Skip to content

Month: November 2018

Bleak Friday by @BloggersRUs

Bleak Friday
by Tom Sullivan

There is nothing like Donald Trump sitting behind the Resolute desk to focus Democrats’ minds. The famously undisciplined coalition of interests demonstrated remarkable focus in the 2018 campaigns. Contrary to the suggestion Democrats needed a positive message (as if theirs was only anti-Trump), not since 2002 has an opposition party spent so little of its campaign efforts attacking an incumbent president, writes Paul Krugman, citing research by the Weslyan Media Project.

Instead, Democrats ran on health care and won. Bigly. Can they do it again? What else deserves their attention?

While with control of the House in Democrats’ hands, further repeal of the Affordable Care Act will be off the table. Although they may be able to prevent further piecemeal demolition of Obama’s signature program. Republicans under Trump eliminated the individual mandate and reinsurrance, Krugman notes. Democrats still lack the legislative clout to swing Medicare for All or some form of Medicare buy-in. They can talk about it plenty, but delivering will take more warm D butts in seats. Krugman suggests the states might move the needle themselves until that happy day arrives.

Not really a national program, Obamacare empowers states to create their own federally-supported insurance marketplaces. California worked at it. Republican-controlled North Carolina did not. Krugman offers Democrat-controlled states can advance their health care agenda for now by reversing the sabotage themselves:

The most dramatic example of how this can be done is New Jersey, where Democrats gained full control at the end of 2017 and promptly created state-level versions of both the mandate and reinsurance. The results were impressive: New Jersey’s premiums for 2019 are 9.3 percent lower than for 2018, and are now well below the national average. Undoing Trumpian sabotage seems to have saved the average buyer around $1,500 a year.

Now that Democrats have won control of multiple states, they can and should emulate New Jersey’s example, and move beyond it if they can. Why not, for example, introduce state-level public options — actuarially sound government plans — as alternatives to private insurance?

There is more to be addressed than health care. Working Americans need jobs paying enough so they can raise their families without having to depend on government assistance to put food on the table.

Writing for Daily Beast, Michael Tomasky urges Democrats to address wage theft. Employers taking time or holding back wages from employees is widespread and not just among large employers. (Last week I wrote about a man south of Delhi, India being attacked and scalped for asking for his son’s back wages.) With the notable exceptions of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (not a Democrat) and Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, few Democrats mention the problem, Tomasky writes.

Perhaps most notable for 2020, however, is that even while it failed in the Senate, Brown’s proposal to a) tax companies that pay so little their employees must depend on SNAP, and b) provide tax benefits to companies that raise wages. Every Democrat voted for it. Including Joe Manchin, Heidi Heitkamp, and Jon Tester, Tomasky adds. This is an issue Democrats can agree on and run on in 2020:

Wages, work, and the idea that if you work full-time you deserve a decent life have to be the cornerstones of what Democrats present to people in 2020. Medicare for All and free college, which constitute most of what I’m hearing out of the newly energized left that will be seated in the next House of Representatives, are secondary. Medicare for All failed in Vermont, and free college does nothing for the 65 percent of young people who don’t go to college. But everybody (mostly) works. Everybody is entitled to a good wage. If the Democrats haven’t firmly associated themselves with these simple ideas by 2020, they have failed.

Those $20,000 a year clerks enduring the Black Friday crush may be getting food stamps or working second and third jobs to get by. Even those working the high-end stores. Many will be part-timers covering their own health insurance out of that (or not). An America drawn to hope in 2008 finds itself in what appears to be a death-spiral of government corruption and dysfunction amidst an opioid addiction crisis and wage and hope stagnation. They voted for something in 2018, something Democrats will have a hard time delivering without more leverage in the states and in Washington. Democrats know what they have to do. Fortunately, they already agree on it, and voters too.

Leftovers

Leftovers

by digby

Try this Turkey Pozole. It’s really good. (Great for a hangover too…)

chile paste

2 dried ancho or pasilla chiles
1 garlic clove
2 tablespoons tomato paste

Soup and Assembly


2 tablespoons olive oil
1 medium onion, thinly sliced
2 15-oz. cans white hominy, rinsed (can subsititue corn)
8 cups turkey stock or low-sodium chicken broth
2 cups shredded cooked turkey meat
Kosher salt and freshly ground black pepper
Tortilla chips, sliced avocado, cilantro sprigs, and lime wedges (for serving)

chile paste:

Remove seeds from chiles; toast in a dry small skillet over medium-high heat, turning, until darkened and fragrant, about 4 minutes. Place in a medium bowl. Add 2 cups hot water; let sit until softened, about 5 minutes. Drain, reserving ½ cup soaking liquid. Pulse chiles in a food processor with reserved soaking liquid, garlic, and tomato paste until smooth.

soup Assembly:

Heat oil in a large pot over medium heat. Cook onion, stirring occasionally, until translucent, 6–8 minutes. Add chile paste and cook, stirring, until thick and darkened, about 4 minutes. Add hominy, turkey stock, and turkey meat; season with salt and pepper. Simmer until flavors meld, 10–15 minutes.

