10.9.22: The State of "Meet The Press" and Other World Notes

It's been a while since we've written and it's due to our reevaluation of the relevance today's (in the general sense) "Meet The Press." One of those reasons, and why we decided to write today, is because of the moderator, which is no more a moderator than just another host anymore. And frankly, when it comes down to that, Mr. Todd isn't the best one out there.

That's not necessarily saying that Mr. Todd shoulders all the responsibility for "Meet The Press'" declining, but most. He's been 'too comfortable' in the chair and it shows in his questioning or lack thereof. There are barely any follow-up questions, very little challenge or push back, no serious attempt to hold a politicians proverbial feet to the fire. And when he does challenge a person's answer, he seems to give them an out. We mention being 'too comfortable' because all this seems to come unconsciously.

This leads us to one main point we wanted to make specifically today, which is on today's "Meet The Press" you saw the individual who should be in the chair, Kristen Welker. Ms. Welker has been a long-term Washington correspondent, has moderated debates, and it's clear that she has been mentored by the best, Andrea Mitchell. 

Ms. Welker's nervousness today showed through with a couple of interruptions but that was because she was challenging her interviews and not letting them just 'walk away' from a tough question. Even in her Q&A with The New York Times' Maggie Habermann, she managed to challenge her on the perception that she is 'too cozy' with the former president. 

"Meet The Press" would benefit greatly by having Ms. Welker take over as moderator.

Additionally, we would scrap the big set for something more intimate that provides the atmosphere more of 'politicians are going to have to answer for themselves instead of I'm going to a TV production.' Maybe bringing back the old, old format where you have say one 'liberal' journalist and one 'conservative' journalist ask questions of politicians on the left and the right. Then there is the need for an actual moderator. 

We say these things because we truly love "Meet The Press" and will indeed hold it to a higher standard than the rest, because we ask political viewers and information seekers deserve it. If there is any doubt as to our commitment to the program, we have over 600 columns that would say different.

Which leads us to say that this will be the last column for a while... maybe forever. There is only so much shouting at the rain that one can do. And because of what we said above, the program doesn't intellectually provoke in a serious manner anymore, truth be told.

But before we go, there are some things we'd like to put down unequivocally for the record.

On Russia:
Putin, not Russia, is an existential threat not to the 'world order' but the world. Hard stop. As we've seen from recent reports, the war is going badly for Mr. Putin and the Ukrainians aren't backing down. In fact they are taking back their land with counteroffensives. With the blowing up of the Kerch Strait Bridge connecting Russia to Crimea, Ukraine is turning the tide of a war that for them has been going on for 8 years. The United States and Europe and NATO should give no quarter to Mr. Putin and keep up the financial and military support to Ukraine at 100 percent. If Mr. Putin is allowed to succeed, he will not stop with Ukraine. If Ukraine wins the war, Russia eventually wins as well. The loser is Putin's regime. 

The danger is that if Mr. Putin can't have it, he'll make sure no one can. What we mean by that is that if Mr. Putin can not win in Ukraine, it's not out of the question for him to do the following: Instead of a tactical nuclear strike, Mr. Putin could exist Ukraine after destroying parts of Zeporizhzhia nuclear power plant, endangering all of Europe, and in true Putin style, since it wasn't a 'nuclear strike' per se, he'll blame the Ukrainians. 

For all of Europe to prosper and be safer, Mr. Putin has to go.

On The U.S. Midterms and the Near Political Future:
Republicans will take control of the House of Representatives, however, it depends how motivated American women are to vote since having a Constitutional right to privacy taken aware from them. It seems counterintuitive to go with conventional wisdom in these uncoventional times. Outside of that aforementioned variable, we don't see anything to change that.

However, the Senate is a different story and we believe that at the end of the day, the Democrats will hold their majority and perhaps increase it. As we see, the candidacy of Hershel Walker in Georgia is a symptom of the larger problem in the Republican party, which is character, truthfulness, integrity and qualification no longer factor, as long as the candidate, as Yamiche Alcindor put it, a 'means to their political end.'

As for the near 300 Republican election-denying candidates, they have no idea the fire that they are playing with, and nor do the American people writ large, we think. These midterm elections will decide the people in charge of counting the votes in the 2024 presidential election. You can see such a scenario playing out in which the former president runs again and claims election fraud again if he doesn't win. If, and this is a big if, in just one of those states in which an election-denying secretary of state (think Arizona) changes the outcome, hence changing the winner and it all goes through. Democracy in the United States would be shattered. 

But here's what they don't get. If it's allowed to stand and the U.S. is no longer called a democracy, the markets will tank because faith in the U.S. dollar will be destroyed. The strength of the dollar is based on the success of the democracy, whether is tacts left or right. All of our current international alliances would all of sudden be up in the air with countries asking, "If you don't believe in your democratic country, why would you believe in ours?" Isolation of this sort will only cause U.S. economic and innovative decline. 

If you think inflation is bad now, if the above happens, it's going to get a whole lot worse, not only going to affect the U.S. but through global economy. These individuals haven't an utter clue of the fire they are playing with. 

The Gun:
We're all for gun ownership, but unless the United States collectively decides to take truly transformative regulatory legislative steps, they will truly be the tool of our own ruination. Our entire collective attitude toward guns, from all sides, make them a literal and existential threat to the country. The literal threat of being killed by one, and the existential threat of someone taking away your firearm. Both cause people to act irrationally and with less common sense. 

You can't rail against crime and if advocate for absolutely no gun regulation. If you want less crime, there must be less guns. The more guns, the more crime. All the rhetoric in the world is not going to change that fact.

A country awash in guns and no shared set of facts due to social media is a recipe for disaster. And if we're going to go down this road, let's at least do it right and bring along plenty of alcohol. We jest, but it speaks to a larger truth, doesn't it.

Well, we could go on and on and on and on, but we'll sign off here. I loved doing this column and I really hope that someone enjoyed it as well. We may be back, maybe not but either way we'll always be watching "Meet The Press."

Thank you thank you thank you! Be safe.

Panel: Maggie Habermann, The New York Times, Yamiche Alcindor, NBC News; Jen Psaki, NBC Analyst; Brendan Buck, Republican Strategist

8.21.22. August Burn and the Mid-Term Churn

We'll admit right at the top that this probably won't be a lengthy column because frankly in the heat of the August summer burn, we're a little too crispy to discuss the mid-term churn. Today's program was 'ok' (purposely lower case), but it was one of those times where "Meet The Press" is bogged down in its 'the beltway is the country' mode, mostly talking about the mid-term elections. 

The problem with discussing the mid-terms is that said discussion is based on polls, which will certainly change and the uncertainty of speculation. If you have read this column before, you know that we try to stay away from that as much as possible.

With that said and because we're feeling a touch of summer burn out, we'll quickly touch on three topics from today's program that earned our attention.

First, Mr. Todd pointed out to Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY), head of the DCCC, about the Democratic party putting money behind attack ads on moderate Republicans so that the Democrat in the race will face someone extremely right-wing. 

As we've said before this is a dangerous strategy and as Mr. Todd was right to call out the hypocracy of the Democrat party that calls for Republicans to be more moderate and then gets involved in the Republican primary. Mr. Malony didn't have a good answer for this in terms of putting country over party.

Secondly, the Secretary of Education Miguel Cardoza is correct when he says there is a lack of respect for the profession. What he didn't include that while there is this lack of respect, teachers are also used as a political football, which damages them in further. Lack of respect means lack in pay, hence shortages of properly trained professionals. Plus in states like Florida, who wants to be a teacher when if you accidentally say something that's not OK with the state, you're fired. No one wants that hanging over her head.

And in terms of loan forgiveness for college students, we say that to qualify for loan forgiveness, you have to give back with some kind, any kind, of service.

Lastly, and most importantly, forty million people in the United States rely on the Colorado Basin and River for their water and starting in 2023 because of decades of drought, there will be drastic reductions in distibutions. The United States has to rethink and modernize its entire fresh water distribution system if we are going to continue to have food grown in Arizona and California.

Mark our words, in the next century the greatest fight for any natural resource will be for fresh water. 

 

Panel: Ali Vitali, NBC News; Symone Sanders-Townsend, MSNBC; Mark Caputo, NBC News; Brendan Buck, Republican Strategist

8.14.22: All The Dumb Questions the Former President Makes Us Ask...

Let's get right to the point: The Department of Justice and the Attorney General Merrick Garland need to get national security experts, The Joint Chiefs and leaders of both parties in a secure room to review the documents and have them explained to them so that it's unequivocal as to what the former president was storing at his home.

Then those same individuals need to figure out how to tell the American people without compromising national security. And when we say individuals, we're talking serious people, not bomb-throwers. And though Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD) is not one of the latter, he is not a leader as he oviscated on his answers with regard to the former president having not only having classified, but classified/special compartmentized information, the most sensitive to national security, in his possession in the first place.

The 'pending' question of whether the president can declassify the documents or not is immaterial because even if they're not classified, they do not belong to him. They belong to the United States government. That aside, and for the sake of argument, if the documents are classified/SCI the president can not simply say they are declassified and that's it. It can not be done be decree, but first with review from several intelligence agencies to make certain that sources and methods can not be revealed.

But these are the dumb questions that the former president makes us ask because of the double standard that Republican politicians have assisted in creating, because of a shrinking yet increasingly violent supporter base.

