5.5.19: Dems... Follow Your Leader

Suffice to say that the Democrats are divided on whether they should impeach the president or not. However, right at the top of this column there is some advice to be had - follow your leader. Nancy Pelosi, as the panel acknowledged, understands this president and the dynamic better than everyone. Impeachment shouldn't be off the table, as she said, but she also knows that the Senate will never vote for removing Donald Trump.

Another piece of advice for the Democrats would be more in the vain of Frank Lunz and that would be to stop saying that the Democrats should keep investigating. What they should say is that they will continue with 'rigorous oversight.' Use the word 'oversight' in place of 'investigation' and they'll keep opinion on their side. In this hyper-sensitive political climate, oversight is something the House must do whereas investigations sound politically motivated. As Eddie Glaude Jr. pointed out, Congress has an obligation to perform oversight.

The Mueller report didn't work out exactly how Democrats had hoped. As Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) so eloquently put it, they have a hair on their biscuit. However, there is little doubt that that hair has fallen out of Donald Trump's head, which is more like a wig throw over an entire breakfast. Part of that hairpiece is the Attorney General of the United States, William Barr who we've come to find out did indeed lie to Congress and then defied a subpoena to turn over the unredacted Mueller Report to congressional leaders and to appear in front of the Judiciary Committee. It's hypocritical of Mr. Kennedy to say that the Democratically-controlled House isn't acting completely in good faith, given what we had to endure when Republicans controlled it and had 6 years of hearings on Benghazi. Even if he were correct in saying that some of the House requests are politically motivated, that's just too bad. Republicans have no qualms about that when the situations are reversed. For Kristen Soltis Anderson to say that the Democrats are upset that William Barr gave Mr. Mueller's report a 'C,' not only trivializes the reports findings but put it in a juvenile context that questions the validity of her political commentary as a whole.

As for Mr. Barr, he had a decision as to whether or not to be the top law enforcement officer of the United States or Mr. Trump's personal attorney, and he chose the latter. He defied a subpoena to appear before congress, something that every other citizen of this country is compelled to do under the law and that he lied to the body, he should resign. That call shouldn't be controversial. However, he will not and impeaching anyone from the administration, let alone the president, will never happen and one need to look no further than Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) for the example. He is someone who you just see doesn't care about anything anymore except winning at the expense of Democrats, the health of the country be damned in the process. (But we digress.)

More grievously, and frankly worrying, is that the Administration is doing nothing in terms of Russian meddling in our elections. Mr. Trump's interactions with Vladimir Putin have been disgraceful inasmuch as they have not put the interests of United States security first. He didn't discuss meddling with the Russian president this week though they continue to do it. However, Mr. Kennedy said to today that the Russians are clever and they don't just go into your office and say we're Russians. Really? Hmmmm… That was about the dumbest thing to say as you can imagine. It's been talked about somewhere... about a meeting that the Trump campaign set up in the offices of the Trump Tower with individuals who they knew to be Russian. It's simply inexcusable to use such an example as that. Mr. Kennedy also added that the dispute between the House of Representatives and the White House is dangerous for the stability of our democratic institutions, and they should negotiate. This column agrees that it is a dangerous time and Mr. Barr has presented Congress with a Constitutional crisis (a politically perilous time Gerrald Seib from the Wall Street Journal called it), however since when do we negotiate the law?

Barack Obama had many detractors on both sides of the aisle when it came to foreign policy, but Donald Trump is on an incompetency scale all his own. Mr. Putin leads our president around by the nose it seems, and acts with impunity in defying the administration's foreign policy. Yet, Mr. Trump wants to recast the United States relationship with Russia. With regard to Venezuela, Putin backed Maduro telling the dictator not to step down as Russia has his back. Mr. Putin also met with North Korean dictator Kim Jung Un earlier this week and now Kim is firing off more missiles. Yet, Mr. Kennedy says that we need to keep talking to Kim.

Politico's Eliana Johnson made the good point that Mr. Trump welcomes impeachment to create the foil to help him in his reelection bid. Don't give it to him. Mr. Trump likes to play victim while bullying his way around the law. It's presidential harassment he says of the oversight. To that, the Democrats should stay in a presidential harassing kind of mood and continue pressing for answers.


Panel: Kristen Soltis Anderson, the Washington Examiner; Gerrald Seib, the Wall Street Journal; Eliana Johnson, Politico; Eddie Glaude Jr., Princeton University

One more thing...
Did you ever notice that when you see photos and videos of Kim Jung Un with his people in North Korea, he's the only one overweight? Just saying...

4.28.19: We're Getting Slimed by Donald Trump

First, this column would like to take a moment to recognize the tragedy in San Diego of another shooting at a synagogue where one person died and three others injured. Their families and the community will forever be affected, for that our deepest sympathies. We should also recognize that too many communities in this country are feeling similar affects of sadness and are worn to the bone from the frustration that our politicians refuse to do anything about it.

A moment...

In the post-Mueller report world that we now live in, the two numbers of note are the 56 percent of the American people believe impeachment proceedings of the president should not happen, but that 58 percent of Americans believe that the president lied about his actions, especially when it comes to obstruction with regard to the investigation.

