Month: February 2020

I mentioned the case of Elaine McCusker in my earlier post. Here’s more on this story from Jonathan Chait:

The New York Post reports that the administration is retaliating against Elaine McCusker, whose nomination for Pentagon comptroller and chief financial officer has been pulled.

What’s especially chilling about this move is the reason for the retaliation. McCusker is losing her job because she attempted to follow the law. There’s no cover story to rationalize it. That is the cover story. “This administration needs people who are committed to implementing the president’s agenda, specifically on foreign policy, and not trying to thwart it,” a White House official tells the paper.

McCusker’s crime is quite literally having attempted to follow the law. Over the summer, the Office of Management and Budget was trying to hold up aid for Ukraine that Congress had passed into law, because it was trying to extort Ukraine to investigate Trump’s rivals. Defense Department officials, who were supposed to allocate the funds, attempted to implement the policy. Just Security obtained the email chain through the Freedom of Information Act.

The emails show McCusker advising budget officials as to what the law said. She was not acting especially rigid about it. As Just Security’s summary notes, “The emails show officials bending over backwards to make every conceivable accommodation to keep the process moving without actually being able to obligate the funding.” One message shows McCusker writing to another official, “We need to continue to give the WH has [sic] much decision space as possible, but am concerned we have not officially documented the fact that we can not promise full execution at this point.” That is, she was trying to do everything in her power to give White House officials room to set the policy as they saw fit, without violating the law.

Importantly, the Government Accountability Office later examined the question, and found that McCusker was right. Holding up the aid was indeed illegal. (It’s not complicated: Congress passed a law providing the aid, so refusing to carry it out would obviously violate it.)

This came on the same day that Trump and his top henchman Bill Barr go to great lengths to spare Trump crony Roger Stone from a long sentence after the president tweeted his dismay in the wee hours of the morning.

I guess this is just what happens now. The congress seems to be paralyzed since the impeachment ended (exactly as they knew it would, by the way.) He has free rein for the next 11 months. What could go wrong?

The exit polls in the New Hampshire Democratic primary on Tuesday said 81% of voters were motivated to vote because of anger at President Donald Trump. Part of the reason for that is likely because of the ongoing authoritarian power grab he was staging even as they cast their ballots.

The president had tweeted out his orders in the wee hours of Tuesday morning:

This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice! https://t.co/rHPfYX6Vbv

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020

By the end of the day, the Department of Justice had rescinded that sentencing recommendation and all four of the prosecutors on the Stone proceeding had withdrawn from the case, with one of them resigning from the Department of Justice altogether. This was, to say the least, highly unusual.

When asked about it at a press availability later in the day, Trump said he didn’t tell the Justice Department to do it.

Asked about Roger Stone, Trump says he has an “absolute right” to tell the Justice Department what to do pic.twitter.com/AZRv9Aff7P

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 11, 2020

Let’s just say that wasn’t very convincing and leave it at that.

David Laufman, the Justice Department’s former counterintelligence chief, tweeted that it was “a shocking, cram-down political intervention in the criminal justice process. We are now truly at a break-glass-in-case-of-fire moment for the Justice Dept.”

This was not just about sparing Trump’s crony a long prison sentence. After all, Trump has the power to pardon him, and no doubt will do so when he feels the time is right. This was also retribution for the Mueller investigation, which originally uncovered the Stone evidence, and about clamping down on the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C. which has prosecuted several of Trump’s associates. Those would include Paul Manafort, who, like Stone, withheld evidence, refused to testify against the president and decided to face a jury — which convicted him. 

That same D.C. office is also dealing with former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who withdrew his guilty plea for lying to the FBI and has been involved in a protracted sentencing process, which resulted in the Department of Justice suddenly rescinding its sentencing recommendation just a couple of weeks ago. Barr recently replaced the U.S. attorney in that office, Jessie Liu, saying she was being “promoted” to the Treasury Department. On Tuesday night, however, the White House withdrew that nomination, no doubt realizing that Liu was scheduled to testify before Congress on Thursday morning.

Stone’s sentence will now be decided by the judge in this case, Amy Berman Jackson, who may have some thoughts about all these bizarre shenanigans. She may also have some thoughts about Stone having posted her picture on social media, with a crosshair over it.

