed the question of whether a president can be prosecuted, indicted or included as an unindicted co-conspirator. The opinions that conclude that a president cannot be indicted deal mainly with the question of whether a president can be put on trial. While the discussions of the option of indicting but postponing trial are more than a mere afterthought, that option was not the focus of the opinions and received scant analysis.

1. The Sept. 24, 1973, OLC Dixon Memo.

This memo, signed by the head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Robert Dixon, is a procedural anomaly: It was not addressed to any official and may not have been made public at the time. It was not mentioned in the submission by the solicitor general two weeks later in the In re Agnew case.

Dixon noted that there was no express provision of the Constitution conferring any immunity upon the president. The “proper approach” he wrote, “is to find the proper balance between the normal functions of the courts and the special responsibilities … of the Presidency.” He concluded that “criminal proceedings against a President in office should not go beyond a point where they could result in so serious a physical interference with the President’s performance of his official duties that it would amount to an incapacitation.” Thus, “a necessity to defend a criminal trial and to attend court … would interfere with the President’s unique official duties.”

Finally, Dixon addressed “a possibility not yet mentioned”: that a sitting president could be indicted but further proceedings could be deferred until he was no longer in office. Unlike placing a president on trial, this would not result in a “physical interference” with the president’s duties. Nevertheless, the memo concludes that this step should not be taken because of the reputational damage to the president: “The spectacle of an indicted President still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination.”

Of particular interest is the memo’s consideration of whether criminal proceedings against a vice president are precluded. OLC found this to be a difficult question before concluding that a grand jury could indict the vice president. The memo notes that Vice President Spiro Agnew was said to be part of a conspiracy and that it would be difficult to have a proper indictment of co-conspirators without including the vice president (a point also true of a conspiracy involving a president).

Moreover,

Another circumstance counselling prompt presentation of evidence to the grand jury is that the statute of limitations is about to bar prosecution of the alleged offenders with respect to some or all of the offenses. The problem presented by the statute of limitations would be avoided by an indictment within the statutorily specified period.

(The issue of statute of limitations arises as well in cases involving a president.)The Dixon memo concludes that “[a]fter indictment, the question of whether the Government should … delay prosecution until the expiration of the Vice President’s duties involves questions of trial strategy” beyond OLC’s expertise. The conclusion that the sitting president should not be indicted was not necessarily a categorical constitutional-judgment conclusion but seems, rather, to be a balance of policy considerations. That, it appears, is how it was read by the office of Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski—as I will describe below.

The entire article is an interesting and easy to understand read.

There is nothing in the constitution nor is there any law that states a sitting president cannot be indicted for a crime. Nor does the DOJ memo protect the president from a state indicting a sitting president. Former U.S. attorney Harry Litman told MSNBC on Wednesday that President Donald Trump is not protected against New York state charges of tax and other fraud — and that if the New York district attorney brings charges, America will enter “untrod territory.”

Missing The Point

You know, I sort of resent being lumped by Millennials into this category of “Boomers” because I’m way, way older than that. Held Orville’s coat at Kitty Hawk I did. I would sort this slight in the bucket of all Blacks and Asians and Lesbians (and especially Black Asian Lesbians) look alike and must therefore know each other (I do keep up with who shows at the Struldbrug conventions) but I’m Ben Franklin white, white, white therefore it’s obviously reverse racism directed personally at me so I’m duly outraged and it’s time for my sponge bath and afternoon medication anyway.

Was I saying something? Why are you mumbling? Oh yeah, damn kids on my lawn. Also Some News.

Mmm… I could go for some flapjacks. And Dinosaurs being gay is why they’re extinct, even the one Jesus rode on. Do the math, it’s Adam and Eve (well, Lilith but she was a slut and a witch and probably gay herself, wouldn’t put out for me) not Adam and Steve.

I have more things to be angry and wrong about in my dotage which is why I’m happy to be able to infest the next wide eyed, innocent, and credulous generation with the hate filled lies I almost believe because I’ve been telling them so long.

And Marley is dead dudes. You can take that to the ‘Change, my word is good on it.

