Thursday
Feb062020
The Commentariat -- February 7, 2020
Afternoon Update:
NBC News is reporting that, according to his attorney, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman "has been escorted out of the White House." Mrs. McC: He should get another medal for this & a promotion to full bird. ~~~
~~~ Update. Morgan Chalfant of the Hill: "Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman was escorted out of the White House on Friday and told to leave his position at the National Security Council (NSC), according to a statement released by his attorney. Vindman was one of the key witnesses who testified in connection with the House impeachment inquiry about President Trump's phone call with the Ukrainian president during which Trump raised investigations of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden's dealings in Ukraine. 'There is no question in the mind of any American why this man's job is over, why this country now has one less soldier serving it at the White House,' David Pressman, Vindman's attorney, said in a statement. 'LTC Vindman was asked to leave for telling the truth. His honor, his commitment to right, frightened the powerful.'... 'Well, I'm not happy with him. You think I'm supposed to be happy with him? I'm not. They'll make that decision. You'll be hearing. They'll make a decision,' Trump, apparently referring to the NSC, told reporters Friday morning before departing for a speech in North Carolina." ~~~
~~~ MEANWHILE. Ellen Mitchell of the Hill: "Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Friday said the Pentagon protects its service members from retribution, following reports that President Trump may oust the top White House expert on Ukraine [Alexander Vindman] after he testified during House impeachment hearings. 'We protect all of our persons, service members, from retribution or anything like that. We've already addressed that in policy and other means,' Esper told reporters at the Pentagon during a press conference with his Colombian counterpart."
Profiteer-in-Chief. David Fahrenthold, et al., of the Washington Post: "President Trump's company charges the Secret Service for the rooms agents use while protecting him at his luxury properties -- billing U.S. taxpayers at rates as high as $650 per night, according to federal records and people who have seen receipts. Those charges, compiled here for the first time, show that Trump has an unprecedented -- and largely hidden -- business relationship with his own government.... Trump's company says it charges only minimal fees. But Secret Service records do not show that.... At the Trump National Golf Club Bedminster, the Secret Service was charged $17,000 a month to use a three-bedroom cottage on the property, an unusually high rent for homes in that area, according to receipts from 2017. Trump's company billed the government even for days when Trump wasn't there.... The records show more than $471,000 in payments from taxpayers to Trump's companies. But -- because these records cover only a fraction of Trump's travel during a fraction of his term -- the actual total is likely to be higher." TPM has a summary report here. ~~~
~~~ Jonathan Chait: "There are several important takeaways from the Post's report. First, it shows that the Trump Organization has flat-out lied about the benefits it gets from the government business Trump throws its way.... Second, the Trump Organization appears to be overcharging the Secret Service for the use of its cottage properties.... Third, the federal government is withholding documentation about just how much it is spending on Trump properties.... While [the Secret Service is] required to report such expenses to Congress twice a year, it's only filed two of the six required reports. What's more, the reports it did file omitted key details.... And finally, as one might infer from the lack of disclosure, there may be a lot worse stuff out there.... Trump claims he has a 'legal obligation' to report corruption by people who happen to be running against him for president, but he is refusing even to comply with the current legal obligations to disclose his own profiteering at public expense."
<Iowa and New Hampshire will not be moved from the Primary Schedule as long as I am President. Great tradition! -- Donald Trump, in a tweet today
While a president* may exert some control over the primary schedule of his own party, he can't do squat over primaries of other parties. -- Mrs. Bea McCrabbie
Marina Villeneuve of the AP: "New York state will file a lawsuit challenging the Department of Homeland Security's decision to block New Yorkers from participating in 'trusted traveler programs' in retribution for a new state law that could hinder federal immigration enforcement, officials said Friday. 'It's an abuse of power. It's extortion. It is hurting New Yorkers to advance their political agenda. And we're going to fight back,' Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, said at a news conference in New York."
Josh Dawsey, et al., of the Washington Post: "President Trump is preparing to push out a national security official who testified against him during the impeachment inquiry after he expressed deep anger on Thursday over the attempt to remove him from office because of his actions toward Ukraine. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman -- a National Security Council aide who testified during House Democrats' impeachment hearings -- will be informed in the coming days, likely on Friday, by administration officials that he is being reassigned to a position at the Defense Department.... Vindman had already informed senior officials at the NSC that he intended to take an early exit from his assignment and leave his post by the end of the month..., but Trump is eager to make a symbol of the Army officer soon after the Senate acquitted him of the impeachment charges approved by House Democrats." The Hill has a summary report here.
Coral Davenport of the New York Times: "The Trump administration on Thursday finalized plans to allow mining and energy drilling on nearly a million acres of land in southern Utah that had once been protected as part of a major national monument. The Interior Department's release of a formal land-use blueprint for the approximately 861,974 acres of land will allow oil, gas and coal companies to complete the legal process for leasing mines and wells on land that had once been part of Utah's Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, established by President Bill Clinton. In December 2017, President Trump cut the monument's acreage about in half, aiming to open the newly unprotected land for drilling and development. At the same time, he removed about a million acres from another Utah monument, Bears Ears. Together, the moves were the largest rollback of public lands protection in United States history." Thanks to Ken W. for the link.
