Skip to content

Month: October 2019

Of course he made it up. Let’s stop pretending otherwise.

Of course he made it up. Let’s stop pretending otherwise.

by digby

Announcing Baghdadi’s death, Trump claimed that the ISIS leader was “whimpering” and likened him to a “dog” in his attempt to escape U.S. forces. Five senior Trump administration officials who watched in real time as the president spoke on Sunday morning each told The Daily Beast that they had no idea where the president got the “whimpering and crying and screaming” detail. Two officials recounted how after they heard that on Sunday, they immediately began messaging each other questions and comments like “uh where is he getting that?”

The comments confused officials in the Pentagon as well, some of who told The Daily Beast that there was no way Trump could have heard Baghdadi’s voice on the Situation Room livestream Saturday night because it did not have audio. Two senior officials said while President Trump could have spoken to commandos on the ground who carried out the raid, they said that has not often been the case in past operations.

And on Monday, questions about where the president got his information continued to make their way to administration officials. At a press briefing Monday afternoon, reporters peppered Acting Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley with questions about Trump’s remarks about Baghdadi “whimpering” and “crying.” Asked whether he too had heard the whimpering and crying from Baghdadi, Esper said: “I don’t have those details.” Milley said the president had planned to talk to unit members involved in the raid, but that he didn’t know the source of the Baghdadi description Trump used.

Baghdadi had commanded forces from hideouts in both Syria and Iraq and was responsible for the killing of thousands of individuals in those countries. He also inspired the kidnapping and killing of American aid workers and journalists as well as spectacular attacks overseas. His death was celebrated as a major breakthrough in a years-long effort to limit ISIS’ reach and operational capacity; and, as such, questions over the validity of Trump’s account of the raid mounted were dismissed by his supporters and Republican operatives as the gripings of a press corps determined to find superficial ways to ding him.
[…]
Trump has made similar overstatements before. Two people close to the president say that when they heard about his comments on the “crying” late ISIS leader, it reminded them of how Trump privately, as well as publicly, enjoys reflexively insulting his enemies in situations much less weighty than an anti-Islamic State raid. “Whether they’re actually crying or not, [Trump] will very often accuse some person he’s in a fight with, like a celebrity or a politician, of being weak and just crying all over the place,” one of the sources said. “It’s a favorite insult of his.”

Remember, it’s all projection. Trump is a whining toddler having a temper tantrum every single day on his twitter feed and in his press avails. No five-year-old whines about “unfairnessssss!” as much as he does. This need to call other people weak and servile is simply his way of trying to hide from himself.

.

The rich man pays no bills

The rich man pays no bills

by digby

I’m rather surprised that this hasn’t been discussed more. Giuliani works for the president for “free” while he’s collecting large sums of money from foreign actors, Sekulow won’t say who pays him and nobody knows whether Trump is footing any of the bills for his legal defense. It’s a big question. As you know, he tends to favor those who personally give him money:

In 1994, as a slew of scandals were popping up around President Bill Clinton, an attorney who worked with his defense team visited the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) in Washington to ask a simple question in person: Could the president of the United States accept free legal services from his personal lawyers?

An unambiguous answer came back from the OGE, the executive branch’s in-house experts at preventing conflicts of interest: No.

“An inquiry was made very early on after the president retained legal counsel,” the attorney, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Yahoo News. “Meetings were held with the OGE, and the OGE advised that any provision of legal services would have to be done at market rate.”

The OGE’s concern, the attorney explained, “was the appearance of undue influence.” In other words, a lawyer providing the president with free legal services, or a donor who subsidized those services so the president would not have to pay out of his own pocket, might appear to have substantial leverage over America’s most powerful elected official.

Flash forward 25 years, and President Trump is doing things very differently. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the most high-profile member of the personal legal team during both the Russia investigation and the Democrats’ ongoing impeachment inquiry, is providing free legal services to the president.

In an interview earlier this month with Yahoo News, Giuliani responded with an unequivocal “Yes, sir” when asked if he is representing Trump pro bono, including covering expenses. Jay Sekulow, Trump’s other main personal attorney, says his work for Trump is paid, but declined to say by whom or how much.

Until now, Trump’s legal arrangements have been in a gray area of regulation, but critics are trying to change that and the OGE is currently considering establishing new rules for how members of the executive branch can pay for their personal legal needs.

Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen, a nonprofit, nonpartisan foundation dedicated to combating corruption, has petitioned the OGE to establish guidelines covering personal attorneys for executive branch officials. Holman, who testified before the office earlier this month, described the current situation — where there are few guidelines and it is unclear where Trump’s lawyers are getting their money from — as “the Wild West.”