A lawyer for the former president signed a written affirmation that there were no more classified documents at the Palm Beach residence and that turned out to be false. If it's anyone else, anyone, there are three words in your future: Search. Warrant. Lawyer. So by that measure, the Department of Justice and specifically the Attorney General did the right thing.

Senator Rounds did say that there are a lot of questions to be answered, in his signature Dakota gentlemanly tone, and we'd agree with that. We think we're just a bit more patient, but on heels of this discussion, he stated unequivocally that South Dakota is ready for Mr. Trump to annouce another run. As scary a prospect that it is, it's a matter of when, not if. However, his point is taken that inflation is still high and the people of his state and around the country are dissatisfied with that, no doubt. 

The Cook Political Report's Amy Walter had an interesting take in terms of which party has motivation going into the midterms explaining that the Republican base is already motivated and the events of this past week aren't going to make it any more so. She also said that the events of the week put Trump on the midterm ballot motivating Democrats more who are gaining in the generic polling against Republicans. As it looks the Republicans will take the House, but the Senate, which Republicans really want is as of right now, unrealistic. Eugene Robinson buttressed the explanation, saying that it only reminds everyone of the chaos that the Trump years wrought on the country and people don't want to return to that. The choice becomes starker. 

And yes, Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-WY) is going to lose her seat in Wyoming, but as Andrea Mitchell pointed out, the state has one congressperson, which is like a senator to them, and if the state's congressperson doesn't have support of leadership then the return on investment for the state is less. 

However, as we've said before, Ms. Cheney isn't done in politics, and as Matthew Continetti predicted, if she loses her congressional seat you'll see her next on a debate stage opposite Mr. Trump.

We so hope he's right.

Panel: Betsy Woodruff Swann, Politico; Amy Walter, Cook Political Report; Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post; Matthew Continetti, American Enterprise Institute; Michael Beschloss, Presidential Historian

8.7.22: In Consideration of the Midterms, Good Week for the President But a Huge Week for Democrats

Well, we guess it is that time to talk about the mid-term elections. If you noticed, we try and hold off on commenting about all the hypotheticals the pundits throw out there because most of them end up poor conjecture. 

Case in point: Kansas' referendum vote on a state constitutional amendment to ban abortions in the state. That measure was shot down 59 percent to 41 percent with double the normal turnout you see for an off-year election. Republican state legislators were as shocked as the rest of the country by the result. However, one has to agree with Democratic strategist Cornell Belcher when he explained that suburban women who may be against abortion but do not like Republican overreach in legislating women's bodies. With that, as Punchbowl New's Anna Palmer described, the culture wars have shifted i favor of the Democrats, at least on this issue.

Of course the economy is top of mind for everyone, but will women's health autonomy also be on the ballot? Considering that over half of registered voters are women, it will be a certainty.

Will it be enough for Democrats to maintain a majority in the House, we'll have to wait and see. However, Representative Nancy Mace (R-SC), bless her heart, spoke on moderation on both sides on the aisle to come to an agreement on abortion, but the fact remains that her party will not and can not negotiate in good faith. Any compromise will have dire political consequences for Republicans from the evangelical rightwing of the party. She spoke about her objection to the idea of women not being allowed to travel out of state to receive an abortion, but her state of South Carolina wants such a restriction, the constitutionality of which strongly comes into question.

Another factor in determining the mid-term outcomes will be President Joe Biden's approval rating, or will it be? What ever factor you think it will have on November, it will be less than that. Trump hovers over the midterms even more than the president and they have both have an equally poor approval rating, which renders their influence a moot point. As the panel agreed, candidates on the trail from both parties aren't embracing either man. 

It was a big week for President Joe Biden as it was a huge week for the Democratic party behind him. Rights for women's reproductive freedom, which the Democratic party espouses won a big victory. Under the president's leadership, the CIA took Al Qaeda's mastermind of 9/11 - Ayman Al-Zawahiri, with a missile that didn't explode but had shredding blades mounted to the front that cut him to pieces on a balcony while no one else in the house was injured... by the way. The Democrats made jerks out of Senate Republicans in a two-for. First, the Veterans' PACT Act passed in which Republicans first voted against it only to vote for it four days later after being shamed. Since Senators Manchin (D-WV) and Schumer (D-NY) outmaneuvered Mitch McConnell, the Democrats are going to pass a reconciliation bill with the biggest investment in climate in U.S. history, not to mention it will also lower Medicare prescription drugs prices and overall energy costs. Something in there for the young, old and in the middle. 

And lastly, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) with praise from both sides of the aisle didn't cancel her trip to Taiwan and rightly stuck it in Xi and China's face. As Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) explained in his support of the trip, China should not be able to dictate where U.S. leaders choose to travel and who to visit. Xi is so thin-skinned that he thought it necessary to fire off military hardware, a temper tantrum on a national scale. But what that means back home is that Democrats are projecting strength internationally.

It was a good week for the president but more importantly, considering the midterms, this was a huge week for Democrats.

Panel: Anna Palmer, Punchbowl News; Susan Page, USA Today; Cornell Belcher, Democratic Strategist; Pat McCrory, fmr. Governor of North Carolina (R)

 One more thing...

You gotta love this, like an icing dagger decorating Donald Trump's moldy cake...

7.31.22: A Rare Astronomical Event This Week Shocked Washington

In case you missed it this week, there was a rare astronomical event on Wednesday so we wanted to share a photo of the phenomenon. 

Yes, a rare sighting of a blue moon. Coincidentally, or not, or dumb luck or it was the same thing. It's all so hazy and shocking, but the Democrats in the Senate out maneuvered their Republican colleagues, specifically Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) who was blindsided by the Manchin-Schumer reconcilliation budget bill. It also forced Republicans into upcoming votes, in which a 'no' vote is politically unpopular forcing them to come on board with Democratic priorities. And you have to give credit to Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) for not walking away and negotiating in quiet to avoid media drama, as he explained.

A total eclipse, a Cubs World Series win, a Blue Moon. They exist but are seen so rarely that afterward you can't believe it actually happened. 

Senator Kirstyn Sinema (D-AZ) has yet to come out in support of the bill, but as NBC's Kristen Welker mentioned, there will be tremendous pressure on her to get on board. With perhaps a minor concession, the bill is there and it has the votes. What the bill does is give Medicare the ability to negotiate prescription drug prices, establish a base 15 percent tax for corporations with $1 billion or over in value, and with an all-of-the-above energy approach it allocates $349 billion investment in climate mitigating energy strategies. The largest investment in climate in U.S. history, which served as the last proverbial groin shot that Republicans could take.

So, they took out their anger and humiliation on Democ... No wait, they took it out on U.S. veterans. Yes, really.

As satirist and veterans advocate Jon Stewart explained, the Senate passed the same PACT Act bill in June, 84-12, and after a one sentence change that had no effect on the bill, Repubican senators voted it down. Mr. Stewart didn't get into the speculation of why Republicans now voted no, but it's obvious that since they know they got played. The PACT Act provides care to veterans who have contracted various diseases from burn pits overseas. It cannot be understated the significance of this as burn pits operated 27/7 during combat operations with soldiers continually breathing in toxins. Lead by Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA), Republicans in the Senate torpedoed the bill and did fist bumps when they accomplished their goal.

Here's the most-widely and succinct summation from Mr. Stewart this week. He and a group of veterans travelled to Capitol Hill for a celebratory press conference, which then became this:

Lastly, we're sad to hear about the catastrophic flooding and heart-breaking death toll in Kentucky. Governor Andy Beshear (D) gave a grim assessment of the status on the ground saying that it is unclear how many people are still missing, that there are 26 deaths with more surely to be confirmed, and the situation is complicated by the fact that it's still raining there and communication is difficult. 

To the president's credit, he cut through redtape to make sure the state had enough additional personnel on the ground, as the Gov. Beshear explained. (An example of how Joe Biden operates, he gets it done but doesn't scream it from the rooftops that he did it.)  

Though the location of this blog's homebase is nowhere near Kentucky, but we say that the state should get all the support it needs and then some, despite one its Senators, Rand Paul, voting against disaster relief for other states that he simply doesn't like [think: New York and Hurricane Sandy]. This tragic event in Kentucky is a clear example of why we needed the infrastructure bill and now this budget package from Senators Manchin and Schumer.

Panel: Kristen Welker, NBC News; Adrienne Elrod, Democratic Strategist; Carlos Carbello, fmr. Congressman (R-FL); Jonathan Lemire, Politco

7.24.22: Sure Seems Like A Melt Down... The Climate Change of Everything

 It sure seems like a melt down if you ask us. Whether it's climate, Donald Trump's prospects or confidence in all branches of government, the heat is rising and all of the above are melting. 

It was a good choice to schedule an interview to an update on what are prophetic thoughts from former vice-president Al Gore, the man who stepped aside for the sake of our democracy and then went on to warn us about the catastrophic effects of climate change. The graphic below from today's program shows a list of recent climate announcements that truly tells the story.   

In terms of the Colorado River, Lake Mead is at such a low level, ships and skeletal remains from the 1940's are being recovered and in 5 years if the water level keeps receding at pace, there will not be enough gallons of water per month required for the Hoover Dam to generate enough power to the states it services.