Jonathan Chait: "Unsurprisingly, Trump is ginning up charges of illegality against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The Speaker's alleged 'crime' is tearing up her printed copy of Trump's State of the Union address.... First of all, it's an official document, you're not allowed, it's illegal what she did. She broke the law,' [Trump said].... As a non-insane person may have intuited, it is not actually a crime to tear up the printed copy of a speech.... There are rules requiring the preservation of documents such as memos to the president, which must be preserved for historical records. Trump in fact violates that law literally almost every day. There are people whose job it is to tape back together the documents that Trump illegally tears up."
Josh Gerstein of Politico: "A federal appeals court has rejected a lawsuit from Congressional Democrats who accused ... Donald Trump of violating the Constitution by receiving profits from foreign governments' spending at his luxury Washington hotel and other businesses. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision did not address the legality of Trump's business dealings, but held that the more than 200 Democratic senators and House members who banded together in 2017 to bring the suit against the president lacked legal standing to do so. The unanimous ruling from an ideologically diverse three-judge panel suggested that if the House or Senate had formally authorized the suit, it may have been allowed to proceed, but the lawmakers acting as plaintiffs in the case did not have standing to pursue it on their own. 'Only an institution can assert an institutional injury,' the court wrote in its brief, 12-page decision."
Jordain Carney of the Hill: "A pledge to investigate the Bidens and Ukraine once the impeachment trial wraps is sparking divisions among Senate Republicans.... Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a vocal ally of Trump's, is pledging 'oversight.' Other GOP senators are warning that it's time for the Senate to move on after a weeks-long divisive fight that left scars on the chamber's normally clubby atmosphere. 'I know there's been some about the Judiciary Committee taking a look at that. I think what I would like to see happen around here is a return to normalcy,' said Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the No. 2 Republican senator...."
Naomi Jagoda of the Hill: "Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) is criticizing the Treasury Department for providing Republican senators with financial records as part of their probe concerning Hunter Biden. Pascrell, a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, blasted the department for turning over the documents while at the same time refusing to provide House Democrats with President Trump's tax returns. 'Continuing to violate the law to shield Donald Trump's tax returns while simultaneously aiding a blatantly partisan investigation is an affront to public service,' Pascrell wrote in a letter dated Thursday to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. Pascrell's letter comes after a spokeswoman for Senate Finance Committee ranking member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said Thursday that the Treasury Department is complying with a request for documents from two Senate GOP chairmen. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) sent a letter to Treasury in November as part of an investigation into 'potentially improper actions by the Obama administration' concerning Ukraine and Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian gas company where Hunter Biden ... worked."
Katie Glueck & Jonathan Martin of the New York Times: "Anita Dunn, a veteran Democratic operative and top adviser to former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., is taking on an expanded role in his campaign as he seeks a reset after a disastrous fourth-place finish in the Iowa caucuses.... But it's not clear that promoting Ms. Dunn will alter Mr. Biden's trajectory in the race -- or be the last change Mr. Biden makes."
Veronica Stracqualursi of CNN: "Former US Rep. Joe Walsh is ending his uphill challenge against Donald Trump for the Republican presidential nomination, after suffering a crushing loss in the Iowa GOP caucuses in which he received only 1% of the vote."
Annals of "Journalism," Ha Ha Ha. Will Sommer, et al., of the Daily Beast: "Fox News' own research team has warned colleagues not to trust some of the network's top commentators' claims about Ukraine. An internal Fox News research briefing book obtained by The Daily Beast openly questions Fox News contributor John Solomon's credibility, accusing him of playing an 'indispensable role' in a Ukrainian 'disinformation campaign.' The document also accuses frequent Fox News guest Rudy Giuliani of amplifying disinformation, as part of an effort to oust former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, and blasts Fox News guests Victoria Toensing and Joe diGenova -- both ardent Trump boosters -- for 'spreading disinformation.' The 162-page document ... was created by Fox News senior political affairs specialist Bryan S. Murphy, who produces research from what is known as the network's Brain Room -- a newsroom division of researchers who provide information, data, and topic guides for the network's programming."
~~~~~~~~~~
Matt Elliott of CNET: "Ahead of the state's first-in-the-nation primary next Tuesday, seven candidates including front-runners Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren will take the stage for the eighth Democratic primary debate.... The debate will take place in Manchester, New Hampshire on Friday, Feb. 7 from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. ET (5 p.m. to 8 p.m. PT) and broadcast live on ABC." The other candidates who qualified are Amy Klobuchar, Tom Steyer & Andrew Yang.
Rebecca Morin of USA Today: "With 100% of precincts reported, Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders are in a near tie in state delegates in the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses. The complete results, which were long-delayed after Monday's caucuses, show Buttigieg, the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor, with 26.198% of delegate equivalents and Bernie Sanders with 26.128%, late Thursday evening.... The Associated Press on Thursday evening announced it is unable to declare a winner in the Iowa Democratic caucuses. 'The Associated Press calls a race when there is a clear indication of a winner. Because of a tight margin between former Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Bernie Sanders and the irregularities in this year's caucus process, it is not possible to determine a winner at this point,' said Sally Buzbee, AP's senior vice president and executive editor." ~~~
~~~ Politico's stats, currently (at 9:40 pm ET Thursday) showing 99.94% reporting, are here. ~~~
~~~ Nolan McCaskill of Politico: "Buttigieg insisted as early as Monday night that he was the clear victor, and he reportedly reassured supporters of that in a phone call on Wednesday. Sanders, meanwhile, told supporters in New Hampshire that he was leading in popular-vote totals and would come out of Iowa with the same number of national convention delegates as Buttigieg."