So what does this tell us? It tells us, first, that in this polarized political climate, impeachment (a political act) will not go through for various reasons. If you're a political sycophant and hack like Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) then you believe that the entire investigation was a witch hunt. However, maybe you believe that the president has committed impeachable offenses but know that an impeachment trial in the Senate will never happen. Robert Costa explained today that through his sources in the Senate there is zero Republican support for an impeachment hearing or trial. In fact, given that it's Trump's Republican party, that they may turn the tables an start investigating the investigators.

Mr. Johnson said he wouldn't have used the word 'scum' to describe law enforcement as the president did, but that he understands his frustration.  He also said that he's concerned with Russian interference but that we shouldn't blow things out of proportion, and explained that the Department of Homeland Security is doing a pretty good job in handling this.  Sorry, if we don't feel reassured Senator Johnson, but to say they're doing a 'pretty good' job kind of sucks.

The fact is that there were 140 contacts between Trump campaign officials and his transition team and never once did anyone report this to the FBI. Now the President of the United States calls senior officials of his justice department and the premier law enforcement agency in the world 'scum.'

As referred to on the program today, here is the clip of Lindsey O. Graham on the Senate floor in 1999 taking about Bill Clinton, in which he says that impeachment is not about punishment but cleansing the office.



As Helene Cooper explained, this is why people are so disgusted with politics because of things like this - that Senator Graham displays brazen and admitted hypocrisy simply to retain power and be reelected. Those are the reasons, plain and simple.  Senator Graham, like Senator Johnson, has forfeited all principle.

Andrea Mitchell, filling in for Chuck Todd this week, asked Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) about the president's stonewalling and his refusal on letting current or fmr. administration officials testify in front of Congress, to which she answered that that is what the subpoena is for. Most prominently, one said current official Attorney General William Barr has not agreed to a hearing with the House after he testifies to the Senate this week. Mr. Barr has a lot to answer for, especially since he is not at all acting like the top law enforcement official for the American people but solely for Mr. Trump. Ms. Klobuchar mentioned that it not only about the Mueller Report though she did note his conflicting answers about obstruction and what constitutes it, but also about repealing the ACA and the justice department's support for a lawsuit that has the potential of taking away the protections Americans now have about being denied insurance based on a preexisting conditions.

When the president speaks of getting rid of the scum in our government what he's really saying is that he's trying to get rid of any individual, like a career law enforcement official like Sally Yates, unwilling to blindly protect him or do his bidding unequivocally.

Talk about slimy.


Panel: Peggy Noonan, the Wall Street Journal; Helene Cooper, The New York Times; Robert Costa, The Washington Post; Carlos Curbelo, fmr. Congressman from Florida

4.21.19: Because of The Attorney General's Dereliction of Duty, We're Left With Lawful But Awful

As Amy Walter pointed out, it is definitely worth reading the Mueller report no matter what side of the aisle you're on as there is something there for everyone. You can read it here.

On the one hand in the first half of the report, it outlines how the president did not collude with Russia. On the other in the second half, it shows a president rooted in obstructing justice at any cost. Now, there are qualifiers and context that are attached to those rudimentary assessments but if you're looking for Rudy Giuliani to provide any cogent explanation, you're looking in the wrong place.

Mr. Giuliani, with every television appearance, embarrasses himself further and today was no exception. The prime observation from the interview with Chuck Todd is that Mr. Giuliani is arguing that it's OK to use information provided by a foreign adversary against your opponent in a campaign, trying to normalize it. As a general proposition, it's difficult to make sense of all of Mr. Giuliani's gibberish because he's in the position of being Mr. Trump's defense attorney, but gives examples of when he was a prosecutor. First, he said that the special counsel never took the position of Mr. Trump being innocent, adding the Mr. Mueller is incapable of this. However, he assumed that FBI was politically motivated against Mr. Trump without any evidence for that assertion. Not to mention that fact that when Mr. Giuliani was the District Attorney of New York and his advocacy for stop and frisk, it's safe to say that he did not believe in people being innocent even if they weren't committing a crime. Also, when Hillary Clinton was questioned by the FBI and said some form of "I don't remember" thirty-seven times, Mr. Giuliani said that since that was the case, she must be hiding something. When Chuck Todd confronted him with the fact that on Mr. Trump's written answers, he said "I don't recall" over thirty times. As a matter of fact, Mr. Giuliani said that he couldn't remember how many times the phrase was used in his written answers. Also, he added that he wouldn't advise his client to volunteer any extra information.

When asked why didn't Donald Trump Jr. report to the FBI that he was offered dirt on a political opponent by Russians (a foreign adversary), Mr. Giuliani said that it was a set up and that people had the right to know to this information. If it actually were a set up, and Don Jr. had the idea that it was a set up then he should have spoken to the FBI.

Rudy Giuliani is to the say the least being hypocritical on a farcical scale, and to that he can never again be called "America's Mayor." Frankly, what is Rudy smoking that he can say with a straight face that he believes that Mr. Trump is truthful. Jonah Goldberg called his answers completely nonsensical and for that he has thoroughly disgraced himself.

At the top of Jerrold Nadler's (D-NY) interview, the congressman, Chair of the Judiciary Committee, laughed at the mention of Mr. Giuliani's interview because he has long known of Rudy's ramblings.