The man doesn’t pay his bills so lawyers are actually being smart if they arrange for people who want to bribe him to pay theirs.

I do wonder if at least a few of his fans might think it’s weird that the alleged multi-billionaire isn’t paying his own bills.

Ah never mind.They’ll just say he’s smart. Who likes to pay bills, amirite?

.

State TV goes full fascist

State TV goes full fascist

by digby

If you thought there was a chance they had some shred of decency left, think again:

They’re talking about a decorated officer and expert on Ukraine and Russia on the National Security Council. He emigrated to the US when he was three years old.

They are saying that he’s a traitor because he’s testifying against the Trump-Giuliani line before the congress. The sad thing is that I knew this was where it was going to go the minute I read that the guy was an immigrant who speaks Russian and Ukrainian. They are nothing if not predictable.

Looks like it’s the official GOP talking point:

.

Mark Meadows, we’ll meet again by @BloggersRUs

Mark Meadows, we’ll meet again
by Tom Sullivan


Still image from Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964).

Here we go (emphasis mine):

RALEIGH, N.C. — A state court on Monday blocked the use of current congressional districts in North Carolina for the 2020 election, which could lead to the drawing of new districts that would make several of the Republican-held districts far more competitive.

The state’s House delegation is made up of 10 Republicans and three Democrats, but many of the GOP-leaning districts rely on the same strategies the court rejected in a previous case about state legislative seats, including splitting Democratic strongholds in some parts of the state while packing as many Democratic voters as possible into other districts.

Drawing new House districts could spell more difficulty for either Rep. Mark Meadows or Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, Republicans who split voters in Asheville, a rapidly growing left-leaning city in the western region of the state. It could also shake up the districts surrounding the state’s high-growth urban regions.

The plaintiffs filed suit in state court after the U.S. Supreme Court took a pass this summer on ruling partisan gerrymandering unconstitutional. The state constitution guarantees that “[a]ll elections shall be free.” Partisan gerrymandering, they argued, violates the established principle that elections reflect the will of the people. The three-judge panel on Wake County Superior Court agreed and threw out the congressional districts.

In ruling against the Republican-led legislators who drew (and defended them) multiple times since 2011, the judges stated that under the existing maps, “the people of our State will lose the opportunity to participate in Congressional elections conducted freely and honestly to ascertain, fairly and truthfully, the will of the people.”

Given that Republican legislators recently managed under court edict to redraw the state’s House and Senate districts in a matter of weeks (just approved on Monday), the court rejected arguments that time will not allow another redraw so close to the opening of the filing period on Dec. 2.

Rick Hasen of Election Law Blog ponders Republicans’ next move:

The North Carolina defendants have an interesting choice to make. They could appeal the granting of this preliminary injunction in the state supreme court, though they are not likely to get a very good reception there given both the egregious nature of the gerrymander (it was the subject of the Rucho case at the U.S. Supreme Court deciding only federal constitutional issues) and the Democratic lean of the state supreme court. Alternatively, the state defendants could decide to redraw the district lines now, knowing that in doing so they might end up getting something approved which is more positive from their viewpoint than what might be done with a special master.

The ruling will throw a lot of campaigns into chaos. How much depends on the shape of final maps. Stephen Wolf of Daily Kos Elections posted a hypothetical nonpartisan map certain not to look exactly like what Republicans will try to slip by.

Here is another map the federal court in the Rucho v. Common Cause case found acceptable. (The numbering does not reflect existing congressional districts):


Whatever the final shape of the redrawn NC-11, it will still be a red district, just much less red.

Of interest to progressives is that in any likely acceptable scenario the city of Asheville will once again be wholly inside NC-11. The R+14 district currently is represented in part by Freedom Caucus chair and Donald Trump lackey, Mark Meadows. Rep. Heath Shuler, the last Democrat to represent NC-11, retired after Republicans in Raleigh redrew the district in 2011 to split Asheville/Buncombe County between NC-11 and NC-10 (Rep. Patrick McHenry). With Asheville back in his district, the shoe will be on the other foot and it will be aimed at Meadows’ backside.

The stars could align once again as they did in 2006 when Shuler won that seat in an R+6 district in a blue moon election from 8-term Republican incumbent Charles Taylor. “Chainsaw” Charlie’s bank was into fraud, conspiracy, and shady Russian deals before that was presidential.

Taylor had worn out his welcome. Tied at the hip to Donald Trump, Meadows is in danger of the same. He will have to defend his seat in a less favorable district and in a presidential year with expected record turnout (but with photo IDs required for voting).

