"A producer would reject it," The Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan said in response to Chuck Todd's assertion that the FBI opening a counterintelligence investigation into the President of the United States was like a bad Hollywood movie script.
But this is where we are...
Donald Trump is taking this country into all kinds of unknown dangerous terrain on several different levels, the first of which to address is what is now the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, with federal workers now having missed their first paycheck. In listening to both Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Time Kaine (D-VA) during their respective interviews, both sides are blaming the other for rejecting bills that would have kept the government open. Even if there is ambiguity on which party is at fault, there is certainty that the Republicans in the Senate were prepared to vote on a Continuing Resolution that the president squashed by tweeting that he would reject such a bill. The biggest obstructing factor in this situation is the president, himself.
The wall or barrier is a vanity project of the president's that the majority of Americans do not support. Even many Trump supporters on the Texas border do not support it, but it was Mr. Trump's loudest promise on during the campaign so he's being egged on by xenophobic right-wing media while he has effectively stifled Republicans in congress afraid of their base that has been taken over by Mr. Trump. What was equally loud was Mr. Trump's promise was that Mexico was going to pay for the wall, which he is now walking back with a nuanced answer that through the new trade deal, they will, but the reality of that is the money won't go into the Treasury, instead to private corporations, and Americans will still float the bill. The wall should not be built on the backs of U.S. taxpayers. Hard stop.
In terms of declaring a national emergency, the president circumvent Congress and have the military, Army Corps of Engineers, built the wall. The president has said that "I may do it... I have the absolute right to do it... I'd rather not do it. Congress should easily do it." However, if it were really an emergency, wouldn't the president have made this declaration already? It's obviously not an emergency, or as Chuck Todd explained, the president is threatening a national emergency because of his political emergency.
On the heels of the New York Times story that the FBI opened up an unprecedented counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Trump and his relationship to Russia, we learn from the Washington Post that the president has gone to unusual lengths to keep the transcripts of his private meetings with Vladimir Putin secret from everyone in government including his senior staff in the White House. At this point, no one can say that the president has nothing to hide. He's hiding the transcripts! As NBC's Carol Lee explained, though it's not being said publicly, Republicans in Washington are concerned. And despite what defenses Senator Cruz offered today with regard to Mr. Trump's 'actions' of being tough on Russia. (As an aside: Mr. Cruz has no credibility when discussing a government shutdown, as the one he orchestrated in 2013 was purely political.) If the administration is being tough on Russia why did the Treasury Department seek to quietly lift sanctions on Russian Oligarch Oleg Deripaska in December? When Treasury Secretary was brought before Congress this week in a closed-door meeting and asked about it, he apparently didn't have a good answer.
As the New York Times Michael Schmidt explained, we now know that the FBI investigation, which the Mueller probe has now inherited, was two-pronged with the obstruction and collusion. The FBI was worried that the president may be an witting or unwitting asset of the Kremlin. Lawfare's Ben Wittes added that the FBI saw the investigations in a light that we should all should focus our attention, and that is that the obstruction - the firing of James Comey, the president's attempts to shutdown the Mueller investigation and his continued attempts to discredit law enforcement - and the collusion are linked. The obstruction of the investigation is part of the collusion with President Trump trying to prevent the FBI from figuring out what happened in the 2016 election.
As Mr. Wittes stated flatly: The investigation into Trump is about Russia. Full stop. Uncharted and devastating terrain indeed.
Panel: Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal; Carol Lee, NBC; Al Cardenas, Republican Strategist; Cornell Belcher, Democratic Strategist
Sunday, January 13, 2019
Sunday, January 06, 2019
1.6.19: So Much for the Great Negotiator
We're in the 16th day of the latest government shutdown and a quick end doesn't look likely. Both sides are entrenched in their positions with new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) saying that "a wall is an immorality," and the president threatening to enact emergency powers, diverting pentagon funds, to get it built.
If the president were to deploy the military to build a wall, wouldn't it be a needless misappropriation of funds and resources? Not to mention that the border is not a military emergency, despite what the president says. Also, Newly appointed Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney called the situation at our southern border a 'crisis.' It's not a crisis of people coming in, but what is really the crisis is the inhuman way the administration has been caging and housing new arrivals.
For a self-proclaimed 'great negotiator' President Trump has certainly backed himself into the proverbial corner. Mr. Mulvaney stated that the $2.5 billion dollar deal that the vice president had discussed with Senate Majority Mitch McConnell (R-TN) wasn't what the president wanted. This, in turn, lead to Mr. McConnell's bringing a vote to the floor of the senate that the president wouldn't sign, in essence embarrassing the Tennessee senator. Now, feeling that burn, Mr. McConnell will not bring any vote to the senate floor that the president won't sign. What this really says is that Mr. McConnell doesn't think that the president can be held to his word via his second in command Mike Pence.
As New York Times columnist David Brooks explained the obvious deal is border security money in exchange for a DACA deal (path to citizenship for the dreamers), which Senator Susan Collin (R-ME) also mentioned was voted on last March. However, because of the outcry from right-wing radio and television pundits, Mr. Trump backed away from such a deal and now insists on $5.6 billion for a wall or the government will not reopen.
[Aside: whether concrete or steel, it's still a wall.]
As House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) pointed out, the Democrats this week voted on a Republican to keep the government open, but again Senator McConnell will not take up the bill because the president won't sign it, which only serves to alienate senate Republicans further. And when Chuck Todd asked Mr. Mulvaney what concession the president was willing to give the Democrats to make a deal happen, he said that the president agreed to take a concrete structure off the table. Really? Who would even take that concession seriously? Mr. Mulvaney also said that the president is interested in something more comprehensive, but as Kasie Hunt outlined, a bigger fix is simply not in play in such a short time.
So far three Republican senators have come out publicly to urge the president to reopen government and then continue negotiating on border security - Cory Gardner (R-CO), Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Susan Collins, who said that shutting down the government as a means to a policy end is never a good idea. All three of these senators will face difficult reelection challenges in 2020. Also, keep in mind what for Congresswoman Donna Edwards said that 80 percent of the government workers affected by the shutdown are outside Washington DC, approximately 640,000 people who are most likely already going to miss one pay check. If the shutdown goes until the 25th of January, that will be two. In other words a month of working without getting paid, a situation that will quickly become untenable.
Washington Free Beacon's Matthew Continetti said that the president is fixated on his base, which will be soon impacted greatly by this shutdown. However, for someone so focused on 35 percent of the population (his base), he sure seems to NOT be doing them a solid. Even in rural America, a large part of the president's base, he's hurting them as the trade war with China continues to do damage to their bottom line and soybean crops sit in silos unsold - U.S. farmers losing billions of dollars. Mr. Trump hasn't made the best deal for them, that much is clear. Not to mention companies like Harley Davidson and Jack Daniel's being hurt by retaliatory tariffs in Europe.
These are real estate deals where it's two-sided and if you don't like the terms, you can walk away. When you walk away from deals as the President of the United States, hundreds of thousands of people get hurt, the people you took an oath to serve.
Panel: Kasie Hunt, NBC; fmr. Congresswoman Donna Edwards; David Brooks, the New York Times; Matthew Continetti, the Washington Free Beacon
One more thing...
For now, cooler heads in the Democratic party are prevailing on impeachment talk, as they should. Once the Mueller report comes out, then the pieces will all start falling into place so while Democrats are conducting rigid oversight of this administration (sorely needed), it's politically best to wait until then.
If the president were to deploy the military to build a wall, wouldn't it be a needless misappropriation of funds and resources? Not to mention that the border is not a military emergency, despite what the president says. Also, Newly appointed Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney called the situation at our southern border a 'crisis.' It's not a crisis of people coming in, but what is really the crisis is the inhuman way the administration has been caging and housing new arrivals.
For a self-proclaimed 'great negotiator' President Trump has certainly backed himself into the proverbial corner. Mr. Mulvaney stated that the $2.5 billion dollar deal that the vice president had discussed with Senate Majority Mitch McConnell (R-TN) wasn't what the president wanted. This, in turn, lead to Mr. McConnell's bringing a vote to the floor of the senate that the president wouldn't sign, in essence embarrassing the Tennessee senator. Now, feeling that burn, Mr. McConnell will not bring any vote to the senate floor that the president won't sign. What this really says is that Mr. McConnell doesn't think that the president can be held to his word via his second in command Mike Pence.