Vice President Gore has been warning us about the effects of melting glaciers for 30 years and we're still seeing state-size chunks of Greenland and Antarctica break way, affecting ocean currents and warming the water causing more catastrophic storms. Mr. Gore also explained that we do have the tools to get to net-zero carbon admissions but not the political will to get there many due to the economic effects. Those economic effects are those that impact the bottom line of the oil companies who then stick it to the average consumer [sic: voter] who is stretch thin as it is. But the tools are there: instituting a carbon emissions tax, automobile companies transitioning their entire fleets to either hybrid or full-electric, along with more off-shore wind, and solar of course. 

However, there are a few notions we'd like to throw out there that time did not permit them to cover. First, the United States should completely rethink its nuclear energy program. Nuclear energy has zero carbon emissions and is very safe, but there is the risk of accident. However, instead of pipelines, make waterlines to transport ocean water inland for rod cooling to more stable earth where a reactor is at less risk of structural damage. Also invest more into the research and development of cold fusion.

Also, many people don't know that when a crypto-currency sets up shop in your state or country, they become to biggest consumer of energy in every case due to the amount it takes to run and cool the vast number of servers that create algorithms and nothing else. The state of Texas had to shutdown a cryptocurrency operation in its state due to the strain it was putting on the Texas's electric grid, causing brown outs in residential neighborhoods. 

The former vice president mentioned something that we've talked about in this column previously, which is that we essentially have a minority government, especially when it comes to legislation on climate. But it's this 'minority government' that has Americans disapproving in Congress, the President and the Supreme Court by overwhelming margins.

A minority of politicians fueled by huge contributions block what the majority of Americans want and the direction they want to go.

Fortunately, the minority of what have been the overly loud voices of insanity are having their collective bubble burst by a thousand cuts from the January 6th Committee. Mr. Trump and his allies are melting under the intense heat of the committee and the DOJ. This week the Murdoch properties The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post, as the panel discussed, walked away from the former president explicitly saying he is "unfit to hold office again." Real question there is whether Fox News will follow.

Steve Bannon went into his contempt of Congress trial all bluster and bravado claiming he would get 'medieval,' but after 3 hours of deliberation the jury found him guilty on both counts and he never took the stand in his own defense; sending him away with his head up his ass and facing jail time.

Lastly, there's the economy. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen made some news as she teased that we'll probably see negative GDP growth for a second quarter, which would normally mean we're in a recession, but Secretary Yellen said that we wouldn't be. Our advice when it comes to statements from Sec. Yellen is that we take the wait-and-see approach... Her batting average isn't great. That said, as many economists had been saying the economy had over-heated and now, pardon the expression again, some of it has to melt off. 

It's not just the meteorologic climate that's changing, it's the climate change of everything.

Aren't you looking forward to August?

Panel: Yamiche Alcindor, NBC News; Stephen Hayes, The Dispatch; Maria Teresa Kumar, Voto Latino; Jake Sherman, Punchbowl News

 

7.10.22: Forecast for the Majority: Hotter and More Exhausting

Maryland Governor Larry Hogan (R) mentioned the 'exhausted majority' in America and for as much talk about nervous Democrats thinking Joe Biden can't hack it, he really didn't provide an explanation to what that means. He used the phrase to confirm that seventy percent of Americans think we're on the wrong track as a country.

Before we go there, the Biden Administration has acted too slowly on the economy without a doubt, and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen didn't see this inflation coming didn't help. But this is reflective of the Administration, not the president himself, which is fair game. It was good to hear Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo says that the president is carefully looking at rolling back the Trump tariffs, which she conceded would help with the cost of everyday goods. This should have been served up yesterday and should be on the front burner.

And let's face it, the president is going to Saudi Arabia because we need to up the supply of crude oil, which has increased but not nearly enough, and that the secretary confirmed. It's the real politik and the necessity to compartmentalize as president. Where we or should we say the oil companies dropped the ball was during the pandemic they scaled back refining and took facilities off line and used the revenue to pay shareholders (we knew you'd love that last bit). Hence, there is a shortage of gasoline and going into talks with the Saudis the Administration loses a little leverage because the Saudis need US refining capabilities; we're the best in the world at it. 

Secretary Raimondo explained that the administration needs to consider the impact on American workers if the tariffs are lowered, which is prudent and warranted. However, we'd advise to consider much faster.

We mention all this first because the U.S. economy comparatively to other countries is quite strong so that aside what is this exhausted majority that Governor Hogan is talking about. Well, one thing is for sure, he's not talking about his party and the extreme right wingers running it. The majority of Americans are center left or right, but for the past 30 years Republicans have only won the popular vote for president once. The minority is blocking what the majority wants and the Supreme Court is pushing the minority agenda in lieu of legislation. Why else do we have more guns than people and that in half the states the fetus has more rights than the woman that carries it? 

America spent four years in existential dread called the Trump presidency followed by criminal activity on the way out the door followed by feckless Republicans only interested in power, not service, as The Atlantic's Mark Leibovich talked about and wrote in his book. 

So not only does the threat to democracy continue in this country, thanks Republicans, people are paying more out of pocket, Putin and his regime are a bunch of fuckos, and no one can seem to agree on anything.

This is what you get in July... So yeah, we're exhausted and now it's freakin' hot.  And as long as the minority, abetted by the Supreme Court, keeps forcing its agenda onto the majority and because of unequal representation in the Senate, it's only going to get hotter and more exhausting.

This exhaustion leads us to ask the most American of questions that all Americans can appreciate and come together around. When does football season start?

Panel: Hallie Jackson, NBC News; Daniella Gibbs-Leger, Center for American Progress; Mark Leibovich, The Atlantic; Rich Lowry, National Review

6.26.22: No More Complaining About Left-wing Activist Judges When You Have the Ultimate Closers

In successive days, over 150 years of precedent law was reversed by the United States Supreme Court. On June 23, the Court threw out a 109 year-old law in New York restricting individuals from carrying guns in public, and of course on the 24th reversed 49 years of precendent with the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, sending abortion rights back to the states.

Whether you agree with the decisions or not, the one thing you can confirm is that these are activist justices on the court and they're wielding their power that with a super majority can move unchecked. 

The other certainty is that both decisions were political, which is illustrated by the these two decisions themselves. In the New York case, no court touched it for over 100 years and the Supreme Court overturned it ruling that the state didn't have the right to make its own law. However, in the Roe case, they ruled the exact opposite and that states should decide.

Where do we go from here? Well, swallow hard because we have to live with it. Or until Democrats can focus and win back state houses and keep their majorities in Congress, which is another way of saying that we just have to live with it.

What we're left with in the Roe v Wade decision is that womens' rights are not equal depending on what state you live in. Andrea Mitchell of NBC made a good point in the Roe dealt with privacy and not equal protection, which women across the country clearly now do not have.  However, only when enough pain and suffering occurs to enough people would a case on equal protection under the law be brought. 

Now that Republicans have won on abortion, their statements really have become laughable in justifying a woman's right to bodily autonomy, starting with Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson (R) who said on today's program that it's not the debate right now about no exceptions for rape or incest only that he believes with the abortion ban his state is saving lives. However, this is where the ideology's callousness and cruelty come into play because it has nothing to do with real world circumstances. Judge Samuel Alito stated the it is not the responsbility of the court to recognize the social impact of its decisions. Obviously... but really?

And The Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan, God love her posed a next step for Republicans after their win that even everyone on the panel audibly laughed at when she explained the Republicans now have to change their image and become the 'party of women' and build the support systems for them. What a credibility grenade that was. Republicans certainly will solidify their image as the party of women when abortion procedures are banned in over half the country (we're looking at 26 potential states). Hardly.

With the current state of the economy with inflation and high gas prices, those will be the determining factors in November which only favors Republicans and if they win control of the house, make no mistake they will introduce a bill on a nation-wide ban.

If Republicans have the majority in the House they will also thrwart the findings of the January 6th Select Committee seeking to discredit them while actively obstructing the Justice Department investigation of the coup plot. This will leave the door open for the individual who said to the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General of the United States, to just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republicans, to run again.

No matter, if a Republican candidate wins in 2024, it will not be with the popular vote, a trend that has now been established. The majority of the country doesn't have proportionate representation in the Senate, which ensures that the minority stays in control and with the backing of an extreme right Supreme Court there's no reason to see this trending losing momentum anytime soon.

And make no mistake, womens' healthcare rights are the end of the line for the Supreme Court. Take Justice Clarence Thomas, of whom it's now fair to say is corrupted because of his wife's political actions, at his word when he says that a revisiting of other privacy rights should be done. 

Even a 3-dollar fortune teller can predict that rights for LGBTQ Americans will be the next target for the right to put in front of their judicial enablers. 

No more complaining from right-wing pundits about left-wing activist judges, they have the ultimate closers.

Panel: Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal; Kimberly Atkins Stohr, The Boston Globe; Andrea Mitchell, NBC News; Garrett Haake, NBC News

6.19.22: Hanging On by a Horse-Haired Thread

In the 4th century B.C., the king Dionysius would let his loyal soldier Damocles sit on the throne so that he could experience what it was like to be king. However, to illustrate more clearly the responsibility, the fear, the pending danger, Dionysius hung a sword over his thrown by a single horse hair. Precariously hanging over the throne by a single hair, ready to fall at anytime, Damocles could no longer take the pressure and stopped taking to the seat.

We mention this little bit of ancient history because it seems like that is where we are now, a metaphoric sword hanging over our country, by a single horse-hair thread. The sense of impending danger and dread.

