Skip to content

Month: September 2018

Sarah stepped in it

Sarah stepped in it

by digby

Can you see what’s wrong with this picture?

I knew that you could. (Hint: Erickmay Arlandgay)

Republicans need to reckon with the fact that now that they’ve completely broken government and democracy, clutching their pearls over broken norms isn’t very effective.

.

Will they dump him? Don’t know. But it would make sense if they did.

Will they dump him? Don’t know. But it would make sense if they did.

by digby

Nate Silver thinks the Republicans should pull Kavanaugh:

Brett Kavanaugh has never been a popular Supreme Court nominee — and he’s probably becoming more unpopular still following allegations earlier this month by Christine Blasey Ford that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her when they both were in high school. No one this unpopular has ever been confirmed to the Supreme Court; the only previous nominees who polled as poorly as Kavanaugh either had their names withdrawn (Harriet Miers) or lost their confirmation vote (Robert Bork). And all of this polling was taken before at least two other accusations surfaced of potential sexual misconduct involving Kavanaugh1 — and before Ford and Kavanaugh’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is scheduled for Thursday.

President Trump and Congressional Republicans are not afraid to take unpopular actions in pursuit of their ideological goals. Last year, they spent many months trying and failing to pass a repeal of Obamacare, even though those efforts were extremely unpopular. And they passed a tax bill that was highly unpopular at the time of its passage, although its numbers have since improved some. The Supreme Court is at least as much of a priority for Republicans.

The difference on Kavanaugh is that there are several other conservative nominees who could potentially replace him — and who may have been better picks in the first place. In other words, you would think Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have better options than rolling the dice with Kavanaugh…

But there’s a midterm coming up in just six weeks. And there’s about a 3 in 10 chance that Republicans lose the Senate, according to the FiveThirtyEight forecast. Could Republicans really get Barrett or another nominee confirmed before then? And if not, could they confirm her in the so-called lame-duck session after the midterms but before the new Congress meets on Jan. 3.

The answers are “possibly” and “probably” — but the timing is getting dicier by the day. As of Tuesday morning, we’ll be 42 days away from the Nov. 6 midterms, and exactly 100 days away from when the new Congress convenes. The eight current members of the Supreme Court variously took between 50 and 99 days to be confirmed.

I really don’t understand why they haven’t insisted that he withdraw already (with a big self-righteous “this was a drive-by shooting” speech.) That’s hat would galvanize their voters, not confirming him. They LOVE martyrs to the cause and are motivated by their feelings of victimization.

Losing Kavanaugh before the mid-terms would help them not hurt them and they could easily confirm his replacement after the mid-terms.

This seems like a no-brainer to me.

Gabe Sherman posted this yesterday:

Trump is growing increasingly frustrated by being mired in a deteriorating political situation beyond his control. On Monday morning, a Republican briefed on Trump’s thinking said the president has been considering pulling Kavanaugh’s nomination.

According to the source, Trump allies are imploring him to cut Kavanaugh loose for the sake of saving Republicans’ electoral chances in the midterms. The argument these advisers are making is that if Kavanaugh’s nomination fails, demoralized Republicans will stay home in November, and Democrats will take the House and the Senate and initiate impeachment proceedings. The end result: Trump will be removed from office. “The stakes are that high,” the source said. Another Republican adviser told me: “Trump is very worried now, and is finally waking up that it’s the end of his presidency if he loses the Senate.” Trump’s outside allies are advising him to nominate Amy Coney Barrett and fast-track her confirmation before the midterms. “Some in the White House think you can only appoint a woman now,” a former administration official told me. An outside adviser added: “Democrats won’t be able to pivot fast enough to attack her since she’s a woman.”

Even before Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer reported Deborah Ramirez’s account that Kavanaugh exposed his penis without her consent at Yale (which Kavanaugh emphatically denies), Trump has been unhappy with how Senate Republicans are handling the nomination process. According to sources, Trump blamed Mitch McConnell and Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley for agreeing to delay Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony until Thursday. “He thinks they look weak,” a Republican briefed on Trump’s thinking said. A White House official told me Trump was also angry that Senate Republicans waited hours to respond to Ford’s interview with The Washington Post, creating a vacuum in the news cycle that allowed the narrative to take hold. “You don’t let that happen,” the official said.