As New York Times columnist David Brooks explained the obvious deal is border security money in exchange for a DACA deal (path to citizenship for the dreamers), which Senator Susan Collin (R-ME) also mentioned was voted on last March. However, because of the outcry from right-wing radio and television pundits, Mr. Trump backed away from such a deal and now insists on $5.6 billion for a wall or the government will not reopen.
[Aside: whether concrete or steel, it's still a wall.]
As House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) pointed out, the Democrats this week voted on a Republican to keep the government open, but again Senator McConnell will not take up the bill because the president won't sign it, which only serves to alienate senate Republicans further. And when Chuck Todd asked Mr. Mulvaney what concession the president was willing to give the Democrats to make a deal happen, he said that the president agreed to take a concrete structure off the table. Really? Who would even take that concession seriously? Mr. Mulvaney also said that the president is interested in something more comprehensive, but as Kasie Hunt outlined, a bigger fix is simply not in play in such a short time.
So far three Republican senators have come out publicly to urge the president to reopen government and then continue negotiating on border security - Cory Gardner (R-CO), Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Susan Collins, who said that shutting down the government as a means to a policy end is never a good idea. All three of these senators will face difficult reelection challenges in 2020. Also, keep in mind what for Congresswoman Donna Edwards said that 80 percent of the government workers affected by the shutdown are outside Washington DC, approximately 640,000 people who are most likely already going to miss one pay check. If the shutdown goes until the 25th of January, that will be two. In other words a month of working without getting paid, a situation that will quickly become untenable.
Washington Free Beacon's Matthew Continetti said that the president is fixated on his base, which will be soon impacted greatly by this shutdown. However, for someone so focused on 35 percent of the population (his base), he sure seems to NOT be doing them a solid. Even in rural America, a large part of the president's base, he's hurting them as the trade war with China continues to do damage to their bottom line and soybean crops sit in silos unsold - U.S. farmers losing billions of dollars. Mr. Trump hasn't made the best deal for them, that much is clear. Not to mention companies like Harley Davidson and Jack Daniel's being hurt by retaliatory tariffs in Europe.
These are real estate deals where it's two-sided and if you don't like the terms, you can walk away. When you walk away from deals as the President of the United States, hundreds of thousands of people get hurt, the people you took an oath to serve.
Panel: Kasie Hunt, NBC; fmr. Congresswoman Donna Edwards; David Brooks, the New York Times; Matthew Continetti, the Washington Free Beacon
One more thing...
For now, cooler heads in the Democratic party are prevailing on impeachment talk, as they should. Once the Mueller report comes out, then the pieces will all start falling into place so while Democrats are conducting rigid oversight of this administration (sorely needed), it's politically best to wait until then.
Sunday, December 30, 2018
12.30.18: Special Edition - Climate Change
At the top of this special edition of "Meet The Press" focusing on climate change, Chuck Todd clearly stated that there is no debate, it's real and that none of the hour's time would be given to denying this reality. This column couldn't agree more with that fact that climate change is real, the planet is warming and humans are the cause. However, even in not giving any air time to deniers, it is those deniers in Congress that hung like a specter over the conversation. During the 'Data Download' segment later in the program, Mr. Todd outlined that today 15% of Republicans in Congress believe the crisis of climate change is real; that percentage is unchanged from 1999 when the question was first asked.
Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) said that there needs to be national policy on climate change to address the problem even though local and state municipalities along with the private sector are taking steps to address the problem. The reason we need national policy is because climate change affects every part of the country - red and blue if you want to frame it in those terms - as the panel discussed.
As Mr. Curbelo explained, in Florida the lunar high tide floods the streets of Miami once a month with no additional rainfall. Governor Jerry Brown (D-CA) explained that the wildfire season used to be in the summer into part of the fall, but now it's all year round. The scorched earth deforestation from fires leaves areas susceptible to mud slides because there's no vegetation to absorb water. This year we saw the most devastating fires in the state's history - 86 people killed and 14,000 homes destroyed. And when asked if he did enough as governor, Mr. Brown stated clearly that though he did a lot, it wasn't nearly enough.
Additionally, Governor Brown explained that in France with its yellow vest protests, a reference point Mr. Todd used too often, that President Macron made the grave mistake of giving a tax break to the wealthy and then wanted to institute a gas tax, which is really a sales tax on ordinary working people. In that context, French citizens have every justification to protest. In California, Governor Brown taxed the wealthy and then proceeded with a gas tax. Mr. Brown said that we have to get away from 'it's the economy, stupid' type of thinking as it's more about the ecology. This column disagrees only inasmuch as to say that it's the economy of now, stupid, but the economy of the future. Ecology now saves the economy for the future.
Former FEMA Director under the Obama Administration and Florida Director of Emergency Management under Jeb Bush Craig Fugate explained that the $100 billion spent in disaster relief last year could be money saved or reinvested in infrastructure. He also mentioned that Hurricane Michael flooded a hanger that destroyed all the F22 military aircraft housed there, meaning more billions sacrificed.
Which brings us to the military which is planning for climate change contingencies. Former Under Secretary of Defense, Michele Flournoy explained that 50% of U.S. military bases abroad need to renovate and prepare for changing climate conditions. The other military factor she mentioned was Arctic ice melt and newly open water areas, which Russia and China are already trying to control for their own.
NASA's Kate Marvel said we should feel a bit overwhelmed because the science is overwhelming. The urgency is all encompassing and to have the entire country thinking in these terms, it starts with leadership. Leadership that need to come from the top, but frankly isn't. When asked about the climate report that 13 Administration agencies put together, President Trump said, "I don't believe it." The specter of denial that endangers our future.
Panel: Former Under Secretary of Defense Michele Flournoy; Former FEMA Director under the Obama Administration and Florida Director of Emergency Management under Jeb Bush Craig Fugate; NASA Scientist Kate Marvel; Florida Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R); Anne Thompson, NBC News
One more thing...
Everyone have a safe, happy and healthy New Year's!!! See you on the flip side of the new year.
Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) said that there needs to be national policy on climate change to address the problem even though local and state municipalities along with the private sector are taking steps to address the problem. The reason we need national policy is because climate change affects every part of the country - red and blue if you want to frame it in those terms - as the panel discussed.
As Mr. Curbelo explained, in Florida the lunar high tide floods the streets of Miami once a month with no additional rainfall. Governor Jerry Brown (D-CA) explained that the wildfire season used to be in the summer into part of the fall, but now it's all year round. The scorched earth deforestation from fires leaves areas susceptible to mud slides because there's no vegetation to absorb water. This year we saw the most devastating fires in the state's history - 86 people killed and 14,000 homes destroyed. And when asked if he did enough as governor, Mr. Brown stated clearly that though he did a lot, it wasn't nearly enough.
Additionally, Governor Brown explained that in France with its yellow vest protests, a reference point Mr. Todd used too often, that President Macron made the grave mistake of giving a tax break to the wealthy and then wanted to institute a gas tax, which is really a sales tax on ordinary working people. In that context, French citizens have every justification to protest. In California, Governor Brown taxed the wealthy and then proceeded with a gas tax. Mr. Brown said that we have to get away from 'it's the economy, stupid' type of thinking as it's more about the ecology. This column disagrees only inasmuch as to say that it's the economy of now, stupid, but the economy of the future. Ecology now saves the economy for the future.
Former FEMA Director under the Obama Administration and Florida Director of Emergency Management under Jeb Bush Craig Fugate explained that the $100 billion spent in disaster relief last year could be money saved or reinvested in infrastructure. He also mentioned that Hurricane Michael flooded a hanger that destroyed all the F22 military aircraft housed there, meaning more billions sacrificed.
Which brings us to the military which is planning for climate change contingencies. Former Under Secretary of Defense, Michele Flournoy explained that 50% of U.S. military bases abroad need to renovate and prepare for changing climate conditions. The other military factor she mentioned was Arctic ice melt and newly open water areas, which Russia and China are already trying to control for their own.