President Biden said in an interview with the Associated Press that he knows the American people are "really, really down." Americans are down because what they witnessed this week during the Select Committee's January 6th hearings this week and that in fact our democracy was hanging by a thread. Despite knowing the fact that he lost and that the plan for the vice president to dispute the electoral count was illegal, the former president persisted in perpetuating that there was election fraud.

Not only that, but we also learned of the utter callousness (and that's being generous) the fmr. president had for his vice president's well-being and life. It's understandable that committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) wouldn't give away any details, especially when pressed by Mr. Todd on why Mike Pence didn't trust his secret service detail; he's not at liberty to say. 

What we do know:

John Eastman knowingly attempted to commit a crime against the Constitution of the United States.

The fmr. president, knowing he lost the election, perpetrated a fraud against the people of the United States by lying about the election results to raise $250 million dollars for a non-existent defense fund, in which the monies went to the fmr. president's personal interests.

There was a tremendous pressure campaign, lead by the president, for Mike Pence to ignore the Constitution by not certifying the vote on January 6th. So much pressure that when Mr. Pence upheld the Constitution, his life and the lives of his family members were put in jeopardy.

The president broke his oath to the Constitution of the United States and abandoned his duty as president on that day.

If that wasn't enough to make the thin threads more taut, there's the economy, which this, that and the other thing that President Biden points to, two things are clear. One, the signs of a coming recession are ominous and the Biden Administration totally dropped the ball and is now playing catch-up.

Former Treasury Secretary Larry Sommers said that while nothing can be forecast with complete certainty, the indicators that he's seen are leading him to believe that a recession is coming.

Demand is way outpacing supply for energy which has been disrupted by war and oil companies cutting back on refining during the pandemic. The supply chain disruptions continue and are exascerbated by high fuel costs have made everything more expense. Not enough micro-chip manufactures, the list goes on. But the bottom line is the Biden Administration reacted too slowly and now the Fed is going to do what it can, but really it just has to run its course.

Mr. Sommers suggested three potential initiatives that could lessen the pain in the short term, while providing a plan for the longer-term. He suggested repealing some of the Trump era tax cuts, reduce the price of prescription drugs and take an 'all of the above' approach to energy in the short term and transition to clean energy.

Here's the rub. Repealing any part of a tax cut is a non-starter for Republicans. They'll message it as a tax hike and that message will get through. The 'all of the above' approach on energy gets a lot of support but any introduction of clean energy initiatives is another none starter. And lastly, we simply don't understand how Congress can't get the price of prescription drugs down. It's such a political winner for everyone, you'd think it's a no-brainer. Alas, to paraphrase Warren Zevon, big pharma brings lawyers, drugs, and money.

All this, on top of coming out of a mindbending, two-year pandemic where over 1 million Americans died then right into a catastrophic war in Europe and it's no wonder we're all hanging on by a horse-haired thread.

Panel: Betsy Woodruff Swann, Politico; Peter Alexander, NBC News; Brendan Buck, Republican Advisor and Strategist; Maria Teresa Kumar, Voto Latino

6.12.22: The Tragic Choice and the January 6th Commission

It is true that Americans' votes won't be decided by the January 6th Hearings. Not this year at least, but maybe in 2024. Representative Don Bacon (R-NE) said he did think there was too much information that he didn't already know, which may be the case for a member of Congress, however, for the American public there was almost too much to take it. 

The Special Committee on January 6th, 2021, as Representative Elaine Luria (D-VA) stated, has only presented and will be presenting statements backed up by hard evidence.  And the hard evidence will be damning, no bullshit, unlike how fmr. Attorney General William Barr describe the fmr. president's election fraud claims.

Unfortunately, Professor Eddie Glaude, Jr. of Princeton may be correct in assessing it as a tragic choice. 

If the evidence is too overwhelming, the Department of Justice may have no choice but to prosecute and if they do, Prof. Glaude predicts a steep rise in violence. However, if they do not prosecute, then what we're saying is that there are some who are above the law in the most glaring fashion. As for the 2024 presidential election, we of the same mind as Rep. Bacon in that he and also Republicans will be "looking for another candidate." 

Representative Bacon also mentioned the temperment of the former president being a disqualifier as well, which bring us to the whole episode with Vice President Mike Pence. How the former president said that the VP deserved the punishment of the crowd, which was hanging is truly sad on so many levels. However much we disagree with Mike Pence's policies and positions, we know for a fact that this is a man who has pledged an oath to the Constitution many times and did not break that oath. How many times has the fmr. president taken that oath - once. (The write of this week's column has taken multiple times.)

The panel agreed that the hearing really resonated with independents and though the frustration and perhaps anger may subside over time, the facts will not be forgotten. At the end of this road, whenever that is, there will not be a conviction, at most political radioactivity and exile... maybe.

What we're revved up about is all the Congressmen asking for pardons, specifically Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) who was named during last Thursday's hearing. Who else was asking for a pardon? Why would these individuals feel they needed them? What did they do? If any convictions do come, they're going to be from this crop of jokers. Resignations at the least. 

Who can say for sure if these hearings will affect the mid-term elections later this November, but maybe, just maybe it will be one small step in cleaning a little house and cleaning up some of the doodoo-kaka-poo-poo the fmr. president left behind.

On the breaking front...

At the end of today's program, Lee Ann Caldwell of The Washington Post had breaking news that Senators Chris Murphy (D-CT) and John Cornyn (R-TX) have reached a deal on gun safety legislation. We'll wait and see but it's said to include state crisis intervention laws (red-flag), mental health provisions, upgrading school safety.  Small things around the margins of the problem, but things nonetheless. There Mr. Todd had a moment, reminding us that nothing's been announced and more importantly nothing has been voted on. Being skeptical is a truly tiresome fashion that simply will never go away. 

Panel: Amy Walter, The Cook Political Report; Eddie Glaude, Jr., Princeton University; David French, The Dispatch; Lee Ann Caldwell, The Washington Post

6.5.22: It is Us and Not Just Washington That Has to Decide

"Meet The Press" is preempted today by The French Open.

Since Wednesday, this has been top of mind for this week's column and that is if we should apologize for providing what we thought was a snide, hyperbolic, ludicrous example of a tragic mass shooting and three days later that exact scenario occurs. In Tulsa, Oklahoma a man bought an AR-15 and then hours later entered a hospital to kill the doctor who performed a surgery on him, along with anyone who tried to stop him. 

A group of Senators has ten days to come up with something bipartisan, bipartisan meaning cojoling 10 Republican Senators that it is in their political interest to pass some form law, a package of laws, that will slow the steady stream of mass gun violence EVERYWHERE in America. The aforementioned package puts on the table red flag laws, waiting periods, expanded background check (not universal) and raising the age to 21 to purchase an assault weapon.

All those proposals would be steps in the right direction, but frankly, at this point it's like holding back a flood with a two-foot wall. And if this group of senators do not come up with a proposal they can bring to the floor, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) will bring a House bill to the floor which Republicans and Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) will surely not vote for. As Americans, we can only hope these Republican Senators are being sincere in their negotiating efforts because we've seen this tragic theater play out too many times.

If no common sense gun-ownership legislation gets passed through Congress and Republicans win control of Congress in the fall, we are truly living in a broken democracy where the minority is in control. Our Constitution was constructed to respect the rights of the minority vote, not to have the minority vote control the majority.

If Congress does manage to pass something, anything, it will not serve as any kind of adequate panacea for the anxiety parents across this country feel who fear simply dropping their kids off a school, especially if mass shootings continue in spite of new legislation.

Make no mistake, if nothing stems the tide of these mass shootings and gun violence writ large, we, not only the politicians, we will have decided to put the Second Amendment and access to guns over our very own lives. 

5.29.22: Helplessly Hoping in the Face of Hopelessness

Write about a mass shooting, take a week off, and write about another mass shooting... 

19 Children - Second. Third. Fourth. Graders. 

2 Teachers

17 Others injured... 

Hopelessness immediately comes to mind because we know that America will do nothing on guns to abate the exceptional carnage we've wrought upon ourselves. It's the hopelessness that our leaders will run out the clock while pontificating on the need for more mental health treatment, the absence of God, violent video games, the hardening of schools, and arming more citizens; while other leaders pack healthcare spending and untenable economic proposals into a background check bill so that it will never pass. 

Why would a person want to become a teacher? To learn the use of firearms? Why would that person just become a policeman? 

How about this heinous hypothetical. A surgeon and a medical team are in an operating room then a deranged person comes into the operating room and shoots them with a gun.  If only the surgeon and the medical team had been armed, right? We need to 'harden' operating rooms in all hospitals around the country by posting armed security outside the doors.

We'll do this after we accomplish this in all the schools in the country. Seriously?

It's nauseating to watch conservative politicians and commentators say everything, anything, with the exception of 'regulation' and 'firearm' in the same sentence, except to say no to it. For some, the 2nd Amendment has become a twisted 11th commandment for lost souls - dogma beyond reproach. However, always conveniently never are those two words in the Amendment that we constantly fixate on - well-regulated. That we are definitely not.

In the meantime, how many of these tragedies do Americans have to endure? 

We've put the right to own a firearm over the collective safety of the society. It's who we are, it's what we do, it's what we refuse to change, it's what we have to live with. Hard stop.

