Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
babylonsister
babylonsister's Journal
babylonsister's Journal
January 25, 2020
Not important enough to pay attention, Mitt? YOU are/were supposed to be watching. 
https://politicalwire.com/2020/01/24/bonus-quote-of-the-day-1262/
Bonus Quote of the Day
January 24, 2020 at 6:15 pm EST By Taegan Goddard
"Oh jeez. No one's watching!"
Not important enough to pay attention, Mitt? YOU are/were supposed to be watching.
https://politicalwire.com/2020/01/24/bonus-quote-of-the-day-1262/
Bonus Quote of the Day
January 24, 2020 at 6:15 pm EST By Taegan Goddard
“Oh jeez. No one’s watching!”
— Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT), quoted CNN, when told there would be six more hours of House manager arguments in President Trump’s impeachment trial.
— Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT), quoted CNN, when told there would be six more hours of House manager arguments in President Trump’s impeachment trial.
January 25, 2020
So who intends on watching the rethug rebuttal, and
how long do you think you'll last? I'm hoping for a House Hunters marathon, or might go weed my garden.
I have no patience for liars.
January 25, 2020
The delicate Victorian spinsters of the GOP Senate are “offended”
Published by digby on January 24, 2020
They’re about to faint dead away at the rudeness of the House Managers.
When you watch a trial, whether you’re on a jury yourself or on the couch in front of the TV, the prosecution’s presentation always seems airtight — until you see the defense. So I don’t want to say at this stage that the House managers in Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial have made their case. But seriously, it’s hard to see how the president’s team can plausibly explain away this behavior. Their only choice will be to admit that all the evidence is true and tell the American people that it was perfect.
Republican senators are all doing their part, acting as if the House managers are a bunch of primitive barbarians rampaging through their hallowed halls, gibbering incomprehensibly and rudely insulting them and their president with the shocking suggestion that he might have done something wrong.
You may recall that on the first night of the trial, at the end of an 11-hour day, Chief Justice John Roberts admonished both sides to be careful of their rhetoric because they were speaking in front of the world’s greatest deliberative body and they’ve earned the House’s respect. As it turns out, he did that because Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, had sent him a note asking him to scold Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, one of the House managers, for saying that senators would be covering up for the president’s misdeeds if they refused to call John Bolton to testify.
On Wednesday, other pearl-clutching senators also complained about Nadler’s comments. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska told the media she was “very offended” and Josh Hawley of Missouri chimed in, saying that Democrats “managed to alienate senators, attack their own jury” — as if any Republicans in the chamber had seriously been considering voting to call Bolton (or any other witnesses) until Nadler hurt their feelings.
Sure enough, the media dutifully asked every Democrat on Thursday if they would distance themselves from Nadler’s comments, giving the impression to the public that this alleged insult was truly over the top. So far, at least, Democrats have resisted the temptation to do that.
Republicans will obviously be using this tactic going forward, even though anyone can see that the House managers are extremely well-prepared and are making their arguments calmly and professionally. At the end of Thursday’s session, lead manager Adam Schiff gave a powerful closing argument in which he explained why the stakes are so high. It was not histrionic or insolent, but it was a sharp condemnation of the president that the House majority concluded must be removed from office for abusing his power.
more...
https://digbysblog.net/2020/01/the-delicate-victorian-spinsters-of-the-gop-senate-are-offended/?fbclid=IwAR30N7YP8nagSxdwwjvwpW2j_gWCs5cyHEErUWjTArrQVJ5mS-tvMiBTExs
digby: The delicate Victorian spinsters of the GOP Senate are "offended"
The delicate Victorian spinsters of the GOP Senate are “offended”
Published by digby on January 24, 2020
They’re about to faint dead away at the rudeness of the House Managers.
When you watch a trial, whether you’re on a jury yourself or on the couch in front of the TV, the prosecution’s presentation always seems airtight — until you see the defense. So I don’t want to say at this stage that the House managers in Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial have made their case. But seriously, it’s hard to see how the president’s team can plausibly explain away this behavior. Their only choice will be to admit that all the evidence is true and tell the American people that it was perfect.