Cartnoon

I was around for the great New York to Paris race and it is supremely easy to forget that most places didn’t have roads worthy of the name, including the United States. Highways didn’t really become popular until the 30s and now they’re everywhere. Frequently, to shock people, I’ll refer them to pictures of roads in Afghanistan or India or China, or other places we consider remote and exotic and they have the same damn white on green signs you see on I 95 (in a different language to be sure).

I keep trying to persuade TMC to join me on a grand tour of the Pan America Highway which she correctly points out is a near suicidal ambition undertaken only by idiots like Jeremy Clarkson, James May, and Richard Hammond who have the might and force of the BBC (now Amazon) behind them and are only truly hated in Mexico and Argentina because of Hammond’s rather unfortunate remarks about the quality of their cars (and some other racist things) instead of the constant, consistent, and deserved reproach of any holder of a U.S. Passport for our continual interference in their politics.

Pondering the Pundits

Pondering the Pundits” 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.

Thanks to ek hornbeck, click on the link and you can access all the past “Pondering the Pundits”.

Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt

Paul Waldman: The dishonest smearing of Ilhan Omar

In what is surely the most shameful decision of her current term as speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has decided that the time has come for the House to rebuke Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) for things she didn’t actually say, and ideas she didn’t actually express. In the process, Pelosi and other Democrats are helping propagate a series of misconceptions about anti-Semitism, Israel, and U.S. political debate.

I’m going to try to bring some clarity to this issue, understanding how difficult it can be whenever we discuss anything that touches on Israel.

To be clear, I do this as someone who was raised in an intensely Zionist family with a long history of devotion and sacrifice for Israel, but who also — like many American Jews — has become increasingly dismayed not only by developments in Israel but by how we talk about it here in the United States.

Tom Udall and Richard J. Durban: Trump is barreling toward war with Iran. Congress must act to stop him.

Sixteen years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, we are again barreling toward another unnecessary conflict in the Middle East based on faulty and misleading logic.

The Trump administration’s Iran policy, built on the ashes of the failed Iraq strategy, is pushing us to take military action aimed at regime change in Tehran. We must not repeat the mistakes of the past, and Congress must act urgently to ensure that.

Similar to the George W. Bush administration’s justification for the war in Iraq, the Trump administration has presented the false narratives that Iran is not meeting its obligations under the nuclear deal, and that it is somehow partially responsible for the rise of the Islamic State in Syria. It’s true that the leaders of Iran are deeply problematic. But if this were enough to justify war, other regimes in the region would also be in the United States’ crosshairs, instead of being recipients of U.S. military aid.

Continue reading

The Breakfast Club (Slow Process)

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.

 photo stress free zone_zps7hlsflkj.jpg

This Day in History

The Alamo falls; The Dred Scott decision brings America closer to Civil War; Renaissance artist Michelangelo born; Walter Cronkite leaves ‘The CBS Evening News’; Ed McMahon and Rob Reiner born.

Breakfast Tunes

Something to Think about over Coffee Prozac

It’s a very slow process – two steps forward, one step back – but I’m inching in the right direction.

Rob Reiner

Continue reading

Mardi Gras

Republished from Feb 21, 2012

Mardi Gras en français or Fat Tuesday in English, it is time to party. It’s the last day for some Christians to eat all the food they like and party before the season of fasting before Lent. In many traditions it isn’t just one day. Mardi Gras, or Carnival season, starts in January after 12th Night or the Epiphany, culminating at midnight on the day before Ash Wednesday. English traditions call the day Shrove Tuesday and for many religious Christians a time for confession. Celebrations vary from city to city and by country but many of the traditions are the same masks, beads, parades and parties. In Mobile, Alabama,the former capital of New France, the Mardi Gras social events start in November with “mystic society” balls on Thanksgiving and New Year’s Eve with more parades and balls in January and February ending on the traditional Tuesday before Lent. And you thought New Orleans and Rio de Janeiro were the party cities, heh. Many if these balls raise large amounts of money for charity, justifying in a way the “decadence”. In other places with a French heritage, like Louisiana, where the revelry also starts weeks before with parades and parties celebrating the arrival of the “Krewes” or organizations that sponsor various parades, the day is an official holiday. Like anyone in New Orleans is going to the office that day. There’s many traditional foods, too, like pancakes, fruit laden sweet breads and sugary pastries. Any food with lots of fat and eggs. Look out arteries here it comes.

