Compare yesterday to the 1994 Republican tidal wave, in which the Rs won control of both the House and the Senate -- 54 seats in the House, 8 in the Senate, followed by a couple of high-level defections. What was the revolution based upon? Paranoia. Propaganda. Nonsensical anti-Clinton conspiracy theories. One bullshit pseudoscandal after the other.
Clinton actually did a fine job in his first two years: He inherited a terrible economy and set the course for both a robust recovery and the eradication of the national debt -- a miracle that neither Donald Trump nor any other Republican could ever pull off. Clinton was, of course, hampered by the fact that he was a Democratic president at a time when the mood of the country was essentially conservative. (He was also hamstrung by progs who insisted that he sacrifice every single speck his political capital on behalf of gays in the military -- a hopelessly unpopular cause at the time, whether you care to admit it or not.)
By contrast, Donald Trump really is a crook. The accusations against him are not bullshit. We know that he's been mobbed up for decades. The Russian connection has been proven beyond rational argument, for anyone who bothers to look at the evidence. His violations of the emoluments clause have been obvious. On top of all that, the man is vulgar, foul, racist, vile, intemperate, inarticulate, impulsive. A fascist.
Yet the progs still won't rethink their "hate white males" strategy. They still think that they can write off millions and millions of white males who feel insecure about their job prospects -- a constituency which ought to be solidly Blue, which would have been Blue if someone like FDR were directing the Dems.
Despite yesterday's dismal results, progs still think that they can alienate white males and make up for the loss with incessant GOTV efforts. Motherfuckers! I've come to hate Prog Purists almost as much as I hate Republicans. We should have had a blowout yesterday. If there had been a blowout, Trump would be on his way out.
Progs would rather see fascism triumph than foreswear their hatred of white males.
Y'know how Hitler won? He won because the far-left political party (the KDP) hated the centrists much much much more than they hated the Nazis. I'm glad Ernst Thalmann, leader of the KPD, ended up in Buchenwald. Bastard got what he deserved.
The secret name of every modern Prog Purist is Ernst Thalmann.
They say that Trump is depressed now. Why? He can handle the House. There will be some setbacks and humiliations, but Russia has kompromat on everybody.
Mueller. A day after losing the House, Trump got rid of Session. In doing so, Trump unashamedly admitted that Sessions was insufficiently protective of the president -- a de facto admission of guilt. The fact that Sessions was forced out immediately tells us that things are going to happen lightning fast. Prepare for a shock, for multiple shocks.
Trump replaced him with a shameless buttkisser named Matthew "Bork" Whitaker. Of course Whitaker should recuse himself. And of course he will not. He will, in fact, be our worst nightmare. He will never, ever do the right thing. Bet on it.
“Whitaker is on record as being more interested in propping up Trump than in upholding the rule of law,” one DOJ trial attorney told The Daily Beast. “It’s hard to have confidence that he’ll do anything other than what the president had said in his tweets.”I've already seen talking heads on teevee speak as though Whitaker were reachable and reasonable, as though Rosenstein can walk into the guy's office and talk sense into him. Bullshit. Bork II is not reachable; if he were, Trump would not have given him the gig. Rosenstein will be out of a job soon, perhaps before the week is out.
I received a notice from MoveOn to attend a "Save Mueller" protest rally in Baltimore tomorrow. I may go, if I can find enough change in the sofa cushions for transpo fare. The towering geniuses at MoveOn sent out a "GO GO GO" message that gave a place but not a time.
For Chrissakes. We've got to be more professional than that. This is serious business.
Asha Rangappa offered an important thread on the upcoming Whitaker disaster...
STEP DOWN FROM THE LEDGE (FOR NOW) THREAD. (Warning: This might be a SPOOL). OK, here are my thoughts on Whitaker taking over the Mueller investigation and why I think we need to see how things unfold before losing it. To be clear, I do NOT think this is an ideal situation. BUT:One last point about Whitaker: He has made clear that his primary goal will be to indict Hillary Clinton on...something. Anything.