The problem facing late entries to the Democrats’ congressional field here is the amount of money they’ll need to raise to be competitive and the abbreviated time they will have to raise it. The average Democrats spent to flip a House seat in 2018 was $5.5 million, with about a third of 18 races I looked at clustered around $4.6-4.7 million. Shuler (with his NFL name recognition) flipped NC-11 in 2006 for $1.85 million and received 54% of vote. Charles Taylor outspent him by more than 2 to 1.

Rumor has it several prospective Democratic candidates with the profiles and fundraising chops to run competitive campaigns have been on the sidelines waiting for new district lines before challenging Mark Meadows. Their time may have come. Meadows’ time may be running out.

HI THERE! We’re coming, @RepMarkMeadows. And so, Dear Readers, stand by with your credit cards handy.

State TV celebrates Dear Leader

State TV celebrates Dear Leader

by digby

If you wonder why millions of people in this country believe Donald Trump is immensely popular and beloved by one and all, take a look at this report from Fox News this morning:

JILLIAN MELE (CO-HOST): The president and first lady were at the game last night. They got there right around the time that it started, and they stayed a pretty long time. They were greeted with mixed reaction but they were out there smiling, waving to everybody as you can see in the crowd. So that’s what happened right around game time, let’s take you into the top of the second inning right now and show you some of that action.

If you are living in that bubble you will not know that the stadium booed loudly, chanted “lock him up” and hung Impeachment banners. They edited the sound and failed to tell the story.

.

On Wisconsin

On Wisconsin

by digby


This piece
about the state of the electorate in the crucial swing state is super interesting. All the analysts consider the state to be the focus of much of the 2020 campaign and it’s worth looking at a state that can elect both Ron Johnson and Tammy Baldwin to the Senate to see how the divide breaks down:

Hillary Clinton’s victorious Election Day model for Wisconsin was wrong. But her mistake was widely shared. The weekend before the 2016 election, a knowledgeable pollster unaffiliated with Clinton assured me that Wisconsin would be closer than many supposed — but Democrats would prevail nonetheless.

Wisconsin is not a Democratic bastion, despite presidential victories that stretched from 1988 until 2016. Obama’s solid wins in 2008 and 2012 were solid exceptions (and solid evidence of what an exceptional politician he was). Obama’s comfortable margins in the state obscured other, perhaps more relevant, data points. In 2004, John Kerry defeated George W. Bush in Wisconsin by little more than 11,000 votes – less than four-tenths of 1%. Al Gore won the state over Bush in 2000 by fewer than 6,000 votes.

Between its warm embraces of Obama, Wisconsin elected Scott Walker, an aggressive Republican partisan, as governor in 2010, again in 2012 in a recall election and once more in 2014. After going for Trump in 2016, the state voted for liberal Democrat Tammy Baldwin, the nation’s first openly gay U.S. senator, in a landslide in 2018, and also elected Democrat Tony Evers for governor over Walker by a very slim margin. Wisconsin is home to Obama-Walker-Trump-Baldwin voters, political shape-shifters who seem to defy reason as well as partisanship.

After the 2016 debacle, Vinehout and Kane zeroed in on another species of voter who contributed to the surprise: rural white men who were not regular voters. “I called up the clerks. I called up the poll workers. I wanted to know what happened,” recalled Vinehout in a telephone interview. What the clerks and poll workers told her was that a number of Wisconsinites who voted in 2016 were new faces. In rural counties like Buffalo, Vinehout said, “ward-level data shows that a lot of people came to the polls for the first time.”

Some Democrats fear that Trump has the equivalent of reserve troops — non-college-educated white males who didn’t vote in 2016 but who, after four years of Trump’s domination of media, political culture and the very oxygen we all breathe, might turn out in 2020.

You can register and vote in Wisconsin on Election Day. In three counties in this southwest corner of the state, each of which flipped from Democrat to Republican, same-day registration jumped from 2012 to 2016 — up 22% in Vernon County, up 40% in Crawford, up 54% in Grant. “They were in their 20s, 30s and 40s, and they were farmers and they were mostly men,” Vinehout said of the new voters. “And they voted for Trump.”

Read on for one of the most interesting breakdowns of the state of a swing state in 2019 that I’ve read yet. It is fascinating and slightly scary. It’s certainly not a slam dunk, either way.

Here’s a little taste of the dynamics they discovered abut 2016.