On this Memorial Day, we apologize to you because we're thinking about the extremely well-trained, brave men and women to fight for our democracy and we give them the best weapons of war to shorten the fight. The same kind of war of weapons we give our citizens to destroy that democracy. 

Have a good meal and hug your family today.

Panel: Ashley Parker, The Washington Post; Ali Vitali, NBC News; Cornell Belcher, Democratic Strategist; Pat McCrory, fmr. Governor North Carolina (R)

5.15.22: The Loss of Rights and Lives Will Continue Unabated

It's too frustrating and painful to regurgitate the same things we've written for years with regard to mass shootings, guns and right-wing extremism in this country. Chuck Todd said each time one of these mass shootings occurs, we get the same wash, rinse, repeat sort of rhetoric in Washington and nothing happens. We would contend that we're not even getting the empty rhetoric anymore. It's the silence on the right that Republican strategist Al Cardenas referring to that now exists. 

And why? Because the Republican base is rapidly growing in extremism? Not necessarily, but it's loudest voices have been breathing the words of intolerance and grievance steadily for years. Reverend Al Sharpton made an interesting point in as much as the 18 year-old shooter in Buffalo, NY yesterday was an impressionable 15 year-old at the time of Charlottesville, with the president at the time saying there are good people on both sides. It's a bit speculative but certainly logically.

However, there were two comments by Rev. Sharpton and The Washington Post's Matt Bai respectively that were incomplete in their reasoning. Rev. Sharpton said that President Biden should call a summit of minority leaders in our country to confront this kind of extremism and Mr. Bai explained that our political leaders have to stand up and look in the mirror. However, in an aforementioned summit, white politicians primarily from the Republican side of aisle need to be forced to listen to these cultural leaders as well. And for Mr. Bai, how about the press looking in the mirror - he should point that at himself. 

This individual had a manifesto teeming with hate speech, white nationalism, anti-semitism and screeds about white replacement theory. The panel, of journalists, said this was a heinous theory, but it is pushed into the mainstream by the biggest name in their profession, Tucker Carlson and hence by his benefactor Rupert Murdoch who is only concerned with the profit margin.

Now, we're not saying that they can't have their biased opinions, but what they're pushing on air to millions of people is beyond irresponsible. What we are saying now is that legitimizing of a heinous theory like that got 10 people killed yesterday, 9 of whom were African-American.

Governor Kathy Hochal of New York, who is from Buffalo, explained that New York has very strick gun laws, but because laws vary state to state, you can never fully enforce your state's laws. She called for national gun legislation, and therein lies the rub.

If we're being honest with ourselves, and Americans writ large are not, Democrats vote for gun legislation and overreach and Republicans have no interest in gun legislation whatsoever so there is no compromise to arrive at a place where 60 senators will vote in favor. 

As "Meet The Press" is alway wont to do, it's all discussed through the prism of elections and most assuredly 'guns' will not be on the proverbial ballot. However, given how the Supreme Court is trending, now that we all know, womens' reproductive health most certainly will be. 

Even if the Democrats manage to maintain control of the House of Representatives, it won't move the needle enough in the Senate unless the filibuster is amended. Republicans will put in that and the Republican majorities in individual state houses are going anywhere.

We're not sure what kind of wake-up call it will take for this country to change it's tone and become less polarized, but may be a day that none of us want to experience. Until then, the loss of rights and lives will continue unabated.

Panel: Ashley Parker, The Washington Post; Susan Page, USA Today; Matt Bai, The Washington Post, Reverend Al Sharpton

5.8.22: Let's Talk The Court and Codification

 As we have said so many times in this column, if the big luxury cruiseliner that is the United States turns too hard and too fast to the left or too hard and too fast to the right, the boat will tip over and you'll sink us all. 

The fate of Roe v. Wade, if the leaked draft opinion with by Justice Samuel Alito holds course, the landmark decision will be overturned. Will this one Supreme Court decision tip us all over? No, but it has certainly assisted in sharpening the degree in the hard right turn Republicans steer us toward.

There are so many points to be considered in discussing this decision it's difficult to know where even to begin, so we'll try this starting point. Since Politico's Josh Edelstein broke this earthquake, Democrats have focused on the substance and Republicans have focused on the leak of the draft. This is a bit of a big sweep but by and large that is how the dividing line has fallen. Both do tremendous damage but do not carry equal weight. When you take away a right that over have the population has had for the past 50 years, knowing now or later isn't changing that fact. 

There is no doubt that the leak of the draft has done tremendous damage to the integrity of the court and their ability to deliberate forthrightly about Constitutional issues. For as much as people may not look favorably upon the Supreme Court, we have to have the belief in it to maintain the rule of law. However, the court is partisan because of disgracefully partisan manipulation in the form of a cynical power grab on the part of Senator Mitch McConnell, a skilled politician but the worst national leader for Americans in its modern history. So what did we expect? 

This exercise of raw ideological power is going to take us all to a dark place if it continues, and once again the Supreme Court is opening the door to the curtailing of other rights. Justice Alito did make it clear in the draft that abortion is a unique case, as did the Governor of Mississsippi Tate Reeves, and that striking down the right to privacy only should apply in the case of abortion. You're being naive if you believe that some interest group or Republican controlled state houses won't try to push it as far as they can, and you're being stupid if you think a Republican politician is going to own that at this point. 

Going back to the leak for a moment, what's interesting to us is that Republicans have expressed outrage about it, which is justified, but they're coming at it as if the leak came from the left. We don't know who leaked the draft yet so we don't really know that person's motivations for doing so. Mr. Todd brought up the fact that it seemed The Wall Street Journal had some inside knowledge of the deliberations and some justices were on the fence. As conservative law professor Jennifer Mascott said, this leak won't change the court's decision, they 'won't be bullied,' a refrain that we're hearing repeatedly. But maybe the leak served to solidify, or codify, some of the justices on the fence. Point being, we just don't know. 

And as much as we would like to believe that the state of Mississippi is going to improve its prenatal care services, its foster care and adoption system, and its job training system as Governor Reeves said because they are all in need of it, in his state one in three children live in poverty and it has the highest infant mortality rate in the country. None of what he said about what needs fixing in his state will get fixed. 

All this ideology and talking about standing up for 'children' who can't speak for themselves; no one is thinking of the real world consequences and what this will do to womens' health in America. The only person who has the right to speak and stand up for a fetus is the mother, not the freaking governor of Mississippi, who is basically imposing his religious beliefs onto state law. 

And one last thing, codification, as term getting thrown around a ton. Democrats in the House and Senate are talking about trying to 'codify' a woman's right to choose into law. Codify: to refine and standardize. Let's us tell you something about codification, making it happen for a woman's right to choose isn't going to happen in this Congress or any other Congress any time soon and in fact there is more of a chance that it could codify and calcify the other way. 

What has been codified is our inability for consensus; what has been codified is the view that anyone who doesn't share your point of view is the enemy; what has been codified is that Republicans need to 'own the libs' even for the most nonsensical reason; what has been codified is Democrats thinking all conversatives are extreme right wingers.

The fact that 1 million Americans have now died becasue of Covid-19 has been codified into the back of our brains.

Laws and Judicial precedence? Not so much.

Panel: Kimberly Atkins Stohr, Boston Globe; Ali Vatali, NBC News; Josh Edelstein, Politico; ZSara Fagen, Republican Strategist 

5.1.22: It's All About the Issues, Not the Solutions

How much should the U.S. aid Ukraine in its fight for sovereignty against Russia? Fifty billion dollars, the new total sum of the U.S.'s committment to Ukraine won't be enough, but Putin has to lose this war. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) is correct when he said that the international world order is at stake in this fight. When President Zelenskyy states that his country is fighting for democracy so that the West doesn't have to has tons of truth packed into it.

And the war is expanding to the western part of Ukraine as Russia tries to build a land bridge from the east all the way to Moldova, having already started the bombing of the historic city of Odesa. So if it takes $100 billion, the United States needs to go there. Also, Senator Menendez was correct in providing nuance to Mr. Todd's question as to whether this is a proxy war, in saying that it isn't necessarily because this effort is to support a country in a fight for its freedom, but on the more macro level, the international world order is at risk.

Spend the money on this righteous cause. And how do we know it is one because Republicans are in support of the United States' aid to Ukraine. The support mostly comes from their collective silence. It's not an issue in which the opposing side (Putin's) is politically tenable. As with immigration, we agree for the most part with the New Jersey Senator in as much as Republicans are looking for the issue and not the solution. 

As for Putin saying he will officially declare war on Ukraine on May 9, the rhetoric is meaningless as the two countries are already at fully scale war against one another. Only that Putin has convinced himself that by declaring war, you can deploy more extreme measures of destruction on the civilian population. 

Speaking of empty rhetoric, there is way too much on both sides of the aisle, however it is true that no matter what happens are the southern border Republicans will make it an issue. Case in point, during the Obama years, illegal immigration was around historic lows and the president deported a lot more people than was publicized. However, as it is now, the border was a 'mess' then. 

Say what you will about the job that Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas is doing, but if you actually listen to what he is saying, Title 42 which rejects asylum seekers based on covid health concerns, allows for immigrants to repeatedly come back to try to cross, and he is following the laws as they are set. And Congress refuses to act in reforming immigration because any compromise on the part of the Republicans is a deal breaker with their fringe.

