Skip to content

Month: November 2019

The wingnuts finally noticed our second front in the culture war: Thanksgiving

The wingnuts finally noticed our second front in the culture war: Thanksgiving

by digby

It’s going to be a bloody battle:

Diamond & Silk decried the so-called war on Thanksgiving with Ainsely Earhardt on President Donald Trump’s favorite morning show “Fox & Friends,” a continued battleground for the conservative culture wars.

Social media personalities and political activists Lynnette Hardaway and Rochelle Richardson, who go by the names Diamond & Silk, told “Fox and Friends” they were upset by a recent HuffPost editorial, which called on Americans who celebrate Thanksgiving to do so in a way that reduces their carbon footprint in order to account for climate change.

“I get tired of people that have lived their life and have eaten meat telling us not to eat meat,” Hardaway said. “Don’t tell us what we can and cannot eat. If you have a problem with climate change, stop driving cars ⁠— ride on your horse to work. You do everything you can to fix the climate, but don’t infringe upon my right to have Thanksgiving with my family.”

The Fox News personalities were criticizing a HuffPost article titled “The Environmental Impact Of Your Thanksgiving Dinner,” which was written by Alexandra Emanuelli. In the op-ed, Emanuelli gave various advice for reducing one’s climate footprint on the annual holiday, including replacing meat and meat byproducts with plant-based alternatives, purchasing ingredients from vendors who provide local materials, not wasting food and traveling shorter distances for Thanksgiving dinner.

Diamond and Silk were actually polite compared to these snotty little bitches:

Honestly, there isn’t even one wingnut with the emotional maturity of a 15-year-old anymore.

This is why I will no longer tolerate anyone telling me that we have to be “sensitive” toward the feelings of all those poor white working-class folks and elderly malcontents who watch this drivel all day long. They may be “joking” but the message it sends is clear: fuck the planet, own the libs. That’s going to kill their children whom they clearly don’t care about. Unfortunately, it’s going to kill everyone else children too.

.

Yes, Trump is dumb enough

Yes, Trump is dumb enough

by digby

A nice explainer by Chris Hayes:

I really enjoy the live format. As someone who’s job requires that I watch a LOT of cable news, it’s a nice change-up from the daily routine. It’s just as informative but there’s a fresh energy there.

.

Can you believe this guy?

Can you believe this guy?

by digby

Crude and creepy as always:

While meeting with President Donald Trump, the parents of a British teenager who was killed in a traffic collision with the wife of a U.S. diplomat were offered money from the Treasury by the president, which they refused, according to The Guardian.

Harry Dunn, 19, was riding his motorcycle near the Royal Air Force base in Northamptonshire, England when he was involved in an accident with Anne Sacoolas. Dunn died of his injuries in the hospital while Sacoolas claimed diplomatic immunity and left the United Kingdom. Trump invited Dunn’s parents, Tim Dunn and Charlotte Charles, to the White House to discuss the case.

Toward the end of the meeting, Trump intimated that he had Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin “standing by ready to write a check.”

“It was almost as if he let it slip out,” said family spokesman Radd Seiger. “When he said, ‘We’ve got the driver here’, he basically meant we’re all going to have a big hug and a kiss and I’ll get my Treasury guy to write a check. That’s how it was. On the day it just didn’t register with me, but the more I think about those words, the more shocking it is.”

He tried to buy them off. With taxpayer money, no less. And that wasn’t all. He ambushed them too.

During the meeting, Trump claimed to have Sacoolas in the next room, ready to meet with Dunn’s parents. Dunn and Charles declined the invitation, informing the president they would not meet with Sacoolas unless it was on U.K. soil.

Here’s his attitude:

He has no redeeming value. Not one thing…

.

Two baby Trumps go to the big game

Two baby Trumps go to the big game

by digby

One of the babies is going to be very mad:

There will be more than one VIP at Saturday’s football game between the University of Alabama and Louisiana State University.

Four blocks from the Tuscaloosa, Ala., stadium set to host President Trump, the familiar face of what activists call a “Very Important Protester” — the mocking “Trump Baby” balloon that’s met POTUS around the globe — will glower above the festivities.