We like to say in this country that no one is above the law. However, Attorney General William Barr seems that that is not the case and that the president is immune from the law. On this point, Mr. Nadler flatly stated that the Attorney General is wrong. And to that end, Mr. Nadler's committee has subpoenaed the full Mueller including the portions that have been redacted. On top of that, Mr. Nadler is calling William Barr, Robert Mueller and former White House Don McGahn to testify.

When asked straight up by Mr. Todd whether what is outlined in the Mueller Report is cause for impeaching the president, Mr. Nadler paused for a moment and then said, "Yeah, I do." Then he said that he's going to see where the evidence leads, but it seems that minds are already made up for Democrats.

In response to a clip of Senator Kamela Harris saying that she wanted to hear from Robert Mueller before making a decision on impeachment, Joshua Johnson rhetorically asked "What game are you playing?" When it comes to impeachment, it's a political action and that's the game that the Democrats are playing, a political one. As for the Administration, Hallie Jackson said that from her reporting the White House wants to turn the page, close the case, and muddy the waters. Democrats shouldn't allow that to happen.

On impeachment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is right that impeachment is not worth it because politically it wouldn't be beneficial for the Democrats to proceed in that direction, as it could backfire on them in 2020. Not to mention that Republicans in the Senate would never take up impeachment. - Would. Never. Happen. Amy Walter explained that the Democrats are looking for that 'aha' moment, the smoking gun, but in agreement with her, they have to give up on that when it comes to the Mueller Report.

What the report clearly shows is that this Administration requires strict oversight and that's what the Democrats need to provide. Does it seem that the president obstructed justice? He certainly wanted to. President Trump has widened the divisions in this country, only professes to want to govern part of it and has made us a laughing stock internationally.

The Attorney General is the one who should be impeached for committing acts that are in the interest of the president solely, and not the American people.

So what we're left with is what Joshua Johnson called, "lawful but awful."


Panel: Hallie Jackson, NBC; Amy Walter, the Cook Political Report; Joshua Johnson, NPR; Jonah Goldberg, the National Review

One more thing...
Joe Biden is finally putting up and will announce he's in the race.

And it's worth noting what Chuck Todd said at the very end of the program - there are still 12 unknown cases going on as we speak... Some of which will probably hit right around election time (our words).

4.14.19: No Semantic Debate - Crisis on the Border, Crisis in Leadership

Let's put this out there at the top - what's happening at the United States' southern border is a crisis. We're not going to debate semantics, however, it's a crisis that has been accentuated and exacerbated sharply by the president. Kasie Hunt explained that the president when faced with either policy or politics, Mr. Trump opts for the latter, meaning he is less interested in fixing problems than in using them to his political advantage. This is something that David Brooks called performative narcissism.

This brings us to Chuck Todd's interview with White House advisor Kellyanne Conway in which he challenged her on the fact that she was presenting proposals to fix immigration that the president is, frankly, loathe to utter. Closing the border, getting rid of judges and cutting off aid to Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala are not policy prescriptions that will solve the problem, but only serve to bolster the president in the eyes of his political base. If anything, on all three of the aforementioned rhetorical pieces, if you want to solve the problem, you need to go in the opposite direction. Keep the border open, hire more judges and hearing officers as Governor Jay Inslee (D-WA) suggested and provide more resources to the Northern Triangle countries. On the last of which, not only should the U.S. up its aid to those countries but make it conditional on allowing more U.S. advisors in country to help combat the problem.

Ms. Conway, denied by Mr. Todd her usual verbal filibustering by being forced to stay on topic, sounded as if the administration wants to work with Democrats but the fact is that the president has no inclination to do so. Why? Because the president needs the issue of immigration for the 2020 election so that he can continue charging up his base support.

Conversely, Mr. Todd put forth the notion that Democrats in Congress don't know where their base is on immigration so we'll try to provide an answer here. First, let's just say that Democrats are not for open borders, but also they are not for the inhumane treatment of people at the southern border. The zero-tolerance policy that the administration put in place caused family separations, permanently traumatizing thousands of children. It makes more sense to put more administrative resources on the border to speed up the hearing backlog, create a path to citizenship for dreamers devoid of political quid pro quo and employ better technologies along the border to combat illegal crossings and drugs from flowing in. Obviously, bipartisan immigration reform is needed and the Gang of Eight in the Senate did come up with it, but the Republicans in the House had killed it so now we have to start all over when in reality that bill should be dusted off and put on the table again. Having no illusions, the president would indeed veto it. It's difficult not to agree with Eugene Robinson generally and he explained that the United States is the wealthiest most powerful nation in the world so we do have the resources and we should be able to fix this. However, again, the president has no interest in fixing the problem. Instead, he wants to weaponize, to use Mr. Inslee's term, the situation and punish Democrats by shipping illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities, which by the way is illegal.

Suffice to say that we agree with Danielle Pletka's use of the word 'crisis' when it comes to the southern border, but we also agree with her use of the word when it comes to the president and what she sees at a turning point this week inasmuch as the widening chasm between the president's rhetoric/ actions and proper governance. She explained that the president's staff is struggling to keep my with Mr. Trump's off-the-cuff proposals that have no constitutional basis and a proper response to them. She is having a difficult time seeing how this can last for another year and a half.