Republican senators are all doing their part, acting as if the House managers are a bunch of primitive barbarians rampaging through their hallowed halls, gibbering incomprehensibly and rudely insulting them and their president with the shocking suggestion that he might have done something wrong.
You may recall that on the first night of the trial, at the end of an 11-hour day, Chief Justice John Roberts admonished both sides to be careful of their rhetoric because they were speaking in front of the world’s greatest deliberative body and they’ve earned the House’s respect. As it turns out, he did that because Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, had sent him a note asking him to scold Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, one of the House managers, for saying that senators would be covering up for the president’s misdeeds if they refused to call John Bolton to testify.
On Wednesday, other pearl-clutching senators also complained about Nadler’s comments. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska told the media she was “very offended” and Josh Hawley of Missouri chimed in, saying that Democrats “managed to alienate senators, attack their own jury” — as if any Republicans in the chamber had seriously been considering voting to call Bolton (or any other witnesses) until Nadler hurt their feelings.
Sure enough, the media dutifully asked every Democrat on Thursday if they would distance themselves from Nadler’s comments, giving the impression to the public that this alleged insult was truly over the top. So far, at least, Democrats have resisted the temptation to do that.
Republicans will obviously be using this tactic going forward, even though anyone can see that the House managers are extremely well-prepared and are making their arguments calmly and professionally. At the end of Thursday’s session, lead manager Adam Schiff gave a powerful closing argument in which he explained why the stakes are so high. It was not histrionic or insolent, but it was a sharp condemnation of the president that the House majority concluded must be removed from office for abusing his power.
more...
https://digbysblog.net/2020/01/the-delicate-victorian-spinsters-of-the-gop-senate-are-offended/?fbclid=IwAR30N7YP8nagSxdwwjvwpW2j_gWCs5cyHEErUWjTArrQVJ5mS-tvMiBTExs
January 25, 2020
The Shame Of The Senate
Joe Conason January 24, 2020
Well before completing his first term, President Donald Trump firmly established himself as the worst president in American history, which should surprise nobody. What we have seen this week suggests that many of the senators now hearing his impeachment trial will join him in historic infamy.
From the very beginning of Trump’s impeachment, a majority of Republican senators have indicated that they would not dare to sanction his unmistakable wrongdoing.
The Republicans stood mutely as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told the nation that he would manage the trial in lockstep with the president’s lawyers. They said nothing when the president brushed aside the constitutional separation of powers and the prerogatives of Congress by withholding all evidence and witnesses. They pretended to believe McConnell when he promised to conduct the trial fairly, and apply the same standards and procedures seen during the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton.
And then, knowing that McConnell planned to railroad Trump’s acquittal, they falsely swore an oath to do “impartial justice.”
snip//
Four years ago, Graham predicted that if Republicans were to nominate Donald Trump for president, their party “would be destroyed” and “would deserve it.” His defense of Trump, even knowing the crimes perpetrated by him, is destroying forever the reputation of Graham and every other Republican senator implicated in the cover-up. They could restore a semblance of probity by reversing course on subpoenas of witnesses and documents, but that seems unlikely.
Instead they are engraving the shame of the Senate, once the world’s greatest deliberative body, on their own souls.
Joe Conason: The Shame Of The Senate
https://www.nationalmemo.com/the-shame-of-the-senate/?fbclid=IwAR0RitQ1msJTQ8ImVWqG38r8OEiy_dSwshIr6DGB0Q02TpvUJwPa7xYh3e8The Shame Of The Senate
Joe Conason January 24, 2020
Well before completing his first term, President Donald Trump firmly established himself as the worst president in American history, which should surprise nobody. What we have seen this week suggests that many of the senators now hearing his impeachment trial will join him in historic infamy.
From the very beginning of Trump’s impeachment, a majority of Republican senators have indicated that they would not dare to sanction his unmistakable wrongdoing.
The Republicans stood mutely as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told the nation that he would manage the trial in lockstep with the president’s lawyers. They said nothing when the president brushed aside the constitutional separation of powers and the prerogatives of Congress by withholding all evidence and witnesses. They pretended to believe McConnell when he promised to conduct the trial fairly, and apply the same standards and procedures seen during the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton.