A GoFundMe page has raised several thousand dollars more than the $4,000 needed to bring the balloon to Alabama and set it up, organizers say. The blowup caricature of a scowling, orange-faced president in a safety-pinned diaper has delighted activists since its first incarnation — 20 feet tall and filled with helium — went up for Trump’s trip to the United Kingdom last year.

The blimp will be the latest conspicuous show of opposition to greet the president at a sports event, after long boos at a World Series game and mixed reactions at a UFC match in New York. Donations toward the display hit targets within hours of the fundraiser’s launch, in a testament to Baby Trump’s reliable appeal to the president’s critics.

The fundraiser “just kind of took off,” said Trace Fayard, a 24-year-old Tuscaloosa resident who helped organize the effort to bring Baby Trump to the area of Bryant-Denny Stadium. “I went out to the bar last night and the bartender was talking about it, and it had only been up for 45 minutes.”

The GoFundMe page says extra funds will go toward the Montgomery, Ala.-based Equal Justice Initiative, a nonprofit that aims to combat mass incarceration and racial inequities.

Baby Trump’s debut in London inspired many copycats, while Trump supporters criticized it as petty (former U.K. Independence Party leader Nigel Farage called the blimp “the biggest insult to a sitting US President ever”). A website under the name Baby Trump Tour now loans out six giant infants and tracks their appearances at Trump visits around the country, from a Florida rally to a Pennsylvania Shell plant.

Many anticipate a warmer welcome for Trump at Saturday’s football game than at the World Series and the mixed martial arts matchup. The Tigers and the Crimson Tide will face off in a red state that the president won by a large margin in 2016.

“If not for the, at best, lukewarm reaction at those two sporting events, would Trump be traveling to see No. 1 LSU play No. 2 Alabama?” a recent article on AL.com asks. “And at an event where he figures to receive overwhelming cheers?”

But the president’s planned visit has also kicked up controversy. A student government leader at the University of Alabama sought to assure people Wednesday that they wouldn’t face penalties for showing their disapproval this weekend, amid an uproar over a warning that organizations engaging in “disruptive behavior” would lose their block seating for the rest of the season…

“I’ve never once been warned not to be ‘disruptive,’ ” one email recipient wrote on Twitter.

Comments on the GoFundMe page for Tuscaloosa Baby Trump also suggest fans will not be entirely welcoming to a divisive leader.

“I decided I would rather send [my alumni dues] to you to protest this abomination than to send them to [University of Alabama] after allowing this fool to come ruin our big game,” one person wrote.

“I do not want my university used as a political platform and ego boost for 45,” said another, promising to show up “with protest signs and booing loudly.”

Trump supporters, meanwhile, have shared their disappointment with the balloon stunt.

“What a shame that you chose to embarrass the University of Alabama and the president of America instead of focusing on a great game,” on woman messaged Fayard, in a note that he says she also sent to his boss. Fayard’s co-organizer got similar expressions of displeasure.

.

Oh look, somebody read the transcripts

Oh look, somebody read the transcripts

by digby

Tamara Keith at NPR read them:

When the House impeachment inquiry began more than a month ago, much of the focus was on a complaint from a whistleblower that drew attention to a July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, during which Trump asked for investigations into potential political rivals.

The whistleblower accused Trump of abusing his office for political gain and laid out a road map that House Democrats have followed in their investigation.

Trump has spent weeks questioning the whistleblower’s motives and slamming the account for being inaccurate. But as this annotation shows, most of the complaint has been corroborated during closed-door depositions of administration officials, through public statements and from a rough transcript of the call itself, released by the White House.


Click here
to read the annotated document. It’s not long. Send it to your Trump relatives. It’s pretty devastating.

CNN’s Manu Raju, Jeremy Herb and Marshall Cohen also read all 2,677 pages of witness transcripts:

To President Donald Trump, the whole flap with Ukraine is over a “perfect” phone call.
“It’s based on a single phone call of congratulations to the President of Ukraine, which they fraudulently mischaracterized to sound absolutely horrible,” Trump said a few weeks ago of his July 25 call with the Ukrainian President cited by a whistleblower complaint.