A Little History

Mardi Gras was introduced to America in colonial days as a sedate religious tradition by Pierre Le Moyne d’Iberville and Jean-Baptiste Le Moyne de Bienville, in the late 17th century, when King Louis XIV sent the pair to defend France’s claim on the territory of Louisiane.

The expedition, led by Iberville, entered the mouth of the Mississippi River on the evening of March 2, 1699, Lundi Gras, not yet knowing it was the river explored and claimed for France by René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle in 1683. The party proceeded upstream to a place on the west bank about 60 miles downriver from where New Orleans is today, where a small tributary emptied into the great river, and made camp. This was on March 3, 1699, Mardi Gras day, so in honor of this holiday, Iberville named the spot Point du Mardi Gras (French: “Mardi Gras Point”) and called the small tributary Bayou Mardi Gras. Bienville went on to found Mobile, Alabama in 1702 as the first capital of French Louisiana. In 1703 French settlers in that city began to celebrate the Mardi Gras tradition. By 1720, Biloxi was made capital of Louisiana. While it had French settlers, Mardi Gras and other customs were celebrated with more fanfare given its new status. In 1723, the capital of French Louisiana was moved to New Orleans, founded in 1718. With the growth of New Orleans as a city and the creolization of different cultures, the varied celebration of Mardi Gras became the event most strongly associated with the city. In more recent times, several U.S. cities without a French Catholic heritage have instituted the celebration of Mardi Gras, which sometimes emerged as grassroots movements.

In other countries Mardi Gras has different names. In Belgium’s city of Binche it is the most important day if the year:

The carnival is the most known of several others that take place in Belgium at the same time and has been proclaimed as a Masterpiece of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity listed by UNESCO. Its history dates back to approximately the 14th century.

Events related to the carnival begin up to seven weeks prior to the primary celebrations. Street performances and public displays traditionally occur on the Sundays approaching Ash Wednesday, consisting of prescribed musical acts, dancing, and marching. Large numbers of Binche’s inhabitants spend the Sunday directly prior to Ash Wednesday in costume.

The centrepiece of the carnival’s proceedings are clown-like performers known as Gilles. Appearing, for the most part, on “Shrove” Tuesday, the Gilles are characterised by their vibrant dress, wax masks and wooden footwear. They number up to 1,000 at any given time, range in age from 3 to 60, and are customarily male. The honour of being a Gille at the carnival is something that is to be aspired to by local men. From dawn on the morning of the carnival’s final day, Gilles appear in the centre of Binche, to dance to the sound of drums and ward evil spirits away with sticks. Later, during the day, they don large hats adorned with ostrich plumes, which can cost upwards of $300 US dollars to rent, and march through the town with baskets of oranges. These oranges are thrown to, and sometimes at, members of the crowd gathered to view the procession. The vigour and longevity of the orange throwing event has in past caused damage to property – some residents choose to seal windows to prevent this.

In Germany, Switzerland and Austria, Mardi Gras is called Karneval, Fastnacht, or Fasching. Fastnacht means “Eve of the Beginning of the Fast”. One of the largest festivals is in Cologne, Germany:

Traditionally, the “fifth season” (carnival season) is declared open at 11 minutes past 11 on the 11th of November. The Carnival spirit is then temporarily suspended during the Advent and Christmas period, and picks up again in earnest in the New Year. The time of merrymaking in the streets is officially declared open at downtown square Alter Markt on the Thursday before the beginning of Lent. Street carnival, a week-long street festival, also called “the crazy days”, takes place between the Fat Thursday (Weiberfastnacht) and ends on Ash Wednesday (Aschermittwoch). The highlight of the carnival is Rose Monday (Rosenmontag), two days before Ash Wednesday. All through these days, Cologne folks go out masqueraded. The typical greeting during the festival is Kölle Alaaf!, a Kölsch phrase which can be translated as “Cologne above all!”