And then, knowing that McConnell planned to railroad Trump’s acquittal, they falsely swore an oath to do “impartial justice.”
snip//
Four years ago, Graham predicted that if Republicans were to nominate Donald Trump for president, their party “would be destroyed” and “would deserve it.” His defense of Trump, even knowing the crimes perpetrated by him, is destroying forever the reputation of Graham and every other Republican senator implicated in the cover-up. They could restore a semblance of probity by reversing course on subpoenas of witnesses and documents, but that seems unlikely.
Instead they are engraving the shame of the Senate, once the world’s greatest deliberative body, on their own souls.
January 25, 2020
First 3 women to be impeachment managers say public will see trial as 'rigged' if Trump is acquitted
NBC News' Kasie Hunt sat down with Democratic Reps. Zoe Lofgren, Sylvia Garcia and Val Demings, who offered their thoughts on Trump's impeachment trial.
House managers on impeachment: 'Not about Donald Trump... It's about our Constitution'
Jan. 23, 202002:24
Jan. 23, 2020, 1:15 PM EST / Updated Jan. 24, 2020, 8:50 AM EST
By Kasie Hunt and Adam Edelman
The first three women to serve as presidential impeachment managers in U.S. history told NBC News in an exclusive interview on Thursday that if the Senate votes to acquit President Donald Trump, the American public will view it as a "rigged trial."
Democratic Reps. Zoe Lofgren of California, Sylvia Garcia of Texas and Val Demings of Florida also spoke about the need for witnesses in the trial, and added that even an acquittal won't amount to an exoneration of the president.
Garcia added that she felt it was "important that we emphasize that he's been impeached. That is done. He can't erase it. He will always be an impeached president."
First 3 women to be impeachment managers say public will see trial as 'rigged' if Trump is acquitte
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/three-women-impeachment-managers-say-public-will-see-trial-rigged-n1121271?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_lw&fbclid=IwAR0UGVgQZM3Mhf0MGjrP1PNdY9h1rRL-uAZlea6vHUJdXOQMV4rszI7O9A8First 3 women to be impeachment managers say public will see trial as 'rigged' if Trump is acquitted
NBC News' Kasie Hunt sat down with Democratic Reps. Zoe Lofgren, Sylvia Garcia and Val Demings, who offered their thoughts on Trump's impeachment trial.
House managers on impeachment: 'Not about Donald Trump... It's about our Constitution'
Jan. 23, 202002:24
Jan. 23, 2020, 1:15 PM EST / Updated Jan. 24, 2020, 8:50 AM EST
By Kasie Hunt and Adam Edelman
The first three women to serve as presidential impeachment managers in U.S. history told NBC News in an exclusive interview on Thursday that if the Senate votes to acquit President Donald Trump, the American public will view it as a "rigged trial."
Democratic Reps. Zoe Lofgren of California, Sylvia Garcia of Texas and Val Demings of Florida also spoke about the need for witnesses in the trial, and added that even an acquittal won't amount to an exoneration of the president.
"It seems to me, if there's not a full, fair trial with witnesses, he may get an acquittal, but he's not going to get an exoneration," Lofgren said in the interview, in response to a question about whether an acquittal would be touted by the administration as a victory. "It's going to be seen for what it is, just a rubber stamp to get him off the hook."
"And so that's yet unknown, whether we’ll have a full trial, but clearly, he engaged in serious misconduct that upended the Constitutional order, really threatens our freedom,” Lofgren said. "Because it's the Constitution that has protected our freedom as Americans for over two centuries. That's what the stakes really are.”
"And so that's yet unknown, whether we’ll have a full trial, but clearly, he engaged in serious misconduct that upended the Constitutional order, really threatens our freedom,” Lofgren said. "Because it's the Constitution that has protected our freedom as Americans for over two centuries. That's what the stakes really are.”
Garcia added that she felt it was "important that we emphasize that he's been impeached. That is done. He can't erase it. He will always be an impeached president."
"If they don't convict and they don't decide to remove, then the public will see that it was rigged, that it wasn't fair," Garcia added. "Because everyday Americans know what a fair trial is. And that includes witnesses, it includes testimony, it includes both sides having a fair shot at presenting their case. And if they don't see that, then they'll say, well, yeah, he got off, but it's because it was rigged. You know, it was a done deal. And I think that will also last forever, and it might hurt him in anything he does in the future."
