The Commentariat -- February 20, 2020
Afternoon Update:
Mrs. McCrabbie: In Wednesday's New York Times story on theTrump's appointment of U.S. ambassador to Germany Ric Grenell as the acting director of national intelligence, the reporters wrote, "... it has never been clear how Mr. Trump viewed Mr. Maguire...." So Washington Post reporters looked into that: ~~~
~~~ Ellen Nakashima, et al., of the Washington Post: "President Trump erupted at his acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, in the Oval Office last week over what he perceived as disloyalty by Maguire's staff, which ruined Maguire's chances of becoming the permanent intelligence chief, according to people familiar with the matter.... Maguire had been considered a leading candidate to be nominated for the post of DNI.... But Trump's opinion shifted last week when he heard from a GOP ally that the intelligence official in charge of election security, who works for Maguire, gave a classified briefing last Thursday to the House Intelligence Committee on 2020 election security.... The president erroneously believed that ... the official, Shelby Pierson..., had given information exclusively to Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), the committee chairman, and that the information would be helpful to Democrats if it were released publicly, the people familiar with the matter said.... The president was furious with Maguire and blamed him for the supposed transgression involving Pierson when the two met the next day. 'There was a dressing down' of Maguire, said one individual. 'That was the catalyst' that led to the sidelining of Maguire in favor of [Ric] Grenell, the person said. Maguire came away 'despondent,' said another individual." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: I don't have to tell you this is bat-shit crazy. The POTUS* hears a false rumor from some guy about an election security briefing, whereupon he has a hissyfit & makes a major personnel decision based on the gossip. There's a good chance found out later the rumor was untrue because he sent Maguire off with a glowing tweet: "I would like to thank Joe Maguire .... for the wonderful job he has done, and we look forward to working with him closely, perhaps in another capacity within the Administration!" Meanwhile, according to the WashPo report above, "On Thursday, Grenell said in a tweet that the president would nominate a permanent DNI 'soon' and that it would not be him." I heard on the teevee that Grenell is keeping his ambassadorship. ~~~
~~~ Update. Here's the New York Times' version of the story, which differs from the WashPo report:
~~~ Putin Is Helping Trump; Trump Is Furious Schiff Knows. Adam Goldman, et al., of the New York Times: "Intelligence officials warned House lawmakers last week that Russia was interfering in the 2020 campaign to try to get President Trump re-elected, five people familiar with the matter said, in a disclosure that angered Mr. Trump, who complained that Democrats would use it against him. The day after the Feb. 13 briefing to lawmakers, Mr. Trump berated Joseph Maguire, the outgoing acting director of national intelligence, for allowing it to take place, people familiar with the exchange said. Mr. Trump cited the presence in the briefing of Representative Adam B. Schiff.... During the briefing to the House Intelligence Committee, Mr. Trump's allies challenged the conclusions, arguing that Mr. Trump has been tough on Russia and strengthened European security.... Though some current and former officials speculated that the briefing may have played a role in the removal of Mr. Maguire, who had told people in recent days that he believed he would remain in the job, two administration officials said the timing was coincidental.... Though intelligence officials have previously informed lawmakers that Russia's interference campaign was ongoing, last week's briefing did contain what appeared to be new information, including that Russia intends to interfere with the ongoing Democratic primaries as well as the general election."
Sharon LaFraniere of the New York Times: "Roger J. Stone Jr., the Republican political consultant who for years portrayed himself as the dirty trickster of American politics, was sentenced Thursday to more than three years prison for obstructing a congressional inquiry in a bid to protect President Trump. The case against Mr. Stone, 67, a longtime friend of Mr. Trump's, had become a cause célèbre among the president's supporters. Mr. Trump has attacked the prosecutors, the jury forewoman and the federal judge overseeing the trial, casting his former campaign adviser as the victim of a vendetta by law enforcement.... Judge Amy Berman Jackson said that for months, Mr. Stone carried out a deliberate and calculated effort to hinder an important congressional inquiry by blatantly lying, hiding hundreds of documents and pressuring a fragile witness.... She added, 'He was not prosecuted to give anyone a political advantage. He was not prosecuted, as some have complained, for standing up for the president. He was prosecuted for covering up for the president.'... Judge Jackson said Mr. Stone's behavior inspired dismay and disgust.'" Politico's report is here. ~~~
~~~ MSNBC: Judge Amy Berman Jackson sentenced Roger Stone to 40 months in prison, plus two years probation, & a $20,000 fine. She had harsh words for Stone, who did not speak in his own defense.
Trump's Takeover of Justice Department, Ctd. Toluse Olorunnipa, et al., of the Washington Post: "The White House is moving to take more direct control over pardons and commutations, with President Trump aiming to limit the role of the Justice Department in the clemency process as he weighs a flurry of additional pardon announcements, according to people familiar with the matter. Trump ... has assembled a team of advisers to recommend and vet candidates for pardons, according to several people with knowledge of the matter who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The group, essentially an informal task force of at least a half-dozen presidential allies, has been meeting since late last year to discuss a revamped pardon system in the White House. Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, is taking a leading role in the new clemency initiative and has supported the idea of putting the White House more directly in control of the process that in past administrations has been housed in the Justice Department, officials said."