In Europe, some of the earliest Carnivales were in Italy. One of the most elegant and sumptuous is in the canal city if Venice:

It is said that the Carnival of Venice was originated from a victory of the “Repubblica della Serenissima”, Venice previous name, against the Patriarch of Aquileia, Ulrico in the year 1162. In the honor of this victory, the people started to dance and make reunions in San Marco Square. Apparently this festival started on that period and become official in the renaissance. After a long absence, the carnival return to operate in 1979. the Italian government decided to bring back the history and culture of Venice, and sought to use the traditional Carnival as the centerpiece of their efforts. Today, approximately 3,000,000 visitors come to Venice each day for Carnivals. One of the most important events is the contest for the best mask, placed at the last weekend of the Carnival. A jury of international costume and fashion designers votes for “La Maschera piu bella”. [..]

Venetian carnival masks

Masks have always been a central feature of the Venetian carnival; traditionally people were allowed to wear them between the festival of Santo Stefano (St. Stephen’s Day, December 26) and the start of the carnival season and midnight of Shrove Tuesday. They have always been around Venice. As masks were also allowed on Ascension and from October 5 to Christmas, people could spend a large proportion of the year in disguise. Maskmakers (mascherari) enjoyed a special position in society, with their own laws and their own guild.

Venetian masks can be made in leather or with the original glass technique. The original masks were rather simple in design,decoration, often had a symbolic, and practical function.[5] Nowadays, most of them are made with the application of gesso and gold leaf and are all hand-painted using natural feathers and gems to decorate.

I would be remiss if I didn’t include the Carnivals of Brazil:

Carnaval is the most famous holiday in Brazil and has become an event of huge proportions. Excepted the industries, malls and the carnival related workers, the country stops completely for almost a week and festivities are intense, day and night, mainly in coastal cities. The consumption of beer accounts for 80% of annual consumption[citation needed] and tourism receives 70% of annual visitors. The government distributes condoms and launches awareness campaigns at this time to prevent the spread of AIDS.

Each Brazilian has its own unique celebration, the most famous, of course, is the one in Rio de Janeiro:

Modern Brazilian Carnival originated in Rio de Janeiro in 1641 when the city’s bourgeoisie, largely Portuguese, imported the practice of holding balls and masquerade parties from Paris. It originally mimicked the European form of the festival, later absorbing and creolizing elements derived from Native American and African cultures.

In the late 19th century, the cordões (literally “cords”, laces or strings in Portuguese) were introduced in Rio de Janeiro. These were pageant groups that paraded through city avenues performing on instruments and dancing. Today they are known as Blocos (blocks), consisting of a group of people who dress in costumes or special t-shirts with themes and/or logos. Blocos are generally associated with particular neighborhoods; they include both a percussion or music group and an entourage of revellers.

Block parades have become an expressive feature of Rio’s Carnival. Today, they number more than 100 and the groups increase each year. Blocos can be formed by small or large groups of revelers with a distinct title with an often funny pun. (Os blocos RJ, para os solteiros, são um lugar para conhecer e até beijar pessoas, or “The blocos in Rio de Janeiro, for the singles, are places to meet and even kiss people.”) They may also note their neighborhood or social status. Before the show, they gather in a square, then parade in sections of the city, often near the beach. Some blocos never leave one street and have a particular place, such as a bar, to attract viewers. Block parades start in January, and may last until the Sunday after Carnival.

There occur Blocos parades in nearly every neighborhood throughout the city and metropolitan areas, but the most famous are the ones in Copacabana, Ipanema, Leblon, Lagoa, Jardim Botânico, and in downtown Rio. Organizers often compose their own music themes that are added to the performance and singing of classic “marchinhas” and samba popular songs. “Cordão do bola preta” (“Polka Dot Bloco”), that goes through the heart of Rio’s historical center, and “Suvaco do Cristo” (Christ’s statue armpit, referring to the angle of the statue seen from the neighborhood), near the Botanical Garden, are some of the most famous groups. Monobloco has become so famous that it plays all year round at parties and small concerts.

Samba schools are very large groups of performers, financed by respected organizations (as well as illegal gambling groups), who work year round in preparation for Carnival. Samba Schools perform in the Sambadrome, which runs four entire nights. They are part of an official competition, divided into seven divisions, in which a single school is declared the winner, according to costume, flow, theme, and band music quality and performance. Some samba schools also hold street parties in their neighborhoods, through which they parade along with their followers.