Last week, White House advisers, including Johnny DeStefano, implored Trump not to attack Dr. Ford. A source said Bill Shine and Corey Lewandowski were pushing a more aggressive approach. Trump listened to the moderates until Friday, until he reverted to form and tweeted: “I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents.”

As Kavanaugh’s poll numbers plummet, Trump is telling people in private that he was never a fan of Kavanaugh’s selection, sources said. According to two people who’ve spoken with Trump recently, Trump complained that establishment Republicans foisted Kavanaugh on him, because they reasoned Kavanaugh would unite the party in November. According to one former West Wing official, Trump’s first choice was Judge Thomas Hardiman, who served on the federal bench alongside Trump’s sister Maryanne Trump Barry.

Trump is keeping his distance from the nominee. A White House official said he hasn’t spoken with Kavanaugh in recent days. “This is Brett Kavanaugh’s fight,” the White House official said

There’s so much back-stabbing and palace intrigue in this administration that it’s always hard to discern any real strategy behind their actions. But it would be the smart move politically. On the other hand, it doesn’t seem to me that these people are very smart so …

.

Mauvais Appétit, Ted by tristero

Mauvais Appétit, Ted 

by tristero

In normal times, people should just get along. Cultural and political disagreements are no reason to harass anyone.

But these aren’t normal times.

These are times when a president elected by a minority of Americans has chosen to appoint rapists, white supremacists, warmongers, and incompetent economists who are radically removed from the mainstream to permanent or semi-permanent government positions. These are times when the opinions of neo-Nazis and fascists are actively solicited to contribute to mainstream discourse.

Young people, if this is the first presidency you’ve paid attention to, trust me:  This is not the way it’s supposed to be. These loons, who’ve been on the mad fringe of the Western World’s politics since 1945, are now back in positions of power. We know how that turned out back in the mid 20th Century. The main difference today is that the American descendants of Europe’s murderous fascists  now have access to weapons of destruction and political suppression that the Nazis and fascists could never imagine.

And so, the fact that Ted Cruz was heckled out of a nice quiet meal is more than justifiable. As long as Cruz is in office, I have no problems with anyone interrupting his mastications in order to protest his outrageous actions. They must be stopped.

There is nothing I’d like more than to have a Congress filled with genuinely diverse viewpoints.  Instead, our present Congress is stocked with neo-Nazis, fascists, racists, and apologists for the madmen of the extreme right. This isn’t a mere difference of opinion, this is existential lunacy and most of the country knows it. We should never let them forget how unwanted they are.

PS. Once Cruz is safely out of my government, I will gladly defend his right to eat in peace anywhere he wants. But frankly, if I was dining next to him, I’d walk out. No reason to get indigestion.

Update: What Atrios sez.

They’re laughing at us! They’re all laughing at us!

They’re laughing at us! They’re all laughing at us!

by digby

I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before. Not even when some of the global crazies said crazy things in the past.  I’m glad to know that the majority of America’s citizens are in solidarity with the rest of the world on this subject but it’s still embarrassing.

The speech was written by Stephen Miller. It was a grotesque travesty as you might expect:

What going on with Rosenstein anyway?

What going on with Rosenstein anyway?

by digby



My Salon column this morning:


Last Friday the New York Times published a bombshell story reporting that in May of 2017 Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein suggested that he and people interviewing for the job of FBI director should “wear a wire” to record the utterances of President Trump. He allegedly discussed rounding up members of the Cabinet to see if they were willing to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office. Rosenstein immediately denied this, also saying that he does not believe the president is subject to the 25th Amendment. Some sources in the Justice Department have subsequently said that Rosenstein was just being sarcastic about the wire.

The Times stuck by its story that Rosenstein was serious about suggesting secretly recording the president but made it clear that there is no evidence that anyone ever followed through. As for the 25th Amendment comment, Rosenstein wouldn’t be the only member of the Trump administration to suggest it. Michael Wolff’s “Fire and Fury,” Bob Woodward’s “Fear” and Omarosa’s “Unhinged” all contain anecdotes about that option being suggested. (It has never been tried, and it’s not at all clear how it would work.) The infamous anonymous New York Times op-ed writer — identified in this Salon essay by literary scholar Don Foster as likely being Defense Secretary Jim Mattis — also admitted it had been discussed. Let’s face facts: Knowing what we know about this administration, it would much more shocking if nobody had ever brought it up.