Trump had this to say about Jackson on Tuesday night:

Is this the Judge that put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure? How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton? Just asking! https://t.co/Fe7XkepJNN

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 12, 2020

He seems to be confusing his fond daydreams about Hillary Clinton being in prison with reality. And Manafort was not put in solitary confinement. He was kept in protective custody, as is typical with high-profile prisoners. It would appear that Trump is drawing up a list of bogus reasons for pardoning all the good soldiers who kept their mouths shut.

There have been a few people connecting the dots as this was unfolding over the past few weeks, but with the impeachment on the front burner and the primary campaign heating up, I don’t think most of us realized just how thorough Trump’s henchmen would be. And none have taken to the job with more alacrity than Bill Barr.

Barr has reportedly opened some kind of “channel” with the U.S. attorney in Pittsburgh for Rudy Giuliani to funnel his Ukraine dirt on Joe Biden. How this differs from an investigation into Biden isn’t clear. In fact, it’s obvious that’s exactly what it is. In addition, there is a new tentacle in the right’s Ukraine conspiracy theory, claiming that Sen. Mitt Romney is involved with the same energy company that employed Hunter Biden, which supposedly explains why Romney was the only Republican who voted to convict the president in his impeachment trial.

Biden is collapsing in the primaries and looks less and less likely to be the nominee who will face Trump in November. I feel sure that Trump will take credit for his demise sooner or later (even though the Ukraine scandal was likely only a minor contributor to Biden’s woes) but I would guess Trump’s team will keep this bogus case going anyway. As Giuliani has said, the whole point now is to “vindicate” the president, which he desires almost as much as he wants revenge.

Trump has fired some of those who testified under subpoena, and reportedly wanted to do it in the most humiliating fashion in order to send a message. There are a few witnesses who still work for the State Department and it’s fair to assume that Mike Pompeo will draw up their walking papers soon enough.

On Tuesday, Trump indicated that the military may punish Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman for what the president called “a false call,” meaning that Vindman supposedly lied about Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. There was a time not too long ago when everyone would have assumed that Trump was just blowing off steam and that no one would take those comments seriously. After what happened with the Roger Stone case, no one can take such things for granted.

Trump tweeted, and Bill Barr saluted smartly and did just as he was told. There is little reason to believe the military brass will do any less. If they don’t toe the line they will be out.

This is perhaps best illustrated by case of Elaine McCusker, the acting comptroller at the Pentagon who had resisted the White House orders to withhold the congressionally mandated military aid to Ukraine last summer. According to the New York Post, the White House now plans to withdraw her nomination as comptroller and chief financial officer of the Pentagon, telling the paper: “This administration needs people who are committed to implementing the president’s agenda, specifically on foreign policy, and not trying to thwart it.”

McCusker wasn’t trying to thwart the president’s agenda. She was trying to avoid breaking the law, which is now a firing offense in the Trump administration.

As the entire legal community was reeling from the news that all four federal prosecutors were withdrawing from the Stone case, in apparent protest agains the rank politicization of the Department of Justice, Attorney General Barr was addressing a sheriff’s conference.

He told the lawmen that “people cannot enjoy freedom and achieve prosperity without the rule of law to protect them.” Coming from him, that sounds a lot like, “Nice little country you have here, be a shame if anything happened to it.”

My Salon column reprinted with permission

“He got whacked,” Donald Trump said in mob-movie-speak. During a rambling, White House “celebration” of his Senate impeachment acquittal last week, Trump referred to Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana being shot at a 2017 Republican congressional baseball practice. The petite mob boss official has had vengeance on his mind ever since he “walked.” Trump means to get even with those who violated the code of silence.

One of the first purged was Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman. Once assigned to the National Security Council for his expertise on Ukraine, Vindman defied Trump’s wishes and testified before the House impeachment inquiry. He was escorted from the White House Friday and exiled to the Pentagon. And with him Vindman’s twin brother, Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman.

“You have to take out their families,” Trump the candidate said of terrorists.

The same day, Trump fired Gordon D. Sondland, now-former ambassador to the European Union. Sondland famously testified to Trump’s quid pro quo on Ukraine arms for which the House impeached Trump.