There Is No End To The Win.

Well, if you consider keeping the margin under a Veto Proof Majority a win.

White House works to limit GOP defections, criticism ahead of vote to nullify Trump’s emergency declaration
By Erica Werner, Jacqueline Alemany, and John Wagner, Washington Post
March 4, 2019

The White House told Senate Republicans on Monday to “keep their powder dry” ahead of a vote to nullify President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border as the administration worked to limit defections on a measure rebuking the president.

The message was delivered by Zach Parkinson, White House deputy director of government communications, in a meeting Monday morning with Senate Republican communications staffers, according to two people who attended the meeting.

It came as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) predicted that the resolution to overturn Trump’s emergency declaration would pass in the Republican-led Senate — but not survive a veto. Over the weekend, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) became the fourth Republican to announce he would vote for the disapproval resolution, ensuring its passage with unified Democratic support.

But the White House is eager to contain further defections from members of Trump’s party on his signature issue of building a wall along the southern border. The emergency declaration is aimed at getting additional money for border barriers after Congress refused to grant Trump’s funding request.

At Monday’s meeting, Parkinson cautioned GOP Senate communications aides against public criticism from their bosses over the emergency declaration, saying that if senators are planning to vote to overturn it, they should contact the White House to get further information on Trump’s rationale, according to the two people.

And if GOP senators do not have anything good to say, Parkinson said, they should “keep their powder dry,” according to the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to detail the private discussion.

The Senate vote is expected next week. The House passed the measure to block Trump’s declaration, but Democrats in the chamber fell well short of securing the two-thirds vote that would be necessary to overturn a threatened veto from Trump.

While Trump appears to have the votes to withstand a veto in the Republican-led Senate as well, passage of the measure would still serve as rebuke of the president’s policy — and large-scale defections by GOP senators could prove embarrassing for Trump.

In addition to the four Republican senators who have announced support for the disapproval resolution, numerous others have expressed serious reservations about Trump’s move, pointing to concerns about constitutional separation of powers and the potential for future Democratic presidents to declare national emergencies on other issues.

Paul joined Senate Republicans Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Thom Tillis (N.C.) in opposing Trump’s move. Paul announced his opposition to the emergency declaration at an event in Kentucky over the weekend and told reporters Monday at the Capitol that he expected 10 or more Republican senators to vote the same way.

“The Constitution’s very clear about some things,” Paul said, including that Congress has control over the nation’s spending. “I think it’s easy to argue that this emergency order, this executive order, goes against the will of Congress.”

Paul said he had spoken about his decision with Trump on Sunday and that they had a good conversation. But he said Trump appeared determined to stick with the emergency declaration — despite pressure from some GOP senators, including Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), to withdraw it and find the wall money another way.

Paul said he held out hope that if GOP opposition in the Senate reached into double digits, Trump might be prevailed upon to change his view. Paul said that for himself, after he had accused President Barack Obama of exceeding his authority on immigration and other issues, it would be hypocritical to consent to Trump doing something similar.

Fifty-three senators caucus with Republicans and 47 with Democrats, meaning that four Republican defections are enough to ensure passage.

McConnell told reporters that he had hoped Trump “wouldn’t take that particular path” of declaring a national emergency.

McConnell said he agreed with Republicans who have argued that the declaration could set a precedent for future Democratic presidents to declare emergencies on issues on which they cannot have their way in Congress.

“That’s one reason I argued, obviously without success, to the president that he not take this route,” McConnell said.

Trump has warned about negative political consequences for senators who go against him, telling Sean Hannity of Fox News last week: “I really think that Republicans that vote against border security and the wall — I think you know, I’ve been okay at predicting things — I think they put themselves at great jeopardy.”

Some people look at this as a test of Republican ‘Statesmanship’. I consider that an oxymoron. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t confront their hypocrisy at every turn, the Republican Party needs to be broken and cast on the ash heap of History with the Whigs, Federalists, Anti-Masonic, and Know Nothings, not to mention the Dixiecrats.

Pondering the Pundits

Pondering the Pundits” 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.

Thanks to ek hornbeck, click on the link and you can access all the past “Pondering the Pundits”.

Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt

Paul Krugman: America the Cowardly Bully

This is the way the trade war ends. Not with a bang but with empty bombast.

According to multiple news organizations, the U.S. and China are close to a deal that would effectively end trade hostilities. Under the reported deal, America would remove most of the tariffs it imposed last year. China, for its part, would end its retaliatory tariffs, make some changes to its investment and competition policies and direct state enterprises to buy specified amounts of U.S. agricultural and energy products.

The Trump administration will, of course, trumpet the deal as a triumph. In reality, however, it’s much ado about nothing much.

As described, the deal would do little to address real complaints about Chinese policy, which mainly involve China’s systematic expropriation of intellectual property. Nor would it do much to address Donald Trump’s pet although misguided peeve, the imbalance in U.S.-China trade. Basically, Trump will have backed down.

Michelle Cottle: Oversight Season Is Heating Up in Washington

If you thought the past two years of inquiries into possible misbehavior by Trumpworld were brutal, brace yourself. Phase 2 is about to heat up.

On Monday, the Democratic-led House Judiciary Committee announced a wide-ranging inquiry into “the alleged obstruction of justice, public corruption and other abuses of power by President Trump, his associates and members of his administration.”

Citing two years of “near-daily attacks on our basic legal, ethical and constitutional rules and norms” by the president, Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the committee’s chairman, asserted that, while it was important to respect the continuing criminal investigations, Congress “cannot rely on others to do the investigative work for us.” With Republican lawmakers having abdicated their oversight duties when they controlled the House, Mr. Nadler said, Democrats must now “begin building the public record.” [..]

Look for the next several months to be a nonstop pageant of subpoenas, hearings and court challenges.

Continue reading

Why You Should Never, Ever Vote For Andrew Cuomo. Ever.

Did I mention ever?

Look, I vote Working Family Party every time I can, strategically. Connecticut can’t hardly get more Blue (Statewide, there are local pockets and we are heavily gerrymandered and white, white, white) and while Greens are not particularly strong or organized WFP is and my consistent advice to Democratic candidates is to make sure they’re listed on that line.

I vote Working Family Party in particular because I want them to stay above the threshold required to keep their line since I’m in favor of Third Parties generally as checks on the duopoly. Sigh. There’s a whole can of worms behind that which I really don’t want to explore here.

Rarely do they offer any but a cross-endorsement but WFP over D and to even seek it shows you’re at least a little woke.

It was with great disappointment I greeted their cross-endorsement of Andrew Cuomo, I thought it a huge mistake and so it has proven to be.

The Working Families Party Helped Democrats Regain Power in New York. Now Democrats Are Trying to Kill It.
by Ryan Grim, The Intercept
March 4, 2019

Democrats and progressive groups across the state of New York are pushing back hard against an effort to ban fusion voting, a system that allows multiple parties to nominate the same candidate. The assault, according to those on the receiving end, is being driven by Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s ongoing hostility toward the Working Families Party, which has been a primary beneficiary of fusion voting in the state.

A majority of Democrats in the state Senate, the entire New York congressional delegation, and a large swath of grassroots groups have all weighed in against the move, which would gut the Working Families Party and handicap the Democratic Party along the way.

“Banning fusion is both substantively misguided and costly for Democrats,” wrote the state’s congressional delegation in an open letter in February, signed by everyone from Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. “It could threaten to put marginal members, who won by just thousands of votes, in jeopardy, and also make it harder to gain more seats in 2020. Without fusion, it leaves the WFP ballot line open to be hijacked by opportunistic spoilers and damages Democratic prospects.”

The dynamics of the fight have implications for the future direction of the national Democratic Party, as well. At its core, the debate is about whether centrist Democrats are willing to be partners in a coalition with progressives if and when the progressives are the ones driving the agenda — as is increasingly the case in New York. Should an Elizabeth Warren or a Bernie Sanders become the party’s presidential nominee, Democrats like Cuomo would be forced into a difficult decision: Support the Democratic Party and back the left, which means upsetting the status quo; or support the status quo, which means keeping Republicans in power.

Cuomo’s approach to the rising progressive energy in New York suggests that, at least for him, the decision is an easy one: Attack the left. The New York State Democratic Committee, which is effectively controlled by Cuomo, voted to ban fusion voting at its convention on Monday. Backers of the ban have said they will push to include it in the state’s must-pass budget, an attempt to force the hand of Democrats who oppose it.