First, Whitaker has spoken and written publicly on the Mueller investigation. This clearly creates an appearance of a conflict of interest. He must consult with the ethics people as his former boss did and, if it is warranted, recuse. Period. But assuming he does not:
First, as a commentator/pundit, you're expected to have an opinion on a given issue. But as discussed in the context of Strzok, et al., keep in mind that there is a very strong culture in DOJ to not let these views infect decisions. As a former USA, Whitaker knows this culture
He is going to be operating in this culture. And he is going to have to articulate his decisions from other people -- career DOJ folks like Christopher Wray and Robert Mueller -- who understand this culture and will see through any attempt to inject politics into the inv.
Further, he has to document these decisions. The standard in the Special Counsel regulations for denying a request or recommendation of the Special Counsel is that it is "so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued."
Whitaker would have to document and justify his decisions under this standard, knowing (especially with Dems in control of the House) that he would have to testify to them under oath. Flimsy or corrupt justifications would open him up to obstruction of justice.
Evenf he wanted to "starve the investigation," the SC regs state that the budget for the coming year must be approved within 90 days of the fiscal year. The fiscal year already started on October 1, and so the budget is in place until Sept '19. The next approval is in June '19
Another objection he made publicly is that going into Trump's finances would be crossing a red line. Remember that Mueller farmed out the Cohen case to SDNY. That is likely the thread that leads to the Trump Org, and it is not under Mueller. So that should not be an issue.
Important to keep in mind that his comments were made when he, like the rest of us, only knew what was public -- which, in summer '17, wasn't much. Since then, we've had indictments and guilty pleas on Manafort, Gates, Flynn, Papadopolous, Cohen, and a bunch of Russians.
The amount of evidence that has been accumulated in an investigation of this scale cannot be overstated. Which brings it back to how hard it will be for him to justify blocking further steps under the standard outlined in #4, above. Not happening.
Also, at a personal level, until now his loyalty as Chief of Staff has been to Sessions -- someone he saw get berated, insulted, pressured, and humiliated by POTUS. He may have seen more cray behind the scenes. I wouldn't count on his loyalty suddenly switching to POTUS.
Which brings me to: What would be the payoff? He's not going to be AG, this is temporary. If he has political ambitions he is much better off with Sessions as an ally and being respected in DOJ than hitching his wagon to Trump's (falling) star.
In short, the rules, culture, and incentives all point to just keeping what's happening on track, not going off a cliff, which would be professional suicide. I may be proven wrong, I hope I'm not. END
This will, of course, work to Trump's benefit, and help him win re-election. In a real sense, he is still running against the Clintons. If he can gin up a case against Hillary, he'll be the most popular man in America.
And the fucking progs will help him do it. The progs hate the Clintons as much as the Republicans do.
Seriously. Ernst Thalmann. His spirit lives on.
12 comments:
You say this is about white males. As a white male I say it's about voter suppression, gerrymandering, and all that. You understand that we won a bigger popular vote margin than any of those midterms you reference? Gerrymandering man. And look at florida. Democrats got wiped out at the state level there. A report dropped today (of course today) that Rick Scott has been restoring voting rights for whites but not blacks. And this: http://www.wlrn.org/post/counties-place-polls-gated-communities-florida-voters-are-left-out
Its still the ratfucking, stupid
Good to have you back, not withstanding what I wrote yesterday. Also would it kill you to drop a post every week or so, just to know you are ok with all your occasional health concerns? No need for it to address politics if you are not feeling it.
FDR didn’t have to deal with Limbaugh and all his hate radio copies, as well as Fox News. Until we deal with those toxic illiberal bulwarks, voter suppression, and gerrymandering, we will be like Sisyphus with an occasional good result, but too many elections where we only win by 3-4 points which might not be enough to retain control of the branches of government. One Magical Democrat, be it Beto or Barrack will not save us long term.