NASA's Kate Marvel said we should feel a bit overwhelmed because the science is overwhelming. The urgency is all encompassing and to have the entire country thinking in these terms, it starts with leadership. Leadership that need to come from the top, but frankly isn't. When asked about the climate report that 13 Administration agencies put together, President Trump said, "I don't believe it." The specter of denial that endangers our future.
Panel: Former Under Secretary of Defense Michele Flournoy; Former FEMA Director under the Obama Administration and Florida Director of Emergency Management under Jeb Bush Craig Fugate; NASA Scientist Kate Marvel; Florida Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R); Anne Thompson, NBC News
One more thing...
Everyone have a safe, happy and healthy New Year's!!! See you on the flip side of the new year.
Sunday, December 23, 2018
12.23.18: Our Mad President
"'Tis the time's plague when madmen lead the blind."
-Earl of Gloucester from King Lear
If it couldn't get any worse, the president capped off the year appropriately with a partial government shutdown. However, in the days leading up to this concluding event did not bode well for Mr. Trump either.
What's amazing is that the president seems to listen and take advice from everyone, anyone, who is not in his government. In a call with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish president recommended that the U.S. pull completely out of Syria and shortly after, Mr. Trump announced just that. The president had a deal for a C.R. (continuing resolution) to keep the government open and then listened to the right-wing fringe of his party with regard to the wall then announced "no deal," and hence we have a shutdown.
This was just in the past week.
Never mind that 17 U.S. intelligence agencies informed the Mr. Trump that Russia interfered in the 2016 election but he listened to Vladimir Putin instead. And the president also deferred to Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman with regard to the murder of Jamal Khashoggi again over his own CIA. After all this, it's crystal clear that Mr. Trump is incapable of making a decision for himself and is listening to either the rational or even the irrational actors in his administration. He's taking his cues from autocrats and right-wing talk show hosts.
Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA) said that we have an impulsive president but would work with him where he could. It's a reasonable answer but these are times beyond reason. To Mr. Toomey's credit, when Chuck Todd asked him if he was disturbed by the fact that President Trump was changing foreign U.S. foreign policy away from what every president since WWII has followed, the Pennsylvania senator answered with an unequivocal 'yes.' He also said that senators (Republican) need to step up. And Syria and the subsequent resignation of General James Mattis just may be been the breaking point for Republican senators who have so far followed the president blindly down a dangerous path. Who likes the president's decision in Syria? Erdogan so that he can crush the Kurds, a steadfast U.S. ally in the region, and Vladimir Putin so that Russia can have free reign in the Middle East. Neither Democratic nor Republican senators are in favor of this decision.
As for the shutdown due to the lack of funding president's physical border wall, the Democrats have flatly said 'no' to it, as they should. The the right-wing doesn't mention is that Mr. Trump promised that Mexico would pay for the wall, so why should American taxpayers float the bill? Answer: They shouldn't. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) explained the 1 in 5 trucks that cross the border are checked in terms of their cargo. The system to check them all would cost $300 million, which is a lot less than the $5 billion that the president wants for an ineffective physical wall. Additionally, the president wants the wall to be made of steel, but because of the tariffs the president put in place, steel is now more expensive. The entire argument is utterly ridiculous.
As PBS's Yamiche Alcindor explained, sends Mr. Trump into a rage is that he's losing the messaging. Despite what he says about how the Democrats should take the blame for the shutdown, he owns it. With Republicans still in control of all branches of government and a shutdown still occurs, it's on the president. The Syria pullout, which even "Fox & Friends" took issue with, was the last straw for General Mattis so he resigned that the covered was brutal for Mr. Trump. Senator Durbin mentioned that foreign dignitaries were calling up senators asking, "What the hell is going on?"
The Cook Political Report's Amy Walter pointed out that the president wants to fight, not fix and that impulsiveness is not working, the latter qualifying as the understatement of the year - just look at the stock market reacting to the madness of the president.
It's time Republicans in Congress peel off the blinders and take a good hard, realistic look at what the president is doing to this country.
Panel: Amy Walter, Cook Political Report; Yamiche Alcindor, PBS; Joshua Johnson, NPR; Hugh Hewitt, Salem Radio Network
One more thing...
Everyone have a safe Merry Christmas and Happy Holiday!!!!
-Earl of Gloucester from King Lear
If it couldn't get any worse, the president capped off the year appropriately with a partial government shutdown. However, in the days leading up to this concluding event did not bode well for Mr. Trump either.
What's amazing is that the president seems to listen and take advice from everyone, anyone, who is not in his government. In a call with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish president recommended that the U.S. pull completely out of Syria and shortly after, Mr. Trump announced just that. The president had a deal for a C.R. (continuing resolution) to keep the government open and then listened to the right-wing fringe of his party with regard to the wall then announced "no deal," and hence we have a shutdown.
This was just in the past week.
Never mind that 17 U.S. intelligence agencies informed the Mr. Trump that Russia interfered in the 2016 election but he listened to Vladimir Putin instead. And the president also deferred to Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman with regard to the murder of Jamal Khashoggi again over his own CIA. After all this, it's crystal clear that Mr. Trump is incapable of making a decision for himself and is listening to either the rational or even the irrational actors in his administration. He's taking his cues from autocrats and right-wing talk show hosts.
Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA) said that we have an impulsive president but would work with him where he could. It's a reasonable answer but these are times beyond reason. To Mr. Toomey's credit, when Chuck Todd asked him if he was disturbed by the fact that President Trump was changing foreign U.S. foreign policy away from what every president since WWII has followed, the Pennsylvania senator answered with an unequivocal 'yes.' He also said that senators (Republican) need to step up. And Syria and the subsequent resignation of General James Mattis just may be been the breaking point for Republican senators who have so far followed the president blindly down a dangerous path. Who likes the president's decision in Syria? Erdogan so that he can crush the Kurds, a steadfast U.S. ally in the region, and Vladimir Putin so that Russia can have free reign in the Middle East. Neither Democratic nor Republican senators are in favor of this decision.
As for the shutdown due to the lack of funding president's physical border wall, the Democrats have flatly said 'no' to it, as they should. The the right-wing doesn't mention is that Mr. Trump promised that Mexico would pay for the wall, so why should American taxpayers float the bill? Answer: They shouldn't. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) explained the 1 in 5 trucks that cross the border are checked in terms of their cargo. The system to check them all would cost $300 million, which is a lot less than the $5 billion that the president wants for an ineffective physical wall. Additionally, the president wants the wall to be made of steel, but because of the tariffs the president put in place, steel is now more expensive. The entire argument is utterly ridiculous.
As PBS's Yamiche Alcindor explained, sends Mr. Trump into a rage is that he's losing the messaging. Despite what he says about how the Democrats should take the blame for the shutdown, he owns it. With Republicans still in control of all branches of government and a shutdown still occurs, it's on the president. The Syria pullout, which even "Fox & Friends" took issue with, was the last straw for General Mattis so he resigned that the covered was brutal for Mr. Trump. Senator Durbin mentioned that foreign dignitaries were calling up senators asking, "What the hell is going on?"
The Cook Political Report's Amy Walter pointed out that the president wants to fight, not fix and that impulsiveness is not working, the latter qualifying as the understatement of the year - just look at the stock market reacting to the madness of the president.
It's time Republicans in Congress peel off the blinders and take a good hard, realistic look at what the president is doing to this country.
Panel: Amy Walter, Cook Political Report; Yamiche Alcindor, PBS; Joshua Johnson, NPR; Hugh Hewitt, Salem Radio Network
One more thing...
Everyone have a safe Merry Christmas and Happy Holiday!!!!
Sunday, December 16, 2018
12.16.18: 'Uncertainty' Is The Only Administration Certainty
So much uncertainty, no one knows what's coming down the road in six months, to paraphrase Politico's Eliana Johnson.
So true. So true.
The president's fixation on a physical wall at the southern border threatens to shut down the government in a week. Then of course there are the investigations in every facet of the president's existence, to where they'll lead is anyone's guess. Thrown into holiday season of political chaos is a Texas district judge's ruling that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional, giving Americans something else to worry about.
