Skip to content

Month: September 2019

Maybe if the Border Patrol leadership didn’t lick Trump’s boots with such vigor, they wouldn’t have these problems

Maybe if the Border Patrol leadership didn’t lick Trump’s boots with such vigor, they wouldn’t have these problems

by digby

The New York Times reports that some Border Patrol agents don’t like their jobs much these days. With the kitchen workers spitting in their food and having to cage children and all it’s not much fun. People don’t like them.

For decades, the Border Patrol was a largely invisible security force. Along the southwestern border, its work was dusty and lonely. Between adrenaline-fueled chases, the shells of sunflower seeds piled up outside the windows of their idling pickup trucks. Agents called their slow-motion specialty “laying in” — hiding in the desert and brush for hours, to wait and watch, and watch and wait. 

Two years ago, when President Trump entered the White House with a pledge to close the door on illegal immigration, all that changed. The nearly 20,000 agents of the Border Patrol became the leading edge of one of the most aggressive immigration crackdowns ever imposed in the United States. 

No longer were they a quasi-military organization tasked primarily with intercepting drug runners and chasing smugglers. Their new focus was to block and detain hundreds of thousands of migrant families fleeing violence and extreme poverty — herding people into tents and cages, seizing children and sending their parents to jail, trying to spot those too sick to survive in the densely packed processing facilities along the border.

They asked for it, Remember? This was March of 2016:

Calling Donald Trump “the only candidate who actually threatens the established powers that have betrayed this county,” the National Border Patrol Council endorsed the New York businessman for president on Wednesday. 

The NBPC says it has never endorsed a presidential candidate in the primaries. But in a statement, it says it is “breaking with past practice.” Trump has made immigration a key part of his campaign for the GOP nomination, repeatedly promising to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, and to force the Mexican government to pay for it.

I’m sorry it’s unpleasant for them now. But it’s been deadly for the people they’ve been incarcerating, people many of them seem to truly hate:

Earlier this year, the disclosure of a private Facebook group where agents posted sexist and callous references to migrants and the politicians who support them reinforced the perception that agents often view the vulnerable people in their care with frustration and contempt.

Interviews with 25 current and former agents in Texas, California and Arizona — some conducted on the condition of anonymity so the agents could speak more candidly — paint a portrait of an agency in a political and operational quagmire. Overwhelmed through the spring and early summer by desperate migrants, many agents have grown defensive, insular and bitter.

The president of the agents’ union said he had received death threats. An agent in South Texas said some colleagues he knew were looking for other federal law enforcement jobs. One agent in El Paso told a retired agent he was so disgusted by scandals in which the Border Patrol has been accused of neglecting or mistreating migrants that he wanted the motto emblazoned on its green-and-white vehicles — “Honor First” — scratched off.

“To have gone from where people didn’t know much about us to where people actively hate us, it’s difficult,” said Chris Harris, who was an agent for 21 years and a Border Patrol union official until he retired in June 2018. “There’s no doubt morale has been poor in the past, and it’s abysmal now. I know a lot of guys just want to leave.”

They should. And they should blow the whistle on the toxic culture that pervades CPB and ICE.  Nobody with a heart should ever participate in something like this:

By and large, the agency has been a willing enforcer of the Trump administration’s harshest immigration policies. In videos released last year, Border Patrol agents could be seen destroying water jugs left in a section of the Arizona desert where large numbers of migrants have been found dead.

Some of those who worked at the agency in earlier years said that it had changed over the past decade, and that an attitude of contempt toward migrants — the view that they are opportunists who brought on their own troubles and are undeserving of a warm welcome — is now the rule, not the exception. 

Who can we thank for that?

And:

Trump jumped on the immigration bandwagon when he got into politics seriously with the birther movement and paid Sam Nunberg to listen to talk radio and tell him what they were all saying. Those people above along with others in hate radio made the anti-immigration movement what it is today.

The Border Patrol was established in 1924. Early agents were recruited from the Texas Rangers and local sheriff’s offices. They focused largely on Prohibition-era whiskey bootleggers, often supplying their own horses and saddles. Though horseback units still exist, the culture of the agency bears little resemblance to its past. 