January 25, 2020
Val Demings mocks Senators walking out: Evidence is painful for them
Demings doesn’t see Republicans walking out during testimony as a bad thing.
By Scott Powers
January 24, 2020
Republican Senators who reportedly are walking out of the U.S. Senate chambers or doing other things to avoid paying attention to the Democrats’ impeachment arguments don’t bother Orlando’s Democratic U.S. Rep. Val Demings, the House impeachment manager said Friday.
She suggested the Republican are finding the evidence presented by her and other Democrats in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump to be “painful for them,” leading them to get up and leave.
Demings made her comments when she was interviewed Friday morning on the MSNBC show “Morning Joe.” Host Mika Brzezinski asked what it would take to reach Republican Senators who appear to not be listening.
Demings is one of the seven House impeachment managers presenting the Democrats’ case against Trump at the Senate trial.
Val Demings mocks Senators walking out: Evidence is painful for them
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/316939-val-demings-mocks-senators-walking-out-evidence-is-painful-for-them?fbclid=IwAR03gOxhfcR5q6Hw7Xroist76Sxu_yJIaK0maOhEhQXhuvRK5IQIGYEmAM4Val Demings mocks Senators walking out: Evidence is painful for them
Demings doesn’t see Republicans walking out during testimony as a bad thing.
By Scott Powers
January 24, 2020
Republican Senators who reportedly are walking out of the U.S. Senate chambers or doing other things to avoid paying attention to the Democrats’ impeachment arguments don’t bother Orlando’s Democratic U.S. Rep. Val Demings, the House impeachment manager said Friday.
She suggested the Republican are finding the evidence presented by her and other Democrats in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump to be “painful for them,” leading them to get up and leave.
Demings made her comments when she was interviewed Friday morning on the MSNBC show “Morning Joe.” Host Mika Brzezinski asked what it would take to reach Republican Senators who appear to not be listening.
“I know that some of them are walking out of the room. But I kind of see it differently. I think when they are presented with either testimony, and we know we’ve seen one foreign service officer after another, testimony from those career, very dedicated foreign service officers, many of whom have direct knowledge, they were on the call, I think sometimes when the Senators walk out of the room I see it many times as an indication that evidence is overwhelming for them,” Demings said.
“That sitting there listening to things we’ve presented in a chronological way and order, I think it can be pretty painful for them,” Demings continued. “I don’t necessarily see them walking out of the room to maybe get some fresh air is necessarily a bad thing. There is no way on Earth that they can get around the fact, that they can get around this drug deal, if you will, as Ambassador [John] Bolton categorized it, that the President and those around him were cooking up to basically cheat in the 2020 election and extort Ukraine into interfering in our election.”
“That sitting there listening to things we’ve presented in a chronological way and order, I think it can be pretty painful for them,” Demings continued. “I don’t necessarily see them walking out of the room to maybe get some fresh air is necessarily a bad thing. There is no way on Earth that they can get around the fact, that they can get around this drug deal, if you will, as Ambassador [John] Bolton categorized it, that the President and those around him were cooking up to basically cheat in the 2020 election and extort Ukraine into interfering in our election.”
Demings is one of the seven House impeachment managers presenting the Democrats’ case against Trump at the Senate trial.
“I think if anybody has been paying attention as we have presented our case over the last couple of days, and I know a lot of people have been paying attention, there’s no doubt that the evidence against the President is overwhelming. It’s clear, it’s convincing,” Demings said. “I think under the leadership of [Democratic U.S. Rep.] Adam Schiff we’ve done a decent job trying to make it clear to the American people. I know the Senators are listening. We’ve had some long days but they are listening. They are taking notes.”
January 24, 2020
Wyden, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, declined to say what the panel knows about Khashoggi’s death, citing its strict rules around secrecy. The CIA has reportedly concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the killing, and senators have said they had little doubt he was involved following a briefing from CIA Director Gina Haspel in December 2018.
more...