The governor has not personally endorsed this particular effort at a ban, but opponents say his fingerprints are all over it. The loudest advocate of the ban is state party chair Jay Jacobs, who Cuomo appointed to the position in January. Cuomo’s office did not respond to a request for comment, but his spokesperson Rich Azzopardi has responded to the outcry with a tweet that appeared to distance Cuomo from the move.

State Sen. Jessica Ramos, who unseated a Cuomo-backed Democrat in a primary last year, said there’s no confusion about Cuomo’s role. “I am fairly certain that those who have been threatened by this movement — and are interested in protecting the status quo and the establishment — are behind this. Everyone knows that the person who would benefit the most is in the executive chamber,” Ramos told The Intercept. Ramos, along with a majority of the Democrats in the state Senate, have signed a letter demanding that the ban not be included in the budget, which must be passed by April 1.

The motion to ban fusion voting originated from the state party’s progressive caucus, whose leaders say that while Cuomo may be pleased with what they’re doing, they’re not doing it on his behalf. Rachel Lavine, chair of the caucus, said that upwards of 20 county party chairs approached the caucus, asking for help banning fusion voting. “It’s incredibly onerous for local chairs and activists,” she said. “I’m not gonna say that Cuomo won’t be happy by it, but we’re not people who are Cuomo’s lackeys.”

“The goal is not to kill the WFP,” Lavine added. “They can do what they do in the 46 other states that don’t have it: Run on your own line. If you wanna be a Democrat, run as a Democrat.”

Elisa Sumner, vice chair of the progressive caucus, said she resents the suggestion that she’s doing Cuomo’s bidding; she has been fighting against fusion since 2009, partly because of the way it forces the major parties to cater to the minor ones. “We have to grovel to get their [ballot] lines,” she said.

Under fusion voting, which only exists in New York and a handful of other states, a candidate may appear on more than one ballot line, and votes for that candidate are fused together when tallied on Election Day. The system allows more than two parties to thrive, while lessening the risk that third-party spoiler candidates will take down a would-be ally.

That’s especially important while the party is being remade from the bottom up, Ramos said. “Everyone knows that the Democratic Party is going through an evolution,” she said. “Many of us are trying to bring the party into a more progressive and less neoliberal place and the only way we can do that, especially during this transition period, is to ensure that we have a ballot line where people feel comfortable casting a protest vote that still supports the real Democrats in races.”

The fractures between New York’s Democratic Party bosses and the WFP-backed progressives became exceedingly clear last year, when Cuomo faced a primary challenge from the left and a number of conservative Democrats he supported were voted out of office.

Cynthia Nixon, Cuomo’s primary challenger, was endorsed by the WFP. The governor spent $30 million to beat her in the Democratic primary, after which she withdrew her name from the WFP line. That’s a typical move from WFP-backed candidates who, if they lose their primaries, take their names off the ballot so as not to draw votes away from the Democratic nominee and risk throwing the race to a Republican.

The WFP also targeted Cuomo allies in the legislature, backing a swath of candidates, including Ramos, who challenged members of what had been known as the Independent Democratic Conference. The IDC was a Cuomo-backed caucus of state Senate Democrats who aligned themselves in Albany with Republicans. The convoluted arrangement helped Republicans control the chamber, which had the dual effect of blocking the progressive agenda while increasing Cuomo’s power, as he became an essential dealmaker. “You knew that your only hope was to convince the governor to take pity on you and actually want to work on your issue and figure out how to get it through the Republicans. That was the main reason he created the IDC, was to create that [power] center for himself,” said Ramos, speaking from her experiences as an activist in Albany prior to the IDC’s dissolution.

Under pressure from progressive activists, the IDC disbanded in 2018, but the electorate wanted more. Six of the eight members were ousted by WFP-backed candidates last year, reshaping statewide politics and uncorking a wave of progressive legislation in Albany, including a sweeping expansion of reproductive freedom and the state’s version of the DREAM Act.