Trump fancies himself the head of a crime family. He “doesn’t give orders,” Michael Cohen, Trump’s jailed, former personal attorney, told a House committee last year. “He speaks in a code.”

Tuesday, Trump suggested the Army “take a look at” Vindman’s actions, signalling he doesn’t believe Vindman losing his White House job is enough. Trump wants him “whacked” in some fashion.

Trump expects underlings to act on his suggestions. Or a tweet. A tweet is fine.

When news broke Tuesday of the sentence proposed for convicted Trump adviser Roger Stone, Trump was displeased. It matters not that the sentence follows federal sentencing guidelines. Stone is a goodfella.

This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice! https://t.co/rHPfYX6Vbv

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020

Attorney General William Barr’s Department of Justice got the memo:

Washington (CNN) —  In an extraordinary move, all four federal prosecutors who took the case against longtime Donald Trump confidant Roger Stone to trial withdrew Tuesday after top Justice Department officials undercut them and disavowed the government’s recommended sentence against Stone.

The mass withdrawal of the career prosecutors on the case was a stunning response to the controversial and politically charged decision by Attorney General William Barr and other top Justice Department officials to reduce prosecutors’ recommended sentence of up to nine years, which came just hours after Trump publicly criticized it on Twitter.

David Lurie writes at Daily Beast that Barr is “doing his part to trash the reputation and authority of the Department of Justice he leads, and to make clear that there is no higher authority in Donald Trump’s America than a presidential tweet.”

Trump replaced Jeff Sessions as attorney general to install a capo.

Writes Peter Baker at the New York Times, “More axes are sure to fall“:

A senior Pentagon official appears in danger of losing her nomination to a top Defense Department post after questioning the president’s suspension of aid to Ukraine. Likewise, a prosecutor involved in Mr. Stone’s case has lost a nomination to a senior Treasury Department position. A key National Security Council official is said by colleagues to face dismissal. And the last of dozens of career officials being transferred out of the White House may be gone by the end of the week.

Politico’s Kyle Cheney tweeted Tuesday evening:

In 6 days since acquittal, Trump/WH have:

-Removed Vindman
-Removed Sondland
-Vowed payback/retribution
-Attacked judge in Roger Stone case
-Attacked DOJ prosecutors for Stone sentencing proposal
-Attacked FBI Director Wray
-Withdrawn Liu/McCusker nominations

Trump’s MAGA followers may be a cult of personality, but Trump has molded the Republican Party into a mob family. It is no accident his family business is not named the Trump Company or Trump, Inc., but the Trump Organization.

And it’s not even clear from the Wikipedia image above if Trump himself is the real Boss or just an Underboss.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide election mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

I’ve written how Trump’s style of threats are successful through the combination of big money, hidden leverage and mob lawyers. Today I want to illustrate how the GOP is using Trump Brand Threats™ to send a message to specific groups in order to get them to stop fighting–especially after a win. 

It’s hard to see now but there will be a time when Trump is no longer President. I’m not sure how it will happen but he and his GOP supporters are preparing for that future. These are the threats and messages they are sending now:

If you win don’t come after us or you’ll be sorry
“We have the guns. We can still legally bring them to protests. What are you going to do? Arrest us? Take our guns?”

We will be intractable in the legal system
“We have the judges. Even if we don’t win out right we will drag out the process for years. Do your prosecutors really have a solid case? We got Cliven Bundy and his kids off!” Cliven Bundy standoff case thrown out – January 30, 2018 The Oregonian

Coming after us means you are just like us!
“The left are hypocrites. They say they are pursuing justice but it’s really retaliation. They are becoming just like us! If you don’t believe us, listen to people on the LEFT who are saying to forgive and move on.”

The Right Wing Media will target prosecutors and witnesses to destroy their lives
“We don’t have to tell the truth. The government can’t stop us, it’s against the 1st Amendment! We have an audience and we are going to use it 24/7 to attack Democrats. We don’t even need to be profitable anymore! Thanks to dark money Breitbart is still in business!”

6 groups that help the GOP avoid justice for their crimes

These messages also reach other groups who wittingly and unwittingly can help the GOP escape justice for their crimes.