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emmaloop/jamal-khashoggi-report-congress-ron-wyden?fbclid=IwAR17uXEsIv4TGAlIZHnaOMtD7-0BkjnA6fFO6KGv6tPrAZTvOGNpX8_Ufnw
A Senator Wants Congress To "Unilaterally" Release Information On Jamal Khashoggi's Killing...
I'm glad Wyden isn't letting this get swept under the rug.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emmaloop/jamal-khashoggi-report-congress-ron-wyden?fbclid=IwAR17uXEsIv4TGAlIZHnaOMtD7-0BkjnA6fFO6KGv6tPrAZTvOGNpX8_Ufnw
A Senator Wants Congress To “Unilaterally” Release Information On Jamal Khashoggi’s Killing If The Trump Administration Won’t
The director of national intelligence was supposed to turn over an unclassified report on Khashoggi’s death earlier this week but blew the deadline.
Emma Loop BuzzFeed News Reporter
Posted on January 24, 2020, at 3:29 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON — Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden said he will seek to make public the secret information about the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi if the Trump administration continues to refuse to turn over a report on the issue.
Earlier this week, the director of national intelligence was required by law to provide an unclassified report to Congress on Khashoggi’s brutal killing at a Saudi Consulate in 2018. However, the DNI missed the deadline, as BuzzFeed News first reported Thursday, prompting inquiries from lawmakers.
On Friday, Wyden told reporters that if the DNI fails to produce the report by the end of President Donald Trump’s ongoing impeachment trial, he will trigger a process that would allow the Senate to “unilaterally” release information itself.
“It has been more than a year since agents of the Saudi government murdered Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi Embassy in Turkey, and yet the Trump administration refuses to publicly acknowledge who ordered that assassination, and instead the Trump administration is basically running interference for an authoritarian government,” Wyden said.
Wyden, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, declined to say what the panel knows about Khashoggi’s death, citing its strict rules around secrecy. The CIA has reportedly concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the killing, and senators have said they had little doubt he was involved following a briefing from CIA Director Gina Haspel in December 2018.
more...
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emmaloop/jamal-khashoggi-report-congress-ron-wyden?fbclid=IwAR17uXEsIv4TGAlIZHnaOMtD7-0BkjnA6fFO6KGv6tPrAZTvOGNpX8_Ufnw
January 24, 2020
Adam Schiff’s perfect shutdown of Trump’s ‘executive privilege’ claims is mandatory viewing
Walter Einenkel
Daily Kos Staff
Friday January 24, 2020 · 3:56 PM EST
VIDEO AT LINK~
Rep. Adam Schiff took time away from wiping the floor of the U.S. Senate with Donald Trump’s weak-sauce arguments, to go in front of cameras outside of the Senate to … wipe the floor with the president’s weak-sauce arguments. Speaking alongside the other House Impeachment managers, Rep. Schiff wanted to disabuse the Republican-media narrative that the reason there are zero witnesses being allowed into the Senate’s trial is because of some kind of legitimate claim on Trump’s behalf of executive privilege. Calling it a “camouflage” and explaining that the Chief Justice has already been empowered to make those determinations in the trial, Schiff very adeptly and succinctly debunks what will likely be a large part of the upcoming Trump defense.
That’s a fact. Rep. Schiff continues to just land devastating body blow after body blow.
Adam Schiff's perfect shutdown of Trump's 'executive privilege' claims is mandatory viewing
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/1/24/1913820/-Adam-Schiff-s-perfect-shutdown-of-Trump-s-executive-privilege-claims-is-mandatory-viewing#read-moreAdam Schiff’s perfect shutdown of Trump’s ‘executive privilege’ claims is mandatory viewing
Walter Einenkel
Daily Kos Staff
Friday January 24, 2020 · 3:56 PM EST
VIDEO AT LINK~
Rep. Adam Schiff took time away from wiping the floor of the U.S. Senate with Donald Trump’s weak-sauce arguments, to go in front of cameras outside of the Senate to … wipe the floor with the president’s weak-sauce arguments. Speaking alongside the other House Impeachment managers, Rep. Schiff wanted to disabuse the Republican-media narrative that the reason there are zero witnesses being allowed into the Senate’s trial is because of some kind of legitimate claim on Trump’s behalf of executive privilege. Calling it a “camouflage” and explaining that the Chief Justice has already been empowered to make those determinations in the trial, Schiff very adeptly and succinctly debunks what will likely be a large part of the upcoming Trump defense.