For all the FDR love, he was the last Dem that was able to enjoy the Southern Wall in all its electoral college glory from Texas to Virginia, because he was ok with not rocking the boat in terms of segregation and voter suppression. He didn’t do anything to prepare Truman for the office which was criminal due to Roosevelt’s health at the time of the 1944 election. It is the racism in respects to too many white males that was the reason for much of that decline since. Truman, unlike FDR actually did something to break down segregation and racism by integrating the US military. White males have been abandoning the party since Truman. It started with Thurman’s Dixiecrats in ‘48, many of whom supported Nixon in ‘68 or ‘72. By ‘80 Reagan had solidified Nixon’s Southern Strategy and white males as a percentage have voted Republican by a 1-2 more points every Presidential cycle.
When I canvass, I notice a few signs that I use as a shortcut to help me be more efficient and not waste my time with lost causes. These are the top four signs I notice that tell me this person is a hard core right wing Republican. If I notice a hockey fanatic with multiple bumber stickers on a car and flags of a specific NHL team on their cars or property, I know I am very likely meeting a bigot and or misogynist. I have lived around hockey fans all my life and most are not like this, but the more hardcore in their fanaticism of their local team the more RW and rigid in their thinking. Another clue is when unprompted they say the phrase, “that woman.” I heard it quite often when I canvassed for Clinton and this year. Females can use the term as well, but it is much more likely to be used by men. It is used to make the subject “the other” someone to be demonized and dehumanized. NRA stickers or guns displayed that are easily seen from the porch. Lastly, if their number one priority or issue is abortion, which is code for virulently anti-choice and anti-women. It is amazing how many of these types are over 55 and divorced.
You ever canvassed Joseph? There are tons of these types and this subset is like anywhere from 25-35% of the population that votes. Have any great ideas that could get them without alienating and losing our current coalition? Currently, we are basically breaking even with those white males outside of these rigid dead enders.
Whitaker has a connection to Sam Clovis, a witness in Mueller Probe (https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/07/politics/whitaker-sessions-mueller-clovis/index.html
Also read https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-unfolding-details-are-remarkable
I think anon 11:48 PM is correct, but I think it's ALSO about white males. That's certainly Trumps target demographic (as well as white women, who supported him in greater numbers than they did Hillary in 2016).
You aren't even telling the truth, Joseph. You can't even admit when you are wrong. The Trump faction didn't increase in the Senate, which doesn't fucking matter as long as they don't have 60-plus votes for judicial confirmations. It was NEVER expected the Democrats would increase their margin in the Senate, for God's sake, because few GOP seats were up for grabs, so stop blaming feminists for everything in the world because your beloved white males are so abused. It is hardly insurmountable a couple of seats difference. Furthermore, it is a lie, and two Senate races are still being decided. Democrats won huge in statehouses across the United States, at least seven governorships plus Guam. Scott Walker was thrown out on his ass in Wisconsin, Democrats took hold control of Michigan, thus it was a HUGE victory against the Kochs. In Nevada, it was a blue wave, with Dean Heller being kicked out and a woman, Jacky Rosen, being elected and rather handily.
I have come to the conclusion you have some issues with women if you are not an outright misogynist. You don't understand feminism, you don't understand much of anything relating to it. The universe has to revolve around you and other white males who feel entitled. White male entitlement is the ruination of the country. You are not owed anything, including "family wage" jobs. I suggest you don't even talk about feminism anymore because it is clearly out of your depth. Would you talk this way about racial minorities? Hell, no, you wouldn't. Nobody would read your blog. Trump is throwing a hissy fit because of the election results. Frankly, I don't really care about the Russian investigation anymore because there isn't much Democrats can do about it not having the votes in Congress. 2020 will be key, but you are naive if you think the GOP is going to have unfettered rule forever.
Florida is not the United States, 11:48 PM. Democrats do not need Florida or Ohio in general elections. Frankly, I am sick of nonsense spewed here by somebody who doesn't even look at the whole picture. Democrats won HUGE nationally. Why the fuck LIE about it?