1) Moderate Democratic politicians
2) The Main Stream Media
3) The violent right: both real ones and the ones who bluster online
4) Concern trolls: both fake ones on the right and real ones on the left.
5) Political consultants
6) Oligarchs: both foreign and domestic 

This week Schumer asked that every agency inspector general investigate retaliation against whistleblowers who report presidential misconduct. (Politico) It was a good move but there needs to be a better understanding of how Trump and the GOP use threats to manipulate people in the future.

The hidden and delayed benefits of threats won’t be obvious until after the Democrats win. 
When Dems win they are pushed to “look forward not backward.” This often means dropping legitimate investigations & prosecution of lawbreaking Republicans and powerful groups.

We saw this from Obama following the George W. Bush years. Obama’s failure to hold people accountable for their crimes emboldened them. It also blocked significant change.

It is essential to make it clear that investigating, arresting and convicting people for actual crimes is necessary for justice and for change.

Here are the reasons and excuses given by the six groups to drop investigations and prosecutions of GOP crimes.

1) Moderate Democrat Politicians 
Right now I see Sen. Klobuchar talking the most about the people in America coming together. She is trying to appealing to the voters who remember decent Republicans. These are the  voters don’t want to believe that their neighbors might be hateful, racist and cruel. “He seems so nice at Church. ”

This appeal works on people who are exhausted by the constant fighting and attacking they see from the right. When they hear “coming together as one nation”, they are thinking about their neighbors or family on the right. They are NOT thinking of the lawbreaking GOP politicians who rode hate and anger to victory.

These “come together and let it go” voters just want the arguing to stop. They would like for Trump and GOP supporters to admit they were wrong and change their views, but they don’t want to start new arguments with their neighbors and family. That would be ungracious.

2) The Main Stream Media 
It’s important to see that the mainstream play a huge role in blocking any investigations and prosecutions of Republican elected officials.. The media will DEMAND that a Democrat winner “reach across the aisle” and work with some mythical moderate Republicans vs the actual lawbreaking, craven ones who exist today and might be re-elected in November.

3) The Violent Right “We’re crazy and have guns!”
The right’s constant threats of violence play a role in blocking future prosecution following an election. “Start going after out defeated leaders and we will go crazy!” This is an idea that is pushed hard in social media and not all of it is coming from inside the US.

4) Concern Trolls
A fourth group blocking justice are concern trolls. The ones from the right appeal to the stated values of the left. If they see Democrats going after politicians they will scream. “Hypocrites! You called us vindictive, but here you are punishing your political opponents!” (This falls under the “Why aren’t you tolerant of the intolerant?” category of blather.)

But the biggest win for Trump Brand Threats™ for evading justice comes from some on the left. “We need to be merciful. We can pass laws so it won’t happen again, but arresting and punishing Republicans will take our energy away from getting our agenda passed.”

5) Political consultants “Don’t upset the swing voter who didn’t vote for you!”
An excuse to not follow up on prosecution of crimes is the concern of upsetting the independent swing voters (who probably didn’t vote for Democrats anyway but they say they do so they are put in a position of power.)

Establishment political consultants do NOT want to satisfy the dedicated people on the left who WANT investigations. They will tell their candidates to move forward. “Don’t get bogged down in the past. It will be a really hard fight. If you expend your political capital and don’t get a conviction you will look vindictive.”

They don’t really want the system to change. “Keep your powder dry” is their motto. For them things going back to normal means GOP still get away with crimes and Democrats have to resign from office for the appearance or rumors of crimes.

6) Oligarchs: Both foreign and domestic
A big part of Trump’s power base are oligarchs. If you are a domestic oligarch you can say, “I’m in a position to pick the candidate who won’t be as hard on oligarchs and super rich. Remember how we convinced Obama not to take us on? We told him it would be bad for the country (i.e. rich people like us) if he punished us. It worked! None of us went to jail!”

The foreign oligarchs who aren’t winning with Trump will look to support the candidate who will have the least desire to prosecute oligarchs and super rich.

“Bookmark my words!” 
I know that it’s really hard to think of a positive future now. As a time traveler I can see the messages the GOP are inserting into the narrative now expecting them to pay off in the future.  If you are believer in the many universes theory making people aware of how the GOP are using Trump Brand Threats™ now will help us to resist them in the future.