Serve with chips, avocado, cilantro, and lime wedges.

.

The battle is engaged, Chief Justice Roberts is in the crosshairs

The battle is engaged, Chief Justice Roberts is in the crosshairs

by digby

Joe DiGenova:

In a remarkably inappropriate and blatantly political statement Wednesday, U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts chastised President Trump for the president’s quite accurate criticism of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and its rogue district and appellate court judges.

The spectacle of the ostensibly nonpolitical chief justice engaged in a dispute with the president of the United States is insulting to the Supreme Court and to our system of justice.

Shame on the chief justice. What he did is unforgivable, especially after the corrosive Senate confirmation battle over now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who was the subject of bitter and baseless partisan attacks and character assassination by Senate Democrats.

With everyone looking for ways to remove the high court from the political thicket, Roberts strode arrogantly right into it. Sad day.

The best part of this statement is Di Genova claiming that it was Roberts who made the inappropriate and blatantly political statement — by saying that the courts are not partisan.

Whatever you and I might think of him, John Roberts is the apotheosis of conservative achievement.

And these people are choosing Donald Trump.

.

Classic Thanksgiving video for the ages

Classic Thanksgiving video for the ages

by digby

Before there was Trump there was Palin:

Fresh off a defeat in the 2008 presidential election, Palin headed to a turkey farm in her hometown of Wasilla, Alaska, to pardon a local bird — a common practice among governors.

Palin delivered her prepared remarks over frequent interruptions from clucking birds not as fortunate as the turkey getting the reprieve. She even touted herself as a “friend to all creatures great and small” before posing for a photo op.

What happened next was entirely unexpected. While many had recently learned that Palin could be unpredictable — even a maverick, perhaps — Americans couldn’t have foreseen her conducting a lengthy on-camera interview while live birds were being fed into a machine of mass turkey murder mere feet behind her.

Palin seemed to unwittingly nail her remarks, commenting on the need to find “levity” in her job as turkey after turkey was decapitated by the metal cone of death in the background. The man shoving the struggling birds into the device even looked up toward Palin and the camera as the governor presciently predicted that the spectacle would invite skepticism.

This is the Republican party of the 21st century.

.

This morning’s trainwreck

This morning’s trainwreck

by digby

His conference call this morning with members of the military was one for the books.

It was one of his worst.

.

Whitaker the drug warrior

Whitaker the drug warrior

by digby

Via:

Raeanna Woody’s crimes hardly seemed like they would add up to a life sentence in prison. She had two nonviolent drug convictions, for possessing marijuana and delivering 12 grams of methamphetamine. But when she was arrested in a third drug case, she said, the office of U.S. Attorney Matthew G. Whitaker decided to make an example of her.

Under Whitaker, who is now acting attorney general, Woody was given a choice: spend the rest of her life in jail, or accept a plea bargain sentence of 21 to 27 years, according to court records. She took the deal.

Judge Robert W. Pratt in the Southern District of Iowa later accused federal prosecutors of having “misused” their authority in Woody’s nonviolent case. He urged President Barack Obama to commute her sentence — and Obama did shorten her term, after she had served 11 years.

Woody’s case highlights one of the most controversial if little-known aspects of Whitaker’s ­career: his efforts to obtain unusually stiff sentences for people accused of drug crimes.

Whitaker spent nearly five years as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Iowa. His office was more likely than all but one other district in the United States to use its authority to impose the harshest sentences on drug offenders, according to a finding by a different Iowa federal judge, Mark W. Bennett, who called it a “deeply troubling disparity.”

Of course. This is what GOP hacks, circa 2005 were doing. He’s a classic.

.

Good people everywhere

Good people everywhere

by digby


A stranger saved this baby’s life:

A Dallas man saved a baby from a burning apartment building the day before Thanksgiving when he persuaded the child’s mother to drop her from a third-story window into his waiting arms, according to news reports.

“I didn’t want my daughter to lose her life,” Shuntara Thomas told KXAS. “He told me: ‘Just trust me. I got her, I got her.’ So without even thinking, I just dropped her.”

The 1-year-old girl was caught by Byron Campbell, who was one of the first people to arrive on the scene.