But when you consider that Mr. Trump has indeed found his Roy Cohn, a former mob lawyer, in the person of William Barr, well then he's going to say and do whatever he wants. Mr. Barr in his so far in his second stint as Attorney General has protected Mr. Trump at every turn, Kasie Hunt's assessment that the Democrats' trust in him is basically nil is an easy call. Mr. Barr chooses his words carefully so when he said that he thought there was 'spying' on the Trump campaign by his own Justice Department, he knew Mr. Trump would use that to attack his critics. Mr. Barr, it seems right now, will give cover to Mr. Trump no matter what he does and says.


Panel: Kasie Hunt, NBC; Danielle Pletka, American Enterprise Institute; Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post; David Brooks, The New York Times

One more thing...
The president this week said that 'I know nothing about Wikileaks, it's not my thing... It's not my deal in life." Really? Talk about BS... He mentioned Wikileaks over 150 times on the campaign, holding up papers on campaign stops. Exasperating...

4.7.19: Forgiveness with Accountability

Chuck Todd brought up a quote from Stacy Abrams, past Democratic gubernatorial candidate in the state of Georgia, in which she said that there must be forgiveness with accountability.  In the case, of former vice-president Joe Biden it has been a matter of debate as to whether this has been the case. These episodes of awkward, unwelcomed touching over the years are indeed forgivable, but has Mr. Biden been held sufficiently to account? That he joked about it in a speech on Friday doesn't bode well for the accountability part of the equation.

While we're on this, Bernie Sanders' response on accusations from his staff that there sexual harassment on his 2016 campaign were replayed on the program, and in a way, this column finds his explanation worse. Mr. Sanders said that he was a 'little bit busy' at the time campaigning all across the country, which in a way says that he's not paying close enough attention to his staff to realize this is going on. That's abdicating accountability.

With that said, it brings us to the question posed by Mr. Todd, does Joe Biden, a person who has built up his political credentials in the 20th century able to govern effectively in the 21st century? Oh, how badly do Democrats want Mr. Trump out of the White House...

As we said last week, Mr. Biden needs to make his decision sooner rather than later on whether he is running or not. And if he is indeed running, his electability factor would indeed go down if he were to pledge a single term.

Though he is not officially in the race as of yet, Mayor Pete Buttigieg (D-IN) is indeed the complete polar opposite of the current president. Mayor Pete's, as he is known, biggest hurdle in the success of his candidacy is his age, 37, not the fact that he is gay. However, impressive beyond expectation is something you can not deny. He is a religious progressive from a Midwestern state who is a Rhodes scholar, Iraq-Afghanistan war veteran who has run a municipality. In terms of experience, he may be the most well-rounded candidate in the race. Hugh Hewitt said as a Republican he's worried about Mayor Pete's candidacy because of all of the outlined above, especially his military service experience.

One of the key things he said today should resonate deeply and that is that good politics is not based on the word 'again.' Despite Mr. Trump's campaign mantra of "Make America Great Again," there is no going backward. This column would postulate that anyone who thinks there is some way to move backward is deluding him or herself and isn't basing their vote in reality. It's understandable that people would be uncomfortable with the pace in which we move forward, but forward is the direction in which we must constantly move.

Mayor Pete explained that it is frustrating and hypocritical that Christian conservatives are blindly backing Mr. Trump, given the fact that he paid hush money to an adult film actress to cover up an affair, but as Mr. Hewitt pointed out, they've gotten the conservative judges on the bench that they have wanted. This is a Faustian bargain that all Republicans have made with Mr. Trump.

But is the price too high?

Mr. Trump since taking the oath of office has been tearing the country apart to what may be irreparable depths. No where is this more evident than with the issue of immigration. Mr. Trump in his rhetoric wants to completely close this country off from the rest of the world. Our distinct humaneness is what makes America the country that it always has been, what Ronald Reagan called a 'shining city on a hill.' It is the largess of heart that Mr. Trump has not desire to pump more blood into. Whether crisis or not at the border, it makes no sense whatsoever that the United States of America with all its resources and heart cannot deal with this issue effectively and humanely all at once. In a nation of immigrants, voluntary and involuntary, this issue defines the humanity that we are as a nation.

So yes, as Heather McGhee pointed out, it's disheartening to hear Senator Mitt Romney (R-UT), who has legitimately questioned the president's decisions, capitulate on the Dream Act, and that an immigration system based on criminalization has no place. As Mr. Buttigieg said, a policy of tearing families apart and denying people a path to citizenship cannot stand.

The president for his part goes to great pains to make sure he doesn't forgive or is held to account.


Panel: Heather McGhee, President of DEMOS; Hugh Hewitt, Salem Radio Network; Anna Palmer, Politico; Jake Sherman, Politico

One more thing...
Senator Romney said that the president is going to win the battle of whether the public will see Mr. Trump's taxes. The Democrats have made the formal request to the IRS for Mr. Trump's tax records.
According to Section 6103(f)(1):

Upon written request from the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate, or the chairman of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Secretary [of the Treasury] shall furnish such committee with any return or return information specified in such request, except that any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer shall be furnished to such committee only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure.