Former Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) accurately described the Republicans' singular drive for power over actually creating solutions for the American people. Exhibit A is minority Kevin McCarthey who blatantly lied about his disgust with the former president after the 2020 election. His colleagues are more upset that McCarthy is a bad liar than that he lied in the first place. 

To say that the American people are cynical is an understatement.

The country's days are numbered as a democracy if Republicans can't alter their course because the voters will put them in control of Congress in November. The solutions are secondary to the issues, the means to a poltical power the primary goal. 

Panel: Helene Cooper, The New York Times; Claire McCaskill, fmr. senator (D-MO); Stephen Hayes, The Dispatch; Garrett Haake, NBC News

4.24.22: The Chaos Putin has Unleashed on the World and Why Republicans Always Win The Culture Wars

Thank you for bearing with us and our intermittance these past weeks, life getting in the way as we're all too familiar with...

And on a programming note, Kristen Welker was filling in for a birthday-celebrating Chuck Todd - Happy Birthday to the moderator - but it should be mentioned that Ms. Welker's questions today punctuated the trend of journalist asking questions to raise conflict instead of obtaining a guest's opinion and perceived solution to the important issues that face us. The salvation caveat is that is not the case with American journalists interviewing foreign leaders (for the most part). We'll provide illustrations below.

The one thing that Americans can agree on is that stepping up aid to Ukraine is in our national interest and providing them the weapons to push back the Russian army and the chaos that Putin has unreleashed upon the world, and if you've been paying attention that's not hyperbole with eighty percent of the world's wheat comes from Ukraine and the adjacent land in Russia. Food shortages have already exascerbated conflicts in Africa - Senegal and Ethiopia being among them. And obviously, energy costs around the world have been affected dramatically. The geopolitical ramifications of Putin's invasion will be felt for decades. Wrap your head around all that and then ask, why aren't they discussing that?

Though it's prudent to ask the Deputy Head of Office to the President of Ukraine, Igor Zhovkva, about the status of Mariupol given Putin has said that the Russians control it, which Mr. Zhovkva said was false. However, to have him speculate on Moldova is searching for the minorly sensational. Even with the Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Finer, you should first ask broadly about intelligence of intention and then go there. That would be our critique, but not our instruction...

In Mr. Zhovkva's description of the armaments Ukraine needs, there was one that stuck out the most, which was the air-craft defense systems. Supplying jets isn't easy, and neither are tanks for that matter. Yes, the U.S. has lots of tanks, but think of the logistics of moving several. They are tanks after all, and their not Soviet tanks so there's the training aspect. But air-defense should have been bolstered a month ago. With air defense and the Horwitzers that are current on the way can provide the cover for battles that they can win.

And it's heartening to hear Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO) to broadly share the administration's line of thinking in terms of support. We also agree with him that you should show an opponent your hand in terms of your red lines and no one saw Western Europe and NATO showing any spine, which it has. 

Which brings us to the spineless... The Secretary General of the United Nations is travelling to Moscow for meeting with the Russian president, and Putin is going to stick it in his face. Russia's on the security counsel and can veto any peacekeeping troops or huminatarian aid or corridors. Is the Secretary General going to talk about a world order that Putin flatly rejects? Let's see how that goes and though we're not wont to speculate, we can imagine it won't end well.

To the feckless... House minority leader Kevin McCarthy is a squid, and The New York Times Peter Baker aptly described his actions and Republican politician writ large in that he's more concerned about the backlash of the former president than the backlash from a bald-faced lie. If it isn't obviously, Mr. McCarthy simple contorts himself and patronizes to whatever audience he's is in front of, whether 1 person on the phone or 100 people in a room. Squid.

Who's not a squid and but not entirely as right as she thinks is Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), with whom we agree that Democrats need to keep pushing on legislation, but not all that she is proposing, namely an across the board student debt cancellation of $50,000. Understanding that student loans hit minorities and the disadvantaged harder and that's why it should be an application process. Why? Because personal responsibility for your choices. Many here have incurred college debt and paid it off. Makes us inclined to ask for it back. Also, it's prudent to air on the side of caution if there is the prospect that it will only add to the deficit and inflation overall.

Here's also another example of asking the wrong question in terms of pertinance. Ms. Welker asked Senator Warren about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi not initially endorsing a ban on stock trading by members of Congress, but she came around after some poilitical pressure. To the question of whether Senator Warren had faith in the Speaker, she said yes with a shrug, but what about the more important matter of the would-be leader Mr. McCarthy, ne did Ms. Welker ask her about that, which she should have, because it's necssary to hold our political leaders to their words, no?

Lastly, the war on words, or more broadly the culture wars in America are always won by Republicans. Period. Hard Stop.

Republicans represent a narrower constiuency of groups so their special interests are much more targeted, and much more cynical, and much more effective because of the continued vagueness of the bills they pass. Contrast that with Democrats who seek to represent a much broader coalition of groups, in which the loudest voices are never satisfied with the result because a particular group is under represented in the response.

Here's the winner in the controversial Florida legislation on parental rights, known popularly as the 'don't say gay' bill. It prohibits the instruction of sex, gender and sexual orientation in grades kindergarten through three. On it's face, that's reasonable and ration, but it doesn't account for the third grader who draws or shows a picture of his or her two moms or dads. What happens then when a student has a question of why that is. Have you ever met a third grader that didn't ask you why a thousand times? It's incumbant upon the teacher to explain it clearly without making it a big deal, but just that simply act can cost a teacher his or her job. 

That's the broader societal implication, to our detriment we might ad. Same-sex marriage, like toothpaste, genies and farts, it's out and it is not going back in. Knowing this, Republicans like the governor of Florida use every opportunity to make life suck for the people with those rights, or anything else they don't agree with. Just ask Disney.

Panel: Errin Haines, The 19th; Carol Lee, NBC News; Sara Fagen, fmr. Bush Administration offical; Peter Baker, The New York Times

4.10.22: Issues to Govern On, Issues to Run On...

The Boston Globe's Editorial Board member, Kimberly Atkins Stohr summed it up best explaining that Democrats search for issues to govern on while Republican search for issues to campaign on. It brakes down this way on practically everything in our collective civil life these days. The byproduct is that it leaves everyone dissatified.

Said in another and accurate way is that Democrats know how to govern and Republicans know how to campaign which plays out both in domestic policy and foreign policy.

That brings us to the war in Ukraine and what Chuck Todd aptly described as 'calculated cruelty.' One could say that if George W. Bush were in office, the world would have to worry about the fate of NATO and the response, outside of minor strategic differences, would be the same - pour as much support, military and otherwise, into the defense of Ukraine. But that's not the Republican party that we have anymore.

Had the last Republican president still been in office, the administration's presumed response would have been tepid at best, NATO would be completely ineffectual, Europe nations would focus on their self interests and their reliance on Russian energy and Putin would have won the Battle of Kyiv. But Putin didn't win this battle, the Ukraine did.

Unlike Afghanistan, the Biden Administration has done as well as any U.S. Administration can to support Ukraine and push back on Russian aggression, which the West has finally woken up to. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan that he and Joint Chief of Staff General Mark Milley are personally coordinating with Ukraine's Ministry of Defense. As we mentioned in a previous column, European and the U.S. governments all have an ax to grind when when it comes to Putin or some nefarious Russian entity violating countries' sovereignty. 

Ukraine's Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba  explained that in 2008 the United States had pushed for Ukraine to join NATO, which was during the Bush Administration, with France and Germany rejecting the idea. So here we are with Russian forces indescriminating bombing civilians - women and children fleeing the war.

Russian forces are regrouping in the eastern part of the country so it's a race to get arms into the hands of the Ukrainians, some of which Mr. Sullivan explained are being delivery at the moment of this writing. 

Mr. Kuleba explained the deal that Ukraine wants, give us what we need to fight and win this war against Putin's Russia so that NATO and the west won't have to. The seems a bit hyperbolic in the cynical sense, but the Foreign Minister is not wrong. If Ukraine doesn't succeed, that larger confrontation will be inevitable.

Republicans, realizing that the Biden Administration's response politically and materially is better than anything the former administration could muster in terms of competency have turned their attention to domestic issues - practical and cultural.

On the practical issues, inflation is a slamdunk for Republicans to slap the Democrats with, and Republicans always profit historically from when Democrats take control, they over reach and their base becomes discouraged.

As fmr. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers explained, the inflation in gas prices is due to the increased demand, the bottleneck in the supply chain caused by covid, and the unforeseen war in Ukraine. In this were the only daily commodity which was seeing a price increase, Americans would be more optimistic about the economy because they see one of the major causes on their television screens everyday. 

However, inflation is running through the price of everything and anyone who checks their bank account more than twice a week has altered one's spending [read: middle and lower-middle class]. That along with big bright lights every other mile on American roads flashing red steep gas prices and Republicans have something to point to.

Mr. Summers also explained that by creating so much demand combined with so many Americans having pent up cash, from the pandemic, he foresaw the inflation that we're seeing now, admittedly, not at this level but he did see it coming. He also explained that nothing is certain in economics but that historically after a period of high inflation, a recession usually follows one to two years later. Translate that into - Do what you can this year to pay off as many debts as much as possible because the next few years could be tight.

Mr. Summers explained what is happening with economy very clearly and fixes to alter the course so for that reason, we've included his entire interview below.