At BLOC, canvassers are trained to listen more than talk, asking residents what their concerns are. At times, the interaction veers from outreach toward constituent service. “Sometimes we’re connecting them, and we’re teaching them how to look up their representatives,” Lang said of BLOC’s canvassing in poor Milwaukee neighborhoods. “Do you know who your alderperson is? And they’re like, ‘Actually, no.’”

The political intelligence such conversations yield can be useful.

Maletha Jones, a BLOC canvasser, said that when she knocked on doors in 2016, a majority of the people she talked to said they supported Trump. “I guess they really didn’t like Hillary because of her background,” Jones said. “They wanted to give Trump a try.”

Jones said many of the black residents she spoke with in Milwaukee in 2016 had heard that Trump at one time had had a black girlfriend. Based on that, she said, many concluded he was probably not racist. Keisha Robinson, program director at BLOC, said she had personally reached the same conclusion about Trump, for the same reason.

As both the Mueller report and the Senate Intelligence Committee report on the 2016 election confirmed, black voters were targeted with propaganda from Russian agents during the presidential campaign. Much of it was dedicated to disparaging Clinton with the goal of suppressing turnout. According to both Jones and Robinson, many black voters they encountered in Milwaukee were both extremely distrustful of Clinton and favorably disposed toward Trump. “Some people were actually excited at the idea of Trump,” Robinson said.

Two-thirds of Wisconsin’s black population resides in the city of Milwaukee. Trump ultimately received few votes from blacks in the state. But the shape of that vote was hugely significant. From 2012 to 2016, the black vote margin in Wisconsin shifted a little more than 6 points from Democrat to Republican. A vote analysis by the liberal Center for American Progress found that black turnout fell 19 points from 2012 to 2016. Clinton, the report stated, “would have emerged victorious – though just barely – if she had retained Obama’s black support.”

Interesting, no?

There’s more about those farmers and the black vote and various strategies to turbo-charge the turnout on both sides. None of it is foolproof and, needless to say, nobody knows how much or what kind of interference on Trump’s behalf will be deployed. And, again, running against Trump is like running against an alien from a foreign planet so nobody knows nothin’.

.

Trump on a roll with the boys in blue. They love him.

Trump on a roll with the boys in blue

by digby

They love him. They really love him:

They’re fine with this as well:

He insults them to his face and they identify with him rather than their own institution. He compared their city to Afghanistan and they applaud him.

They just love him, no matter what he says. I honestly can’t think of anything he could do that would turn them against him.

They are law enforcement. And that’s scary.

He believes they are loyal to him and him alone.

.

We’re on fire

We’re on fire

by digby

Trump is trying to kill us. All of us. Mostly out of personal pique and a desire for revenge against people who didn’t vote for him.

.

The CW is that they’re flailing. Wrong. Chaos and repetition is their strategy.

The CW is that they’re flailing. Wrong. Chaos and repetition is their strategy.

by digby

My Salon column this morning:

President Trump left the safe bubble of his properties and his rallies to venture out into a world where people don’t cheer ecstatically when he appears. He attended the 5th game of the World Series on Sunday night and was lustily booed by the crowd which also held up impeachment banners and chanted “lock him up” for good measure. He is not used to that sort of thing and he had a hard time hiding his discomfort.

He probably thought he was going to be received as a hero since earlier in the day he’d announced that U.S. Special Forces had staged a raid in Syria that led to the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. (Who has been declared dead several times before, to be fair.) No doubt he was gravely disappointed to turn on the TV and see that the impeachment inquiry that is bedeviling him remains at the top of the news. If he had it in his head that wagging the (“beautiful, talented”) dog would tamp down impeachment talk, by the time he got into his jammies on Sunday night he must have realized that it didn’t work.

Last week we saw the absurd protest staged by Trump’s favorite court jester, Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and several dozen other GOP members of Congress who stormed the secure facility where witness depositions are taken in private session. They made a big show of claiming that the process is being used improperly by House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif,, because Republicans like Gaetz are not allowed in the room to ask questions and transcripts are not being released to the public.

This is ridiculous, of course, since all members of the House Intelligence, Oversight and Foreign Affairs committees, of both parties, are allowed to participate and ask questions. According to the Washington Post, Republicans, led by Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., have been quite active during these long depositions. Mostly they seem to be trying to find out the name of the CIA whistleblower, and to further conspiracy theories about Ukraine supposedly working with Hillary Clinton to sabotage Trump in the 2016 election. They also want to know if these witnesses are loyal to Trump because, as we know, anyone who fails to declare fealty to him cannot be trusted to tell the truth. With his usual dignity and grace, Trump recently suggested that at least some of these witnesses were “human scum.”