We don't know how Mr. Trump gets out of this one, but no doubt we'll see how this battle of oversight ends up.

3.31.19: Of Course The President Wants Revenge... On Everything Barack Obama

Attorney General William Barr distributed his summary letter on the Special Counsel's investigation in which no collusion on the part of the Trump campaign with the Russian government. The letter also said that while no recommendation on the issue of obstruction of justice has been given, the president has not be exonerated. You can read the full letter here.

To that end, of course President Trump would crow about complete exoneration of any wrongdoing and then go on to seek vengeance against his political opponents, namely Congress Adam Schiff (D-CA), chair of the House Intelligence Committee. During a rally in Michigan this week, Donald Trump called Mr. Schiff a pencil neck (really?) and said that sick people tried to defraud the people with bullshit. Seriously presidential, do you think? Did anyone really think that the president wouldn't seek revenge against his critics?

Republicans, namely Congressmen Devin Nunes (R-CA) and Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) have called for Mr. Schiff's resignation from the committee. Frankly, this is laughable considering that Mr. Nunes actively worked with the administration to derail the investigation and Mr. McCarthy cynically and famously said that the Benghazi investigation into Hillary Clinton was drawn out to damage her campaign (not to find the facts). On top of that, to further the poor reputation of the U.S. Senate as a functioning body politic, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is angling to start an investigation of the investigators.

The bottom line is that the full report should be released so that the American people can decide for themselves if what the president and his campaign may have done rises to the level of illegality or at the very least unethical behavior. Not to mention that there is still a counter-intelligence investigation going on and we have no idea what will come from that.

The woman on the Chicago subway that Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) spoke about had it right. We (the American people) paid for it so we should be able to see it.

More importantly, after Mr. Barr released his 4-page letter, the president pivoted to healthcare joining a lawsuit brought by 20 states attorneys general that the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) should be nullified because it is unconstitutional, the result of which would be taking away health insurance for 20 million Americans. The president said that the Republican party would become know as the 'party of healthcare.' As Peggy Noonan said, quoting an administration official, there was too much good news this week so the president dove in again on healthcare. NBC's Hallie Jackson explained that there was disagreement among administration officials, specifically on the part of Vice President Mike Pence who did not necessarily disagree with the policy objective but the tactics meaning that the Republicans do not have an alternative plan together so there is nothing to replace the current law. Hence, twenty million people losing their health insurance is a political loser for the administration.

Let's face it, the president isn't concerned that the Republicans in Congress don't have a replacement plan ready to go; he wants to force their hand. He's also not concerned about the prospect of so many people losing coverage. His sole motivation since the beginning of his presidency is to undo every policy achievement or decision made by Barack Obama, to erase it all. Whether it be the Iran Nuclear deal or the Paris Climate Accord or concerns about North Korea's nuclear program or the Affordable Care Act, President Trump is going in the completely opposite direction, for the sake of going in the opposite direction regardless of the consequences and repercussions. That's what it is all about.

That aside, Senator Tom Barrasso said he has been working on a healthcare plan since he came to the Senate. That was in 2008. We still don't have a plan on the table from him. He's had 11 years to come up with something and we still don't know what it is. Of course, he can easily point out what he doesn't want, but we can all do that. He explained that Democrats want Medicare for all, a complete government take over of healthcare, which he thinks is not a good idea. Fair enough, but where is your plan? Medicare for all might not be the answer but what could/should be put in place as part of the Affordable Care Act is a public option. When the law was originally being debated back in 2008, the public option (read: Medicare option) was put on the table but the Republicans raised hell about how it was government dictating your healthcare and socialism and all the other rhetoric arguments. But what they really knew was that the public writ large would eventually migrate to the public option putting insurance companies out of control of the system and thus losing profit.

Are there fixes that are needed for the ACA, absolutely. As Senator Durbin explained, prescription drug prices right now are through the roof and indefensible. Something needs to be done on this issue immediately; it should be a congressional priority. The American people are being held hostage by drug companies. They have us addicted to their opioids, which once addicted you can't afford so people turn to crime for more lethal alternatives. Life-saving drugs like insulin or others have American families financially burdened way beyond their capacity. That's what is really criminal.


Panel: Hallie Jackson, NBC; Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal; Cornell Belcher, Democratic Strategist; Rich Lowry, The National Review

One more thing...
This allegation against fmr. Vice President Joe Biden is certainly disconcerting and really all too easy to believe. Mr. Biden has always been a 'touchy feely' person to the point where it has always made women feel uncomfortable. In response, here is Mr. Biden's statement:

"In my many years on the campaign trail and in public life, I have offered countless handshakes, hugs, expressions of affection, support and comfort. And not once - never - did I believe I acted inappropriately. If it is suggested I did so, I will listen respectfully. But it was never my intention."

What's problematic is that Mr. Biden says "... never - did I believe I acted inappropriately..." It can also suggest that he never really considered how the other person felt.

So now two things for Mr. Biden. First and foremost, he needs to respond to this directly and publicly, not through a statement. Second, he needs to stop flirting with us and either declare that he's running or not. End the speculation.