It has become a sprawling arm of Customs and Border Protection, the country’s largest federal law enforcement agency, which is responsible for 7,000 miles of America’s northern and southern borders, 95,000 miles of shoreline and 328 ports of entry. On a practical level, the Border Patrol’s hubs along the Mexican border, known as sectors, operate in some ways as fiefs. 

In border cities, sector chiefs become household names, delivering annual State of the Border speeches. In the 1990s, an El Paso sector chief, Silvestre Reyes, used his popularity to win a seat in Congress.

Guess who primaried Reyes and kicked him out of congress?

Beto O’Rourke.

The CBP agents love them some Trump:

Mr. Trump “said it to us, he said it in public, ‘I’m going to consider you guys, the union, the subject-matter experts on how we secure the border,’” said Mr. Harris, the former agent and Border Patrol union official from Southern California who retired last year. “We had never heard that from anyone before.”

That’s mainly because we don’t have cops making the law in this democratic country. Or, at least, we didn’t used to. That’s not their job.

The private Facebook group, which was created in 2016 and had more than 9,000 members, became a forum for agents to vent about the increasingly thankless nature of their jobs and the failure of successive administrations to fully secure the border. 

Some agents who were members of the group said the tone of the posts shifted after Mr. Trump’s election, becoming raunchier and more politically tinged. A post mocked the death of a 16-year-old migrant while in custody at a Border Patrol station in Weslaco, Tex., with an image reading “Oh well.” A member used an expletive to propose throwing burritos at two Latina congresswomen.

Why wouldn’t it have gotten worse after Trump was elected. The whole damned country has gotten worse.

The union says it was just some bad apples of course. Blowing off steam, no doubt:

In some ways, though, the posts reflected a culture that was long apparent in parts of the agency. For years, the Border Patrol has quietly tolerated racist terminology. Some agents refer to migrants as “wets,” a shortened version of “wetbacks.” Others call them “toncs.” 

Jenn Budd, a former agent of six years who is now an outspoken critic, said a supervisor at her Border Patrol station in California had explained the term “tonc” to her: “He said, ‘It’s the sound a flashlight makes when you hit a migrant in the head with it.’” 

Josh Childress, a former agent in Arizona who quit in 2018 because the job had begun to wear him down, said the Facebook posts hinted at a deeper, darker problem in the agency’s culture. “The jokes are not the problem,” he said. “Treating people as if they aren’t people is the problem.”

It is the problem and it goes all the way to the top “joker” who calls these people animals and terrorists.

The rest of the story is worth reading. They talked to a lot of people and it’s clear that some of them are extremely unhappy with what’s happening in the agency. Many of them feel trapped because it’s a secure middle-class government job that gave them a way out of poverty.  Those agents are being failed by their Trump cultist leadership. The rest are co-conspirators.

.

All because selfish boys need their killing toys

All because selfish boys need their killing toys

by digby

America is now a war zone all because a bunch of insecure morons have to have their toys. And yes, to them the AR-15 is just a toy. It’s fun. They aren’t mass killers themselves. They are probably responsible gun owners. And that makes them accomplices to the lunatics and extremists who are mowing people down in Walmarts and synagogues. Because they don’t need these guns for anything but their own image  and they’re not going to use them for anything other than struttingaround like Rambo or getting some kicks at the range. They don’t need them. They just want them.

So we all have to walk around in fear and hundreds of people have to die because of their shallow selfishness.

.

Yes, Kavanaugh did it. And yes, they covered it up.

Yes, Kavanaugh did it. And yes, they covered it up.

by digby

The New York Times published an excerpt of a new book about the Kavanaugh confirmation which alleges that the FBI failed to interview at least 25 witnesses. It turns out that there was credible corroboration for one of the charges (shoving his penis in women’s faces in college) which was offered to the FBI.

Apparently, the president and his accomplices abused their power egregiously. Surprise!