But a review of more than 2,600 pages of transcripts released this week from eight witnesses who have testified in the House impeachment inquiry over the past six weeks shows how controversy over Trump’s Ukraine policy had been brewing inside the US government for months. It roiled efforts to bolster a key strategic alliance after Trump enlisted his own personal attorney to work outside normal diplomatic channels in an apparent effort to bolster his reelection chances.
The testimony details how top US officials were alarmed that Trump had outsourced Ukraine policy to his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, who had pushed top Ukraine officials to publicly announce an investigation into the Bidens and to pursue a conspiracy theory that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 elections to help Democrats. Giuliani’s efforts, with support from the President, led to the ouster of America’s top diplomat in Ukraine, who stood in his way, while enlisting emissaries who have since been indicted.
Moreover, the testimony shows a President detached from the integral role Ukraine plays in US policy against Russia — but also animated in his agitation toward Ukraine. And the testimony of at least one witness links Trump to the decision to withhold nearly $400 million in security aid for Ukraine until that country announced it would pursue the investigations into his political rivals.
Yet, there still remains one unanswered question: Why was the aid delayed by the White House? While there’s ample circumstantial evidence pointing the finger at the President’s desire to push Ukraine to publicly announce a probe of his political rivals first, the White House has blocked key figures — like acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney — from testifying, and they could shed more light on the decision to withhold the aid.
“It actually came as a direction from the Chief of Staff’s office,” said Fiona Hill, who was a top Russia adviser at the White House.

You can click the link for all the details and I highly recommend that you do it if you have the time. It’s not too long. But it’s an excellent primer on the case as it stands today.

The one thing that goes unsaid is that one again, Trump’s decision benefitted Russia. At some point, you have to stop wondering why he does what he does and just accept that he’s doing it to please Vladimir Putin. We don’t know why he is so hellbent on doing that but there really is no question that he is doing it.

Dispatch from Bizarroworld

Dispatch from Bizarroworld

by digby

While normal people are focused on impeachment and electoral politics, this is what the right wing is obsessing about:

I’m sure you can find an article about this apparently gigantic scandal if you are really curious. But in a nutshell, a producer at ABC got a copy of a reporter saying they had the Jeffrey Epstein story a while back and the network spiked it ostensibly because of Epstein’s friendship with Clinton. This producer had moved to CBS and CBS fired her when this came out.

If you think this might not be the biggest story of the day, don’t tell the wingnuts. They are OUTRAGED!

Meanwhile, this is fine:

.

Expanding Democrats’ reach by @BloggersRUs

Expanding Democrats’ reach
by Tom Sullivan

Freedom Caucus chair Mark Meadows still wants to be Donald Trump’s next chief of staff, the Washington Examiner reported on Friday. Meadows did not make the cut last December when he was in the running. Mick Mulvaney holds the job in an “acting” capacity for now, and Mulvaney is under a cloud.

It might be an opportune for Meadows to leave his R+14 sinecure in North Carolina’s far west before it leaves him. A state court has ordered congressional districts redrawn for the 2020 cycle. Before the 2011 “surgical” gerrymandering that split Asheville between NC-10 and NC-11, Blue Dog Heath Shuler held the R+6 seat. Any map acceptable to the court today could make Meadows’ reelection far more challenging. Good time for him to consider a job change.

Republicans in Raleigh are working on the new map this week in a process rumored to be public. As I noted Thursday, Stephen Wolf of Daily Kos Elections expressed doubts:

Like many swing and red states, much of North Carolina is rural. “West of the Balsams” (as Shuler referred to a ridge 40 minutes west of Asheville), NC-11 is densely forested and sparsely populated. That doesn’t mean there are no Democratic voters out there. NC-11 went narrowly for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primary.

This week, New York magazine examined how Democrats can take back rural places like that.

Stephen Smith helped organize West Virginia’s Working Families Party affiliate. He is running in 2020 as a Democrat to challenge incumbent Republican Jim Justice for governor. He tells Sarah Jones, “In West Virginia and in most rural places in America, the fight is not left versus right at all. It’s the good old boys versus everyone else.” That rings true here as well.