Former Florida Congressman Carlos Curbelo said that Republicans are definitely winning the culture wars, and he's not wrong. Republicans, and yes lead by Florida's Governor Ron DeSantis, are pushing Democrats buttons with divisive policies and they have the state legislations and the death-proof majority in the Supreme court to push their agenda as far as they can imagine. 

As Mr. Todd reminded us, and we're paraphrasing more poetically, overreach is the inevitability of too much power. This brings us to the Supreme Court.

Congratulations to newly-confirmed Associate Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson who after 232 years and 115 appointments, we finally have a black woman on the highest court of the United States. This should be celebrated uniquovocally despite the despictable, cynical, gutter level attacks that Republican Senators throw at her. F**k them, she shined.

However, as we know all too well, it doesn't change the balance of the court and that Mississippi abortion ruling is coming down the pike. If the Court rules in favor of Mississippi, which most legal prognosticators believe to be the case, a wave of abortion bills will be voted into the law. 

Given the Republicans ruthless efficiency in enacting such overreaching policies, it could work to Democrats' advantage. Such sweeping policy that effects over half the U.S. population is a pretty motivating factor - for and against, but in this case mostly against.

Panel: Kimberly Atkins Stohr, The Boston Globe; Anna Palmer, Punchbowl News; Josh Lederman, NBC; Carlos Curbelo, fmr. Florida Congressman (R)

3.27.22: Despite The President's Gaffes, The U.S. Handling of the War In Ukraine Could Be A Lot Worse

"For God's sake, this man cannot remain in power." 

USA Today's Susan Page explained that President Biden said what everyone in Washington is thinking and discussing which is Vladimir Putin needs to be out of power. However, the president saying the quiet part out loud is no doubt a mistake because unless some drastic, unlikely shift happens in the Kremlin, The West, NATO, and the United States are going to have to talk to the Russian dictator.

Two more points there - Putin is a dictator, no other description is applicable, and this dictator is going to need to talk to the west unless he also wants the task of trying to build an economy from scratch in the 21st century, which is where he is heading.

As The Dispatch's Stephen Hayes explained, it's not so much the adhoc statements themselves but that the administration keeps walking things back that have an effect on how Americans perceive his handling of the conflict. 

However, a matter of perspective is needed here. Was it a mistake to say that Putin needs to go, many would say 'yes' because it doesn't show message discipline and it's not the official policy of the United States. Does an off-script statement like this become dangerous as Ms. Page asked? We'll have to wait and see, but it isn't like it's an opinion that is not agreed upon. The perspective is warranted because what is not in question is Mr. Biden's devotion to democratic values and standing up for them, and lest we not forget 14 months ago we had a president that was not interested in defending democracy.

Frankly, we'd take Biden's gaffes, however cringeworthy, over Mr. Trump's anti-democratic, Putin-praising idiocy everytime.

And Ukraine's president Volodymyr Zelensky has a point, too much talk and not enough action. As Ukraine's Ambassador to the United State, Oksana Markarova explained, Putin cannot be trusted and if Ukraine doesn't win, it will be a threat to all democracies and the world order that has been in place since WWII. If Putin wins, she said that the will show that dictator and military force are the only things that matter. To back up President Zelensky's point, she said that the Ukrainians had the best boots on the ground but that they needed the weapons.

The best part of the interview with the Ambassador was when Mr. Todd asked her about the independent territories in Ukraine like the Donbas and whether her government would negotiate on those points. Her answer: There are no independent territories with the borders of Ukraine.

The ambassador also said that Putin has no red lines, so it was interesting to hear Senator Rob Portman say that the use of chemical or biological weapons is a red line that the United States should enforce and retailiate, not in kind, but militarily.

Despite the gaffes, President Biden's defense of democracy and his handlining of the situation have been overall quite good. We think about this because we know that it could have been a lot worse with western democracies in full cowering stance instead of standing up as a united force.

On other matters, like the Supreme Court, with each passing day confidence in the court wains. Mr. Todd pointed out that the only thing that changes in confirmation hearings is that the hearing for Supreme Court nominees are televised, which encourages Senators to grandstand. There's your answer right there on how to get these proceedings reigned in so that we don't have a senator like Josh Hawley bring conspiracy theories to the hearing questions. Even conservative writer, Stephen Hayes said that the Republican party has a problem with conspiracy theories. Wow, you think? Susan Page explained that 1 in 4 Republicans believe some aspect of Q Anon... sad.

All this does is serve to put further doubt in people's minds about the legitimacy of the Court. And then there's Justice Clarence Thomas and his 'best friend' his wife Ginni, who apparently is wrapped up in January 6th conspiracies and was a de facto advisor to the White House Chief-of-Staff Mark Meadows on how to unlawfully overturn the election. 

Senator Portman explained that given this revelation, if a case on January 6th comes before the Court, then perhaps Justic Thomas should recuse himself from the case. But the fact is that a case on January 6th already has come before the court in the form of releasing documents from the National Archive and Justic Thomas was the lone dissenter in releasing them. Coincidence? Not bloody likely.

Panel: Susan Page, USA Today; Yamiche Alcindor, PBS Newshour; Stephen Hayes, The Dispatch; Jeh Johnson, fmr. Secretary of Homeland Security

 

3.20.22: An Animal Is Most Dangerous and Ruthless When Wounded

An animal is always at its most dangerous and ruthless when it's wounded, and the Russian Bear has certainly had a few claws pulled at the root of paw. In other words, the humiliations the Russian army has suffered are prompting Putin to use crude and more brutal weapons such as a hypersonic missile, but also as devastating, especially on civilian populations are non-smart bombs that are launched indiscriminately hitting hospitals, apartments buidlings and theaters filled with children.

The moderator, Chuck Todd's central question for all the guests was at what point does Putin's brutality in Ukraine warrant a more direct military response or intervention on the part of the U.S., NATO and other allies?

Understandably, the answers depend on where you currently sit. Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY) is more hawkish in the Cheney-family tradition, but she's in a position where she can say that chemicalweapons, for instance, are indeed a red line that would precipitate a direct military response. However if you're the NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg you have to address the question more carefully and NOT commit to a position that locks in a thirty-nation alliance into a potentially untenable position. However, the Secretary did plainly state that the use of chemical weaspons is a clear violation of international law.

One point that Secretary Stoltenberg made requires distinction which was he thank the U.S. president for his leadership and admitted that U.S. and the Biden Administration were briefing NATO for months and worked all the diplomatic channels to make NATO as unified in its actions as it is today. It was a big statement.

As PBS's Amna Nawaz explained, there is a throughline between how Putin's forces acted in Syria and what is happening the Ukraine. The Russians demolished Aleppo with cluster bombs and facilitated Assad's use of chemical weapons. The only inclination to think that Putin will not deploy chemical weapons is that there would be no coming back from pariah status by the European Union with its economic might alone cutting off Russia will have harsh consequences for as long as Putin is in power. 

Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) said that we shouldn't be placing redlines on specifics, but that Putin should know that the United States will escalate its response to the scale of Putin's actions. Senator Murphy being a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and closer to President Biden is going to be more measured, but reaffirmed his unwavering support for President Zelenskyy and the Urkainian people, as did Representative Cheney. 

When you hear leaders from both parties agreeing on the fundamental issue of freedom and democracy it's allows one to better understand where the differences are on a particular issue and see that both sides bring good points to their arguments and the gray areas in between. No better than the Iran Nuclear deal where Senator Murphy said that we should do everything we can to get back into it, whereas Representative Cheney explained that we shouldn't be rewarding Iran with sanctions relief at this time when the status of their nuclear ambitions wouldn't be changed. Senator Murphy's position that since pulling out the Iranians' progress toward a nuclear weapon has moved at a rapid pace, and presumably reinstituting the deal would halt that progress.

There's nothing wrong with seeing valid points from both sides of the aisle when the baseline of American values are shared and shared honestly. 

And speaking of honesty, take Represntative Liz Cheney at her word when she says that nothing that she has learned being part of the January 6th Select Committee has lessened her concern with regard to the gravity of that day and the actions of the previous president and administration. 

Lastly, it was mentioned a few times that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (admittedly a cool name for a morally questionable individual) has emerged as the interlocutor that could possibly negotiate with Putin to stop the violence; Mr. Erdogan's Turkey is conveniently a member of NATO while the president personally has a sufficient authoritarian inclination acommpanied by action to that end to make Mr. Putin feel more at ease. Or so one would think... However, if you try to force a wounded animal out of the corner, it's coming with everything to try and kill you.

Panel: Andrea Mitchell;, NBC News; Amna Nawz, PBS Newshour; David Ignatius, The Washington Post; Shane Harris, The Washington Post

One more thing...

For the record and your viewing, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's speech to the U.S. Congress.

3.13.22: As History Unfolds Daily, the Right Side of It Needs Clarification

First things last...

To be clear, if Mr. Trump were still president, the NATO alliance would be irreparably broken, the White House's position would be that Ukraine is not the U.S.'s problem, and it would embolden other authoritarian regimes to take similar actions because the United States would be in retreat. The New York Times' Pentagon correspondent Helene Cooper mapped it quite succinctly and accurately. 

And to this day, as Peter Baker explained, Mr. Trump has never uttered one negative word or made one negative statement directly about Putin... Ever.

Pardon us if we take a moment to sound off a bit. Throughout the week, and each week of this war does indeed become more consequential, there have been things that need to be called out.