The president responded this morning by abusing his power some more:

When Kavanaugh appeared before the committee that day to respond to Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony, he showed himself to be a hardcore partisan bully with the temperament of a 14-year-old boy with serious adjustment problems. Other Republicans revealed themselves to be the same. Let’s not forget hat they all vigorously kiss the ring, every single day, of a man who is on tape bragging about grabbing women by the pussy and is credibly accused of rape and assault all the way into his 50s.

They are all Brett Kavanaugh.

Crooks and Liars captured one of the discussions of the article on the Sunday Gasbag shows this morning:

Rather than defend the fact that the FBI and his committee obviously failed to do their jobs and properly investigate these allegations, Cruz lashed out at Democrats for calling for Kavanaugh’s impeachment and dismissed the reporting by the Times as just another liberal witch hunt from the “far left” that’s out to get poor Kavanaugh.

STEPHANOPOULOS: One of the big issues we’re going to talk about now with Republican Senator Ted Cruz of Texas. Senator Cruz, thank you for joining us this morning. And I — and I do want to get to guns but first, that breaking news I spoke with Senator Klobuchar about, Justice Kavanaugh. You’re a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee as well. What do you make of the new revelations from The New York Times, the calls from your fellow Texan Julian Castro to impeach Justice Kavanaugh?
SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): Well, George, good morning, good to be with you. I read that The New York Times article this morning. You know, I gotta say, they apparently spent 10 months with undercover reporters trying to track down every person that went to school with Justice Kavanaugh 30 years ago. You know, it’s an amazing level of reporting trying to just really dig up any dirt they can on the guy. I think that follows up with — with the rather shameful circus we saw during the confirmation hearing, where — where they took allegations, they sat on them, they didn’t make them public, they revealed them at the 11th hour.

And you know what, the Judiciary Committee did what we should have done. We held a hearing, we — we invited the principal witness to testify, we’ve heard it, the American people heard it and at the end of the day, the American people made a judgment that — that the evidence wasn’t there, the corroboration wasn’t there, and — and I think this article just shows the obsession with the far left, with — with trying to smear Justice Kavanaugh by going 30 years back with anonymous sources. It — it — it really is another sign of how —

STEPHANOPOULOS: You say the —

CRUZ: — nasty and divided the time is today.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You say the corroboration isn’t there but one of the points the article makes is that 25 witnesses weren’t even interviewed by the FBI and a named — a person named who is making allegations wasn’t interviewed by the FBI at all. That’s part of their point, that it wasn’t an adequate investigation.

CRUZ: Well, to be clear, the — the — the allegations the Senate Judiciary looked at and considered were the allegations from Dr. Ford, the allegations of sexual assault, that the committee rightly said if this happened, this is a serious allegation and — and we scheduled a hearing, we invited Dr. Ford to testify. We actually gave Dr. Ford the opportunity to testify in private if she preferred. Amazingly enough, she testified at the hearings. Her lawyer never passed that on to her. She said she didn’t want to be in that public hearings, but — but her lawyers apparently kept that a secret. And — and what you saw is you really saw the Democrats I think taking advantage of Dr. Ford and turning it into a circus.

You know, we saw a Spartacus moment in the middle of it, which showed how ridiculous the entire proceeding was. But at the end of the day, we listened to the evidence, we listened to all of the potential corroborating witnesses for Dr. Ford, the FBI interviewed them, examined them. Their testimony did not corroborate her allegations and the American people had a chance to look Judge Kavanaugh in the eye — now Justice Kavanaugh — and hear his explanation. And at the end of the day, I think this is The New York Times just — just — just being bitter enders.

And you know what, I bet you the next Democratic debate, they’ll all be saying impeach Kavanaugh, impeach Trump. There’s nobody they don’t want to impeach. And at some point, they just have to let the anger go and recognize that the democratic process actually moves on. And I think it’s time for them to do that.

Kavanaugh’s crimes, aside from the lying to the committee (which may actually be the result of drunken blackouts rather than dishonesty) were long in the past. Trump, on the other hand, is committing crimes left and right, abusing his power, corruptly using his office for personal gain and betraying the country. If they won’t impeach him, they surely won’t impeach Kavanaugh.