To curb the fears of the last point, challenges in the circuit court and then the Supreme Court will delay any repeal of the ACA at this time. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) made the argument that without the ACA, otherwise known as Obamacare, protections for preexisting conditions will disappear, along with increased funding for opioid treatment and young adults being able to stay on their parents' insurance until age 26. On top of that, he argued that drug prices would also increase. When you look at the prospect of those provisions going away, it's a powerful argument against repeal.
Though the president is quoted as saying, via Twitter, that this is great news for America, Ms. Johnson commented that he may be the only Republican in Washington cheering this because of the increased popularity of the ACA among Americans and given that Republicans during the midterms explicitly assured voters that protections for preexisting conditions would not be taken away. Senator Roy Blount (R-MO) who touted the fact that he proposed the provision of staying on parents insurance until 26 was hard pressed to answer clearly Chuck Todd's question about having 8 years to come up with an alternative to the Affordable Care Act. Republicans in Congress simply can not agree on a way forward on healthcare, hence their lack of enthusiasm for this decision. That leaves the administration that definitely doesn't have a plan on how to move forward on healthcare. Let's face it, the only agenda President Trump has is erasing President Obama's legacy (Maybe you like that, maybe you don't but it's fact.) and especially a piece of legislation which carries the former president's name.
One last thing on healthcare that really caught this column's ear in the respective interviews with the senators was that Senator Schumer said 'access to healthcare' and Senator Blount framed it as 'access to insurance.' The difference there really frames the argument in stark terms inasmuch as healthcare is getting treatment whereas insurance can only provide treatment to a degree. It really puts how each side views the argument into distinct light. The origin of the ACA came from a Republican plan in the 90's to lower and expand healthcare, but at the same time protecting the insurance industry. The way it was phrased today by the respective senators shows us where the priority is for each.
In terms of the investigations and the Trump administration, Mr. Todd flashed two polls saying that 62% of Americans believe that the president has not been truthful and that 55% of the electorate believe that more oversight is needed. Speaking of oversight, it's quite telling that Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke is resigning at the end of the year due to his various ethics violations while in the cabinet. Rather than face scrutiny for how he's conducted himself as Interior Secretary, he's hightailing out of there.
What's most concerning about all the investigations is what soon-to-be chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA) outlined, and that is whether the president's personal business interests have had an effect on U.S. foreign policy making. As he explained, Mr. Trump's prospective business in Russia has contributed to the weak response the U.S. has had to Russian hacking during the 2016 election. He explained the his business entanglements have to be looked at as a contributing factor. The fact that it has been proven that Deutsche Bank laundered Russian money and that the same bank was the only one that would lend to the Trump Organization is not coincidence.
And speaking of finances, did they play a part in the case of the Saudis and President Trump siding with the Crown Prince over the CIA when it comes to the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi? Mr. Trump had said at campaign rallies that the Saudis have purchased millions of dollars in real estate from Mr. Trump. On the face of it, it seems like a U.S. response, or in this case non-response, is being shaped by the president's personal dealings with the Kingdom.
The Administration's posture in terms of foreign policy and how it is being shaped by Mr. Trump's personal business interests should concern all Americans.
With the news cycles being as chaotic and uncertain as they are from literally hour to hour, how and when all this comes to a head is anyone's guess.
Panel: Katy Tur, NBC News; Eliana Johnson, Politico; David Brody, Christian Broadcast Network; Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post
So true. So true.
The president's fixation on a physical wall at the southern border threatens to shut down the government in a week. Then of course there are the investigations in every facet of the president's existence, to where they'll lead is anyone's guess. Thrown into holiday season of political chaos is a Texas district judge's ruling that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional, giving Americans something else to worry about.
To curb the fears of the last point, challenges in the circuit court and then the Supreme Court will delay any repeal of the ACA at this time. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) made the argument that without the ACA, otherwise known as Obamacare, protections for preexisting conditions will disappear, along with increased funding for opioid treatment and young adults being able to stay on their parents' insurance until age 26. On top of that, he argued that drug prices would also increase. When you look at the prospect of those provisions going away, it's a powerful argument against repeal.
Though the president is quoted as saying, via Twitter, that this is great news for America, Ms. Johnson commented that he may be the only Republican in Washington cheering this because of the increased popularity of the ACA among Americans and given that Republicans during the midterms explicitly assured voters that protections for preexisting conditions would not be taken away. Senator Roy Blount (R-MO) who touted the fact that he proposed the provision of staying on parents insurance until 26 was hard pressed to answer clearly Chuck Todd's question about having 8 years to come up with an alternative to the Affordable Care Act. Republicans in Congress simply can not agree on a way forward on healthcare, hence their lack of enthusiasm for this decision. That leaves the administration that definitely doesn't have a plan on how to move forward on healthcare. Let's face it, the only agenda President Trump has is erasing President Obama's legacy (Maybe you like that, maybe you don't but it's fact.) and especially a piece of legislation which carries the former president's name.
One last thing on healthcare that really caught this column's ear in the respective interviews with the senators was that Senator Schumer said 'access to healthcare' and Senator Blount framed it as 'access to insurance.' The difference there really frames the argument in stark terms inasmuch as healthcare is getting treatment whereas insurance can only provide treatment to a degree. It really puts how each side views the argument into distinct light. The origin of the ACA came from a Republican plan in the 90's to lower and expand healthcare, but at the same time protecting the insurance industry. The way it was phrased today by the respective senators shows us where the priority is for each.
In terms of the investigations and the Trump administration, Mr. Todd flashed two polls saying that 62% of Americans believe that the president has not been truthful and that 55% of the electorate believe that more oversight is needed. Speaking of oversight, it's quite telling that Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke is resigning at the end of the year due to his various ethics violations while in the cabinet. Rather than face scrutiny for how he's conducted himself as Interior Secretary, he's hightailing out of there.
What's most concerning about all the investigations is what soon-to-be chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA) outlined, and that is whether the president's personal business interests have had an effect on U.S. foreign policy making. As he explained, Mr. Trump's prospective business in Russia has contributed to the weak response the U.S. has had to Russian hacking during the 2016 election. He explained the his business entanglements have to be looked at as a contributing factor. The fact that it has been proven that Deutsche Bank laundered Russian money and that the same bank was the only one that would lend to the Trump Organization is not coincidence.
And speaking of finances, did they play a part in the case of the Saudis and President Trump siding with the Crown Prince over the CIA when it comes to the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi? Mr. Trump had said at campaign rallies that the Saudis have purchased millions of dollars in real estate from Mr. Trump. On the face of it, it seems like a U.S. response, or in this case non-response, is being shaped by the president's personal dealings with the Kingdom.
The Administration's posture in terms of foreign policy and how it is being shaped by Mr. Trump's personal business interests should concern all Americans.
With the news cycles being as chaotic and uncertain as they are from literally hour to hour, how and when all this comes to a head is anyone's guess.
Panel: Katy Tur, NBC News; Eliana Johnson, Politico; David Brody, Christian Broadcast Network; Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post
Sunday, December 09, 2018
12.9.18: No Way Around It, Individual-1 Is In Deep Trouble
First, let's take it easy on the 'impeachment' talk, simply for the fact that we're not there yet. The Southern District of New York put in its filing on Friday that Individual-1 (Donald Trump) directed Michael Cohen, the president's person lawyer to pay women (Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal) hush money so that the information would not get out during the campaign. This is a campaign violation and a crime, which we're all fairly certain happened. However, this is a filing and not a conviction.
To keep the potential impeachment of President Trump from becoming strictly perceived as political, Special Counsel Robert Mueller should be allowed to finish his investigation first. Seemingly, most Democrats are taking this course so that they can set a legislative agenda first. Impeachment is a political act, and political division is inherent in this act. For the Democrats to proceed with the course of action, there will need to be more information, specifically from Robert Mueller's team.
Given this, Jonah Goldberg's point shouldn't be lost for Republicans who are abdicating their moral position to defend the president on legals terms, and that is the president paid off a porn star and a Playboy playmate to cover up affairs. This is the amoral deal that Republicans have made and any claim to high ground declared by conservatives and evangelicals has now been ceded.