Cuomo’s answer to the WFP has been to attempt to destroy it. During last year’s primary season, he forced major unions to leave the WFP. He then poached the party’s original electoral star, Letitia James. A longtime activist, James was the first New York politician elected outright on the WFP ticket when she won a city council race in 2003. Last year, Cuomo offered to endorse her for attorney general and raise money for her campaign — but only if she refused the WFP’s endorsement. James took the deal and is now the attorney general.

But the WFP, on the back of its IDC takedown, is still thriving. Its candidate for public advocate, Jumaane Williams, won a landslide election to the second-highest position in New York City last week. In January, state lawmakers passed the DREAM Act, legislation that, among other things, makes scholarships available to undocumented college students.

Ironically, Sen. Diane Savino, a former IDC member and one of only two who were re-elected, claimed last year that the WFP was scapegoating the IDC and unfairly blaming it for standing in the way of the state’s DREAM Act. After winning her primary last year, Savino pledged to end fusion voting when she returned to Albany.

Ok, so far you’ve been hearing about how “Progressives” are complicit and part of this Cuomo led plot. Not so much.

On Monday, at a meeting of the progressive caucus that happened alongside the Democratic convention, the group voted down the resolution Lavine and Sumner had pushed. The state party moved forward with it and passed it anyway. “There have always been some members of the Democratic State Committee who have opposed fusion,” said Joe Dinkin, WFP’s national campaigns director. “We believe they’re wrong. But the reason it passed today isn’t because of them. It’s because it had the backing of Gov. Cuomo and his recently selected Democratic Party State Chair Jay Jacobs, who whipped votes and argued for the executive committee to overrule the progressive caucus. And the reason for that is because Cuomo and the Democratic revenge against the progressive movement for defeating the IDC and winning a progressive state senate that isn’t under his control.”

If passed through the budget, the ban on fusion voting might be satisfying for Cuomo and a handful of his allies — but it will likely also hurt the party in the long run, Democrats are warning. The WFP would still be able to run candidates, but now those candidates would simply draw votes away from Democrats. That’s a point critics of the ban are stressing. In a letter sent to the state Democratic committee, the six Democrats who unseated IDC members slammed the suggested ban.

“There is nothing progressive about abolishing fusion. A fusion ban would weaken the Democratic coalition in New York, harm our ability to defend and grow our majorities, and undermine one of the pillars of our state’s progressive movement, the Working Families Party,” they wrote.

Progressive activists called Cuomo’s move self-serving and urged him to reconsider. “Any ban on fusion will inevitably be seen as retaliation against the WFP for supporting the new progressive State Senators who defeated the IDC, and for backing Cynthia Nixon’s primary challenge to Governor Cuomo. Using governmental power in a self-serving way that injures or destroys political rivals can only be described as Trumpian. And practically speaking, for Democrats seeking to govern and hold on to or grow their majorities, banning fusion will accomplish precisely the reverse as the WFP would no longer be allowed to support Democrats in general elections,” wrote representatives of the Center for Popular Democracy, Indivisible, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Every Voice, Our Revolution, United We Dream, and others.

Ultimately, the reason to ban fusion voting, and crush the Working Families Party, is because it has been effective at pushing state politics to the left.

“We’re living quite a historic moment here in Albany and we’d be wise to take advantage of it,” said Ramos, who represents a Queens Senate district inside the congressional district represented by Ocasio-Cortez. “And it all started because of fusion voting. Bringing it back full circle, we have this movement because there’s a Working Families Party. There’s a Working Families Party that’s effective because there’s fusion voting in New York.”

I don’t expect to be a member of the New York electorate in the near term, but were I, I might be tempted to write in Cynthia Nixon just for spite.

Cartnoon

Yah know, though it seems ages ago it was only two weeks. Get your head out of the spokes of the news cycle.

You want time travel? 2018-

The Breakfast Club (Rebellion)

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.

 photo stress free zone_zps7hlsflkj.jpg

This Day in History

The Boston Massacre; Winston Churchill’s ‘Iron Curtain’ speech; The Soviet Union’s dictator Josef Stalin dies; Comedian John Belushi found dead; Country singer Patsy Cline killed in a plane crash.

Breakfast Tunes

Something to Think about over Coffee Prozac

The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.

Albert Camus

Continue reading

Load more