In fact, if they don’t get off the dime, I’m afraid that we can take impeachment out of the constitution, at least for Republicans. (Democrats, of course, will be impeached for the smallest infraction. They were already planning the impeachment of Hillary Clinton before the election.)

I’m watching people on TV talking about prosecuting Trump after he leaves office. I think that it’s possible the State of New York or California might prosecute him for state crimes. But we’re already hearing that the new president will have to “bind up the nation’s wounds” so a federal prosecution is probably off the table. And the fact that the congress was unable to impeach the president will weigh heavily on that decision. After all, if they couldn’t do it, maybe the whole thing was a witch hunt anyway. Why would prosecutors go out on a limb when the US Congress didn’t really try to make a case? Especially when they have the Mueller Report that clearly and unambiguously lays out the cover-up?

If the Democrats don’t impeach, the idea of Trump being held accountable by the legal system is unrealistic. He will get aways with it. And he will be a hero to tens of millions of Americans for doing it. Just like Brett Kavanaugh.

Crooks and Liars Nicolle Belle did a nice analysis of everything that was wrong with the New York Times’ headline and story, about this which is a scandal in itself.

Oy.

.

QOTD: Kellyanne

QOTD: Kellyanne 

by digby

On impeachment this morning:

Complete nonsense. Even Jerry Nadler said “oh it’s just a term.” They need to get a messaging meeting and they need to read the constitution of the Democratic Party. 

Americans, the Congress, they work for you. And they’re wasting your money and your time trying to impeach a president where there are no high crimes and misdemeanors…

Stop the nonsense of harassing and embarrassing this president and the people around him when you have no constitutional or legal basis to do so.

She was talking to Democrats. Sadly, it seems that some of them agree.

But I must confess that I didn’t know that the Democratic Party had a constitution. It’s nice that Republican hacks are so concerned about it though.

.

.

Jonestown of the mind by @BloggersRUs

Jonestown of the mind
by Tom Sullivan

The fierceness with which devotees of the acting president defend the indefensible in his name, and the reckless abandon with which they cast their avowed values to the wind is chilling. From his “trouble with a number of the Ten Commandments” to “palling around with” dictators to tearing apart desperate families to deporting the ill and disabled to denying refuge to hurricane refugees to threatening to get streets “cleaned up” of the homeless so they don’t “ruin our cities,” they stick by him. Even if they only infrequently vote. (Small blessings.)

If it was weirdly cultish before, it is even more so now. A sizable fraction of the population, it seems, has moved to Jonestown and it’s just a matter of time before their leader offers them a sugary kids’ drink to swallow to prove their loyalty.

America has both a fondness for and propensity for producing grifters. Ligaya Mishan joins commentators who consider grift “the ascendant ethos of our time.” The difference between grifters and common swindlers, she writes in the New York Times, is that grifters are small-time, not the kind of epic liars who leave the wreckage of lives and nations in their wake. They’re not even bad people, per se: They stand outside morality, defying the social binary of good and evil. They tend to pilfer just enough to disrupt but not devastate.” As Alexis de Tocqueville found prior to the Civil War, Americans pursue prosperity “ever tormented by the shadowy suspicion that they may not have chosen the shortest route to get it.”

By that definition, the head of the Trump Organization is a hybrid, a small-timer who stumbled into the biggest grift of his life, a kid left alone in a candy store or Santa’s workshop, eyes wide with possibility. More post-turtle even than George W. Bush, he finds himself atop a nation “deeply identified with the possibility of transcending humble origins and becoming someone powerful and new.” Not that he had humble origins, mind you. He was born into wealth and privilege. But as a “short-fingered vulgarian,” he cons fans less fortunate into thinking he is one of them and that they could be him. His wealth, his cunning, his stand outside morality is something to which they might aspire. They are one with him in spirit, glorying in owning the libs, the political short con.