The good news is that for all the pressure from all the groups I mentioned there are also people who understand the need for accountability, justice and change.  Between now and November there will be continual outrageous acts of lawbreaking by Trump and cover ups by the GOP. New information will leak and be disclosed. In addition to information about Trump we should be looking into all the reasons GOP politicians support him. 

To remove Trump for his crimes we might also need to expose ALL the pressures on GOP senators like Lindsey Graham. If a senator is being blackmailed we should know who it is from & what is about. We don’t have to wait until Trump is out of office to start and when he’s gone we shouldn’t stop.

Investigating, arresting and convicting people for actual crimes is necessary for justice and for change. 

Deseret Times polled the question:

That looks pretty good, right? It gives you at least a little bit of faith that the GOP hasn’t completely gone around the bend, at least in Utah.

Well:

The numbers change dramatically according to party affiliation. The polls shows 60% of Republicans had a negative reaction to Romney’s vote, while 31% were positive. Among Democrats, 83% had a positive reaction to the vote and only 13% negative.

Republicans were 56% less likely to vote the freshman senator, while 23% were more likely, according to the poll. Among those who describe themselves as very conservative, 62% were less likely to vote for Romney. […]

Members of the Utah Republican Party Central Committee have drafted a resolution to censure Romney and a call on him to “vigorously” support Trump’s agenda. Romney has voted for the president’s policies 80% of the time.

I wrote yesterday about the Louisiana Republican Party voting to censure Romney. It appears to be a trend.

But sure, this is perfectly normal. Nothing to worry about.

As you watch this Roger Stone atrocity play itself out keep in mind that Trump is still selling himself as “the law and order” president:

President Trump’s approach to law and order is informed to some significant extent by having lived in New York City at its most dangerous. His infamous call for the restoration of the death penalty after the rape of a jogger in Central Park — a crime for which a group of black and Hispanic teenagers were falsely convicted — encapsulates his approach to crime in the abstract: better that an innocent stranger be punished harshly than that someone guilty walk free.

Speaking to a group of governors on Monday, Trump again praised extremely harsh punishments as a deterrent.

“States with a very powerful death penalty on drug dealers don’t have a drug problem,” Trump said. “I don’t know that our country is ready for that. But if you look throughout the world, the countries with a powerful death penalty — death penalty — with a fair but quick trial, they have very little, if any, drug problem. That includes China.”

China, of course, is an authoritarian state for which any number of actions can result in capital punishment. Trump has at other times embraced the approach taken by President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines, whose acceptance of extrajudicial killings in his country’s war on drugs has earned international condemnation but repeated praise from Trump.

Trump’s approach to crime is uncoupled from justice. It is, instead, about the manifestation and exercise of power.

Even after the five teenagers accused of the crime in Central Park were exonerated (thanks to a jailhouse admission by a convicted rapist), Trump insisted that they must nonetheless be culpable. For Trump, it was a way to show voters that he would deploy a powerful hand against any whiff of criminal behavior — at least, when the alleged behavior came from those who stood outside Trump’s cultural and political sphere.

He simultaneously took credit for criminal justice reform and is feted by celebrities for his great compassion by pardoning their personal causes. It’s amazing how easily he gulls people into seeing what they want to see.

What he said above is Trump’s real worldview: “Show ’em that you’ll kick hard and they won’t mess with you.” He’s made that clear over and over.

I wouldn’t have thought Trump’s primitive and crude manifestation of this thuggish philosophy would work in 2020 but it appears to be quite potent, at least with Republicans. They are either cowed or thrilled.

Why? Well, because he’s a jackass, of course:

President Donald Trump on Monday justified a smaller-than-anticipated proposed pay raise for civilian federal workers by citing “national emergency or serious economic conditions,” despite his frequent statements that the nation’s economy is booming.Trump proposed that pay raises for civilian federal workers be limited to 1% in 2021 in a bid to “maintain efforts to put our Nation on a fiscally sustainable course.”