Jessica Kwong of Newsweek: "Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner's Washington, D.C., mansion landlord was granted lease renewals from the Trump administration Wednesday for a proposed copper-nickel mine that could turn a protected Minnesota wilderness area into a 'gigantic new potty,' [Richard Painter] a former chief ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush warned.... Painter said he was not surprised at the approvals of the leases, which had been terminated by the Obama administration citing environmental risks." --s
Brad Reed of RawStory: "A man who killed nine people in a mass shooting in Germany published a racist manifesto in which he identified as an 'incel' and called for killing all non-whites in the country. Insider reports that 43-year-old Tobias Rathjen, whom police say went on a shooting rampage in the town of Hanhau on Wednesday night, published a 24-page manifesto on his personal website that outlined his racist beliefs.... [He] also accuses President Donald Trump of stealing his ideas." --s
Michael Isikoff of Yahoo! News: "Former California Republican congressman Dana Rohrabacher confirmed in a new interview that during a three-hour meeting at the Ecuadorian Embassy in August 2017, he told Julian Assange he would get President Trump to give him a pardon if he turned over information proving the Russians had not been the source of internal Democratic National Committee emails published by WikiLeaks. In a phone interview with Yahoo News, Rohrabacher said his goal during the meeting was to find proof for a widely debunked conspiracy theory: that WikiLeaks' real source for the DNC emails was not Russian intelligence agents, as U.S. officials have since concluded, but former DNC staffer Seth Rich, who was murdered on the streets of Washington in July 2016 in what police believe was a botched robbery. A lawyer for Assange in London on Wednesday cited the pardon offer from Rohrabacher during a court hearing on the U.S. government's request to extradite the WikiLeaks founder.... [Rohrabacher] did not, however, ever speak to Trump about it, he said." Instead, he spoke to John Kelly, then Trump's chief-of-staff. Emphasis added. Mrs. McC: IOW, according to Rohrabacher, the pardon was all his idea, and Trump probably never heard about it.
Facebook Designed Its Policies to Help the Right Wing. Craig Timburg of the Washington Post: Facebook created 'Project P' -- for propaganda -- in the hectic weeks after the 2016 presidential election and quickly found dozens of pages that had peddled false news reports ahead of Donald Trump's surprise victory. Nearly all were based overseas, had financial motives and displayed a clear rightward bent. In a world of perfect neutrality..., the political tilt of the pages shouldn't have mattered. But in a videoconference between Facebook's Washington office and its Silicon Valley headquarters in December 2016, the company's most senior Republican, Joel Kaplan, voiced concerns that would become familiar to those within the company. 'We can't remove all of it because it will disproportionately affect conservatives,' said Kaplan, a former George W. Bush White House official and now the head of Facebook's Washington office.... [Thus,] a company led mainly by Democrats in the liberal bastion of Northern California repeatedly has tilted rightward to deliver policies, hiring decisions and public gestures sought by Republicans..., [ensuring] a platform that gives politicians license to lie and that remains awash in misinformation, vulnerable to a repeat of many of the problems that marred the 2016 presidential election."
~~~~~~~~~~
Best Planned Zingers
I'd like to talk about who we're running against: a billionaire who calls women fat broads and horse-faced lesbians. And no, I'm not talking about Donald Trump. I'm talking about Mayor Bloomberg. Look, I'll support whoever the Democratic nominee is, but understand this. Democrats take a huge risk if we just substitute one arrogant billionaire for another. -- Elizabeth Warren
Mayor Buttigieg really has a slogan that was thought up by his consultants to paper over a thin version of a plan that would leave millions of people unable to afford their health care. It's not a plan, it's a Power Point. And Amy's plan is even less. It's like a Post-it note: 'insert plan here.' Bernie has started very much -- has a good start. But instead of expanding and bringing in more people to help, instead his campaign relentlessly attacks everyone who asks a question or tries to fill in details about how to actually make this work. And then his own advisers say, 'Eh, probably won't happen anyway.' -- Elizabeth Warren ~~~
What a wonderful country we have. The best known socialist happens to be a millionaire with three houses. -- Michael Bloomberg on Bernie Sanders
Let's put forth someone who is actually a Democrat. -- Pete Buttigieg, on Sanders & Bloomberg
Best Uncanned Responses
I take personal offense because Post-it notes were invented in my state. -- Amy Klobuchar, on Elizabeth Warren's attack
I hope you heard what his defense was: 'I've been nice to some women.' -- Elizabeth Warren, on Michael Bloomberg
~~~ Alexander Burns & Jonathan Martin of the New York Times: "The Democratic presidential candidates turned on one another in scorching and personal terms in a debate on Wednesday night, with two of the leading candidates, Senator Bernie Sanders and Michael R. Bloomberg, forced onto the defensive repeatedly throughout the evening. In his first appearance in a presidential debate, Mr. Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City, struggled from the start to address his past support for stop-and-frisk policing and the allegations he has faced over the years of crude and disrespectful behavior toward women. Time and again, Mr. Bloomberg had obvious difficulty countering criticism that could threaten him in a Democratic Party that counts women and African-Americans among its most important constituencies. Two candidates who have shied away from direct conflict in past debates, Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., mounted something of a tag-team onslaught against Mr. Bloomberg, several times leaving him visibly irked and straining to respond." ~~~
~~~ Karen Tumulty of the Washington Post: "Bloomberg's uneven performance Wednesday offered little reassurance that he could hold his ground against Trump on a debate stage this fall."