Mishan writes:

OURS IS A CURIOUS time of both peak cynicism and peak gullibility. News is fake unless it comes from sources that espouse our worldview, in which case even the most preposterous conspiracy theory is seen as ironclad truth. Never have we been so suspicious or more ready to expose and accuse, and yet daily we accept fictions as the basis of reality, from the posturings of bots and provocateurs on Twitter to the radiantly lit, commercially sponsored posts of Instagram influencers for whom there is no distinction between the personal and the corporate, to the seemingly innocuous deceptions of friends who obsessively filter photos and curate their feeds to present a better version of themselves. We live in constant suspension of disbelief, what the American anthropologist Michael Taussig has called “this silly if not desperate place between the real and the really made-up.” This makes us easy prey for — perhaps even complicit with — grifters who play off our communal, mimetic desires. As the linguist David Maurer wrote in his 1940 study “The Big Con,” the grifter is “really not a thief at all because he does no actual stealing. The trusting victim literally thrusts a fat bank roll into his hands.”

Or, in this case, executive authority in the most powerful nation on Earth.

Serendipitously, a friend Friday recommended a 2017 book by Kurt Andersen, writer and host of the public radio’s Studio 360, as an insightful explainer for this political and cultural era. Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire: A 500-Year History traces Americans’ unique susceptibility to being dupes. With Graydon Carter, Andersen founded Spy magazine, the source of the “short-fingered vulgarian” epithet for the acting president.

Not having read the book, I watched an interview.

Andersen considers much of the rejection of authority and facts a byproduct of the anti-establishment ethos of the 1960s. “Do your own thing” morphed into believe your own facts. Even so, from its earliest founding, the United States has been a place that promotes “fake news” and “alternative facts,” an early biography of George Washington providing the “cherry tree” zombie lie. It demonstrates, Andersen says, “Americans’ defining desire to believe, and insistence on believing, in the unprovable and untrue of every variety.”

From Randian fantasies of the capitalist Übermensch to New Age belief in unmeasurable “energies” to fascination with UFOs and medical quackery, etc., a historic pattern emerges. They are not one-offs. Where once conservative lights kept the movement’s conspiracist fringe at arm’s length, slowly the conspiracists have taken over the Republican party. And now the White House. Gullibility is a feature, not a bug.

A former member of the Jonestown cult observes, “Many people, individually and in religious, social, and political movements around the world, seem so desperate for charismatic leaders who have ‘the answers,’ that they happily surrender common sense and reason.” It is a fine American tradition with which we cannot afford to be fine. It was when Jim Jones felt the authorities closing in that it was time for everyone to drink up.

That may not happen inside these borders, at least not in that way. But every day of watching supporters of this administration spout obvious untruths and defend the indefensible leaves the unsettling feeling we now inhabit a Jonestown of the mind.

The singer not the song: Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice (***½) by Dennis Hartley @denofcinema5

Saturday Night at the Movies

The singer not the song: Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice (***½)

By Dennis Hartley

It always gave me a chuckle that singer-songwriter Barry Manilow did not write his hit “I Write the Songs”, which zipped to #1 in 1976. The song was in fact composed by ex-Beach Boy Bruce Johnston, who wrote it for David Cassidy. Here’s where it gets interesting. While Cassidy released it as a single in 1975, it was originally recorded by Captain and Tennille for their 1975 album Love Will Keep Us Together (but never a single). Alas, Cassidy’s version went nowhere fast, despite his pop idol status at the time.

David Cassidy and Captain and Tennille were highly popular acts in the mid-70s. So what gives…why did Manilow’s rendition win out in popularity? Speaking in purely technical terms, is Barry Manilow a “better” singer than David Cassidy or Toni Tennille?

Must be that elusive “x factor”.

There’s a venerable “chicken/egg” conundrum regarding this sort of thing. It goes something like this: What’s more important, the singer, or the song? Given that this is all subjective to begin with…it depends. For example, the Beatles were not only superb songwriters, but singers as well; I prefer their original versions of their own material. I even love their covers of songs by Buddy Holly, Burt Bacharach, etc. Bob Dylan is a superb songwriter, but I’d much rather listen to the Turtles’ hit version of “It Ain’t Me Babe”, since Howard Kaylan and Mark Volman manage to sing it, oh, you know-on key?