Nolan McCaskill & Zack Motellaro of Politico: "The leader of the Democratic National Committee called for an immediate recanvass of the Iowa caucuses Thursday, dealing another blow to Iowa's reputation and further extending an already delayed process to tally votes from Monday night. DNC Chairman Tom Perez‘s announcement came shortly before Bernie Sanders claimed victory Thursday in a race that officially remains too close to call. 'Enough is enough,' Perez tweeted. 'In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.' The parallel developments underscored the chaos that has gripped the party in the aftermath of Iowa's caucus debacle.... In a defiant statement, however, the Iowa Democratic Party made no mention of the the DNC's request for a recanvass. 'While I fully acknowledge that the reporting circumstances on Monday night were unacceptable, we owe it to the thousands of Iowa Democratic volunteers and caucusgoers to remain focused on collecting and reviewing incoming results,' said Troy Price, the state party chairman. 'Should any presidential campaign in compliance with the Iowa Delegate Selection Plan request a recanvass, the IDP [Iowa Democratic Party] ... will audit the paper records of report, as provided by the precinct chairs and signed by representatives of presidential campaigns.'" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Nate Cohn, et al., of the New York Times: "The results released by the Iowa Democratic Party on Wednesday were riddled with inconsistencies and other flaws. According to a New York Times analysis, more than 100 precincts reported results that were internally inconsistent, that were missing data or that were not possible under the complex rules of the Iowa caucuses. In some cases, vote tallies do not add up. In others, precincts are shown allotting the wrong number of delegates to certain candidates. And in at least a few cases, the Iowa Democratic Party's reported results do not match those reported by the precincts.... Not all of the errors are minor, and they raise questions about whether the public will ever get a completely precise account of the Iowa results." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Nate Cohn: "The winner of the Iowa Democratic caucus might come down to one not-so-simple question: How many state delegate equivalents does a satellite caucus get? The Iowa Democratic Party's answer, first evident when it released the results of satellite caucuses Wednesday night, differs from what was expected by at least one Democratic campaign and here at The Upshot, based on the state party's official delegate selection plan. The difference between the two interpretations is a net 3.8 state delegates -- small in just about any contest except one separated by 3.42 state delegates, as the Iowa race is right now." ~~~
~~~ Ben Collins, et al., of NBC News: "The phone number to report Iowa caucus results was posted on a fringe internet message board on Monday night along with encouragement to 'clog the lines,' an indication that jammed phone lines that left some caucus managers on hold for hours may have in part been due to prank calls. An Iowa Democratic Party official said the influx of calls to the reporting hotline included 'supporters of President Trump who called to express their displeasure with the Democratic Party.' The party official's comments were first reported late Wednesday by Bloomberg News. Users on a politics-focused section of the fringe 4chan message board repeatedly posted the phone number for the Iowa Democratic Party, which was found by a simple Google search, both as screenshots and in plain text, alongside instructions." Related stories linked below. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Jon Keller of CBS Boston: "In the latest exclusive WBZ/Boston Globe/Suffolk University poll, Pete Buttigieg continues his remarkable post-Iowa surge. Bernie Sanders is holding steady at 24 percent, but Buttigieg is up four points over last night with 23 percent, a virtual tie in a survey with a margin of error of 4.4 percent. Elizabeth Warren takes over third place with 13 percent, and Joe Biden slips to fourth with 11 percent. Mayor Pete's gains don't seem to be coming at the expense of Sanders, whose numbers haven't changed much all week. Instead, Buttigieg seems to be attracting registered Democrats. And his biggest gains appear to be raided from key backers of Warren and Biden."
Jonathan Chait: "Bernie Sanders is currently favored to win the nomination, a prospect that would make Donald Trump a heavy favorite to win reelection.... It is hard to see how the situation is likely to improve soon.... It seems hard to imagine how [Joe] Biden or a Biden alternative could emerge in the next three contests.... So it is entirely possible that, following South Carolina, Sanders will have won three or all four of the contests." You'll have to read the whole post to grasp Chait's thinking. ~~~
~~~ Mrs. Bea McCrabbie: Right now, I think the only two candidates still standing who could beat Trump are Klobuchar & Warren, in that order. But Klobuchar, and to a lesser extent Warren, look like also-rans at this point. That really leaves the only alternative to Sanders as Buttigieg, and -- even tho he's smart as a whip -- he's greener behind the ears than Trump was in 2016. I would choose some who have dropped out over Buttigieg, even though I would not have voted for them in the primary: Harris, Booker, Castro, Gillibrand, Inslee, even O'Rourke. I think Buttigieg's rise to No. 1 or 2 is a backlash to Biden's candidacy. It troubles me that less than a week before my own state's primary, I don't know who will get my vote, Warren or Klobuchar. And whichever I choose, I may kick myself later.