~~~ New York Times opinion writers assess the candidates' performances. Politico reporters point out the highlights. Mrs. McC: Bloomberg & Klobuchar didn't effectively counter the attacks against them, and Buttigieg proved he's a lightweight. Warren "looked presidential," but mean presidential.
Mrs. Bea McCrabbie: Although it took me a while to find it, Klobuchar's campaign Website has a long page of small print on healthcare. I don't know what page it was Warren thought would fit on a Post-it, but it wasn't this page. Unless Klobuchar's campaign put together this page overnight (and I don't think that's what happened) Warren's attack was untrue.
Here's the New York Times reporters' snark analysis of the Democratic presidential debate. Includes live videofeed of the debate. Update: Oops! Got an error message on the livefeed. It seems to be defunct as the debate begins.
Jordan Weissmann of Slate: "... Elizabeth Warren ... seemed to give her campaign some new, much needed energy on Wednesday night during the Democratic showdown in Nevada, where she pretty much laid Michael Bloomberg out on the stage and then ran a truck back and forth over him while the crowd cheered like it was a Monster Jam rally. Then she gunned it for her other opponents. I mean, it was brutal. It was crushing. It was a command performance full of zingers that drew roars, even if they were a bit obviously prewritten.... It may or may not be enough to bring back her candidacy from the brink. But I'm sure at least a few voters found themselves thinking it would be fun to see her give Donald Trump the same treatment as the billionaire she embarrassed in Nevada."
Eric Levitz of New York has a withering assessment of all of the candidates' reality-show performances: "... pugnacity is just another word for nothing left to lose."
Eoin Higgins of Common Dreams: "Sen. Bernie Sanders was the lone voice on Wednesday night's debate stage in Las Vegas endorsing without reservation the idea that the candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination with the most votes by this summer's convention in Milwaukee should be the party's standard bearer. All other five candidates onstage endorsed allowing the 'process' to play out, which would mean allowing super-delegates to weigh in from the second ballot on, alongside the regular delegates earned from votes in the primary." Mrs. McC: This may prove to be the most important question of last night's food fight, and Chuck Todd asked it! ~~~
~~~ Ed Kilgore of New York: "... as Sanders pointed out in his answer, a second ballot would allow 771 unelected and unpledged super-delegates (basically elected officials) to cast their own votes. They would represent an estimated 16 percent of total second-ballot delegates. The provision keeping superdelegates off the table on the first ballot (and also reducing their number) was part of a compromise deal struck by the DNC with Sanders supporters after the 2016 cycle. But now Sanders is arguing that only pledged delegates should count, which means, in practice, that the first ballot should be the last.... Unlikely as this is, imagine Bernie's got 35 percent of the pledged delegates and someone else has 33 percent. Why should he be the putative nominee, without a second ballot to sort out, well, second choices? That is particularly true since, as my colleague Gabriel Debenedetti points out, Sanders persistently refused to concede the 2016 nomination to Hillary Clinton until she could claim a majority of pledged delegates."
Shane Goldmacher & Adriana Ramic of the New York Times: "This will be the ninth Democratic debate but the first featuring former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, and he is bound to face an avalanche of attacks from his rivals. Mr. Bloomberg's rise in recent polls has coincided with the decline of Joseph R. Biden Jr., who needs a big debate performance to recover from stinging losses in Iowa and New Hampshire. Senator Bernie Sanders, who appears in strong shape heading into Nevada's caucuses on Saturday, simply needs to continue avoiding the scrutiny that some rivals have received in past debates. Tonight is also a chance for Senator Elizabeth Warren to regain her footing pre-Super Tuesday and for Pete Buttigieg to show he can speak to the concerns of a racially diverse electorate. The surge of Senator Amy Klobuchar in New Hampshire after one strong debate showed just how much these television spectacles can matter. Here are the dynamics to watch for."