Campbell told Dallas News on Wednesday that he had seen smoke coming from the apartment building, so he drove to it. He went inside, knocked on apartment doors and told people to get out.

When he emerged from the building, he joined people who were using a mattress to help residents jump from the windows. That’s when he heard Thomas yell that she had a baby. “So I told her to drop the baby out,” Campbell said. “The baby was crying.”

After catching the baby, he said, he handed off the girl to a woman on the scene and went back to assisting others who were jumping out of the windows. Firefighters said six people escaped the burning building by going out the windows. No one was injured.

The fire destroyed 24 apartments that housed about 40 people, and the building has been demolished, KXAS reported.

“Throwing my baby out to a complete stranger that I didn’t know … but I do thank him because without him my child’s life would not have been saved,” Thomas told KDFW. “As long as I got my family, I’m good. So I may not have anything else, but it teaches me not to be thankful for the material things but to be thankful for everything that I do have.”

I’m thankful for everyday decent people behaving decently.

.

Too bigoted to fail? by @BloggersRUs

Too bigoted to fail?
by Tom Sullivan


Image via Army Times.

“Relax. Don’t worry about it, okay?” Defense Secretary James Mattis told Pentagon reporters Wednesday. His troops aren’t even carrying guns, Mattis reminded them.

Mattis responded to press questions about a Military Times report of a “Cabinet order” signed by White House Chief of Staff John Kelly that authorizes lethal force against migrants approaching the southern border. A White House decision memorandum obtained from a Defense Department source bears the same instructions and the signature of the president. Kelly signed the memorandum late Tuesday, reports Newsweek. (The web site has both.)

No violation

As justification, the documents argue “migrant caravans” fleeing gang violence and poverty in Central America represent a national security threat.

The documents reportedly authorize military forces deployed along the southern border to perform “military protective activities” including “a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search … in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security.” The document specifies military personnel shall not carry out “traditional civilian law enforcement activities” without further direction.

“There’s no violation of Posse Comitatus,” Mattis continued. “There’s no violation here, at all. We’re not going to arrest, or anything else. To stop someone from beating on someone and turn them over to someone else — this is minutes, not even hours.” Mattis was quick to add most active-duty troops along the border have no weapons.

Military Times supplies some background on Posse Comitatus:

The Congressional Research Service, the non-partisan research agency for Congress, has found that “case law indicates that ‘execution of the law’ in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act occurs (a) when the Armed Forces perform tasks assigned to an organ of civil government, or (b) when the Armed Forces perform tasks assigned to them solely for purposes of civilian government.” However, the law also allows the president “to use military force to suppress insurrection or to enforce federal authority,” CRS has found.

Civil rights groups were quick to raise objections. Public Citizen filed an immediate Freedom of Information Act request for the Kelly memo. Michael Breen, president of Human Rights First, issued a statement saying, “This legally dubious ‘cabinet order’ creates confusion, undermines morale, and may very well lead to violence.” Breen added, “Americans should be thankful that those currently serving are likely to exhibit more judgment than their commander in chief.”

Mattis last month objected to the use of force on the border to protect border agents, not necessarily on principle but because the Pentagon lacked authority, reports Daily Beast. So the Department of Homeland Security went over Mattis’ head to secure “the potentially lethal military force for which immigration hardliners in the administration had clamored.”

The administration has already suggested deadly force against migrants was acceptable. “Anybody throwing stones, rocks, like they did to Mexico … we will consider that a firearm,” the president said. “I told them to consider it a rifle.” He walked back those comments the next day.

This is a slippery slope tread by an especially slippery administration. Posse Comitatus “is a norm that cannot be allowed to fall,” writes Charlie Pierce at Esquire. There is no insurrection, no national security threat. DHS has identified 270 individuals among the migrants it claims have criminal backgrounds and are thus ineligible for asylum. Newsweek is unable to verify that claim.

The Washington Post reports Mattis now says the cost of Donald Trump’s military deployment to the border will exceed the $72 million estimate released on Tuesday: “All told, the cost of both the active-duty and National Guard deployments looks set to total more than $483 million by the end of this fiscal year in late September 2019.”

Walking right up to the line, stepping over it, and daring someone to push them back is a familiar tactic among hardliners. With these memos, the administration has walked up to another one. Immigration hardliners facing criticism for spending $72 million on an election-year stunt to put the fear of brown-skinned women and children into Trumpers now need a way to justify it. A single Army-issued bullet fired at migrants at the border will do.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Dersh drowns in a bucket of lukewarm water

Dersh drowns in a bucket of lukewarm water

by digby

The great civil libertarian Alan Dershowitz says it might not be a good thing for a president to try to use the power of his office to throw his political opponents in jail on trumped up charges, but apparently there’s nothing to be done if he does:

Former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz — who has gained notoriety in the Trump era as a frequent cable news supporter of the President — criticized President Trump on Wednesday for attempting to weaponize his Justice Department to attack his political foes.