Which brings us to one of the most successful singers of the last 50 years, Linda Ronstadt…who didn’t write her own hits either. Reminds me of a funny story. In preface to singing “Desperado” at a 2016 tribute concert to Ronstadt, Don Henley had this to say:

The song I’m about to do for you didn’t get much love or attention when it was released on [The Eagles’] second album in April of 1973. In fact, the executives at the record label freaked out… [feigning shock] “Oh god, they’ve made a fucking cowboy album!” And then Linda Ronstadt recorded the song [knowing laughter from audience] and put it on her album “Don’t Cry Now” that came out in September of 1973…and everything was different after that.

In the case of Linda Ronstadt, sounds like it’s the singer, not the song… n’est-ce pas?

Ronstadt (and that truly wondrous voice) is the subject of an intimate documentary portrait by directing tag team Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman (The Celluloid Closet, Howl, Lovelace). Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice is narrated by Ronstadt herself (archival footage aside, she only appears on camera briefly at the end of the film).

Bad news first (this is a matter of public record, so not a spoiler). While Ms. Ronstadt herself is still very much with us, sadly “that wondrous voice” is not. In 2012 she was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease (she mentions in the film that it runs in her family), which has profoundly affected her ability to sing. That said, she remains sharp as tack; in turns deeply thoughtful and charmingly self-effacing as she reflects on her life and career.

For those of us “of a certain age”, Ronstadt’s songbook is so ingrained in our neurons that we rarely stop to consider what an impressive achievement it was for her to traverse so much varied musical territory-and to conquer it so successfully at every turn. Name a genre, she’s likely mastered it and moved on: rock, pop, folk, country, country-rock, hard rock, soft-rock, new wave, torch, Latin pop, mariachi, light opera. Not to mention the 10 Grammy Awards, 3 American Music Awards, 2 Academy of Country Music Awards, etc.

What struck me is her humility in the wake of prodigious achievement. I don’t get an impression the eclecticism stems from calculated careerism, but rather from a genuine drive for artistic exploration. For example, when Ronstadt shares memories of growing up in Arizona singing Mexican canciones with her family, her decision to make an all-Spanish language album in 1987 makes perfect sense (record company execs fretted it was tantamount to career suicide, but when it went on to become the biggest-selling non-English language album in U.S. music history, I’m guessing they sang…a different tune).

Ronstadt is candid about her “rock chick” image, particularly in context of the music business environs of the 1970s, when it was considered “uncool” among many male musicians to play backup for a female singer. She notes that since she didn’t really have any role models, she had to carve her own way in dealing with “the boys in the band”, as well as the inevitable performance pressures that arise from playing packed arenas night after night, weeks on end. She certainly learned how to hold her own, but it wasn’t easy.

Despite her health condition, there’s no self-pity; Ronstadt comes off as pragmatic, forward-thinking and impressively resilient. There is a moment where the filmmakers gently coax her to appear on camera, while she is visiting with family in Mexico. She sings a traditional Spanish-language song with two of her relatives. At one point, she stops and asks they start again; she isn’t happy with her harmony (ever the pro). She takes pains to insist what she is doing is “not singing”, because she feels she has lost control of her instrument (not to my ears). They complete the number, and it is beautiful. It’s a bittersweet coda for the film, but I’d wager Linda Ronstadt’s song is far from over.

“Behind the music” archives at Den of Cinema
On Facebook
On Twitter

— Dennis Hartley

Dear Leader Watch

Dear Leader Watch

by digby

Fox is getting to be more and more like North Korean state TV every day:

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): Read The Art of the Deal. Some of you in the media mob, you might discover Trump says, always be willing to walk away from a deal, even up to the last second.

We saw Europe learn this the hard way. Remember, Neville Chamberlain came back after meeting with Hitler in Munich and trying to appease Nazi Germany told the people of Great Britain they will have peace in their time — but in the end, appeasement never works.

Winston Churchill had the moral clarity, he understood the nature of this enemy, and he knew there was only one way to negotiate with a tyrant and a killer and a mass murderer like Hitler, and he said it — “blood, toil, tears, and sweat.”