The Fallout

Total Exoneration

No Collusion

Total Vindication

Pencil-neck Adam Schiff

Dick Durbin
John Barrasso

Repeal and Replace

The Party of Healthcare

2020 campaign

Hickenlooper

Hallie Jackson
Cornell Belcher
Rich Lowry
Peggy Noonan

31% unsure the Mueller

43% approve

stable but weak

Defending Obamacare -

Total vindication - Pence

defrauding the public with bullshit

schiff - calls for him to resign from the committee

the have to be accountable

Lock them up

the entire ACA should be

John Barrasso - release the full report
for transparency -
throw mueller under the bus - dems are...

it does not exonerate him...

counter-intelligence investigation is on-going

behavior as presidency?
public is asked is 2020

he has been falsely accused

no fault on the part of the president  - doing business with russia

president of the us is the law? no man is above the right
invesigating the investigators... lindsey is leading to that

healthcare - complete gov. takeover for healthcare

president joined the lawsuit...
not imminent

failed to keep its promises -

a plan - 12 years

a plan since I joined the senate

dick durbin...
mueller - tuesday deadline - not going to meet it

should dems move on - should be a complete disclosure

we paid for the inquiry, we should see it...

should focus on the counter-intelligence aspect

can't imagine lindsey reclusing himself from any investigation

DHS growing humanitarian crisis...
massive migration crisis right now

cutting off aid to these countries will not solve the problem

precription prices are through the roof and indefensible

Biden behavior...

done treasonous things - will certainly looked at
sick people

revenge path

push on healthcare - too much good news - peggy

disagreement on the tactics - not the policy - pence - hallie
full revenge mode - no surprised

genuinely angry -
the process went off the rails - rich
investigate the investigators

cornell - this stinks...

no transparency - put it out there.. cornell

19% of independents

polling data to russia - that's colluding... cornell

healthcare law - that's what we'll be debating...

cudgel - hallie used by the president

rich - nancy pelosi - typical republican posing as a populist...

Hickenlooper - a dem moderate

complexities at the border - a form of kidnapping

I don't like any labels -
a crisis of division -
issue of abortion - fetal heartbeat bills
woman's right to take care of her own healthcare

accusation against biden - disqualifying...

an inflection point - women have the courage to come forward
very disconcerting...

the political reeducation of Joe Biden

the good news is you know what you're going to get, the bad news is that you know what you're going get.

3.24.19: The Mueller Report: The President Isn't Out of the Woodshed

What's all the fuss about? ...Just kidding of course.

After 675 days of investigating and 34 indictments, special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has finally issued his report to Attorney General William Barr, and now as the AG pours through we are all left to wait. To that end, most all agree that the entire report should be made public as both Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), chair of the House judiciary committee, and Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) agreed. Too much anxiety and time has been invested on the part of the American people that denying being able to read what the findings are is simply untenable.

In terms of the report itself, Mueller's office announced that there would be no further indictments stemming from the special counsel's investigation, but Republicans and Trump loyalists who now say he is vindicated shouldn't be spiking the football just yet, to borrow a phrase from Kristen Welker today. Having worked with Mr. Mueller, fmr. federal prosecutor Chuck Rosenberg said that Mr. Mueller would be thoroughly describing in the report what happened and not characterizing the finding. This is key because what that says is something we've always known, which is that Mr. Mueller is a process, policy and rules-governed individual. Justice Department policy is that you can not indict a sitting president so the findings of the Mueller report may state that the president did have knowledge of collusion with the Russian government. That's speculation of course as is the possibility that the report fully exonerates the president, which is also a possibility. The point is that it is still too soon to tell. Politically, that's another story due to the fact that it is already baked into voters' minds whether or not the president is guilty of illegal activity. And speaking of which, there are still several investigations going on at present into Mr. Trump business dealings.

Again, the full report should be made public.

Much of the discussion also centered around whether or not the president obstructed justice, which again Mr. Mueller wouldn't indict a sitting president based on justice department guidelines. However, the president is guilty in plain sight of obstruction of the investigation. There's the pressuring of fmr. FBI Director James Comey to drop the investigation into Michael Flynn, his firing, the firing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, investigation witness tampering and the president's Twitter feed, which called the investigation a 'witch hunt' 183 times, to name a few. As fmr. Congressman Carlos Curbelo stated, it's certainly not a witch hunt. Thirty-four people have been indicted and many of those were Russian operatives who executed various measures in trying to influence the election, something that the president himself refuses to acknowledge.

And though there are no more indictments coming from the special counsel's office, which is good news for the president, politically it is suspect that the report will be all good news. There will be some political damage most assuredly. NBC's Ari Melber mentioned the possibility that administration officials, including the president, could have financial entanglements with foreign governments that played a role. To circumvent this, the White House may claim executive privilege, but given the intense public interest in the report, the House and also the Senate perhaps may override it if the chambers conclude that the White House is covering up anything illegal through that declaration. As Congressman Nadler said, if Congress cannot override that then it in essence put the president above the law, and no one in the United States is above the law.