Ezra Klein of Vox: "Since entering the presidential race in November, Mike Bloomberg has spent more than $400 million of his own money on ads.... He's [also] spent a decade as a generous and effective donor to progressive causes, friendly politicians, cash-strapped cities, and worthy nonprofits.... For many frightened Democrats..., the case for Bloomberg [is]: Whatever his faults, he carries a deep war chest he could use to defeat Donald Trump and elect congressional Democrats.... 'Winning the presidential election is starting to look hard.' quipped Jonathan Chait in New York magazine. 'How about buying it instead?'... This is how bad systems corrupt good individuals -- they do it by enlisting our self-interest to convince us to betray our values.... [Bloomberg's] campaign isn't a betrayal of the political and economic system we have now but its logical extension: If we are going to allow this much wealth concentration, and if the Supreme Court holds that the rich can spend as much money pursuing their political ambitions as they want, then eventually American politics will simply become a competition between billionaires of the left and billionaires of the right.... Even if Bloomberg would be a good president, he'd be a terrible precedent."
Brian Schwartz of CNBC: "Key fundraisers are jumping ship from Joe Biden's struggling presidential campaign to instead support Mike Bloomberg's ascending candidacy. The development comes amid growing concerns within Biden's affluent donor network that the former vice president is struggling to convince voters that he can defeat Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, for the Democratic nomination."
Savannah Berhmann of USA Today: "Bernie Sanders said Tuesday night that he is not planning to release any additional medical records. Sanders, 78, suffered a heart attack in October during a campaign event. He had a blockage in one artery and two stents were inserted, his campaign said at the time. Speaking during CNN's town hall in Las Vegas, Sanders was asked to clarify whether his presidential campaign would be releasing full medical records, which he previously stated he would do.... At the time, he said, 'The people do have a right to know about the health of a senator, somebody who's running for president of the United States -- full disclosure.' However, Tuesday he said: 'We have released quite as much documentation as any other candidate has' and reiterated that letters from cardiologists and doctors have said he is in good health."
Edward-Isaac Dovere of the Atlantic: "Bernie Sanders got so close to running a primary challenge to President Barack Obama that Senator Harry Reid had to intervene to stop him. It took Reid two conversations over the summer of 2011 to get Sanders to scrap the idea, according to multiple people who remember the incident, which has not been previously reported. That summer, Sanders privately discussed a potential primary challenge to Obama with several people, including Patrick Leahy, his fellow Vermont senator. Leahy, alarmed, warned Jim Messina, Obama's presidential reelection-campaign manager. Obama's campaign team was 'absolutely panicked' by Leahy's report, Messina told me, since 'every president who has gotten a real primary has lost a general [election].' David Plouffe, another Obama strategist, confirmed Messina's account, as did another person familiar with what happened."
Devan Cole of CNN: "Former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang is joining CNN as a political commentator, the network announced Wednesday.... He'll appear on the network in his new capacity later Wednesday, he added. Yang, a businessman who ended his campaign last week, rose from obscurity to become a highly-visible candidate, rallying a coalition of liberal Democrats, libertarians and some disaffected Republicans to form a devoted group of followers known as the Yang Gang."
Eileen Sullivan of the New York Times: "Ignoring appeals from his attorney general to stop tweeting about the Justice Department, President Trump renewed his attacks on the agency on Wednesday, demanding 'JUSTICE' for himself and all future presidents.... With a series of retweets, Mr. Trump appeared to embrace the suggestion that Attorney General William P. Barr 'clean shop' at the department. And the president promoted the idea of naming a special counsel to investigate what Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative nonprofit Judicial Watch, described as a 'seditious conspiracy' at the department and the F.B.I."
Ashraf Khalil of the AP: "Roger Stone ... faces sentencing Thursday on his convictions for witness tampering and lying to Congress. The action in federal court comes amid Trump's unrelenting defense of his longtime confidant that has led to a mini-revolt inside the Justice Department and allegations the president has interfered in the case."
Peter Baker, et al., of the New York Times: "The clemency orders that the president issued ... to celebrity felons like [Bernie] Kerik, Rod R. Blagojevich and Michael R. Milken came about through a typically Trumpian process, an ad hoc scramble that bypassed the formal procedures used by past presidents and was driven instead by friendship, fame, personal empathy and a shared sense of persecution. While aides said the timing was random, it reinforced Mr. Trump's antipathy toward the law enforcement establishment. All 11 recipients had an inside connection or were promoted on Fox News. Some were vocal supporters of Mr. Trump, donated to his campaign or in one case had a son who weekended in the Hamptons with the president's eldest son. Even three obscure women serving time on drug or fraud charges got on Mr. Trump's radar screen through a personal connection." ~~~
~~~ Washington Post Editors: "IN ANNOUNCING seven pardons and four commutations of convicted federal criminals on Tuesday, President Trump ... made clear the pardons were a function of his whim, based on which celebrity or personal friend caught his ear, who got on Fox News to appeal to him, or who gave money to the Trump cause.... This arbitrary deployment of presidential pardon power sent several messages, all of them insidious. One is that favor flows from the leader's good graces.... Another is that Blagojevich-like corruption is not serious and that those who investigate and prosecute such wrongdoing do so not because it is unusual but because they are biased. This is false.... Lastly, Mr. Trump is asserting control over criminal matters, which his predecessors avoided for fear of corrupting the justice system."