He described a pay increase above 1% as “inappropriate.””This alternative pay plan decision will not materially affect our ability to attract and retain a well qualified Federal workforce,” the President wrote.An across-the-board 2.5% increase for federal workers is slated to take effect in January 2021.

In limiting federal pay raises, Trump cited his statutory authority to adjust pay because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” but the President frequently touts a growing US economy, including a strong growth rate for the gross domestic product and low unemployment.

This is actually yet another presidential power grab and they get more and more transparently political very time he does it. Recall that he has declared these emergencies to justify aspects of his trade war and the border wall as well. Now he’s using it to punish federal workers — also known among his Fox News wingnut advisers as “the Deep State.”

His budget also calls for cuts to all the safety net programs including medicare and social security even though he has promised never to do that. But he just says whatever he thinks he needs to say to his base and his administration does what it wants.

But never fear, all those military contractors who are gorging themselves until they hurl are get another big taste of taxpayer money in his budget. Of course.

This is just his proposed budget which would have to get through Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in the House so it’s a dead letter. But people shouldn’t dismiss it. if Trump pulls off a victory in November there’s a fairly good chance he’ll take back the House. Then he can do whatever he wants.

Last night in New Hampshire the crowd was chanting “46!” “46!” for Don Jr, which I understand is becoming more and more common in right-wing circles. I guess the idea is that Jr gets 8 and then Ivanka sweeps in and becomes the first woman president after that. I’m not sure if elections are even considered anymore in all this. There’s a good chance that Trump just names his successors after 2024 and that’s that.

But if they do still believe they must coddle their base four years from now, I guess we can take heart in the fact that Trump won’t want to mess up Junior’s chances by destroying Social Security and Medicare before then. So that’s good.

Yesterday the DC US Attorney’s office recommended 7 to 9 years for Roger Stone. Trump tweeted this:

This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice! https://t.co/rHPfYX6Vbv

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020

Now this:

I’ve never seen this happen before. DOJ makes a specific sentencing recommendation; the President publicly expresses displeasure; and now DOJ takes it back and apparently will seek a much lower sentence. Unprecedented and dangerous. https://t.co/fD4QEsJqC8

— Elie Honig (@eliehonig) February 11, 2020

One of the twitter wags commenting on that tweet quipped:

“We have a banana republic. If we can keep it.”

I would guess that Roger knows he has nothing to worry about either way. Trump isn’t going to let his buddy go to jail.

This is ridiculous:

The FBI is expanding its focus on domestic terrorism, and that includes pro-choice violence—even though such violence is so vanishingly rare, it’s all but nonexistent. 

In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray disclosed that the bureau has recently “changed our terminology as part of a broader reorganization of the way in which we categorize our domestic terrorism efforts.” It’s part of a much-heralded reinvigoration of the bureau’s domestic terrorism focus after a rising tide of mostly white-supremacist terrorism.

Among four broad categories of domestic terrorism that the FBI confronts, Wray said, is “abortion violent extremism.” 

But Wray wasn’t only talking about the pro-life extremism that murders abortion providers in their churches, he hastened to add, but “people on either side of that issue who commit violence on behalf of different views on that topic.”

His questioner, Rep. Karen Bass (D-CA), was puzzled at Wray’s seeming equivalence: “People on either side of that issue don’t commit violence.” In fact, the FBI pointed The Daily Beast to just one episode of pro-choice-inspired terrorism—one that did not involve an actual act of violence, but rather a threat in an online comments section.“The FBI pointed The Daily Beast to just one episode of pro-choice-inspired terrorism – one that did not involve an actual act of violence, but rather a threat in an online comments section.”

But Wray persisted: “Well, we’ve actually had a variety of kinds of violence under that, believe it or not. But at the end of the day.” Bass asked, “Really, that blow up buildings and threaten doctors?” Rather than responding, Wray moved on to detailing the FBI’s next domestic-terrorism category, one about “animal rights and environmental extremism.”

Apparently, this isn’t new. The FBI has said this as long ago as 2012. But they have never provided any evidence of pro-choice violence. That’s because there isn’t any. It’s obviously some anti-abortion fanatics in the DOJ or someone under political pressure putting this into the mix despite its total absurdity.