Matt Viser, et al., of the Washington Post: Following his 4th-place showing in Iowa, Joe Biden left the campaign trail & retreated to to Delaware where he met with top advisors to regroup & held no public events.
Peter Beinart of the Atlantic: "... impeachment appears to have hurt Biden more than Trump.... Not only will Trump remain president, and not only does he appear stronger politically than before the impeachment battle began, but he has succeeded in doing precisely what he wanted in the first place: He tarred Joe Biden, who last year looked like Trump's most formidable Democratic rival, with the kind of vague suspicion of wrongdoing that presidential candidates can't easily shake.... By keeping Hunter Biden's business dealings in Ukraine in the news, they have turned them into a rough analogue to Hillary Clinton's missing emails in 2016 -- a pseudo-scandal that undermines a leading Democratic candidate's reputation for honesty.... Biden's extremely defensive response to the story has made matters worse." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: In fairness to Biden, few other Democratic presidential candidates can parry with Trump. Elizabeth Warren failed miserably in the Pocahontas fiasco. Those who seem to have done best are Michael Bloomberg -- who called Trump a liar in response to a Trump dig and questioned Trump's wealth in another case -- and Bernie Sanders who famously yelled during a 2016 debate with Hillary Clinton, "The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails." The candidates should ask Nancy Pelosi for advice; she makes Trump craz(ier).
~~~ And the Beat Goes on. Asawin Suebsaeng & Erin Banco of the Daily Beast: "... some of [Trump's] allies and most prominent lieutenants are in no mood to let the Ukraine impeachment scandal go.... Rudy Giuliani ... is planning on 'ramping up' his investigations into Joe and Hunter Biden. It's a matter of the fair administration of justice for real,' he told The Daily Beast.... One America News Network [-- which collaborated with Giuliani in a series supposed to exonerate Trump & implicate the Bidens --] ... doesn't appear to be through.... About an hour after Wednesday's acquittal, GOP senators Chuck Grassley (IA) and Ron Johnson (WI) announced a review regarding 'potential conflicts of interest posed by the business activities of Hunter Biden and his associates during the Obama' era."
Hunter Moyler of Newsweek: "New poll results from Morning Consult released Monday showed all five of the leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination defeating ... Donald Trump in hypothetical match-ups. Mike Bloomberg ... had the greatest lead over Trump. Forty-seven percent of respondents said they would vote for him if he were nominated to run against Trump, while 40 percent said they would vote for Trump and 13 percent were undecided." Mrs. McC: What this poll means to me is that Bloomberg, because he has been advertising in a lot of states, has higher name recognition than some of the other Democratic candidates. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Helene Cooper of the New York Times: "The Navy secretary ousted by President Trump said Thursday that he would endorse Michael R. Bloomberg for president, a high-profile defection that Mr. Bloomberg's allies hope will convince Democratic voters that their best chance of defeating Mr. Trump is the former mayor of New York. Richard V. Spencer, who was ousted as Navy secretary in November after he publicly disagreed with Mr. Trump's intervention in an extraordinary war crimes case involving a member of the Navy SEALs, is a lifelong Republican." An NBC News story is here.
Martin Matishak of Politico: "Widespread paralysis in the Obama administration prevented the U.S. from developing an effective response to combat Russian hacking in the 2016 election, according to a new, bipartisan report from the Senate Intelligence Committee. The panel found that the U.S. government 'was not well-postured to counter Russian election interference activity with a full range of readily-available policy options.'... [The report] lays out several factors tha hamstrung the White House's ability to coordinate a response, including partisan concerns not only on the campaign trail, but also in Congress. The report details resistance by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to issuing a bipartisan statement in 2016 about the Russian effort.... The committee makes a number of recommendations to counter future attacks on U.S. elections...." Mrs. McC: Ha ha. Good luck with that. Putin's Puppet is encouraging foreign hacking, not countering it.