Julian Borger & Owen Bowcott of the Guardian: "Donald Trump offered Julian Assange a pardon if he would say Russia was not involved in leaking Democratic party emails, a court in London has been told. The extraordinary claim was made at Westminster magistrates court before the opening next week of Assange's legal battle to block attempts to extradite him to the US, where he faces charges for publishing hacked documents. The allegation was denied by the former Republican congressman named by the Assange legal team as a key witness. Assange's lawyers alleged that during a visit to London in August 2017, congressman Dana Rohrabacher told the WikiLeaks founder that 'on instructions from the president, he was offering a pardon or some other way out, if Mr Assange ... said Russia had nothing to do with the DNC [Democratic National Committee] leaks.'" ~~~
~~~ "Was There a Quid Pro Quo? The Answer Is 'Yes.'" Colin Kalmbacher of Law & Crime: "A judge in the United Kingdom will allow Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange to argue that he was offered a pardon by ... Donald Trump in exchange for issuing a statement that Russia was not the source of leaks beneficial to Trump's 2016 campaign.... The Assange lawyer's allegation does appear to be corroborated after all -- by [Dana Rohrabacher] himself. Rohrabacher previously told Los Angeles media -- in September 2017 -- that he took part in a 'confidential interaction' with the White House -- in order to secure Assange a deal. The deal Rohrabacher described involved making Assange's legal troubles go away in exchange for information that could exonerate Trump and the Trump campaign during the Russia probe. The news outlet asked Rohrabacher if Assange was asking for a pardon as a part of a potential deal, but he would only say discussions were 'confidential.' Former federal prosecutor Richard Signorelli called the upshot here: 'This is called corroboration of Assange's attorney proffer of corrupt pardon promise by Trump.'" ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: While I don't doubt that all of Trump's pardons are corrupt -- that is, he grants them to further his own political or personal interests -- the alleged offer to Assange, as Signorelli writes, is directly tied to a corrupt purpose. The presidential pardon, despite what Trump believes and what we often hear on the teevee, is not absolute. The president (or a state's governor, for that matter) cannot pardon an individual for the purpose of gaining something in return. This is different from granting pardons to your friends or allies-- as George H.W. Bush did -- or to donors -- as Bill Clinton did, where the friendships, alliances, actions or political contributions were not expressly conditioned on receiving pardons. In the Trump-Assange case, if proved, there was an expressed quid pro quo.
Post-Impeachment House Cleaning, Ctd.
~~~ Maggie Haberman & Julian Barnes of the New York Times: "President Trump was expected to name Richard Grenell, the American ambassador to Germany, to be the acting director of national intelligence, three people familiar with the matter said on Wednesday. Mr. Grenell, whose outspokenness throughout his career as a political operative and then as ambassador has prompted criticism, is a vocal Trump loyalist who will lead a group of national security agencies often viewed skeptically by the White House. He would take over from Joseph Maguire, who has served as the acting director of national intelligence since the resignation last summer of Dan Coats, a former Republican senator from Indiana.... Mr. Maguire initially blocked the whistle-blower complaint from being forwarded to Congress, following the guidance of administration lawyers. But he eventually helped broker the agreement to provide the complaint to Congress's intelligence committees, allowing the impeachment inquiry to gain steam." Axios has a story here. ~~~
~~~ All the Best People, Ctd. Kaitlin Collins, et al., of CNN: The appointment of Grenell "is raising concerns even among Trump allies who have been quick to point out that Grenell's primary qualification appears to be his loyalty to the President. One source close to Trump told CNN they were surprised by the pick, noting Grenell has zero intelligence-related experience. And another Trump adviser described Grenell as 'out of his league' for the acting DNI job, adding that some in the administration are 'embarrassed by his behavior.'... Grenell, also a former Fox News contributor, is not expected to be nominated for the full-time director position, which would require Senate confirmation. His track record as US ambassador to Germany has also raised concerns, even among some Republicans. 'Some Republicans are outraged with the job he has done as ambassador, there is no way he could get confirmed,' a source familiar with the move said."
~~~ Jim Sciutto, et al., of CNN: "The Pentagon's top policy official who warned against withholding military aid to Ukraine last year resigned on Wednesday at the request of ... Donald Trump, according to a copy of his resignation letter obtained by CNN. John Rood, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy at the Pentagon, is the latest senior national security official involved in the Ukraine controversy to be forced out following Trump's acquittal in the Senate impeachment trial, but sources told CNN that he broke with the administration on several issues, in addition to the handling of aid to Ukraine, leading to a loss of support from leadership.... He was involved in certifying to Congress that Ukraine had embarked on significant reforms to justify its receipt of $250 million in security assistance. That certification undermined one of the justifications -- concerns about corruption in Kiev -- that some members of the Trump administration made to defend blocking aid to Ukraine. Hours after Trump's July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky..., Rood emailed Secretary of Defense Mark Esper -- who had been in the job two days -- ... that 'placing a hold on security assistance at this time would jeopardize this unique window of opportunity and undermine our defense priorities with a key partner in the strategic competition with Russia.'"