Jones writes:

The Can’t Wait campaign isn’t necessarily about electing Democrats, but about fundamentally changing the makeup of the state’s political class … But Can’t Wait has ambitions bigger than the governor’s mansion: It wants to build a movement. The group now has a presence in each of the state’s 55 counties, where county captains direct organizing at the local level. It also runs 39 teams committed to organizing specific demographics and communities, a tactic that builds on recent populist momentum in the state.

West Virginia’s teachers sparked national protests in 2018 after they staged a walkout. When Republican legislators tried to introduce charter schools to the state in 2019, teachers walked out again.

Jane Fleming Kleeb, the chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party, has criticized party leaders for what she characterizes as their neglect of rural constituencies. “I think one of the biggest problems that we are facing, and this may sound so simple to say, is that none of our national party leaders live in a rural community,” she said. “When you’re looking at a candidate in a rural community and you’re not from a rural community, you don’t see the path to victory.”

People who actually live in those communities, she added, “know what is possible and how to win.”

But they could use some support. Nebraska once received $25,000 per month from the national party. A Sanders supporter in 2016, Kleeb says things have gotten somewhat better after getting much worse:

“I tell Chair Perez this, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi was just in Nebraska two days ago and I said this to her as well, we cannot continue to starve state parties and think that somehow we are magically going to come up with some unicorn of a candidate that is going to turn things around,” said Kleeb. She adds that things have improved recently: Her state party is now getting $10,000 a month from the Democratic National Committee, as opposed to $2,500 a month while President Obama was in office.

Former senators Claire McCaskill, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Donnelly of Indiana believe Democratic policies are out of step with rural America. They’ve formed their own One Country Project aligned with Partnership for America’s Health Care Future which, the Intercept reports, opposes Medicare for All.

Jones continues:

The three former senators share a familiar logic. They conflate rural with a preference for centrist or even conservative policies and rhetoric. In this vision, rural America is still Trump country. Its residents will budge so far and no further, so the naïveté of the left threatens the party’s survival.

Yet, hospitals are closing by the dozens in rural America, especially in states that rejected Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act. Farm country communities are becoming food deserts, the New York Times reported this week:

The loss of grocery stores can feel like a cruel joke when you live surrounded by farmland. About 5 million people in rural areas have to travel 10 miles or more to buy groceries, according to the Department of Agriculture.

Dollar-store chains selling cheap food are entering hundreds of small towns, but their shelves are mostly stocked with frozen, refrigerated and packaged foods. Local health officials worry that the flight of fresh foods will only add to rural America’s health problems by exacerbating higher rates of heart disease and obesity.

Many of the places losing their grocery stores are conservative towns that value industrial agriculture and low taxes. About 75 percent of the people in the county containing Winchester [Illinois] voted for President Trump. But people in these communities have also approved public money to kick-start local markets, and they are supporting co-ops whose cloth-bag values and hand-stuffed packs of arugula can feel more Berkeley than Mayberry.

“Communities tell me: We don’t want to use the term co-op,” said Sean Park, a program manager for the Illinois Institute for Rural Affairs. He has helped guide rural towns through setting up their own markets. “It’s ironic because it was farmers who pioneered co-ops. They’re O.K. with ‘community store.’ They’re the same thing, but you’ve got to speak the language.”

Smaller municipalities (map at top) and rural places want and need attention. They need local hospitals to remain open more than they need them to remain for-profit. They need broadband service being stymied by corporate lobbyists angling in state capitals for subsidies and a piece of the action, and by Republicans unwilling to support it at the federal level.

Howard Dean once countered (as Kleeb does now): “If you don’t show up in 60 percent of the country, you don’t win.”

Democrats who promote every damned presidential election as the most important election of our lifetimes never find time or dollars for building presence and influence in places that determine the composition of state legislatures which 1) influence the composition of the U.S. House through redistricting, as well as 2) the partisan balance in the U.S. Senate, and ultimately 3) the composition and tenor of the U.S. Supreme Court. The suburbs this week may have handed Kentucky’s governorship to Democrats, but very narrowly. Republicans won the rest of the statewide races.

QOTD: NY Times editorial board

QOTD: NY Times editorial board

by digby

Just this:

“The Warren campaign calculates that under Ms. Warren’s plan, Mr. Gates would owe $6.379 billion in taxes next year. Notably, that is less than Mr. Gates earned from his investments last year. Even under Ms. Warren’s plan, there’s a good chance Mr. Gates would get richer.”