REP. ADAM SCHIFF: I do want to address one issue that the president's team has been pushing out, not in the senate chamber but evidently everywhere else. And that is their last refuge. The last refuge of the Republican—not the Republican—of the president's team’s effort to conceal the evidence from the American people, and that is this claim of executive privilege. Now, we urged at the beginning of the trial that any witness issues be resolved at the beginning of the trial. The president's team wished to push that off, as did Senator McConnell, so that later in the process they could say, “well, if we were to entertain those questions now that would simply take too long.” That's nonsense. This is not a trial for a speeding ticket or shoplifting.
This is an impeachment trial involving the president of the United States. These witnesses have important firsthand testimony to offer. The House wishes to call them in the name of the American people and the American people overwhelmingly want to hear what they have to say. Now unlike in the House where the president could play rope-a-dope in the courts for years—that is not an option for the president's team here—and it gives no refuge to people who want to hide behind executive privilege to avoid the truth coming out. We have a very capable justice sitting in that Senate chamber empowered by the Senate rules to decide issues of evidence and privilege. And so if any of these witnesses have a colorful claim that they wish to make, or the president on their behalf, we have a justice who is able to make those determinations, and we trust that the chief justice can do so.
The Senate will always have the opportunity to overrule the justice, but what they fear, what the president’s team fears, is that the justice will, in fact, apply executive privilege to that very narrow category where it may apply. And here that category may be nowhere at all. Because you cannot use executive privilege to hide wrongdoing or criminality or impeachable misconduct. And that is exactly the purpose for which they seek to use it.
And finally, they have withheld hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of documents for which there is no colorable claim of privilege. Several of the witnesses that we seek to call have no even colorable claim of privilege. This is merely the latest camouflage and merely the latest effort to obstruct the Congress in its investigation and now to obstruct the Senate in the trial.
This is an impeachment trial involving the president of the United States. These witnesses have important firsthand testimony to offer. The House wishes to call them in the name of the American people and the American people overwhelmingly want to hear what they have to say. Now unlike in the House where the president could play rope-a-dope in the courts for years—that is not an option for the president's team here—and it gives no refuge to people who want to hide behind executive privilege to avoid the truth coming out. We have a very capable justice sitting in that Senate chamber empowered by the Senate rules to decide issues of evidence and privilege. And so if any of these witnesses have a colorful claim that they wish to make, or the president on their behalf, we have a justice who is able to make those determinations, and we trust that the chief justice can do so.
The Senate will always have the opportunity to overrule the justice, but what they fear, what the president’s team fears, is that the justice will, in fact, apply executive privilege to that very narrow category where it may apply. And here that category may be nowhere at all. Because you cannot use executive privilege to hide wrongdoing or criminality or impeachable misconduct. And that is exactly the purpose for which they seek to use it.
And finally, they have withheld hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of documents for which there is no colorable claim of privilege. Several of the witnesses that we seek to call have no even colorable claim of privilege. This is merely the latest camouflage and merely the latest effort to obstruct the Congress in its investigation and now to obstruct the Senate in the trial.
That’s a fact. Rep. Schiff continues to just land devastating body blow after body blow.
January 24, 2020
2 hours ago
The Main Trump Super-PAC Is Covering Up Its Own Role in the Impeachment Scandal
A conspiracy theory, a chronology, and a con.
David Corn
Washington, DC, Bureau ChiefBio | Follow
The number-one super-PAC for Donald Trump, which is expected to raise tens of millions of dollars to help re-elect him this year, has come up with a nifty fundraising gimmick: the “Witch Hunt Timeline”. This interactive chronology supposedly details “the road to a sham impeachment” to show how a phony Russia scandal turned into a phony Ukraine scandal that turned into a phony impeachment. But this is a highly selective timeline, and in a bout of Trump-sized chutzpah, America First Action leaves out at least one crucial episode: its own role in the Ukraine scandal.