Mrs. McCrabbie: I saw only three minutes of Trump's victory speech. I thought he sounded NUTS even though he wasn't drooling and screaming in that moment. Then I read this by unwashed in yesterday's Comments: "Made myself watch the display by the Orange Menace. All I can say is Oh-My-Geebus.... It'll likely be used in training future mental health experts." So I guess any sample snippet will do. (Also linked yesterday.)~~~
~~~ Peter Baker of the New York Times: "At a jampacked ceremony in the East Room of the White House that veered back and forth between celebration and condemnation, the president complained about the 'crooked politics' that had resulted in his impeachment and trial on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. In addition to Democrats and other favorite targets, he singled out Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, the only Republican to vote for conviction. 'It was evil,' Mr. Trump told the roomful of supporters from Congress and his administration in a long, rambling, stream-of-consciousness talk, tossing aside the text that had been so carefully prepared for him by his staff.... He reviewed the long litany of investigations against him over the last three years, dismissing them all as nothing more than partisan efforts to take him down and suggesting that the 'top scum' at the F.B.I. had plotted to stop him from serving as president." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Caitlin Oprysko of Politico: "... Donald Trump on Thursday unloaded on his perceived political enemies, declaring that the investigations into him have been 'all bullshit' in a sprawling and teleprompter-free address at the White House less than a day after senators acquitted him on two articles of impeachment.... He lit into his antagonizers from the opulent East Room, lobbing verbal attacks at everyone from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Reps. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), and calling them 'some very evil and sick people.' He singled out Utah Sen. Mitt Romney ... and Hunter Biden, the son of the former vice president.... The hourlong stemwinder was also littered with doting anecdotes and praise for the president's allies, including at one point a reenactment of the 2017 shooting of House Minority Whip Steve Scalise and a compliment of GOP Rep. Elise Stefanik's appearance." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ John Wagner, et al., of the Washington Post have numerous entries on what-all Trump said. This is an update of a report linked yesterday. ~~~
~~~ Josh Dawsey of the Washington Post: "President Trump ripped into his critics on Thursday, making clear he plans to use his bully pulpit to exact at least some verbal revenge on Democrats and Republicans who crossed him during his impeachment and subsequent Senate trial. He called Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) a 'horrible person' and derided Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) as a flip-flopping Republican with 'no sign of principles' whose vote to convict Trump on abuse of power charges was born not out of principle but bitterness over his failed 2012 presidential bid.... Some of the president's aides are discussing whether to remove or reassign administration officials who testified during the impeachment inquiry, according to aides and advisers who spoke on the condition of anonymity...." ~~~
~~~ Jen Kirby of Vox has the transcript of Trump's remarks. "The rambling, stream-of-consciousness, more-than-hourlong 'speech' touched on the usual grievances: Russia, Mueller, witch hunts, impeachment. Trump leapt from topic to topic, calling out random members of the Senate, House, and Cabinet with weird biographical details, including a Chuck Grassley impression. At one point, he referenced the NCAA and Rep. Jim Jordan's lack of a sport jacket. At another, he talked about Rep. Devin Nunes going into dungeons to get documents." Mrs. McC: BTW, one person Trump didn't thank or mention was his personal attorney Rudy.
Catherine Rampell of the Washington Post: "Our vindictive president, now unshackled by his frightened followers in Congress, may well be teed up to punish his perceived political enemies. And we needn't exercise much imagination to envision how this loaded-gloved counterpuncher might weaponize his executive authority. Because he's done it already. Many, many times.... Consider the selectively punitive antitrust actions undertaken by this administration, which is otherwise not exactly known for caring about market concentration.... Elsewhere, he has allegedly tried to use federal procurement to punish perceived enemies -- in particular, Amazon, because the company's chief executive, Jeff Bezos, personally owns The Post.... And for years, Trump has openly called for the Justice Department to prosecute his political adversaries. He pressured senior law enforcement officials, including former attorney general Jeff Sessions, to appoint a second special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Here is an example of how Trump's personal corruption translates to institutional acts of corruption: ~~~
~~~ Luppe Luppen of Yahoo! News: "The Treasury Department has complied with Republican senators' requests for highly sensitive and closely held financial records about Hunter Biden and his associates and has turned over '"evidence" of questionable origin' to them, according to a leading Democrat on one of the committees conducting the investigation. For months..., powerful committee chairmen in the Republican-controlled Senate have been quietly but openly pursuing an inquiry into Hunter Biden's business affairs and Ukrainian officials' alleged interventions in the 2016 election, the same matters that President Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani unsuccessfully tried to coerce Ukraine's government to investigate.... 'Applying a blatant double standard, Trump administration agencies like the Treasury Department are rapidly complying with Senate Republican requests -- no subpoenas necessary -- and producing "evidence" of questionable origin,' [Sen. Ron] Wyden['s (D-Oregon)] spokesperson Ashley Schapitl said in a statement. 'The administration told House Democrats to go pound sand when their oversight authority was mandatory while voluntarily cooperating with the Senate Republicans' sideshow at lightning speed.'" ~~~
~~~ One example not convincing? How about two in one news cycle? ~~~
~~~ Joel Rose & Colin Dwyer of NPR: "The U.S. Department of Homeland Security says it will no longer allow New York state residents to enroll in programs intended to expedite international travel because of a state law that blocks immigration authorities from accessing motor vehicle records. New York's 'Green Light' law, which took effect in December, allows immigrants without legal status to apply for driver's licenses. It also includes a provision barring state officials at the Department of Motor Vehicles from sharing data with immigration authorities unless a judge orders them to do so. Ken Cuccinelli, acting deputy secretary at DHS, told reporters on a conference call Thursday that the state law was 'dangerous -- really thoughtless in terms of unintended consequences.'... He said his department has suspended all applications and renewals connected with several of its Trusted Traveler programs, such as Global Entry and NEXUS, which are designed to facilitate and speed up security screening at ports of entry." Thanks to Ken W. for the link.
Anthony Faiola & Karen DeYoung of the Washington Post: "In the year since the Trump administration declared what amounted to economic war against the Venezuelan government of President Nicolás Maduro -- an oil embargo that cut it off from its biggest petroleum buyer, the United States -- the move has yielded some clear losers, including U.S. investors now shut out of the market. It has also produced one clear winner: Vladimir Putin's Russia. U.S. officials, oil industry insiders and analysts say secret deals between Moscow and Caracas to produce, transport and sell oil to other markets have become a cash cow for Russia that is earning its state-controlled enterprises an estimated $120 million a month.... The Russians are to some extent extorting Maduro.... They're chartering vessels from third parties and obscuring the origin of the crude as they market it around the world. But they're also charging Maduro dearly for their efforts.... Today's relationship with socialist Venezuela is providing Russia with a rare opportunity to make a mint as it strengthens its foothold in the backyard of the United States." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Uh, isn't Russia's surest foothold in the U.S. on the steps of the South Portico?