These filings, as Senator Angus King (I-ME) explained it is not a criminal prosecution and the evidence has not be fully presented as of yet for impeachment or prosecution, hence his statement that he's more 'conservative' when considering all this. He's still in a 'wait-and-see' mode, which is sensible. With this in mind, it's said that a sitting president can not be indicted. The reasoning here is that if the president is indicted it will take too much time away from his duties as president. This is more of an excuse than a reason because it puts the president above the law and the entire premise of our constitutional society is that no one is above the law, and that includes the president of the United States. If the president is alleged to have committed crimes then the person should be indicted.
Taking Senator King's sensibility into account, conversely Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) made no sense at all. For lack of a better rhetorical framing, Senator Paul always talks the talk, but never does he walk the walk. He says that he does in fact hold the president and the administration to account, yet in the face of alleged campaign finance crimes that in this case may have altered the outcome of the election he said that the person should pay a fine. Really? And how much should that fine be? He also said that there is nothing illegal that he knows of about building a hotel in Moscow, but he only gives you part of the equation. Michael Cohen lying to Congress about the complete dynamic of the business, Mr. Paul excuses. It's also alleged that the Trump Organization promised a $50 million penthouse for Vladimir Putin which is a crime - the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. And to cement this point with regard to Rand Paul's squishiness, he said that he has concerns about the president's nominee, William Barr, for Attorney General but when push comes to shove he'll fall in line.
In finding good somewhere, Mr. Paul does say that right things when it comes to our relations to Saudi Arabia and its Crown Prince, Mohammad bin Salman. The United States needs to extricate itself from the civil war in Yemen forthwith. If only the administration wasn't in the pocket of the Saudi prince, the United States could serve as an honest broker of at the very least a cease fire. Unfortunately, the administration doesn't have the meddle for such diplomacy.
Earlier in the week, Mr. Mueller's team filed a heavily-redacted sentencing recommendation with regard to Michael Flynn, in which no jail time was recommended due to his 'substantial assistance.' This really is the canary in the coalmine in causing alarm for the president. Mr. Trump and his legal team have no idea the totality of information Mr. Flynn provided to the special counsel but it certainly spells significant trouble on the horizon. Manafort is going to jail, as he should having lied throughout his cooperative plea deal. Mr. Cohen didn't fully cooperate with law enforcement, raising the speculation that he didn't want to implicate persons that he is fearful of, namely Russian Mafia figures.
But Micheal Flynn's willful and substantive assistance can only spell political and legal jeopardy for Individual-1.
Panel: Kimberly Atkins, The Boston Herald; Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal; Jonah Goldberg, The National Review; Eddie Glaude Jr., Princeton University
One more thing...
2020 Democratic Presidential Candidates... Ms. Atkins was so right on about Elizabeth Warren in that people are getting tired of her and she is increasingly a polarizing figure. She would not win. Beto as presidential candidate, Peggy Noonan was not convinced he could win either. She's onto something there. He'd be ready as a vice-presidential candidate... maybe. Others? We're still not there yet in terms of in-depth discussion, but these two people were specifically mentioned today.
To keep the potential impeachment of President Trump from becoming strictly perceived as political, Special Counsel Robert Mueller should be allowed to finish his investigation first. Seemingly, most Democrats are taking this course so that they can set a legislative agenda first. Impeachment is a political act, and political division is inherent in this act. For the Democrats to proceed with the course of action, there will need to be more information, specifically from Robert Mueller's team.
Given this, Jonah Goldberg's point shouldn't be lost for Republicans who are abdicating their moral position to defend the president on legals terms, and that is the president paid off a porn star and a Playboy playmate to cover up affairs. This is the amoral deal that Republicans have made and any claim to high ground declared by conservatives and evangelicals has now been ceded.
These filings, as Senator Angus King (I-ME) explained it is not a criminal prosecution and the evidence has not be fully presented as of yet for impeachment or prosecution, hence his statement that he's more 'conservative' when considering all this. He's still in a 'wait-and-see' mode, which is sensible. With this in mind, it's said that a sitting president can not be indicted. The reasoning here is that if the president is indicted it will take too much time away from his duties as president. This is more of an excuse than a reason because it puts the president above the law and the entire premise of our constitutional society is that no one is above the law, and that includes the president of the United States. If the president is alleged to have committed crimes then the person should be indicted.
Taking Senator King's sensibility into account, conversely Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) made no sense at all. For lack of a better rhetorical framing, Senator Paul always talks the talk, but never does he walk the walk. He says that he does in fact hold the president and the administration to account, yet in the face of alleged campaign finance crimes that in this case may have altered the outcome of the election he said that the person should pay a fine. Really? And how much should that fine be? He also said that there is nothing illegal that he knows of about building a hotel in Moscow, but he only gives you part of the equation. Michael Cohen lying to Congress about the complete dynamic of the business, Mr. Paul excuses. It's also alleged that the Trump Organization promised a $50 million penthouse for Vladimir Putin which is a crime - the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. And to cement this point with regard to Rand Paul's squishiness, he said that he has concerns about the president's nominee, William Barr, for Attorney General but when push comes to shove he'll fall in line.
In finding good somewhere, Mr. Paul does say that right things when it comes to our relations to Saudi Arabia and its Crown Prince, Mohammad bin Salman. The United States needs to extricate itself from the civil war in Yemen forthwith. If only the administration wasn't in the pocket of the Saudi prince, the United States could serve as an honest broker of at the very least a cease fire. Unfortunately, the administration doesn't have the meddle for such diplomacy.
Earlier in the week, Mr. Mueller's team filed a heavily-redacted sentencing recommendation with regard to Michael Flynn, in which no jail time was recommended due to his 'substantial assistance.' This really is the canary in the coalmine in causing alarm for the president. Mr. Trump and his legal team have no idea the totality of information Mr. Flynn provided to the special counsel but it certainly spells significant trouble on the horizon. Manafort is going to jail, as he should having lied throughout his cooperative plea deal. Mr. Cohen didn't fully cooperate with law enforcement, raising the speculation that he didn't want to implicate persons that he is fearful of, namely Russian Mafia figures.
But Micheal Flynn's willful and substantive assistance can only spell political and legal jeopardy for Individual-1.
Panel: Kimberly Atkins, The Boston Herald; Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal; Jonah Goldberg, The National Review; Eddie Glaude Jr., Princeton University
One more thing...
2020 Democratic Presidential Candidates... Ms. Atkins was so right on about Elizabeth Warren in that people are getting tired of her and she is increasingly a polarizing figure. She would not win. Beto as presidential candidate, Peggy Noonan was not convinced he could win either. She's onto something there. He'd be ready as a vice-presidential candidate... maybe. Others? We're still not there yet in terms of in-depth discussion, but these two people were specifically mentioned today.
Sunday, December 02, 2018
12.2.18: Leverage and Russia - How Time's Have Changed
There's much to be said of George H.W. Bush, 41st president of the
United States, but what should stick out in people's memories and in
history is his steady stewardship of world-changing events, namely the
collapse of the Soviet Union, and the fall of the Berlin Wall. This is
not to mention the restraint President Bush showed during the first Gulf
War when his administration drove Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, but did
not march on Baghdad - the temptation of hubris that his son as the
43rd president gave into.
However, the Bush 43 Administration had leverage over Russia and the capacity to dictate the terms when it came to geopolitical relations and ensured that in the midst of a falling empire, violent conflict did not breakout all of eastern Europe. It was the experience of having been a pilot in WWII, a two-term Congressman, the UN Ambassador, Ambassador to China, Head of the CIA and Vice President that gave George H.W. Bush to see through the global changes with a steady hand. As his former Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney, said on today's program, defense came first for Mr. Bush and peace through strength was an operating principal.
James Baker, Mr. Bush's friend of over 60 years, said that he was the most success one-term president in United States history and perhaps our greatest foreign policy president. An outstanding case can be made for the latter given the above-mentioned challenges, but Mr. Baker also mentioned the ending of wars in Central America and building relations with China despite the Tiananmen Square crackdown on democracy. In this latter instance knowing that military action would be catastrophic, Mr. Bush instead employed harsh sanctions on China.