Ariane de Vogue of CNN: "A group of federal judges hastily postponed an emergency meeting that was scheduled to take place Wednesday to discuss concerns about ... Donald Trump and the Justice Department's intervention in politically charged cases."
Rebecca Beitsch of the Hill: "President Trump on Wednesday signed an order in California to re-engineer the state's water plans, completing a campaign promise to funnel water from the north to a thirsty agriculture industry and growing population further south. The ceremonial order comes after the Department of the Interior late last year reversed its opinion on scientific findings that for a decade extended endangered species protections to various types of fish -- a review that had been spurred by the order from Trump. Trump said the changes to the 'outdated scientific research and biological opinions' would now help direct 'as much water as possible, which will be a magnificent amount, a massive amount of water for the use of California farmers and ranchers.'"
Jonathan Mattise of the AP: "Former national security adviser John Bolton on Wednesday denounced the House's impeachment proceedings against ... Donald Trump as 'grossly partisan' and said his testimony would not have changed Trump's acquittal in the Senate, as he continued to stay quiet on the details of a yet-to-be-released book. In his second public discussion this week, Bolton was on stage at Vanderbilt University with former national security adviser under President Barack Obama, Susan Rice, who questioned Bolton's refusal to discuss more details while his book undergoes screening for possible classified national security details by the Trump administration. Bolton was likewise quiet on specifics from the book during a Monday speaking engagement at Duke University."
Josh Dawsey of the Washington Post: "Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said Wednesday night that the Republican Party is hypocritical when it comes to deficits, according to audio of an overseas speech obtained by The Washington Post. 'My party is very interested in deficits when there is a Democrat in the White House. The worst thing in the whole world is deficits when Barack Obama was the president. Then Donald Trump became president, and we're a lot less interested as a party,' Mulvaney said at the Oxford Union to a group of several hundred people. Mulvaney, who ran the Office of Management and Budget before taking the acting chief of staff role, said he found the growing deficit -- which reached almost $1 trillion in 2019, soaring in the Trump era -- 'extraordinarily disturbing' but that neither party, nor voters, cared much about it. Republicans, he said, were 'evolving' since Trump became president."
John Bowden of the Hill: "China has expelled three reporters for The Wall Street Journal after its foreign ministry deemed as 'racist' an op-ed headline in the newspaper. A statement obtained by multiple news outlets from China's foreign ministry blamed the expulsions on an opinion piece written by Walter Russell Mead titled 'China is the Real Sick Man of Asia,' a reference to the ongoing outbreak of a new form of coronavirus in the country.... The Journal's CEO and publisher William Lewis called for China to immediately reinstate the reporters' credentials, while apologizing for the headline which offended Chinese readers.... The expulsions followed a decision by the Trump administration to designate several Chinese media companies as de facto arms of the government in Beijing.Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday chastised China for expelling the three WSJ journalists."
Beyond the Beltway
Utah. Bethany Rodgers of the Salt Lake Tribune: "A bill that would effectively decriminalize polygamy and dispel fears of prosecution for plural marriage among consenting adults sailed through the Utah Senate on Tuesday. Sen. Deidre Henderson's bill would reclassify bigamy as an infraction, codifying the practice of the Utah attorney general's office not to prosecute otherwise law-abiding polygamists. An infraction, like a traffic ticket, carries no threat of imprisonment. The measure, SB102, cleared the Senate by a unanimous vote after scant debate and now heads to the House. Current Utah law makes polygamy a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. It can be up to 15 years if the defendant is also convicted of fraud, child abuse, sexual abuse, domestic abuse or human smuggling or trafficking. Henderson's bill would leave intact these enhanced penalties and add a few more crimes under which polygamy would be a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison."
Way Beyond
Germany. David McHugh & Frank Jordans of the AP: "A 43-year-old German man shot and killed nine people at several locations in a Frankfurt suburb in attacks that appeared to have been motivated by far-right beliefs, officials said Thursday. The gunman first attacked a hookah bar and a neighboring cafe in central Hanau at about 10 p.m. Wednesday, killing several people, before heading about 2.5 kilometers (1.5 miles) west and opening fire again, first on a car and then a sports bar, claiming more victims. Chancellor Angela Merkel said that while the circumstances of the attack still needed to be fully investigated, the shootings exposed the 'poison' of racism in German society. Merkel pledged to stand up against those who seek to divide the country."
News Lede
The New York Times' live updates on developments in the coronavirus epidemic are here.
Share Article
Reader Comments (14)
Debate: A formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting
or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.
Dogfight: A ferocious struggle for supremacy between interested
parties.
I'm wondering why we call these things debates.
Klobuchar needs a better debate team. After forgetting López Obrador's name in a public forum, Klobuchar should have boned up on him (he's anti-Trump!), and as a U.S. Senator, she could have phoned him and apologized. Then in last night's debate, she could have said she had apologized to him personally and would invite him to the first state dinner she held as president. And while she was at it, she could have gently dissed Buttigieg for making a mountain out of a molehill, demonstrating that memorizing names does not a president make.