Martin Pengelly of the Guardian: "Though Jared Kushner was a 'lead point of contact' for US allies worried about Donald Trump's threats to Nato, the president's son-in-law did not 'seem to know what Nato actually did', a new book [by Daily Beast reporters Lachlan Markay and Asawin Suebsaeng] claims. Kushner even appeared to be ignorant of article 5, the treaty clause which stipulates that an attack on one member is an attack on all." Mrs. McC: He shoulda read some books about NATO, so he could be an expert.
Mike DeBonis of the Washington Post: "An indignant Nancy Pelosi signaled Thursday she was in no mood to reconcile with President Trump and his congressional Republican allies a day after the Senate voted to acquit him of impeachment charges. Instead, the House speaker launched into a fierce attack on Trump's State of the Union address, his record on the economy and health care, his response to the months-long impeachment process and the swipes he leveled Thursday morning at the National Prayer Breakfast targeting the faith of his political enemies. And the California Democrat defended her decision to publicly tear up a copy of Trump's speech Tuesday night in the moments after he concluded his speech, saying she did not 'need any lessons from anybody, especially the president of the United States, about dignity.'" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Michael Gerson of the Washington Post: At yesterday's National Prayer Breakfast, "the president again displayed a remarkable ability to corrupt, distort and discredit every institution he touches. The prayer breakfast was intended to foster personal connections across party differences. Trump turned it into a performative platform to express his rage and pride -- the negation of a Christian ethic.... Trump has again shown a talent for exposing the sad moral compromises of his followers, especially his evangelical Christian followers.... Trump's unholy outburst (and the White House event that followed) shows we are reaching a very dangerous moment in our national life. The president is seized by rage and resentment -- not heard on some scratchy Watergate tape, but in public, for all to see and hear. He now feels unchecked and uncheckable." Gerson leads with this:
"... the main remarks were made by the former president of the American Enterprise Institute (and Post columnist) Arthur C. Brooks, who spoke on the themes of his wonderful 2019 book 'Love Your Enemies.' President Trump then prefaced his speech by saying: 'Arthur, I don't know if I agree with you. But I don't know if Arthur's going to like what I'm going to say.'... The command to love your enemies, of course, came from Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. 'Love your enemies, bless those that curse you, do good to them that hate you.' It might be expected for a president to express how difficult obeying such a mandate can be. Trump decided to dispute the command itself."
Mrs. McCrabbie: Of course Christian evangelists' favorite president* had no idea he was refuting what is regarded as the second of the "two greatest commandments" and using the prayer breakfast itself to essentially disavow the religion he claims to follow and make of himself a new, Old Testament-style messiah. ~~~
~~~ Daniel Burke of CNN: "... the National Prayer Breakfast is typically a nonpartisan event that organizers say is meant to provide a spiritual refuge from political warfare.... It's striking to hear Trump, who is a Presbyterian, so directly reject one of Christianity's core teachings. Instead, the President has said he prefers another part of the Bible, where it talks about taking 'an eye for an eye.' (Ironically, some Christians see Jesus' instruction to turn the other cheek as moving past that kind of morality.) Later in his speech on Thursday, Trump seemed to acknowledge that many in the room, which included Christians, Muslims and other faith leaders from around the world, might disagree with him about loving one's enemies. 'I'm sorry, I apologize,' he said. 'I am trying to learn. Not easy. It's not easy when they impeach you for nothing, and you're supposed to like them.'" Mrs. McC: Yeah, and right after that "apology," Trump took another swipe at President Obama.
Way Beyond the Beltway
Li Yuan of the New York Times: "The Chinese public have staged what amounts to an online revolt after the death of a doctor, Li Wenliang, who tried to warn of a mysterious virus that has since killed hundreds of people in China, infected tens of thousands and forced the government to corral many of the country's 1.4 billion people. Since late Thursday, people from different backgrounds, including government officials, prominent business figures and ordinary online users, have posted numerous messages expressing their grief at the doctor's death and their anger over his silencing by the police after sharing his knowledge about the new coronavirus."
News Ledes
USA Today: "Federal investigators on Friday dispelled the notion that engine failure was to blame for the helicopter crash last month that killed Kobe Bryant his daughter and seven others. The helicopter damage was consistent with 'powered rotation' -- from the engine moving the rotors -- when the flight crashed, according to a preliminary report by the National Transportation Safety Board. The finding is significant because investigators determined immediately after the accident that the copter was in a fast descent at the time of impact, after having climbed to try to get out of thick clouds. That gave rise to the notion that perhaps the engines had failed."
AP: "Hiring jumped at the beginning of the year as U.S. employers added 225,000 jobs, bolstering an economy that faces threats from China's viral outbreak, an ongoing trade war and struggles at Boeing. The Labor Department also said Friday that a half-million people streamed into the job market in January, though not all of them found jobs. That influx meant more people were counted as unemployed, and it boosted the jobless rate to 3.6%, from a half-century low of 3.5% in December."