It's in domestic policy where Mr. Bush had trouble, famously breaking his pledge not to raise taxes, cited on today's "Meet The Press."
"Read my lips..."
Of course, Congressman Newt Gingrich (R-GA) lead the revolt against Mr. Bush in 1992 for this transgression, which cost Mr. Bush a second term. Mr. Gingrich, one of the architect's of today's zero-sum politics would not allow this correct compromise, as Andrea Mitchell described it, to go unpunished. In hindsight, it was the fact that Mr. Bush raised taxes. In fact, President Reagan after the massive tax restructuring in the 1980's, raised taxes realizing that he had gone too far. However, for Mr. Bush, it was the reversal of such a dramatic pledge. It didn't help that on the domestic front, Mr. Bush had one of the most inconsequential Vice Presidents in history, Dan Quayle. (Why haven't we heard from him?)
On foreign policy, there's little doubt that George H.W. Bush was a great president, and he used the new leverage that he had over the former Soviet Union to strike the 1991 START Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) - another major accomplishment.
This brings us to leverage lost... Or leverage switched. Leverage is what Vladimir Putin has seemingly had over President Donald Trump. (Note that Mr. Putin also views the collapse of the Soviet Union that greatest tragedy in Russia's history, and is working to rebuild the empire as we speak.)
This week Michael Cohen, the president's former personal attorney and fixer, admitted that he had lied to Congress and that discussions with the Kremlin about Trump Tower Moscow had continued well into the summer of 2016 at a time when candidate Donald Trump was practically shouting that he had no business deals or discussions with Russia. As Chuck Todd outlined, Mr. Cohen was lying and the president knew that he was lying, which created Kremlin leverage over Mr. Trump. Mr. Todd also reported that the Kremlin has confirmed Mr. Cohen sequence of events and has presented the emails to prove it.
Even conservative writer David French, cited on today's program, wrote that the president had an enormous conflict of interest in running for president of the United States while seeking a business deal with the Kremlin. Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) who will become the chair of the Judiciary Committee stated that the president's days of lying without accountability are coming to an end. Typically, but still unfortunate, Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) said that everyone knew that the president had international business dealings, but brushed aside any questions of concern about the president's lying. He answered with a ridiculous, "There were so many things going on in 2016..." And inexcusably, for North Carolina governor Pat McCrory called this leverage that the Kremlin had over now President Trump 'grassy knoll issues,' referring to the conspiracy theory of the Kennedy assassination. Both men are simply denying reality, and one can't help but think that if the shoe were on the Democratic foot that they would both be calling for impeachment, simply on the optics of all this.
With all this said, Andrea Mitchell did say that doing this kind of business is not illegal, but the fact remains that the American public while considering who to vote for did not know of these business dealings.
Mr. McCrory said that this leverage is a theory. Like the theory of the alternative universe that he lives in? This real leverage that the Kremlin had over Mr. Trump begs the question of another theory. What else do they have on the man?
Panel: Andrea Mitchell, NBC News; Heather McGhee, Senior Fellow at DEMOS; Dan Balz, The Washington Post; Pat McCrory, fmr. governor of North Carolina
However, the Bush 43 Administration had leverage over Russia and the capacity to dictate the terms when it came to geopolitical relations and ensured that in the midst of a falling empire, violent conflict did not breakout all of eastern Europe. It was the experience of having been a pilot in WWII, a two-term Congressman, the UN Ambassador, Ambassador to China, Head of the CIA and Vice President that gave George H.W. Bush to see through the global changes with a steady hand. As his former Secretary of Defense, Dick Cheney, said on today's program, defense came first for Mr. Bush and peace through strength was an operating principal.
James Baker, Mr. Bush's friend of over 60 years, said that he was the most success one-term president in United States history and perhaps our greatest foreign policy president. An outstanding case can be made for the latter given the above-mentioned challenges, but Mr. Baker also mentioned the ending of wars in Central America and building relations with China despite the Tiananmen Square crackdown on democracy. In this latter instance knowing that military action would be catastrophic, Mr. Bush instead employed harsh sanctions on China.
It's in domestic policy where Mr. Bush had trouble, famously breaking his pledge not to raise taxes, cited on today's "Meet The Press."
"Read my lips..."
Of course, Congressman Newt Gingrich (R-GA) lead the revolt against Mr. Bush in 1992 for this transgression, which cost Mr. Bush a second term. Mr. Gingrich, one of the architect's of today's zero-sum politics would not allow this correct compromise, as Andrea Mitchell described it, to go unpunished. In hindsight, it was the fact that Mr. Bush raised taxes. In fact, President Reagan after the massive tax restructuring in the 1980's, raised taxes realizing that he had gone too far. However, for Mr. Bush, it was the reversal of such a dramatic pledge. It didn't help that on the domestic front, Mr. Bush had one of the most inconsequential Vice Presidents in history, Dan Quayle. (Why haven't we heard from him?)
On foreign policy, there's little doubt that George H.W. Bush was a great president, and he used the new leverage that he had over the former Soviet Union to strike the 1991 START Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) - another major accomplishment.
This brings us to leverage lost... Or leverage switched. Leverage is what Vladimir Putin has seemingly had over President Donald Trump. (Note that Mr. Putin also views the collapse of the Soviet Union that greatest tragedy in Russia's history, and is working to rebuild the empire as we speak.)
This week Michael Cohen, the president's former personal attorney and fixer, admitted that he had lied to Congress and that discussions with the Kremlin about Trump Tower Moscow had continued well into the summer of 2016 at a time when candidate Donald Trump was practically shouting that he had no business deals or discussions with Russia. As Chuck Todd outlined, Mr. Cohen was lying and the president knew that he was lying, which created Kremlin leverage over Mr. Trump. Mr. Todd also reported that the Kremlin has confirmed Mr. Cohen sequence of events and has presented the emails to prove it.
Even conservative writer David French, cited on today's program, wrote that the president had an enormous conflict of interest in running for president of the United States while seeking a business deal with the Kremlin. Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) who will become the chair of the Judiciary Committee stated that the president's days of lying without accountability are coming to an end. Typically, but still unfortunate, Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) said that everyone knew that the president had international business dealings, but brushed aside any questions of concern about the president's lying. He answered with a ridiculous, "There were so many things going on in 2016..." And inexcusably, for North Carolina governor Pat McCrory called this leverage that the Kremlin had over now President Trump 'grassy knoll issues,' referring to the conspiracy theory of the Kennedy assassination. Both men are simply denying reality, and one can't help but think that if the shoe were on the Democratic foot that they would both be calling for impeachment, simply on the optics of all this.
With all this said, Andrea Mitchell did say that doing this kind of business is not illegal, but the fact remains that the American public while considering who to vote for did not know of these business dealings.
Mr. McCrory said that this leverage is a theory. Like the theory of the alternative universe that he lives in? This real leverage that the Kremlin had over Mr. Trump begs the question of another theory. What else do they have on the man?
Panel: Andrea Mitchell, NBC News; Heather McGhee, Senior Fellow at DEMOS; Dan Balz, The Washington Post; Pat McCrory, fmr. governor of North Carolina
Sunday, November 25, 2018
11.25.18: Donald Trump Does Anything to Avoid The Tough Choices
Today's panel had a spirited debate with regard to Saudi Arabia and how the United States should approach its relationship with the kingdom, which certainly needs to change. There's one thing that must be taken off the table at the outset:
President Trump doesn't care that the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman ordered the murder of Jamal Khoshoggi.
That's not stated as an ad hominem attack per se as much as he sees it as an inconvenience in the transactional relationship that the United States has with that country. Embedded with that transactions are Mr. Trump's personal interests, namely the massive amounts of real estate that the Saudis have purchased from him personally, which disincline him from any serious accountability.
However, with that in mind, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) is absolutely correct that the United States should not be engaging in unconstitutional support of a civil war in Yemen. The United States needs to disengage from that war and tell the Saudis that they are on their own if they want to continue prosecuting that war. (There was a time that the United States would have the capacity to bring people to the table to at least achieve a cease-fire, but those days are not today.) Congress, as Mr. Lee stated, needs to step up and end U.S. involvement.