The period when this supposedly happened was a particularly tumultuous time, even for this administration. Rosenstein was said to be upset that he’d been ill-used by the president when his memo about FBI Director James Comey’s malpractice in his handling of the Clinton email investigation was used as a pretext for Comey’s firing. That was especially true since Trump made it clear not long afterward, in his interview with Lester Holt, that he had dumped Comey in an effort to shut down the Russia investigation.

But that wasn’t all the president had done. Recall that the day after the Comey firing Trump met with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in an unannounced, off-the-record meeting in the Oval Office. The president told his visitors he had fired the “nutjob” FBI director and said, “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” Then he proceeded to share sensitive classified information with the two Russians, making clear it had come from Israeli intelligence.

That period after Comey was fired obviously shook the FBI and the Justice Department. They were aware of Michael Flynn’s lies, Russian interference in the election and quite likely other things we don’t know about. It’s hardly surprising that they would have been brainstorming such possibilities as the 25th Amendment.

Nobody knows who leaked this story to the Times. It was relayed through several layers of anonymity and is based mostly on hearsay about notes from two meetings that took place on the same day, documented by Department of Justice lawyer Lisa Page and the since-fired former FBI acting director, Andrew McCabe. There has been plenty of criticism of the Times for its sourcing on this story and it seems clear that the person or people from whom the information came are no friends of Rosenstein. He is portrayed as “erratic,” “nervous” and “emotional,” which suggests this story may have been planted in order to portray him as weak and unstable and lay the groundwork for his dismissal.

McCabe, who is facing a criminal probe for lying to the DOJ inspector general, adamantly denies providing his memos to the Times. He has said that he believes protecting the Mueller investigation is vital to the integrity of law enforcement and points out that he personally sacrificed to ensure that it was put on the right course. He wrote that “if the rumors of Deputy AG’s Rosenstein’s departure are true, I am deeply concerned that it puts that investigation at risk.” He’s clearly right about that.

After the Times story broke, Gabe Sherman at Vanity Fair reported that White House communications director and former Fox News president Bill Shine was launching a major campaign for Rosentein’s ouster, and that Fox luminaries Laura Ingraham and Jeanine Pirro immediately got on board. But that same night Sean Hannity took to the Fox airwaves to addressed the president directly, claiming he had it on good authority that the story was a set-up and that Trump shouldn’t fire Rosenstein or anyone else. Ingraham and the others quickly reversed course and the president didn’t make a move.

Fast forward to Monday, when amid all the Kavanaugh Sturm und Drang Axios reported that Rosenstein had resigned and had been summoned to the White House, sending the media into convulsions. That clearly wasn’t true, and subsequent reports in other media suggested that Rosenstein was about to be fired, the difference being relevant to what happens next with the Mueller probe. That’s a complicated issue that sheds little light on why Rosenstein would either choose to resign or force the president to fire him. It’s a bad situation either way.

The White House at first offered no talking points, and it seemed nobody had a clue what was really going on. Rosenstein met with White House chief of staff John Kelly and reportedly spoke on the phone with Trump in New York, after which it was announced that the two men would meet on Thursday. The New York Times’ “tick-tock” of the day’s events once again portrayed Rosenstein as “emotional” in his meetings and calls on Monday, banging yet another nail in his coffin.

This is a confounding story. Only the Times knows who’s leaking these “erratic” Rosenstein tales and it’s not clear its reporters know whether they are being used for nefarious purposes (or whether they care). According to Vanity Fair’s Sherman, the White House is pushing the Rosenstein drama in hopes of burying the growing scandal around Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, which could explain a Thursday meeting was scheduled between Trump and Rosenstein, in direct conflict with the Senate hearing at which Kavanaugh and his initial accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, will testify. Hannity and company are of course insisting this is all a set-up by the “deep state” and the Democrats. Whatever the motive, the consequence is a week of unbelievable chaos. Perhaps that’s the idea.

One thing is clear, however. The Justice Department and the FBI are now following the lead of the White House, breaking down into competing camps with opaque agendas and self-serving leaks to the media. Bureaucratic infighting is certainly nothing new. But the crudeness of it, with the nasty personal jibes at Rosenstein and a clear intention to provoke an angry explosion by the president, is a very Trumpian strategy. His “Mad Max” management style is infecting the entire government and in fact the entire culture.