Instead, she seemed somewhat flummoxed again by the question she should have been prepared for; she even sort of muddled the pronunciation of López Obrador, which isn't all that hard to pronounce. (Or she could have called him AMLO, which is an acronym for the first letters of his name, and one recognized in Mexico.)
If I were Amy, I'd throw my debate binder at my debate team. This was an easy oopsy to correct.
Didn't think I could dislike Amy Klobuchar any more but she proved me wrong last night: so harsh and dishonest, like the make-up (her stylist should be fired) and teeth-clenching “smiles” she (unconvincingly) hides behind. As a woman, I cringe each time she reminds us of her gender — as if that should be enough to qualify. (Gee, have I mentioned that I can’t stand the senator from Minnesota?)
More morning java, please.
Mrs. Bea McC -
LOL - Didn’t notice (Did we post at the same time?) your Klobuchar impressions. Mine were not a response - or challenge - to your entry.
From a bright, chilly NYC morning.
@Hattie: To quote a statement by Margaret Mead---"human
potential does not come prepackaged with one's sex organs."
Tell that to the president* and lots of other politicians, national,
state and local.
@Forresr Morris re:
<< “human potential does not come prepackaged with one's sex organs." >>
Excellent quote! Thank you. Will surely find opportunity to borrow (with attribution, of course.)
"What a night!" sang Doctor John and last night's debate was one of those what-a nights. Forest gives us the definition of a "debate" but the really good ones often result in dog fights which makes for a more revelatory experience. Such fun to read the NYT's people's take on all the candidates who themselves gave us a few zingers––some very funny.
Poor Bloomie–- clearly this kind of thing was out of his purview–-petulant and pissed, he bombed –-"Money can't buy love" is perfect. I would love for him to concentrate on putting his mouth and money into Kentucky to take down McConnell; he's the creature with the shell of protection that ambles slowly into stopping anything liberal in its tracks.
Warren: and they said a woman couldn't stand up to Trump–-oh yeah? And her standing up for Amy––good show!
Bernie: Calm down, smile more, and stop yelling––by this time your mandate is clear.
Uncle Joe: He had his day; his day is done.
Pete: Underneath that boyish charm and smooth talk resides a " mean boy"; perhaps a residual characteristic from his past.
Amy: Shucks, honey, with your sense of humor I'd expect you could ward off the "hits" you are bound to encounter from that guy on your right that joins you as the slightly left of center candidate. If you're as strong a midwestern gal as you claim you need to show it.
Ezra Klein (see above) expressed for me exactly how I look at this "buying of elections" specifically referring to Bloomberg's foray into this political season:
" This is how bad systems corrupt good individuals — they do it by enlisting our self-interest to convince us to betray our values.... [Bloomberg's] campaign isn’t a betrayal of the political and economic system we have now but its logical extension: If we are going to allow this much wealth concentration, and if the Supreme Court holds that the rich can spend as much money pursuing their political ambitions as they want, then eventually American politics will simply become a competition between billionaires of the left and billionaires of the right.... Even if Bloomberg would be a good president, he’d be a terrible precedent.”
@PD Pepe: Thanks. That's as good -- and accurate -- a summary as I've seen from any of the pros.
I only caught the second hour of the debate but it seems like PD's take is pretty spot on. And I agree about Bernie. Enough yelling, dude. We know you're pissed and your anger is well founded. But even though you don't have to appeal to everyone, you have to find a base larger than your army. Buttigieg comes across as pretty well organized when he isn't trying to zing the other candidates (he must have kicked it in high school debates). He's got a future but his time is yet to come. Warren may have scored some much needed points. I certainly hope so. Someone has to come out of this mess to stand up to the Orange Monster.
I am not despairing that we are lost, only that Fatty and his evil monster horde (and their Russian backers) are gearing up for a gigantic clusterfuck of the coming election and we need someone to separate from the pack sooner rather than later. I'm deathly afraid that Sanders will be the one and I'm thinking that, despite all these polls that say he beats Trump head to head, months and months of non-stop "Soshulist! Soshulist! Soshulist" will be this year's "Emails, Emails, Emails!". And we all know how that turned out. And don't forget the down-ballot elections. If enough people can be frightened off from Bernie, they may be disinclined to give Democrats the Senate as well. Or more House seats. And we are in the current mess because Democrats fucked up those down-ballot contests and allowed the greedy, mendacious, treasonous Turtle to spit on the Constitution.
One technical aspect of this "debate" format (and Forrest is right: labeling these things debates is terribly misleading--"candidate forum" might be more accurate) I truly detest is this hand-raising bullshit. What the hell is that? It makes them look like schoolchildren. "Teacher, teacher, pick me, pick me!" Not very presidential. It might be entertaining for the R's and media snicker-crowd, but it has a nasty flavor of juvenile desperation. Maybe next time they can be required to hop on one foot and spin in a circle before they get called on. I get that they want to respond to a statement made by another candidate, but jeez Louise.