Mr. Lee also did state that he disagrees with the president in terms of the CIA's assessment of the crown prince's involvement - he sides with U.S. intelligence. To that, Chuck Todd then asked what Mr. Lee's 'breaking point' would be with this president who continues to attack the institutions of this country, to which the Utah senator stated a violation of the Constitution. That breaking point has been reached already. If it's clear to this column and one of public record that the president has taken money for his businesses from the Saudi government that violates the emoluments clause of the Constitution. The defense there can be that there isn't definitive proof because we haven't seen the president's tax returns.
Emoluments will be something that the Congress will be investigating as outlined by Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), soon to be chairman of the House oversight committee. This is one of the top orders of Congressional business as the president has disputed his own intelligence community with regard to not only Saudi Arabia but also with regard to Russia, two countries that the president presumably has significant financial ties. If you read Craig Unger's impeccably researched House of Trump, House of Putin, there is little doubt for the latter.
It is true what Mr. Cummings said today with regard to Republicans particularly in the House aiding and abetting this president in terms of protecting him from oversight. A must-needed check has been delivered by the American electorate in the form of a Democratically-controlled House. It is for this very reason that President Trump continues his attacks on American institutions such as the judiciary, the intelligence community and the election system to name a few. The president hopes that the continued attacks will throw into doubt any conclusions that are reached that negatively impact him personally, of which many are coming.
However, Mr. Cummings did say that he wants to hold the president accountable to himself and the promises he made about prescription drug prices and infrastructure - two issues that need to be addressed. The congressman said that the Democratically elected Congress would be able to provide oversight while not taking it's eye off the ball with regard to policies that everyday Americans face, namely healthcare. It's a good first step to hear this as Congressional Republicans during the Obama Administration wanted to make you believe that the endless Benghazi hearings were important American policy instead of a complete waste of time.
Moving on, aside from not being about personal gain or preservation, the presidency of the United States is not one of cynicism.
As The New York Times Helene Cooper said, it's the ultimate in cynicism that the Trump administration issued its climate report on Black Friday so that news coverage would be a light as possible. With that, the climate discussion has been long overdue on 'Meet The Press.' With all due respect to Danielle Pletka who said that we've had the coldest years these past two in the last twenty (or whatever she said exactly) speaks to her little understanding of climate change. As the earth's poles become warmer, which they are dramatically, temperatures will shift to other parts of the world in the short term (relatively speaking) but eventually all parts will continue to warm. What we're seeing right now are extremes in whether because of changing climates in other parts of the world. Ms. Pletka said she's not a scientist and neither is the writer of this column but it shouldn't be used as an excuse not to listen to the scientific professionals that know something about this - like the 13 federal agencies the conducted the study.
Doris Kearns Goodwin explained that with regard to climate change, there isn't leadership on this issue on any level, and Elise Jordan reinforced the point saying that there is also no political will to make the tough choices. Tough choices are things that Donald Trump anything to avoid.
Panel: Doris Kearns Goodwin, presidential historian; Helene Cooper, The New York Times; Danielle Pletka, American Enterprise Institute; Elise Jordan, MSNBC contributor
President Trump doesn't care that the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman ordered the murder of Jamal Khoshoggi.
That's not stated as an ad hominem attack per se as much as he sees it as an inconvenience in the transactional relationship that the United States has with that country. Embedded with that transactions are Mr. Trump's personal interests, namely the massive amounts of real estate that the Saudis have purchased from him personally, which disincline him from any serious accountability.
However, with that in mind, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) is absolutely correct that the United States should not be engaging in unconstitutional support of a civil war in Yemen. The United States needs to disengage from that war and tell the Saudis that they are on their own if they want to continue prosecuting that war. (There was a time that the United States would have the capacity to bring people to the table to at least achieve a cease-fire, but those days are not today.) Congress, as Mr. Lee stated, needs to step up and end U.S. involvement.
Mr. Lee also did state that he disagrees with the president in terms of the CIA's assessment of the crown prince's involvement - he sides with U.S. intelligence. To that, Chuck Todd then asked what Mr. Lee's 'breaking point' would be with this president who continues to attack the institutions of this country, to which the Utah senator stated a violation of the Constitution. That breaking point has been reached already. If it's clear to this column and one of public record that the president has taken money for his businesses from the Saudi government that violates the emoluments clause of the Constitution. The defense there can be that there isn't definitive proof because we haven't seen the president's tax returns.
Emoluments will be something that the Congress will be investigating as outlined by Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), soon to be chairman of the House oversight committee. This is one of the top orders of Congressional business as the president has disputed his own intelligence community with regard to not only Saudi Arabia but also with regard to Russia, two countries that the president presumably has significant financial ties. If you read Craig Unger's impeccably researched House of Trump, House of Putin, there is little doubt for the latter.
It is true what Mr. Cummings said today with regard to Republicans particularly in the House aiding and abetting this president in terms of protecting him from oversight. A must-needed check has been delivered by the American electorate in the form of a Democratically-controlled House. It is for this very reason that President Trump continues his attacks on American institutions such as the judiciary, the intelligence community and the election system to name a few. The president hopes that the continued attacks will throw into doubt any conclusions that are reached that negatively impact him personally, of which many are coming.
However, Mr. Cummings did say that he wants to hold the president accountable to himself and the promises he made about prescription drug prices and infrastructure - two issues that need to be addressed. The congressman said that the Democratically elected Congress would be able to provide oversight while not taking it's eye off the ball with regard to policies that everyday Americans face, namely healthcare. It's a good first step to hear this as Congressional Republicans during the Obama Administration wanted to make you believe that the endless Benghazi hearings were important American policy instead of a complete waste of time.
Moving on, aside from not being about personal gain or preservation, the presidency of the United States is not one of cynicism.
As The New York Times Helene Cooper said, it's the ultimate in cynicism that the Trump administration issued its climate report on Black Friday so that news coverage would be a light as possible. With that, the climate discussion has been long overdue on 'Meet The Press.' With all due respect to Danielle Pletka who said that we've had the coldest years these past two in the last twenty (or whatever she said exactly) speaks to her little understanding of climate change. As the earth's poles become warmer, which they are dramatically, temperatures will shift to other parts of the world in the short term (relatively speaking) but eventually all parts will continue to warm. What we're seeing right now are extremes in whether because of changing climates in other parts of the world. Ms. Pletka said she's not a scientist and neither is the writer of this column but it shouldn't be used as an excuse not to listen to the scientific professionals that know something about this - like the 13 federal agencies the conducted the study.
Doris Kearns Goodwin explained that with regard to climate change, there isn't leadership on this issue on any level, and Elise Jordan reinforced the point saying that there is also no political will to make the tough choices. Tough choices are things that Donald Trump anything to avoid.
Panel: Doris Kearns Goodwin, presidential historian; Helene Cooper, The New York Times; Danielle Pletka, American Enterprise Institute; Elise Jordan, MSNBC contributor
Sunday, November 18, 2018
11.18.18: Vanquishing the Personal and Party Over Country
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) certainly did have his caffeine this morning. Senator Graham was unequivocal in his stance on matters of policy foreign and domestic.
First, with regard to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, Mr. Graham said he was confident that the probe will not be shut down and that most everyone on the Hill believes that Mr. Mueller and his team should be allowed to do his job. Democrats in the Senate, lead by Chuck Schumer, are insisting that legislation protecting the probe should be enacted. In addition, outgoing Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) will refuse to vote on anymore of President Trump's judicial nominations unless such legislation is approved. The constitutionality of such legislation is in question.
The National Review's Rich Lowry made two good points on this that circle round to Senator Graham's confidence. One, he agrees with that said legislation would be unconstitutional due to the fact that Congress can not control Executive Branch hires, of which Mr. Mueller is one. That may disheartening to Democrats, however, he also made the point that the proverbial ship has sailed on firing the Special Counsel because if that happens, the first thing that the new chairman of the judiciary committee come January, presumably Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), will do is call Mr. Mueller in front of Congress and tell everything he knows - in front of the American people, the more significant point in this discussion hence Mr. Graham's confidence. Additionally, Democrats forcing a government shutdown because of the exclusion of such legislation would spend a damaging amount of political capital and ultimately would not go over well.