“It’s a terrible mistake,” Dershowitz told “Fox and Friends” Wednesday morning. “You don’t want to weaponize the political differences.”

Dershowitz was responding to a Tuesday evening New York Times report that revealed Trump tried to get his Justice Department to prosecute his political nemeses Hillary Clinton and former FBI Director James Comey, before getting pushback from former White House counsel Don McGahn.

McGahn reportedly told Trump that taking that action would be an impeachable offense, a sentiment that Dershowitz did not share.

“No, it’s not an impeachable offense but it’s the wrong thing to do,” he said. “If you don’t like what people have done, run against them, use political weapons, do not use the criminal justice system.”

Well, try not to use it, anyway. But if you do it wouldn’t be good but it’s not impeachable. So whatevs.

Dershowitz seems to have concluded that only presidents have civil liberties. Interesting take.

.

Catching up on the palace intrigue

Catching up on the palace intrigue


by digby

There is so much going on these days that we can’t even keep up with the chaos among the White House staff. It’s still happening. From Gabe Sherman in Vanity Fair:

Following the sting of the midterms—which Trump still insists were a victory—staff housecleaning was supposed to provide some satisfaction. After the defenestration of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, next on the hit list was Trump’s long-suffering chief of staff, John Kelly, possibly accompanied by Homeland Security chief Kirstjen Nielsen.Kelly has managed to hang on in part because there was never an obvious replacement. But last week, it appeared Trump had finally settled on Nick Ayers, Mike Pence’s 36-year-old chief of staff. On election night, Ayers attended a White House party and was seen mingling with the president and Melania Trump. A source said the president asked Ayers not to join Pence on his Asia trip last week so he could be in Washington for an announcement. But in recent days, Trump’s plan appears to have hit a snag. Ayers’s appointment has gone from a sure thing to “who knows?” after White House staffers mobilized against him. “They’ve gone to POTUS. There is a campaign against Nick. And it’s vicious,” a former West Wing official said.

Ayers is an unctuously boyish Southerner, known for his strategic acumen—not incidentally in regards to his own career. Ayers’s candidacy has been championed most intensely by Ivanka and Jared Kushner, four sources familiar with internal discussions said. In Ayers, they see a generational peer who possesses a sophisticated understanding of Republican politics at a moment when the White House is turning its focus to the 2020 election. “They think he’s savvy,” a person close to the couple said. “Jared and Ivanka have been telling people Nick will get the role,” a prominent Republican said. One source close to the White House said the president’s sons Don Jr. and Eric also support Nick’s appointment. “Even Kelly’s biggest fans know the guy knows nothing about politics. We’re going to be at loggerheads in Congress and we have to get Trump re-elected. Nick understands politics,” another former West Wing official said.

Ayers is known in Washington as a sharp-elbowed operative who would come to the job with a long list of bitter enemies. “He’s nakedly ambitious,” a former White House colleague said. In advance of the 2012 Republican Primary, Ayers, then 28, sent an e-mail to friends about his decision to join Tim Pawlenty’s campaign that made it appear that Ayers was the one running for president. In 2017, Politico reported that Ayers was eyeing a run for governor in his home state of Georgia. He was 34. Earlier this year, I reported that Ayers was seen by some inside the White House as quietly positioning Pence for a presidential run in the event Trump wasn’t on the ballot in 2020. “Everybody knows Nick is not loyal to the president,” an administration official told me at the time.

The campaign to block Ayers is being led, not surprisingly, by Kelly loyalists, including Deputy Chief of Staff Zachary Fuentes and White House counselor Johnny DeStefano.DeStefano is said to have an intense dislike of Ayers. According to a second West Wing official, DeStefano spoke to Melania Trump’s chief of staff, Lindsay Reynolds, as part of an effort to turn the First Lady against Ayers’s promotion. But the First Lady has mostly sat this one out. “She is wary of Nick,” the source said. Elsewhere, even staffers who normally stay out of West Wing battles have been drawn in. A source said Dan Scavino, Trump’s social-media director, spoke out against Ayers to the president. “I’ve never heard of Dan weighing in on any staff debates,” the source said. (The White House did not respond to a request for comment.)

The problem for Trump has always been: if not Kelly, then who? “Look, I put the odds of Nick being chief down in the teens,” the source continued. “The challenge is, who else can they get?”

Lewandowski?

.