.

Sometimes Establishment is a good thing by @BloggersRUs

Sometimes Establishment is a good thing
by Tom Sullivan


Rosenstein being sworn in as Deputy Attorney General. (Public domain)

Establishment is a bad word when progressives discuss Democratic Party squabbles. But should the sitting president fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in coming days, the fate of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation could rest on whether his replacement will defend the norms of the Department of Justice. Will the next Deputy support the establishment, be an institutionalist like Rosenstein, or be a Trump toady?

Last week’s New York Times reporting that Rosenstein suggested wiretapping the president, even if sarcastically, gives Donald Trump the opening he needs to relieve himself of his major impediment to quashing Mueller’s investigation of Russian election interference and Trump’s involvement. Rosenstein called the Times reporting “inaccurate and factually incorrect.”

David Frum worries the White House might attempt to cast Rosenstein’s departure as a resignation rather than a firing. A resignation gives Trump more flexibility in covering his back. If Trump can browbeat Rosenstein into resigning or successfully recast his firing as a resignation, under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act Trump can bypass Senate confirmation and install any previously confirmed official. The White House has played fast and loose already with whether other administration officials were fired or resigned.

DOJ sources say Rosenstein will not resign. But that might not keep Trump from buying “substantial impunity for many months” by selling a firing as a resignation.

Natasha Bertrand lays out other scenarios for what might happen to the Russia probe should Rosenstein leave:

Regardless of who would replace Rosenstein, Mueller would still have broad authority to conduct the probe as he sees fit; federal guidelines mandate that the special counsel “shall not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any official of the department.” But his replacement would still have the power to stymie the probe by deeming certain investigative or prosecutorial steps “inappropriate or unwarranted.”

A Mueller firing could mean pieces of the investigation might be “farmed out” to other divisions, the Southern District of New York, being one.

Were Trump to fire Rosenstein for reasons related to the Russia investigation—for example, if he wanted to replace the deputy attorney general with someone willing to shut Mueller down—that, too, could constitute obstruction of justice, legal experts told me. But if Rosenstein resigns, even under some pressure, “the obstruction argument loses a lot of force,” said Jens David Ohlin, a vice dean and law professor at Cornell Law School. “By definition, a resignation involves at least some level of personal or professional choice. For myself, I find it hard to believe that Rosenstein would simply resign under these circumstances.”

But as Frum worries, the difference between firing and resigning in this administration might be a matter of who controls the narrative.

Any Rosenstein replacement would likely be less inclined to take a hands-off approach to overseeing Mueller. Solicitor General Noel Francisco could be next in line. He would require an ethics waiver, writes Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern, since his former law firm represents Trump. But since the Trump administration has watered down ethics standards, that could be easy to obtain. Francisco, Stern adds, “shares Trump’s skepticism of the FBI and co-authored an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal shortly before the 2016 election that accused the agency of having a ‘double standard’ with regard to Democrats and Republicans.” He has accused the FBI of conducting “ambush interviews” and more:

Equally disconcerting as his past anti-FBI rhetoric is Francisco’s breathtakingly expansive view of executive power and privilege. Earlier this year, Francisco, in his capacity as solicitor general, weighed in on a Supreme Court case, Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, that revolved around the issue of who, exactly, has authority to appoint administrative law judges. Francisco attempted to turn the highly technical case into a presidential power bonanza. He went far beyond the question presented to argue that the president could remove administrative law judges, and any other “inferior” (or “subordinate”) officers, at will.

That would include Mueller. A Trump partisan, Francisco is also close to Rosenstein, NPR’s Carrie Johnson reports:

If he were to step aside – Noel Francisco – for any reason, that would put Steve Engel, who runs the Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel, next in line to oversee the Russia investigation. Steve Engel is a DOJ veteran, worked in the George W. Bush administration. And he’s a former Supreme Court clerk. But he doesn’t have experience as a prosecutor, and that experience could really come in handy supervising the most important criminal investigation at the Justice Department in the last generation or two.

Being a Bush veteran will not recommend Engel to Trump.

* * * * * * * * *

For The Win 2018 is ready for download. Request a copy of my county-level election mechanics primer at tom.bluecentury at gmail.