However, there's one more aspect to this that needs to be touched on, which is Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell's refusal to bring said legislation to the Senate floor for a vote. Mr. McConell also doesn't think the legislation is constitutional but say if it were. He still wouldn't bring it to the floor of the Senate and the reason is that if it were to pass, it would send a message that the Republican-control body officially sanctions the probe and thus its findings. When those findings become public and if there is clear wrong-doing on the part of the president the Democratically-controlled House would vote to impeach. The Senate having given sanction to the Mueller probe, would then have to act accordingly. One thing is for sure and that's that Senate McConnell always puts party over country so he's not inclined to give Democrats any perceived leverage.
The president is lashing out at the Mueller investigation because, frankly, he's freaking out because the special counsel's questions were literally put right in front of him and he realized that he's lost his protectors in the House.
With regard the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and CIA's determination that Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman sanctioned the murder, Senator Graham clearly stated his thoughts on the matter, essentially agreeing with the CIA's assessment and gave a flat 'no' when it came to inviting the Kingdom's US ambassador back who also happens to be related to the crown prince. He also explained that the Senate was planning to invoke the Magnitsky Act on Saudi officials. In terms of the Senate that U.S.-Saudi relationship is deeply fractured with Senator Graham calling the crown prince 'irrational' and 'unhinged.'
The problem of taking appropriate steps to sanction Saudi Arabia isn't with Congress, but with this transactional administration. In addition to Jared Kushner's close relationship with the crown prince, there's the perception that the president is making decisions on this, or in this case not making decisions, based on his personal financial relationship with the Saudis and their buying of Trump real estate. In this instance it seems quite clear that the president has violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution, but we can not know for sure until the president's tax returns are subpoenaed by Congress. Hallie Jackson explained that the administration keeps putting this on the back burner, pushing farther and farther back in the hopes that it will go away, but that's the rub, things like this do not simply go away.
"The problem is with the Republicans, not the Democrats," stated Senator Graham on the topic of prison reform, something that is much needed and that has wide bipartisan support in Congress. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) said that it was his top priority in the lame duck session. It even has the support of the president. The reason that Mr. Graham made that statement is because some Republican senators such as Tom Cotton (R-AR) who still believe in minimum sentencing and 'three strikes and you're out' for non-violent offenses. Mr. Graham stated that the bill should be brought to the floor where Senator Cotton would be voted down. The rub - the question remains as to whether Mitch McConnell will bring it to the floor for a vote.
Now that the midterms are over and there's divided government, or for the sake of this point, more balanced government, the American people want to see the parties working in a more bipartisan fashion. Congress's bipartisan outrage with regard to Saudi Arabia and its overwhelming agreement on criminal justice reform are a good start. The problem is that aforementioned individuals are putting the personal and party over country.
Panel: Hallie Jackson, NBC; Yamiche Alcindor, PBS; Rich Lowry, The National Review; John Harwood, CNBC
One more thing...
In terms of Nancy Pelosi being the next Speaker of the House, this column is conflicted. Yes, the Democrats need new leadership to come forward but they also need Nancy Pelosi. What the Democrats should do is have some one new in a leadership role and have Ms. Pelosi groom that person. Given the era of Donald Trump, the Democrats right now need some one who is savvy, who can mobilize others, who can go toe to toe with the Republicans and who can fund raise. Given that, the Democrats should get all they can out of Nancy Pelosi because it's true - Republicans demonize her because there is no Democrat who is a more effective politician.
First, with regard to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, Mr. Graham said he was confident that the probe will not be shut down and that most everyone on the Hill believes that Mr. Mueller and his team should be allowed to do his job. Democrats in the Senate, lead by Chuck Schumer, are insisting that legislation protecting the probe should be enacted. In addition, outgoing Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) will refuse to vote on anymore of President Trump's judicial nominations unless such legislation is approved. The constitutionality of such legislation is in question.
The National Review's Rich Lowry made two good points on this that circle round to Senator Graham's confidence. One, he agrees with that said legislation would be unconstitutional due to the fact that Congress can not control Executive Branch hires, of which Mr. Mueller is one. That may disheartening to Democrats, however, he also made the point that the proverbial ship has sailed on firing the Special Counsel because if that happens, the first thing that the new chairman of the judiciary committee come January, presumably Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), will do is call Mr. Mueller in front of Congress and tell everything he knows - in front of the American people, the more significant point in this discussion hence Mr. Graham's confidence. Additionally, Democrats forcing a government shutdown because of the exclusion of such legislation would spend a damaging amount of political capital and ultimately would not go over well.
However, there's one more aspect to this that needs to be touched on, which is Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell's refusal to bring said legislation to the Senate floor for a vote. Mr. McConell also doesn't think the legislation is constitutional but say if it were. He still wouldn't bring it to the floor of the Senate and the reason is that if it were to pass, it would send a message that the Republican-control body officially sanctions the probe and thus its findings. When those findings become public and if there is clear wrong-doing on the part of the president the Democratically-controlled House would vote to impeach. The Senate having given sanction to the Mueller probe, would then have to act accordingly. One thing is for sure and that's that Senate McConnell always puts party over country so he's not inclined to give Democrats any perceived leverage.
The president is lashing out at the Mueller investigation because, frankly, he's freaking out because the special counsel's questions were literally put right in front of him and he realized that he's lost his protectors in the House.
With regard the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and CIA's determination that Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman sanctioned the murder, Senator Graham clearly stated his thoughts on the matter, essentially agreeing with the CIA's assessment and gave a flat 'no' when it came to inviting the Kingdom's US ambassador back who also happens to be related to the crown prince. He also explained that the Senate was planning to invoke the Magnitsky Act on Saudi officials. In terms of the Senate that U.S.-Saudi relationship is deeply fractured with Senator Graham calling the crown prince 'irrational' and 'unhinged.'
The problem of taking appropriate steps to sanction Saudi Arabia isn't with Congress, but with this transactional administration. In addition to Jared Kushner's close relationship with the crown prince, there's the perception that the president is making decisions on this, or in this case not making decisions, based on his personal financial relationship with the Saudis and their buying of Trump real estate. In this instance it seems quite clear that the president has violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution, but we can not know for sure until the president's tax returns are subpoenaed by Congress. Hallie Jackson explained that the administration keeps putting this on the back burner, pushing farther and farther back in the hopes that it will go away, but that's the rub, things like this do not simply go away.
"The problem is with the Republicans, not the Democrats," stated Senator Graham on the topic of prison reform, something that is much needed and that has wide bipartisan support in Congress. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) said that it was his top priority in the lame duck session. It even has the support of the president. The reason that Mr. Graham made that statement is because some Republican senators such as Tom Cotton (R-AR) who still believe in minimum sentencing and 'three strikes and you're out' for non-violent offenses. Mr. Graham stated that the bill should be brought to the floor where Senator Cotton would be voted down. The rub - the question remains as to whether Mitch McConnell will bring it to the floor for a vote.
Now that the midterms are over and there's divided government, or for the sake of this point, more balanced government, the American people want to see the parties working in a more bipartisan fashion. Congress's bipartisan outrage with regard to Saudi Arabia and its overwhelming agreement on criminal justice reform are a good start. The problem is that aforementioned individuals are putting the personal and party over country.
Panel: Hallie Jackson, NBC; Yamiche Alcindor, PBS; Rich Lowry, The National Review; John Harwood, CNBC
One more thing...
In terms of Nancy Pelosi being the next Speaker of the House, this column is conflicted. Yes, the Democrats need new leadership to come forward but they also need Nancy Pelosi. What the Democrats should do is have some one new in a leadership role and have Ms. Pelosi groom that person. Given the era of Donald Trump, the Democrats right now need some one who is savvy, who can mobilize others, who can go toe to toe with the Republicans and who can fund raise. Given that, the Democrats should get all they can out of Nancy Pelosi because it's true - Republicans demonize her because there is no Democrat who is a more effective politician.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)