Starting with Bill Barr and his cynical attempt to repair his image for the history books. We have read his book, admittedly nor will we, but I think it's safe for us to say that the only thing we'd consider indisputable is the title - one damn thing after another. Between Attorney General Bill Barr and White House Counsel Pat Cippolone, the scope of crimes and violations they turned a blind eye to while Mr. Trump was in office will still be uncovered years from now.

Also, in the grand scope of geo-politics and the real politik, there's lots of grey, charcoal in some places, but Israel's fecklessness when it comes to silence in condemning Russia's war of choice against Ukraine is appalling. Inexcusable. We know there is too much business that depends on this silence, but isn't the morality that you show in this life and not the money? Doesn't the United States have 12 billion reasons why Israel should be helping us out. As Mr. Todd mentioned, Israel is one country that could provide an 'off ramp' for Putin. Really, how's that going? Some have gone as far as to blame the positions of the United States that drove Putin to this... Yeah, soft apologists we have no time for.

And as for Representative Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) calling President Zelenskyy a 'thug' is beyond the pale. He can only be an American by birth because in principles there is nothing American in the slightest. Our advise, read a history book.

We also have to call out the Biden Administration because politics is perception. Americans imprisoned in Venezuela are released and we need their oil. This was a step way too far if the end is a result of these means. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan tried to separate the two, but of all the despots in all the gin joints around the world, do we have to sit at the bar with Maduro?

Lastly, people should understand what a no-fly zone really means. As Ambassador Michael McFaul explained, if NATO or the United States imposed a no-fly zone over Ukraine, it may as well be a declaration of war. And in this instance, the Biden Administration has correctly pushed back on that notion because they have made it clear that the U.S. would not take provocative [read: direct offensive action against Russia] action.

As history is unfolding on a daily basis, we had the need to clarify who's on the right side of it.

Experts: fmr. Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch; fmr. Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, James Stavridis; fmr. Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul

Panel: Helene Cooper, The New York Times; Rich Lowry, The National Review; Kimberly Atkins Stohr, The Boston Globe; Peter Baker, The New York Times

3.6.22: How Far Is The West Willing To Go?

The question now is how far is the NATO alliance, the United States, Europe and the world willing to go to stop Putin's aggression in Ukraine. Mr. Putin has stated that the sanctions levied against his country are the equivalent of a declaration of war. 

Of the 4 main requests made by Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, two involve sanctioning and inflicting more pain on the Russian economy. These should be done as quickly as possible, embargoing Russian energy exports and withdraw their favored-nation trade status. Call the bluff and continue highlighting big asset seizures of Russian oligarchs. 

However, as Secretary of State Anthony Blinken explained, and confirmed later by The New Yorker's Robin Wright, a ban on Russian oil in the United States would strictly be symbolic if we do not do it in coordination with allies.

Call the bluff because as fmr. Allied CDR of NATO, James Stavridis explained, NATO outspends Russia 15-1 on its military. Putin knows too well that combined economic and military conflict with the west is a serious loser.

It's progress that the Poles will supply fighter jets to the Ukraines, but the import opf anti-aircraft munitions to the Ukrainians needs to be stepped up, and yes, the United States should backstop both efforts. In terms of a no-fly zone, frankly, does NATO, more specifically Western Europe have the stomach for the implications of what that would mean? As Secretary Blinken succinctly desribed, if NATO imposes a no-fly zone and a Russian Miig flies through it, then NATO would shoot it down, with the implications that the war would immediately expand across the continent.  Putin said the sanctions are a declaration of war.

Senator Joe Manchin disagreed that taking a no-fly zone off the table is a mistake, but to our point above, for now it should be because saber-rattling on this point only prompts action not well thought out. The saber-rattling, mind you, wouldn't come from Senator Manchin but potentially other irresponsible persons such as say... hmmmm... Lindsey Graham, maybe.

As for fmr. UN Secretary Nikki Haley saying that this would have never happened if the former president were in office, one would be inclined to call BS on that simply because it still would have happened but the Trump Administration would have not had the unified response we're seeing now. When Chuck Todd rattled off a list of items that Mr. Trump 'tried' to do to appease Putin, Ms. Haley's reply was that those we're the things he only 'tried,' to do, but not what he did. What?

Right, what did do, which was exhort President Zelenskyy for a political favor in exchange for supplying military assistance. As Fiona Hill explained, he did this at a critical juncture in the conflict in eastern Ukraine and it sent a signal of weakness in saying that Ukraine's defense didn't matter. 

Ms. Haley also suggested that we shouldn't engage with China diplomatically at all on Russia, which is also a mistake. This is exactly the time to use our soft power to weaken any support China has for Russia, and it sends a clear message that the United States isn't looking the other way.

So Ms. Haley... please. Take all that someplace else.

One last note with regard to the State of Union speech. Mr. Todd asked Princeton Professor Eddie Glaude, Jr. about the speech and the fact that President Biden stressed the point of freedom in Ukraine but didn't directly address defending democracy at home. Mr. Glaude said that he was shocked that Mr. Biden didn't bring it up and thought it a mistake.

While we agree with Mr. Glaude's sentiment, we disagree that it was a mistake because that it wouldn't have fit with what Joe Biden was trying to do with the speech which was to bring people together. Secondly, Mr. Biden in his speech while speaking about Ukraine referred the hall of the Capitol so the implied meaning of how Mr. Biden was speaking about Ukraine, listeners understood that he was referencing democracy at home as well. This implied meaning was not lost on the American people, and Mr. Biden did well in trying not to deliberately alienate Americans on the other side of the political spectrum. 

Panel: Robin Wright, The New Yorker; Hallie Jackson, NBC News; Eddie Glaude, Jr., Princeton University; Steven Hayes, The Dispatch

2.27.22: There's No Going Back from Democracy for Ukrainians

Should the U.S. and Europe have done more to help Ukraine defend themselves before the Putin Regime unlawfully invaded this sovereign country? The answer is, of course, but even amongst Ukrainians along with the rest of the world, it seemed unfathomable that Putin would actually go through with it. One day you're a computer programmer and the next you have a Kalishnikov in your hand is pretty incredible to even get your head around. Even for Putin.

The Russian leader has indeed been on his heels, surprised the unified response of NATO, pressure at the United Nations with 88 countries standing in solidarity against Russian action as the UN Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield described, and most importantly and not least of which is the resistence of the Ukrainian Army and its civilians. For twenty years, Ukrainians have decided they want democracy for their country and in the end no matter when that comes, they're not going back.

The unfortunate reality of now is that despite the announcement of Russian and Ukrainian delegations meeting tomorrow, those talks which Mr. Todd mislabeled as peace talks, will go no where. Putin, because of his isolation that fmr. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul described, has to go all-in at this point and send troops in for street-to-street fighting in urban centers. Anything less than the goal of folding Ukraine back into a 'soviet' empire is a failure for Putin.

There was debate on sanctions between all the guests feature on the program today, but they've seemed to all miss the point, which is that it's the threat of sanctions to deter malign action. Now, bring on the full sanctions for what they're designed to do, which is punish the Putin regime. As a side note: there has been a lot of talk about SWIFT and kicking Russian banks out of it. SWIFT is a European banking system that allow major banks to communicate and manage transactions worldwide. So kicking out Russian banks from this system along with U.S. banks freezing Russian assets and you're pretty much out of the international banking system.

In the last panel segment, the conversation became a bit testy discussing some in the Republican party being apologists for Putin, such as the fmr. president and notably fmr. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo who has presidential aspirations. The American Enterprise Institute's Danielle Pletka felt that she was being ganged up on in her defense of Pompeo's comments, in which he said that he had a lot of respect for Vladimir Putin the very day before the invasion. Ms. Pletka said that his comments shouldn't be taken serious because she knows that Mr. Pompeo doesn't really believe that. She dismissed Andrea Mitchell's rebuttal that Mr. Pompeo's comments are being played on Russian state television and that's dangerous, which it is. Also, Ms. Pletka said she needed to be heard because she was the only Republican on the panel, which again Ms. Mitchell answered that she was neither Republican or Democrat, but a journalism. Ms. Pletka once again poo-poo'ed. 

The problem is Mr. Pompeo has made these statements several times and his words matter. So not to pile on her, but Ms. Pletka once again needs to take the shoe that was once up her butt about being ganged up on and remove it from her mouth. Frankly, there is no space in this column for Putin apologists neither the defense of them.

Just to give you some context on this, some in the news media (or whatever) ask why shouldn't we see Putin's point of view that he doesn't want NATO on his border. Just call bullshit on that. NATO was already on his border - Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia... and Poland (Kalingrad is a carve out part of Russia). This column has many friends in Poland who we communicate with frequently and without going into too much depth, Poles are worried. If Putin succeeds in Ukraine, what makes them think they're not Putin's next direct target for cyber and all the rest?

The isolation of Putin has only begun.

****

On another note, President couldn't have made a better choice for his Supreme Court nomination in Judge Kentanji Brown-Jackson. Already on the DC Circuit Court, once a public defender, impeccable credentials, endorsement from the Fraternal Order of Police, not a legislator from the bench. And yes, an African-American woman, which plays into this column's theory that it will be black women who come over time to save our nation domestically. Just another thought.

Panel: Kristen Welker, NBC News; Andrea Mitchell, NBC News; Danielle Pletka, American Enterprise Institute; Jeremy Bash, fmr. Pentagon Chief of Staff