Money can’t buy happiness, the saying goes, but it can buy popular support. Billionaire former New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg has spent $300 million of his own money to inject himself into the race for the Democratic nomination for president. He’s already working to double that while skipping early primary states.

Ron Brownstein concludes at The Atlantic, “So far, none of the candidates has built a coalition that reaches broadly across the party. Instead, each is confined to a distinct niche of support that is too narrow to establish a commanding advantage in the race.” Bloomberg is using his vast wealth to bypass all that.

Polling and anecdotes suggest (if my Twitter exchange from Monday is any indication) Democrats are casting about for someone, anyone, who can beat Donald Trump in the fall. And they are “not very ideological” about it.

Data from Advertising Analytics shows Bloomberg pouring money into the 14 Super Tuesday states, with 35% of that spent in California, New York, Texas and Florida. Nearly half has gone into Super Tuesday and Rust Belt states, Axios reports.

If you find horse race election coverage annoying (as I do), please indulge me a moment.

A new poll from Quinnipiac has Sen. Bernie Sanders atop the Democratic pack at 25% support among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independent voters. Former Vice President Joe Biden’s support has slid 9 points to 17% since his fourth-place finish in the Iowa caucuses. Bloomberg’s money (if not Bloomberg himself) is nipping at Biden’s heels at 15%. Sen. Elizabeth Warren is at 14%.

Moreover, Bloomberg is eroding Biden’s national support among black voters:

While Biden is still holding onto his lead among black voters, according to the poll, his support has plummeted from 49 percent before the caucuses to 27 percent. Bloomberg, meanwhile, has rocketed into second place among black voters, with 22 percent support compared to 7 percent late last month.

It is not clear how many black voters outside New York City know of Bloomberg’s stop-and-frisk policy that landed most heavily on minority neighborhoods. They will.

But the problem with campaign spending is it tends to follow a hyperbolic curve. Getting to 15% in the polling (with no votes yet cast for him) has already cost Bloomberg $300 million. He might finance an expedition to Mars with what it could cost to get to 50 percent+1 in actual votes. Money can buy lots of advertising and favorable polling, but can it buy turnout?

Fortune reports (signup required):

If the historic voter turnout during the U.S. midterm elections is any indication, the 2020 presidential election could potentially draw a record number of young people to the polls, including the 18- to 23-year-old Generation Z, many of whom will be casting ballots for the first time.

Together, Gen Z and millennials (ages 24 to 39) are projected to make up 37% of voters in the 2020 presidential election, according to the Pew Research Center, and both demographics are largely split along party lines.

Despite the press flutter over the 79% jump in voter turnout among 18- to 29-year-olds in 2018, the question is 79% starting from what? The answer is: Not very much. That jump took turnout among Gen Z voters to 36%. Average turnout nationwide in 2018 was 53%.

The good news is voters under 40 represent the greatest potential for increasing voter turnout in 2020, as I note with regularity (see the graph). If Gen Z and millennials outvote their elders, they can run this joint.

James Lance Taylor, former political science department chair at the University of San Francisco, tells Fortune younger voters are more focused on issues. The Trump presidency could have a “radicalizing effect” on them:

“I think, more than anyone, Bernie speaks to issues that directly affect young people: minimum wage, student debt forgiveness, universal health care, and concerns about the environment, issues he’s been consistent with,” says Taylor, who teaches college students. “He’s nothing but a ‘New Deal Democrat,’ a centrist who attracts new voters and those really learning about politics for the first time.”

“There’s something about Sanders’ appeal that’s still a bit of a mystery,” says Carl Cannon, a longtime D.C. insider, and the Washington bureau chief for polling aggregation site RealClearPolitics. “Somehow, he’s caught lightning in a bottle with young folks, and it still seems to be working,” Cannon says.

But counting on Gen Z and millennials to save the country (and the planet) from oldsters who vote reliably is still a risky bet. Having an oligarch like Bloomberg overtake Sanders and alienate them could put Democrats’ November prospects at risk. Having Sanders atop the ticket could alienate the suburban women who delivered the House to Democrats in 2018. So far, none of the Democrats has achieved what Brownstein calls “critical mass” for breaking out.

The stress of it will have all of us breaking out.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 3rd Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide election mechanics guide at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.