The New York Times' coronavirus updates are here. A guide to protect yourself from this & other viruses is linked below under PSAs.
Share Article
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.
Reader Comments (14)
Nudged by CA, the market occasionally shows more sense than the Pretender, who has shown he's willing to trade damaged children's brains for corporate profits.
But CA wasn't. Call it a legislative reality check.
Think the "Justice" Department will sue?
https://apnews.com/2b433b664d834f3faa4e39ff257cabb6
https://www.snopes.com/ap/2020/02/06/manufacturer-to-stop-making-pesticide-linked-to-brain-damage/
I didn't hear or see the East Room gloat. Were senators collins and alexander there to see firsthand how much trump learned from his impeachment? From the reports on the event and on the senate investigations and the NY traveler restrictions, it seems as if trump has learned quite a bit.
Wednesday night's Colbert was good, but a little righteous indignation pales against the destruction of American government systems we are witnessing. We have government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich. That other thing? It has been in decline since the '80s, but it perished on Wednesday.
Finally some numbers re corona virus as of 2/7/2020:
https://www.health.gov.au/news/coronavirus-update-at-a-glance
28,285 cases
565 deaths
2% fatality rate
We're gonna be okay.
Heading out again, this time for the rest of Feb. so thought to deliver this Sunday Sermon a day or two early. Think of it as an anticipatory response to some of the SOTU and much of what we'll be hearing from the Pretender and his flunkies between now and November.
"The peculiar alliance of God and politics has some believers praising both the Lord and Mr. Trump for an economy that has increased employment, raised wages and goosed the stock market to all-time highs. Trump, of course, plans to ride that horse to his re-election.
But that horse’s shiny coat doesn’t tell the whole story.
In the Trump economy inequality continues to soar (politico.com). More than 3 million, including 400,000 children, have lost health insurance (politifact.com), and two out of five households don’t have $400 in the bank (abcnews.com).
Except where juiced by short-sighted deregulation and a government giveaway of public oil and gas resources, manufacturing in Trumpworld is still sluggish (usatoday.com); and while employment is high, the ratio of US workers to its working-age population remains lower than in many other countries (project-syndicate.org).
Wages did increase by four percent in 2019,but inflation rose by two percent, taking half of the increase (cnbc.com), and nearly half of America now works in low-wage jobs (cbsnews.com). Walmart recently announced a wage increase in some stores--to a princely 12 dollars/hour—and women, who earn less than men, are now the nation’s working majority.
Horse traders of old would paint horses’ teeth and pour gasoline on their flanks to disguise lameness (americancowboy.com). Debt is our economic paint and gasoline. Consumer debt neared $14 trillion in 2019 (debt.org), while the 2017 tax scam has ballooned our yearly budget deficit to an astonishing trillion dollars.
Years ago, watching a neighbor dig in a patch of ground, I asked him what he was doing. "Digging for gold," he told me and handed the five-year-old me a rock with sparkly flecks.
He was just joshing a young kid easily taken in by glitter, but I believed him.
Since then, I’ve been wary of old horse traders’ tricks."
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/climate/trump-grand-staircase-monument.html?
This remains subject, as does so much of the nation's fate, to the very slow grinding of our courts' wheels of justice, where the whole shrinking of national monuments by Pretender decree is under review.
The plan apparently is to get in and get out of the bank before the very slow cops can arrive.
Ken's "The peculiar alliance of God and politics has some believers praising both the Lord and Mr. Trump for an economy..." got me thinking once again of Trump's remarks at the prayer breakfast–how shameful, many said, but I wondered how his white evangelicals took it. I thought of how Hitler was seen in the eyes of the German Christian Church––a "volk Messiah" and an instrument of God––a view, I think, is similar to the one held today about Trump by many of his Evangelical supporters.
It's also interesting to me that Trump, being what you could call "irreligious," demands a god-like fealty and smites those that don't. As an atheist I try very hard to respect those that find solace in their religion, but oh, what a difference it would make if we wouldn't have it sneak and take over our politics. I also find it dangerous.
and Ken––it's still raining here and I don't feel any better than I did yesterday nor hopeful.
The dilemma of which Democratic candidate will be the one to head the ticket. I like Warren. I respect her...but, can't quite see her as President. Ditto, Sanders. You all will think I'm off my rocker...but, I am leaning Bloomberg at this point. Really!
...that said, I will vote Blue.
MAG,
You’re not the only one.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/2/7/1917408/-What-I-Learned-at-the-Dog-Park?
Replied to Bob (whom I have interviewed and with whom I occasionally correspond) thusly:
Bob,
Limited—particularly by geography-- as the sample was, I liked the dog park poll. Wonder what impressions you might have gathered in oh, let’s say, Boise, on a similar mission? And yes, the Bloomberg candidacy is worth following. The Pretender sure seems to think so and I notice this AM the ex-Navy Secretary has just endorsed him. Don’t like the presidency to be a battle of the billionaires, real or purported, but I think we’d all agree anything is better than what we have.