The problem with Asha's line of reasoning is that it assumes that Whitaker will act in a rational manner through self preservation of his future career outlook. That only holds up if he has a future career outlook beyond Trump. It is highly suspected that most of Trump's inner circle are there because they have no where else to go at this point. Whitaker was most likely placed in his position because he has been compromised already. Given his background that is not out of the realm of possibility. He will do what Trump wants him to do because he has no alternative and no future.
There is only one way Fattie McOrangeface can save his bacon at this time, there are workarounds for every scenario put forward, the president has the power to classify documents. The White House can gather up the evidence and reports then declare them secret.
Robert Mueller is no dummy he'll be ready for any other trick Trump might pull including turning evidence over to state prosecutors.
Is OTE admin a Russian bot? The idea that "Democrats do not need Florida or Ohio in general elections" is absurd, and anyone who says "I don't really care about the Russian investigation anymore" is effectively a tool of Putin, witting or otherwise.
Ernst Thalmann didn't attack the center. He directed all of his energy on orders from Moscow on the center left Social Democrats. He called them "social fascists" despite them delivering all the progress on the issues they care about during the Weimar republic. What was one of the justifications for doing this? He was trying to appeal to left wing Nazis. (Spoiler alert: It didn't work.) It's both spooky and comical how closely aligned the strategies of the 1930s German Communists and today's Bernie Bros are. The only solace I take is that Bernie has become an almost entirely irrelevant figure, and I think the damage he has done is in the past.
Following Watergate Congress put in place laws to forestall a President sabotaging any DOJ investigation or subverting the process of Senate appointments. Trump's appointment of Matt Whitaker is illegal under those laws. For Whitaker to be Acting AG he has to be (1) currently holding the Deputy AG position; or (2) holding a position within the DOJ where he has already obtained Senate confirmation; or (3) appointed when Congress is in recess. None of these conditions have been met.
Trump pulled the same illegal stunt in 2017, appointing loyalist Michael Mulvaney to be Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau over Deputy Director Leandra English. Mulvaney then went on to gut key consumer safeguard provisions. An appeal against that appointment is still before the courts. This is a familiar Trump tactic.
@nemdam 5.38
"Ernst Thalmann didn't attack the center. He directed all of his energy on orders from Moscow on the center left Social Democrats. He called them "social fascists" despite them delivering all the progress on the issues they care about during the Weimar republic. What was one of the justifications for doing this? He was trying to appeal to left wing Nazis. (Spoiler alert: It didn't work.)"
You can joke with your spoiler but trying to win back members and voters who had only recently gone to the NSDAP from the KPD wasn't a bad aim. And anyway part of the idea was to win votes from the SPD.
Few when making the German analogy seem to remember what happened in 1918-21 in Germany, when the SPD leadership crushed the workers' revolution with little or no resistance from the Moscow-subservient leadership of the KPD. And in fact they did it with help from the far right, the very far right (Freikorps) that workers had risen up to defend the SPD government against! Noske and Scheidemann were no better than Thalmann.
I am not trying to defend Thalmann, just to comment on why many in the KPD backed the line. The united front or popular front would have been the right policy in 1932-33, but it was a totally murderous policy in 1922-23.
I don't know why, but many seem to assume that the SPD formed the German government during all or most of the Weimar period. They didn't. They were only it for a small proportion of that time.
The SPD leadership all had the blood of the working class on their hands, and the KPD leadership were mostly assets of the Bolshevik government whose hands were similarly coloured. Unfortunately no movement was around in Germany in the late 1920s and early 1930s that could put forward a seriously socialist message in a big way. The KAPD was tiny by then.
The reference to "orders from Moscow" is accurate, and it's no coincidence that the USSR joined the League of Nations as Germany was leaving. Soviet-US trade also expanded rapidly from 1934. The Bolshevik government switched horses, from chumming up with Germany (sealed train, Brest-Litovsk, weapons industry cooperation) to smiling their way in to the League of Nations and making "great deals" with men such as Henry Ford in the US. With that on their CV, it wasn't even slightly difficult for the Bolsheviks to switch again in 1939 and cooperate with Hitler.
Post a Comment