In a fear-mongering email seeking donations, the super-PAC claims that Trump is a victim of a nefarious and wide-ranging plot, insisting that “federal law enforcement officers, intelligence agencies, and government bureaucrats engaged in a shocking effort to influence the 2016 election, crush the Trump campaign, and cripple our elected president.” The timeline, it asserts, “follows the genesis and development of the deep state’s Witch Hunt against President Donald J. Trump, a monstrous conspiracy against the American people and the American system of government.” Yeah, that again—and it’s part of another rightwing buck-raking scam.
This alternative-reality con job is not being mounted by a group of GOP schmoes or wannabes. This super-PAC is run by the the cream of Trump World. It is chaired by Linda McMahon, who was Trump’s pick to run the Small Business Administration. Its senior adviser and spokesperson is Sean Spicer, Trump’s first White House press secretary. Kelly Sadler, formerly a senior Trump White House official in charge of coalitions outreach, is the communications director for the group. Steve Cortes, another adviser for this super-PAC, has been a member of Trump’s Hispanic Advisory Council.
It raised $39 million for the 2018 elections to support pro-Trump Republicans, and in Trumpistan, it is the Trump-approved place to go for donors who want to give big-bucks for Trump’s reelection. It had over $10 million cash in the bank as of last June, the latest data available. But that amount will likely swell by several times as the election approaches. As a super-PAC, it is supposed to act independently of Trump’s official reelection campaign. But its affiliated non-profit, America First Policies, which last month announced it was spending $2 million on anti-impeachment ads, was cofounded by Brad Parscale, who is now Trump’s campaign manager.
The timeline ignores many significant moments of Trump’s Russia and Ukraine scandals. Gone are key contacts between the Trump campaign and Russians in 2016. There’s nothing on Trump’s secret endeavors during that campaign to score a deal in Moscow to develop a tower that could earn him hundreds of millions of dollars (while telling voters he had “nothing” to do with Russia). Trump’s denials that Russia was attacking the US election? Nope, not there. The release of Russian-stolen Democratic emails just when the grab-them-by-the-pussy tape emerged? They forgot that, too. The timeline neglects to mention that the US intelligence community concluded Moscow attacked the 2016 election in part to help Trump win the White House. (Interest declared: the timeline does note the story I posted on October 31, 2016, that first revealed the existence of what would become known as the Steele dossier and that disclosed the FBI’s interest in the allegations they contained. Somehow, presumably, that was part of a Deep State operation.)
The timeline indicates this Trump super-PAC suffers from selective amnesia. Especially regarding one incriminating incident.
more...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/01/the-main-trump-super-pac-is-covering-up-its-own-role-in-the-impeachment-scandal/
David Corn: The Main Trump Super-PAC Is Covering Up Its Own Role in the Impeachment Scandal
2 hours ago
The Main Trump Super-PAC Is Covering Up Its Own Role in the Impeachment Scandal
A conspiracy theory, a chronology, and a con.
David Corn
Washington, DC, Bureau ChiefBio | Follow
The number-one super-PAC for Donald Trump, which is expected to raise tens of millions of dollars to help re-elect him this year, has come up with a nifty fundraising gimmick: the “Witch Hunt Timeline”. This interactive chronology supposedly details “the road to a sham impeachment” to show how a phony Russia scandal turned into a phony Ukraine scandal that turned into a phony impeachment. But this is a highly selective timeline, and in a bout of Trump-sized chutzpah, America First Action leaves out at least one crucial episode: its own role in the Ukraine scandal.
In a fear-mongering email seeking donations, the super-PAC claims that Trump is a victim of a nefarious and wide-ranging plot, insisting that “federal law enforcement officers, intelligence agencies, and government bureaucrats engaged in a shocking effort to influence the 2016 election, crush the Trump campaign, and cripple our elected president.” The timeline, it asserts, “follows the genesis and development of the deep state’s Witch Hunt against President Donald J. Trump, a monstrous conspiracy against the American people and the American system of government.” Yeah, that again—and it’s part of another rightwing buck-raking scam.
This alternative-reality con job is not being mounted by a group of GOP schmoes or wannabes. This super-PAC is run by the the cream of Trump World. It is chaired by Linda McMahon, who was Trump’s pick to run the Small Business Administration. Its senior adviser and spokesperson is Sean Spicer, Trump’s first White House press secretary. Kelly Sadler, formerly a senior Trump White House official in charge of coalitions outreach, is the communications director for the group. Steve Cortes, another adviser for this super-PAC, has been a member of Trump’s Hispanic Advisory Council.