Is it ok that the billionaire simply adds less to his massive, ridiculous fortune under her plan?  Is that such a hardship? Will billionaires be able to function without taking every last penny they can lay their greedy hands on?

I simply cannot have even the tiniest concern for these people. It’s ridiculous that we are even talking about this. If you are that rich you never have to even think about money again for many lifetimes and neither do your heirs.  So STFU and help save the country and the planet.

.

PBS! Listen to Bill Moyers! It’s important!

PBS! Listen to Bill Moyers! It’s important!

by digby

I know that most people get news from their twitter feed or Facebook on the run these days. Maybe they catch a few minutes of CNN or Rachel Maddow. (And, of course, there are the Fox viewers but they are a lost cause.) A lot of them will get their impression of the historic impeachment hearings next week from the pundits and cable analysts and that’s fine as far as it goes.

But the fact is that many people are at work all day who would like to see the impeachment hearings and would appreciate it if there was a way to sit down in the evening and watch them all the way through. I know that sounds old fashioned but I truly believe these people exist`and the public TV network should accommodate them.

Bill Moyers and Michael Winship make the case:

With the House set to hold its first public impeachment hearings next week as part of the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, renowned public broadcast journalist Bill Moyers took out a full-page ad in the Friday print edition of the New York Times calling on PBS to carry the hearings live on television and re-air them in primetime every night, just as it did during the Nixon impeachment proceedings.

“Now, during yet another great Constitutional crisis, it’s time for PBS to stand up again—to air the Trump impeachment hearings live during the day and repeat them in the evening primetime hours,” reads the ad (pdf), which Moyers co-authored with longtime collaborator and Common Dreams senior writing fellow Michael Winship.

“Plenty of Americans still rely on good old broadcast TV to get the word,” the ad—which appears on page 5—continues. “Hearken, PBS: Pull out the stops once again, and for the sake of the nation, throw away the schedule and air the Trump impeachment hearings in prime-time. Who wins? Democracy—and viewers like you.”

In an op-ed for Common Dreams Friday, Moyers and Winship called readers to reach out to PBS directly or their local public stations and urge them to air the hearings.

(Disclosure: Moyers sits on the board of the Schumann Media Center and Winship’s fellowship receives funding from the foundation.)

Moyers and Winship both began working in public broadcasting “when Watergate was at the top of the news,” the veteran journalists noted in Common Dreams. Moyers began his long career at PBS with the Bill Moyers Journal, which aired between 1972 and 1976. Of the 37 Emmy’s he received over the course of his career, Moyers’ very first was for an essay on Watergate.

PBS’ historic gavel-to-gavel coverage of the Nixon hearings “almost didn’t happen,” Moyers and Winship wrote, due to the former president’s efforts to destroy public television, which he viewed as one of his many enemies.

“The now defunct-National Public Affairs Center for Television (NPACT), which produced the coverage for PBS, already was under fire from the Nixon administration,” the journalists noted, “part of the president’s efforts to quell ‘Eastern liberal’ dissent he thought was biased against him and even eliminate public television altogether. (Nixon special assistant Patrick Buchanan had said, ‘We’ve got to zero it out, and that’s that.’).”

Attacks on public broadcasting have continued under the Trump administration. For three consecutive years, the president’s budget has proposed the complete elimination of federal funding for PBS and NPR.

Moyers and Winship urged PBS to once again stand up to the “right-wing vigilantes” and “partisan budget-cutters in Congress and the White House” by broadcasting the Trump impeachment proceedings to the millions of people in the U.S. who rely on public television to stay informed.

“Once upon a time PBS offered prime-time specials, debates, even teach-ins to help us sort out complex public issues or get to the heart of a clear and present danger to our fragile democracy,” Moyers and Winship wrote. “The least its gatekeepers can do now is re-broadcast these upcoming impeachment hearings in primetime.”

“Yes, it means disrupting the schedule for as long as it takes,” the journalists added. “And yes, we know they can be streamed online—but not every American has that luxury; many still rely for their information on the good, old-fashioned TV set.”

You can see the full statement at the link.