QOTD: A Trump adviser

QOTD: A Trump adviser

by digby

Jane Mayer wrote a long, comprehensive review of Professor Kathleen Jamison’s new book about the Russian interference in the 2016 election which concludes that it had a tangible effect on the outcome. She gathered reams of evidence which can be interpreted in various ways and which some experts do think is inconclusive.

When asked for comment this is what Mayer got from a senior White House adviser:

“Where is the evidence? And when do people start to feel ashamed that they can’t accept the election results and the crappy candidate they ran?”

Does everyone in the Republican Party of 2018 have the emotional maturity of a 12-year-old just like their Dear Leader? Is their only mode of speech puerile, nasty, insults

Trump didn’t invent this, of course. He’s just the guy who finally gave them permission to act in public the way they do in private — like snotty little bitches.

This Mayer review is fascinating, by the way, very thought-provoking. There is evidence that the Russians got hold of some very important Clinton campaign data that told them who the campaign had targeted as specifically “Hillary Defectors” and pushed out damaging information. I haven’t read the book but it’s interesting. Hall Jamison finds that he Russians sabotage campaign was dispositive. Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million votes and barely won the electoral college with 70,000 votes spread across three states. We know it certainly could have been.

.

Trump’s loyalty only goes one way

Trump’s loyalty only goes one way

by digby

Gabriel Sherman at Vanity Fair has some insider gossip about Trump’s thinking on Kavanaugh. He doesn’t really like him that much — he’s a Bush guy:

Trump allies are imploring him to cut Kavanaugh loose for the sake of saving Republicans’ electoral chances in the midterms. The argument these advisers are making is that if Kavanaugh’s nomination fails, demoralized Republicans will stay home in November, and Democrats will take the House and the Senate and initiate impeachment proceedings. The end result: Trump will be removed from office. “The stakes are that high,” the source said. Another Republican adviser told me: “Trump is very worried now, and is finally waking up that it’s the end of his presidency if he loses the Senate.” Trump’s outside allies are advising him to nominate Amy Coney Barrett and fast-track her confirmation before the midterms. “Some in the White House think you can only appoint a woman now,” a former administration official told me. An outside adviser added: “Democrats won’t be able to pivot fast enough to attack her, since she’s a woman.”

Even before Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer reported Deborah Ramirez’s account that Kavanaugh exposed his penis without her consent at Yale (which Kavanaugh emphatically denies), Trump has been unhappy with how Senate Republicans are handling the nomination process. According to sources, Trump blamed Mitch McConnell and Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley for agreeing to delay Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony until Thursday. “He thinks they look weak,” a Republican briefed on Trump’s thinking said.

A White House official told me Trump was also angry that Senate Republicans waited hours to respond to Ford’s interview with The Washington Post, creating a vacuum in the news cycle that allowed the narrative to take hold. “You don’t let that happen,” the official said.

Last week, White House advisers, including Johnny DeStefano, implored Trump not to attack Dr. Ford. A source said Bill Shine and Corey Lewandowski were pushing a more aggressive approach. Trump listened to the moderates until Friday, until he reverted to form and tweeted: “I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents.”

As Kavanaugh’s poll numbers plummet, Trump is telling people in private that he was never a fan of Kavanaugh’s selection, sources said. According to two people who’ve spoken with Trump recently, Trump complained that establishment Republicans foisted Kavanaugh on him, because they reasoned Kavanaugh would unite the party in November. According to one former West Wing official, Trump’s first choice was Judge Thomas Hardiman, who served on the federal bench alongside Trump’s sister Maryanne Trump Barry.

Trump is keeping his distance from the nominee. A White House official said he hasn’t spoken with Kavanaugh in recent days. “This is Brett Kavanaugh’s fight,” the White House official said.

So far they’re sticking with him. But I’d say there’sat least a 40% chance they get him to withdraw. He’s damaged goods.

.

If you know some young people …

If you know some young people …

by digby

… make sure they vote this time.

If you can get them to apply or an absentee ballot, sit down with them and help them fill it out if necessary. Then put it in the mail for them. I remember when I was young “forgetting” to vote sometimes. Your life tends to be very full and politics feels pretty abstract, particularly these non-presidential years. But this time it’s especially important that they do it.

By the way, the low Latino turnout is also largely attributable to the young age of that demographic.

If you get the youngs out to vote in places with high numbers of Latinos you also boost the Latino vote and vice versa.