In other news, it goes without saying that Mr. Trump's personal attacks on Senator John McCain are beyond the dignity of any American, let alone the President of the United States. To trample on the deceased, especially a war hero, shows a classlessness that shouldn't be expected from even someone as self-obsessed as Donald Trump. This column has criticized policy views of Mr. McCain in the past and didn't endorse his presidential run in 2008, but to say anything short of Mr. McCain being a devoted family man and a genuine American hero would never happen here. And that Mr. Trump's base supporters cheer when he says these things just illustrates how so many Americans have lost their way in terms of what this country is all about.

Fmr. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) explained it as 'beyond weird' that the president would denigrate the memory of an American war hero but then turn around cancel sanctions on a dictator that starves his people and executes members of his own family. And speaking of North Korea, the Treasury Dept. said it would be instituting more sanctions against the regime only to have the president cancel them. As Senator Rubio speculated, something must have gone on between the time that Treasury issued the statement and the president changing his mind. White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said that the president 'likes' Chairman Kim. Well, isn't that special? Mr. Rubio went on to say that that is not how it is normally done. Simply put, this requires so serious oversight because this is just another instance of President Trump making a mockery of the United States' foreign policy.


Panel: Fmr. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO); Kristen Welker, NBC News; Dan Balz, The Washington Post; Fmr. Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R-FL)

One more thing...
We're still not commenting on Democratic presidential candidates or the race in general except to say this about today. Ms. McCaskill is correct that Beto O'Rourke needs to start putting some 'meat on the bone' in terms of substance of policy. And... the one thing that Democrats need to show if they want to win is strength. Stop apologizing...

3.10.19: Gasoline Is To Fire As Social Media Is To Polticians

This column is purposely staying away from the presidential election at this time as it is still too early to dive into the weeds of the candidates' positions when the field hasn't really even been set yet. With that said, it is disappointing that Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) has decided not to run, though its understandable. The field is already crowded and his prospects for coming out on top are low, despite his good proposals and his ability to talk to working class voters from a progressive stance.

That aside, you can always count on a Cheney to provide one with consternation yet tuck something sensible into the conversation. First, with regard to the new members of the Democratic caucus, they have to realize the power they bring but they also have to understand that they don't know everything about everything. Certainly, what they haven't come to understand yet, specifically Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, that they're on a national stage and that their words carry ten times more weight now than before they were elected. Congresswoman Omar's anti-Semitic tropes [trope: metaphorical use of words] are unacceptable and should be condemned. For her part, she has to understand that she is a member of Congress now and has to bite her tongue, rise above the petty and not disparage other Americans because of race or creed.

With that said, Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-WY) described the Democratic party as socialist and anti-Semitic which is certainly not accurate. And it takes a lot of gall (of which politicians named Cheney have plenty) to say such a thing, invoke the tragic shooting in Pittsburgh at the Tree of Life Synagogue and not address where the vast majority of anti-Semitic rhetoric is coming from, which is from the right fringe. She and Mr. Todd got into a bit of a back and forth about 'whataboutism' which is has become so prevalent in today's politics, and when you throw politicians together with social media it gets even worse. That's spraying gasoline on fire.

The right's attacks on George Soros have continued for two decades enough to the point where a pipe bomb was sent to his residence, an example Mr. Todd brought up. When confronted with the president's own rhetoric, Ms. Cheney deferred to the 'it's not a left or right issue' defense without speaking to the president's words specifically. "Very fine people on both sides...," with regard to Charlottesville is something that this column will not, can not let go. Where there's fire the president is never carrying the water.

However, Congresswoman Cheney was equally as forthright, and sensible, when it came to the president's budget proposal of trying to extract 'cost plus 50' from our allies where the United States have military bases, which would be to cover the cost of running them plus a 50% mark up. As the congresswoman succinctly said, this would be devastating. Not only would it further alienate the United States from its allies, but also put U.S. national security at further risk.

This column, for one, is so sick and tired of the president of the United States disparaging and pushing away our allies. Even if you take out moving the Israeli embassy to Jerusalem and pulling out of the Iran deal from the equation, Donald Trump has been the worst foreign policy president in the last fifty years, hands down. The president's 'very good relationship' with the North Korean dictator has brought nothing positive for the United States.

And whether there was collusion or not, the unprecedented amount of contacts and sucking up to the Russian government personally by the president and his campaign along with the active effort to cover it up is Manchurian at the very least.

This brings us to the case and sentencing of Paul Manafort who is otherwise 'not blameless' as Judge T.S. Ellis described him. He defrauded the United States' taxpayers of $6 million dollars, working for Russian-back Ukrainian politicians, something that Maria Teresa Kumar called borderline treasonous. And the president said that he feels very badly for Paul Manafort. With statements like that, why should anyone wonder why Mr. Trump has gone through five communication directors.

Mr. Trump runs the United States government, and he hates the United States government.

It's one of those times, where it's too infuriating to write on...


Panel: Robert Costa, The Washington Post; Maria Teresa Kumar, President Voto Latino; Kasie Hunt, NBC News; Pat McCrory, former governor of North Carolina

One more thing...
Cudos to Chuck Todd for referencing Spinal Tap and equating its drummers with Trump's communication directors.

3.3.19: Your Channel and Your Reality... It's Not A Crime Per Se

Fred Yang of Hart Research Associates said, "You get your reality from the [news] channel you watch," referring to the divide among Americans on how they see shape their political beliefs. This column tries to stay away from that though the irony is not lost on the fact that this column centers around a television program, on a channel.