Oh, and Joe? Thanks for everything, man, but someone else will take it from here. I'll never forget your ass-kicking of Lyin' Ryan a few years ago. That was stellar, but so far in this "debate" season, you're not doing yourself (or us) any favors.
Back in the day, the golden (shit covered) boys of Republican ratfucking worked for the firm of Stone, Manafort, and Black. Here's a picture of three of those stalwarts (accent on warts). One is in prison for multiple offenses, the middle one, with the smirk, is heading there (I'm guessing there's no smirking today), and the asshole on the right died in disgrace, asking forgiveness for his evil deeds and "naked cruelty". Here's hoping he's enjoying his fire and brimstone afterlife.
These guys are avatars of the current Republican Party. Liars, crooks, scumbags, and the nakedly cruel; and now jailbirds.
May the rest of them follow. Dante's Inferno awaits.
@Akhilleus: Yeah, the firm of Stone, Manafort & Black is sort of the personification of the evolution of the Republican party. It evolved from dirty trickster Lee Atwater & Richard Nixon, who introduced dirty tricks but tried to hide them, to Roger Stone & Donald Trump who boast about them. The party evolved from understanding the difference between right and wrong but doing wrong anyway, to being proud of their cunning wrongdoing. The party is essentially a very successful, effective, criminal cabal.
And that's where we are. Every day I link to stories that once would have shocked the conscience of the nation, but now half the country says "So what?" or "Ha ha, got the best of you sniveling do-gooders."
A couple of media spots caught my attention in the last day or two: this one appeared on Democracy Now about Biden's role in the Iraq war
https://www.democracynow.org/2020/2/18/worth_the_price_joe_biden_documentary
The other one was a streamed political ad showing Obama up-talking Bloomberg. I don't know if it was some old footage that MB cherry picked for his campaign or if Obama has actually come out and officially endorsed Bloomberg. Sorry I don't have the link (ads are unlinkable). I suspect the former is true because an official Obama endorsement would have been a major media event. So it's kind of creepy that Bloomberg would resurrect the footage and present it as if it was a recent endorsement - or have I missed something?
The film about Biden's endorsement of the Iraq war is a potent retrospective. It's hard to say "oops - it wasn't worth the price afterall" when so much ongoing death and misery resulted. I'm with Eric Swalwell - it's time to pass the torch Joe.
I'm having a hard time imagining a Sanders cabinet (should he win). How does that man find a collection of like-minded experts that can agree on passable legislative proposals? Its hard to see him as a team player, let alone someone who can moderate a team of rivals.
Back to practicing my voting with nose clamped move.
I have seen that MB/Obama clip too, and have also heard some people from the Obama camp say that MB didn't like O, didn't support him, or vote for him. So, it is nasty of MB to use it in an ad. But of course, since he is rich, and moves people around like chess pieces, he can do whatever he wants. Hmmm-- who does that sound like?
I messaged my kids that the "debate" was already a bloodbath pretty early on. I was delighted to see Senator Professor Warren go after MB like a pit bull, get in some heavy jabbing and in general show everyone else what she can do. Bernie was Bernie, unelectable in 2020, and he can't change his spots any more than Dumpster can. He is angry all the time, and although I understand why, since his Utopia eludes him, I can't see him either on the throne in the Oval or working with anybody at all, even those who might share his vision. Pete was pretty busy shivving Amy, and she wasn't very good at parrying the expected remark about the president of Mexico. Frankly, that made me angry at him, and then at her. I had no idea who the president is, as he is never in the news, since it's all Dump, all the time, regardless. It was an unfair jab. She is expected to know all, regurgitate all, when the guy she wants to replace knows absolutely zero about THIS country, never mind the rest of the world. I did not like any of that. Joe: we hardly knew ya... Bloomberg is only half eviscerated-- if Harvey W went down for his sins, he can too. The only teflon being is King Rodentnose, and he is only so because of his courtiers. What a world...
It will be interesting to see if the MSM (not wanting to offend the Orange Menace and/or find their outlet subsequently cast into the trash by Fatty’s authoritarian storm troopers) inform the public that Richard Grennell, Fatty’s latest choice from the All You Can Sleaze Traitor buffet line, to serve as the national intelligence director, has exactly zero experience in intelligence. Zero. As in none.
It’s like appointing a tone-deaf, rhythmically challenged, stunningly unmusical tweaker as music director and principle conductor of the New York Philharmonic. The difference being, if he fucks up Berlioz’s “Symphonie Fantastique”, no one dies from a terrorist attack.
He is, however, a classic Trump gangster who, as ambassador to Germany, began his stay there with a demand that that country do exactly as he told them, prompting Wolfgang Kubicki, deputy chairman of the Free Democratic Party, to call “...for Grenell to be expelled from Germany, stating, ‘Any U.S. diplomat who acts like a high commissioner of an occupying power must learn that our tolerance also knows its limits.’”
Grennell is another in the loooong line of frighteningly unqualified Trumpy hacks placed in highly sensitive and vital national positions, whose single qualification for being there is his fealty to a criminally ignorant traitor.