Man that’s dumb. So very, very dumb.

He’s lucky Fox News viewers are also historically illiterate and have apparently never paid any attention to anything a conservative has said over the past 60 years. If they weren’t they would realize that Trump is Chamberlain in this scenario.

They are on the team and they make no bones about it:

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): There’s one thing that’s going to be certain, though, and that is – as we were talking about this campaign – the biggest contributor will be the media mob. The New York Times, Fake News CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS – I mean, pretty much everybody except for like me, Tucker, Lou Dobbs, Rush, Mark, Jeanine, you know there’s only a few of us, I’m going to forget a few people. And then our great guests like Joe and Victoria and Gregg and John and I’m going to miss people, but you get my point. So will that have any impact in any way? Last question Kayleigh McEnany, Jeff Lord.

KAYLEIGH MCENANY: Yeah, the work that you do every night, Sean, is going to go a long way. It already has. We now have the Justice Department looking into the misdeeds of the Obama administration and look, if Joe Biden is the nominee, the Democrats really have a huge albatross around their neck ’cause he was right there in the center of all the wrongdoing we saw happen there…

JEFFREY LORD: You will be there and Tucker and Laura and all of these folks will be there to answer this.

.

House GOPers go back to basics

House GOPers go back to basics

by digby


I told you so …

House Republicans plan to run on tried-and-true issues in 2020: repealing Obamacare and reducing the national debt, even though the GOP fell short of both goals the last time the party had full control of Washington.

“The first thing we would do is make sure our debt is taken care of,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy told reporters during a meeting of party members in Baltimore to work on their election-year agenda.

They don’t really have anything else to run on. And anyway, their real agenda is licking Trump’s boots as vigorously as humanly possible. The details are unimportant.

It does take some gall to run on reducing the debt after three years of Trump’s free-spending on tax cuts and the military for no good reason, but really, what else do they have? I suspect they’re keeping their powder dry for a Trump win in which they would immediately commence rolling Obamacare into the “entitlements” definition. Trump won’t be running again (or he’ll be planning some kind of Reichstag fire to stay in office illegally. In either case, if the GOP takes the congress back as well (certainly possible — they cheat) they’ll go for it.

And obviously, the minute a Democrat takes over they will turn into shrill shrieking debt harpies. Screwing the economy and blowing up the deficit on taes and the military and then hectoring the Democrats into cutting spending on programs that help real people has been their go-to since Reagan. I don’t think they’ve had a new idea since 1982.

Let’s hope this agenda sounds as absurdly out of touch this cycle as it did in the last and McCarthy is kept out of the leadership of the House until the end of his career. Hopefully, that will be soon.

.

.

Drink some conservative snowflake tears

Drink some conservative snowflake tears

by digby

Beto wasn’t trolling. He believes what he’s saying and millions and millions of people agree with him. Someday this country is going to wake up to the fact that we don’t have to put up with this lunacy and start behaving rationally. I don’t know when that will happen but it has to. American children are growing up in a warzone, doing survival drills and learning how to protect themselves from weapons of war. All so that men (and the women who love them) who are suffering from extreme masculine insecurity can swagger around intimidating people.

But instead of liberals getting scared about this dweeb’s hysteria at the idea of having his toys taken away, maybe the liberals should just treat it the way they treat liberal outrage. By laughing in their faces.

.

Take his sharpie stat!

Take his sharpie stat!

by digby

On Saturday, an asteroid will pass by Earth that’s larger than some of the tallest buildings on the planet.

Asteroid 2000 QW7 is estimated to be between 290 meters and 650 meters in diameter, or between 951 and 2,132 feet, according to NASA. The world’s tallest building is the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, which reaches 2,717 feet tall. The second tallest building is the Shanghai Tower at 2,073 feet.

The asteroid will be traveling at 14,361 miles per hour when it passes within 3,312,944 miles of Earth at 7:54 p.m. ET.
Astronomers don’t believe the asteroid poses any danger, but NASA’s Center for Near Earth Object Studies is tracking it.

I think we can all see the problem here, can’t we?

.