However for this week, we'll keep that more front of mind than usual, which brings us straight away to the House Oversight Committee's hearing with former Trump attorney, Michael Cohen. First, Mr. Cohen is a liar, a cheat and a conman - the three things he directly described the president as being. Foremost, he lied to Congress under oath and that's why in May he will be going to jail for the next three years. At this point, Mr. Cohen is certainly not going to be given a pardon so why did he 'throw himself at the mercy of the world that hates Trump?' as Commentary Magazine's Jon Podhoretz described. Was he telling the truth now as some part of an act of contrition? Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH), senior Republican on the Oversight Committee said that Mr. Cohen had lied to Congress again in this hearing.

What we do know is that at this point, Mr. Cohen can not have his sentence reduced any further and was not offered any reduction for his testimony this week so if he lied again the main consequence would be that more years would be added to his sentence. But still, why testify? It seems to this column that Mr. Cohen was a willing and loyal soldier for Mr. Trump, carrying out the dirty work that needed to be done in New York City. Upon Mr. Trump being elected president and Mr. Cohen not being rewarded for his effort, he most probably held out hope that Mr. Trump would back him up when investigators came calling. Mr. Trump did initially, but when Mr. Cohen lied to Congress for Mr. Trump's benefit and then had to take this fall, the loyalty wasn't reciprocated. An ax to grind? Yes, of course, but isn't that the common motivation in a situation like this?

When Mr. Jordan says that Mr. Cohen lied again to Congress this week that's just hard to believe. With that said, everything Mr. Cohen said in terms of charges he made about Mr. Trump has to be verified. Heidi Przybyla pointed out that Mr. Cohen's credibility went up because if he were lying, he would have said that the president did collude with Russia during the 2016 election, but instead he said that he had no knowledge of that. She also gave a few other instances where Mr. Cohen defended the president, so there's that.

Mr. Jordan also said that he doesn't believe that the president has lied at all when it comes to all things Russia, which is just impossible to believe given what's out there in the public record, specifically the overwhelming reporting on the Trump Tower Moscow deal.

It's not a crime per se to lie about this, but it's a relevant fact that the voters should have been made aware of, as Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) pointed out. Mr. Cohen also stated the Mr. Trump was in contact with Roger Stone about Wikileaks prior to the hacked information dump, which Mr. Warner said his counter-intelligence committee is looking into. If the president was aware of this before the fact, then that would be a crime. But Republicans don't want to talk about this and in the hearing instead of defending the president, which they didn't do, they solely focused on attacking the credibility of Mr. Cohen. And as Mr. Jordan outlined today, he doesn't want to talk about Russian collusion, but instead of the many accomplishments of the administration such as: tax reform, putting two conservative justices on the Supreme Court, record low unemployment and economic growth.

There are holes in those accomplishments such as raking up $2 trillion more dollars of debt and the fact that the middle class is suffering on the tax return front because refunds are significantly less because Republicans adjusted the withholding tax structure. Despite that, Mr. Jordan did outline a list of things that conservatives like.

To that point, The New York Times Helene Cooper explained that if you look past the ridiculous tweets and statements, the Administration's actions with regard to North Korea has been sound. Mr. Trump has opened up a dialogue with the Kim regime and smartly walked away from this week's summit because North Korea couldn't meet any of the United States demands in exchange for sanctions relief. However, it should be pointed out that a summit shouldn't really occur if some sort of framework for an agreement hasn't been worked out beforehand. Fine, that's not how Mr. Trump negotiates and that we have to accept. But Ms. Cooper then pointed out that after rightly walking away from the deal, Mr. Trump once again took the word of a dictator over what American intelligence officials had told him.

It's not a crime per se that Mr. Trump said that he takes Kim Jung Un at his word that he didn't know about what happened to Otto Warmbier, but just on the face of it, it's unfathomable that he didn't know. Mr. Trump explained that it would have been to Mr. Kim's advantage for such a thing to happen, as if he was defending the North Korean dictator. That's simply an affront to American values and respect to human rights. Defending a dictator's personal responsibility with regard to the torture and in essence murder of an American citizen is a moral crime.

It prompted a rare statement from Mr. Warmbier's parents:

"We have been respectful during this summit process. Now we must speak out. Kim and his evil regime are responsible for the death of our son Otto. Kim and his evil regime are responsible for unimaginable cruelty and inhumanity. No excuses or lavish praise can change that."

 As Yahoo News' Matt Bai pointed out, this president seems to lack any measure of empathy and the ability to feel someone else's pain. If we're thinking in terms of realpolitik as Jon Podhoretz brought up in the discussion, it has to be acknowledged that in that context that people do suffer making empathy an essential quality that the President of The United States must possess.


Panel: Helene Cooper, The New York Times; Matt Bai, Yahoo News; Heidi Przybyla, NBC News; Jon Podhoretz, Commentary Magazine

One more thing...
 The president's longest riff... er, speech... occurred this weekend at CPAC this weekend where among other things he he said that 'people try to take you down with bullshit.' Not a crime, but also not very presidential and neither is this:

It's just f**king weird.