Meanwhile, we had Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., fatuously declaring that the impeachment inquiry is unfair and offering a resolution to condemn it in the Senate. That was a meaningless gesture, more or less designed as a test vote to reassure the president that he doesn’t have to worry about being convicted in an impeachment trial. As of Sunday, only three Senate Republicans had failed to sign on.

But some of them have gone even further, such as Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., who told CNN’s Jake Tapper that he believes Schiff and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi want to give Trump “a fair and impartial firing squad.” (Kennedy sees himself as a clever and colorful character.)

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas just went for it:

That’s odd, considering that Cornyn signed the recent Senate Select Committee on Intelligence findings confirming that Russia was behind the 2016 election interference. So he knows better. But he’s up for re-election in Texas next year and is playing to the big rube in the White House, who was no doubt pleased.

The Beltway conventional wisdom, repeated like a mantra dozens of times a day, is that the Republicans aren’t winning on the facts of impeachment so they are reduced to attacking the process. That assumes this is some sort of wild Hail Mary pass without any hope of accomplishing anything. Pundits and analysts marvel at the fact that the White House doesn’t have an “impeachment war room” and that the president serves as his own communications director, assuming that means the process is thoughtlessly chaotic and purposeless. Axios reports that an informal impeachment meeting now takes place daily in the White House, but it doesn’t appear to be geared toward a disciplined response to the onslaught of revelations because that’s simply not possible. Donald Trump is uncontrollable and there’s no use even trying.

That doesn’t mean there isn’t a plan. It might not be fully articulated or laid out in a PowerPoint presentation. But for all of Trump’s many failings he does have one talent: personal survival. He has been dancing as fast as he can his whole life, and he is highly skilled at getting out of trouble. In this case, we can see how he thinks he’s going to do that, because he has already done it once during his presidency.

People underestimate how well the “No collusion, no obstruction” and “Witch hunt!” strategy worked with the Mueller investigation. When Robert Mueller took that job he was considered the single most honorable, straight-arrow lawman in the nation, and was widely praised by prominent members of both parties. But through sheer repetition, echoed by his media minions, Trump managed to convince millions of people that Mueller, a lifelong Republican, and his team of prosecutors were a bunch of vengeful Democratic hacks out to take him down for partisan reasons. With the help of Attorney General William Barr, that narrative was reinforced upon the release of Mueller’s report, and it solidified the “witch hunt” meme that Trump and his supporters continue to push to this day.

I think most people who aren’t in the TrumpWorld bubble were taken aback that the Mueller report didn’t pack a bigger punch. After all, it laid out a case that the president had welcomed election interference by a foreign adversary on his behalf, and then repeatedly broke the law trying to cover it up. But Democrats in the House seemed unimpressed and the public more or less shrugged it off. True or not (and of course it wasn’t), “no collusion, no obstruction” pretty much stuck.

Trump and his henchmen are running the same game with the impeachment inquiry into Ukraine. They’re denigrating the witnesses, attacking the investigation as a partisan witch hunt, and saying that Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian president was “perfect” over and over again. It is apparent that they expect the president to be impeached in the House, but they will acquit him in the Senate — not on the merits of the case, but because the process was supposedly illegitimate.

The point is to rally their white working-class voters by stoking their rage and resentment, and trying to convince what remains of their white college-educated vote to stay the course. Imagine the feral, frothing-at-the-mouth Lindsey Graham of the Kavanaugh hearings leading the charge, with a smirking Mitch McConnell by his side. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and Tom Cotton will give soaring speeches railing against the Democrats’ illegal crusade to depose the duly elected president, echoing the Trump’s robotic messages once again. Perhaps there will be a couple of defectors who vote to convict — Mitt Romney and one or two others — but nonetheless, Trump will be acquitted and will spin it as “total exoneration” once again.

Will it work? Who knows? If I had to guess I’d say it won’t be persuasive to the Independent and suburban voters he’s going to need to eke out another win in the Electoral College. But it’s a mistake to assume that Trump and the Republicans are flailing around without any purpose, and attacking the process for lack of any other options. They’re doing this because it’s worked before, and they figure they might just get away with it again.

.

The NY Times and Its Diner Obsession by tristero

The NY Times and Its Diner Obsession 

by tristero

Diner wisdom? Seriously? Fucking again????

At the diner she manages in the heart of New Mexico’s oil country, Joni Moorhead talks to roughnecks all day long about potholed roads, cramped lodging camps, soaring rents — and state politics. 

“I’d load up my guns for the fighting if we could just secede and join Texas…”

Oh, how colorful is the beating heart of America’s hinterlands when it comes with a side of fries.