It raised $39 million for the 2018 elections to support pro-Trump Republicans, and in Trumpistan, it is the Trump-approved place to go for donors who want to give big-bucks for Trump’s reelection. It had over $10 million cash in the bank as of last June, the latest data available. But that amount will likely swell by several times as the election approaches. As a super-PAC, it is supposed to act independently of Trump’s official reelection campaign. But its affiliated non-profit, America First Policies, which last month announced it was spending $2 million on anti-impeachment ads, was cofounded by Brad Parscale, who is now Trump’s campaign manager.
The timeline ignores many significant moments of Trump’s Russia and Ukraine scandals. Gone are key contacts between the Trump campaign and Russians in 2016. There’s nothing on Trump’s secret endeavors during that campaign to score a deal in Moscow to develop a tower that could earn him hundreds of millions of dollars (while telling voters he had “nothing” to do with Russia). Trump’s denials that Russia was attacking the US election? Nope, not there. The release of Russian-stolen Democratic emails just when the grab-them-by-the-pussy tape emerged? They forgot that, too. The timeline neglects to mention that the US intelligence community concluded Moscow attacked the 2016 election in part to help Trump win the White House. (Interest declared: the timeline does note the story I posted on October 31, 2016, that first revealed the existence of what would become known as the Steele dossier and that disclosed the FBI’s interest in the allegations they contained. Somehow, presumably, that was part of a Deep State operation.)
The timeline indicates this Trump super-PAC suffers from selective amnesia. Especially regarding one incriminating incident.
more...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/01/the-main-trump-super-pac-is-covering-up-its-own-role-in-the-impeachment-scandal/
January 24, 2020
The result, the group argues, is that we’re closer to doomsday than we’ve ever been.
more...
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/1/23/21079028/climate-change-extinction-nuclear-war-ai-existential-risk-doomsday-clock
The Doomsday Clock is now at "100 seconds to midnight." Here's what that means.
Here's some cheery news. 
The Doomsday Clock is now at “100 seconds to midnight.” Here’s what that means.
Climate change, nuclear war, accelerating technology, and incompetent leadership threaten us.
By Kelsey Piper Jan 23, 2020, 5:00pm EST
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was founded in 1945 by researchers who worked on the atomic bomb. It publishes research on “manmade existential threats such as nuclear war, climate change, and disruptive technologies.”
And lately, it’s been a little bit, well, doomsaying. Its famous extinction clock has hovered for the last few years at “two minutes to midnight” — as pessimistic a future as it predicted in 1953 during the volatile early Cold War.
On Thursday, the group moved the clock again, announcing that we are “100 seconds to midnight.” The change from minutes to seconds is a bit awkward, but it solves an important problem for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: while the world does seem to be getting more dangerous, the danger mostly isn’t imminent (global civilization is overwhelmingly likely to survive the year 2020), and the Bulletin likely wants the ability to have some granularity in its risk assessments from one year to the next year.
The overall assessment that accompanied the 100-second clock unveiling is a gloomy one. All of the problems we faced last year are still facing us, and we have less time than ever to solve them. Both nuclear war and catastrophic effects from climate change, the Bulletin argues, grew more dangerous in 2019 — and world leaders made things worse.
“This situation — two major threats to human civilization, amplified by sophisticated, technology-propelled propaganda — would be serious enough if leaders around the world were focused on managing the danger and reducing the risk of catastrophe,” the Bulletin statement read. “Instead, over the last two years, we have seen influential leaders denigrate and discard the most effective methods for addressing complex threats — international agreements with strong verification regimes — in favor of their own narrow interests and domestic political gain.”
The result, the group argues, is that we’re closer to doomsday than we’ve ever been.
more...
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/1/23/21079028/climate-change-extinction-nuclear-war-ai-existential-risk-doomsday-clock
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: NY
Home country: US
Current location: Florida
Member since: Mon Sep 6, 2004, 09:54 PM
Number of posts: 171,092