Me too on the Warren / Klobuchar primary vote. Old white men, whichever side they're on, will be the death of the Republic. This is a deadly serious election. Buttigieg is clearly smart. He's also clearly inexperienced in so many ways. He doesn't have the vote of POC and I can't see that critical constituency flocking to him in numbers that would be needed to win the general. It chokes me to say it, but I sincerely believe the country will not elect a gay president. I've notice that his completely charming husband has also taken a much lower profile on twitter.
Fahrenthold has another excellent article on the Secret Service filling Trump's coffers with payments for lodging - with receipts.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/secret-service-has-paid-rates-as-high-as-650-a-night-for-rooms-at-trumps-properties/2020/02/06/7f27a7c6-3ec5-11ea-8872-5df698785a4e_story.html
Is it me, or is everyone else tired of the the traditional horse race already? It wouldn't surprise me to find out that whole circus was run by a third party startup company - campaigns-R-us (they do high school popularity contests on the side hustle).
I think Warren can only win if she does something bold. She has to overcome the 'inadequate commander-in-chief' optics (and I mean optics, because for all I know she might have the sensibility to oversee the military). And she has to present air-tight arguments toward explaining that her economic programs are not "socialist" - meaning that she has to explain that the flavor if socialistic governance she envisions is not the same "socialism" we have been taught to believe is evil and leads to totalitarianism.
There is a large voting demographic who remember Eisenhower and pappy Bush as projecting military leadership and oversight. Those are the voters who were required to read "Animal Farm" in junior high, and maybe some Ayn Rand novel in high school. They had parents that served in WWII, and many tightly associate patriotism with military service. So, the bold thing that I think Warren has to do to win these voters as well as all today's young 'selfie' voters is to break away from the traditional campaign paradigm and come out with an early announcement of a running mate that is male (sorry PD) with military leadership experience as well as federal government experience, and one that is slightly more centrist in policy views. That is the way she could break out of the three-way race and earn some free media attention. (Yes - I'm delusional)
The GOP will make short work of a Warren nomination when Trump trots out a collection of generals that say they would not trust Warren as commander-in-chief - especially if her VP pick has no military background. I am sure that there are historical examples you RC readers can site that will refute this argument. But, remember John Kerry and the swift-boaters. Today the American military industrial complex is the economic ocean we are floating in. It will take more than naive optimistic idealism to control or deflate this beast.
Since I'll be suffering RC withdrawl for the next three weeks, I'll continue to hog the comments today. Sorry.
Interesting post, Periscope.
I think you make a good point about Warren, two of them in fact, the socialism canard that will play well to the many ignoramuses who happily cash their monthly SS checks, drive on public roads, have even come to like the ACA, and the legion who feel deep in their bones a woman cannot possibly command the military. Those feelings I would guess shared by millions, some of them D's, are the reasons I'd predict Warren, Buttigieg and even Sanders will fade as the year goes on, leaving the increasingly dopy Biden and and the rising Bloomberg and his billions on the field.
You mention both socialism and the military. I would not separate the two, though much of the country does.
Posted this to last night's Krugman column (nothing new there, so I won't link it) in response to a contributor who didn't know an "entitlement" from a whatever. Couldn't help myself. I tried to set him straight.
@hm1342
"Perhaps you meant these two programs (Social Security and Medicare) are "entitlements" because people have paid for them and are therefore entitled to receive them?
I'm sure you know Social Security is not actuarily part of the federal budget. Nor is it running a deficit. It has a 2-3 trillion dollar reserve.
Medicare is part of the budget and does cost a ton, but since it is means tested, it costs those with adequate means thousands of dollars each year in addition to that part of their income tax that goes to pay for it. Their SS checks are reduced per means-test formula each month specifically to support their Medicare.
Medicaid is another story, but when writing or talking about these programs it's critical we don't lump them together and perhaps unintentionally imply that those that are really earned benefit programs are some kind welfare.
It would be much easier and more logical to make the case, as others have, that corporate welfare (yes, definitely including the military) is the nation's largest welfare program.
That welfare program goes back to all those land deals that got the nation started, and to the giveaway of the nation's land and national resources to individuals and corporate interests that created the now legendary family fortunes. We all know those names.
And under the current administration, that practice (with the 2017 tax scam, the giveaway of more public lands and resources and the overly generous military budgets) has been given new life."
Then I went to bed.
To MAG and Periscope: Perhaps you didn't read my comment yesterday––posted it late:
I watched the whole of Trump's congratulatory session to all who helped him get away with impeachable actions. He's an expert at drawing these morally deficient, desperately needy people under his umbrella. How they smile and clap and when recognized for their prowess stand up and take a bow. This man, Trump, is a masterful monster of high end manipulation and for the first time I felt we don't have a chance. He and his goon squad are going to destroy Sanders, Warren, Pete and Biden they'll have for lunch. We no longer have anything resembling a normal ways and means––it's mean and it's their way and it's gonna be dirty.
So I hate to say this––but Bloomberg might just be the one person who could––with all his money and clout and connections––save the day.
and Ken––it was raining here, too––all day.
Filthy McNasty defeated, which one of these candidates could form an effective Administration? My guess is that Mike has one ready today. Is the kid from South Bend ready or will he be a captive for a year or so as Obama was?
@PD: I did miss your comment re Bloomberg yesterday. Interestingly we have arrived at a similar conclusion.