Saturday, August 31, 2019

The Number One Shoe? - Updated

Is Sean Hannity the number one shoe on Cable Television? Donald thinks so:




As I've said here before, posting Donald's "tweets with typos" isn't as much fun as it used to be because there are so many of them. Every now and then, however, I just can't stop myself. Enjoy.

Update: Donald doesn't always correct his typos; this time he did:


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Friday, August 30, 2019

Something Has Changed - Updated

This is striking:

Update on Sunday evening. More evidence that Donald is not well:

In a FEMA briefing today, Donald says he's never heard of a Category 5
hurricane, but watch the video. Back in 2017, he talked about a Cat 5
storm on September 14, September 21, September 26, October 3 and
October 19. He also talked about one on May 8 of this year. Does he really
not remember? 

 Daniel Dale provides specifics: 
  
And one more thing: 


Well, not Alabama:


Update #2, on Wednesday afternoon:

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Thursday, August 29, 2019

Scandalous, Indeed

From yesterday:

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

Wednesday, August 28, 2019

And Then There Were Nine? - Updated

I currently have 21 candidates on my "I'm Running" list: (Added Wednesday afternoon: We're now down to 20 after Kirsten Gillibrand dropped out.)

I'm Running: Declared Democratic candidates, in order of their announcement
  1. John Delaney (7/28/17) 
  2. Andrew Yang (11/6/17) 
  3. Elizabeth Warren (12/31/18)
  4. Tulsi Gabbard (1/11/19)
  5. Julián Castro (1/12/19)
  6. Kamala Harris (1/21/19)
  7. Pete Buttigieg (1/23/19)
  8. Marianne Williamson (1/30/19)
  9. Cory Booker (2/1/19)
  10. Amy Klobuchar (2/10/19)
  11. Bernie Sanders (2/19/19)
  12. Beto O'Rourke (3/14/19)
  13. Tim Ryan (4/5/19)
  14. Joe Biden (4/25/19)
  15. Michael Bennet (5/2/19)
  16. Wayne Messam (Declared 3/28, added to this list on 5/2/19)
  17. Steve Bullock (5/14/19)
  18. Bill de Blasio (5/16/19)
  19. Joe Sestak (6/22/19) 
  20. Tom Steyer (7/9/19)

Now, in a column posted today, political scientist Jonathan Bernstein says only nine are what he calls plausible nominees:

  1. Joe Biden
  2. Elizabeth Warren
  3. Kamala Harris
  4. Pete Buttigieg
  5. Cory Booker 
  6. Beto O'Rourke 
  7. Julián Castro
  8. Amy Klobuchar
  9. Bernie Sanders

Here's why :

We’ll find out Wednesday whether any more candidates have qualified for the next round of Democratic debates. So far, 10 have made it in. If we’re going to rank them, one could do worse than what Richard Skinner said on Tuesday: “I feel like there’s Tier 1 (Joe, E-Dubs, Bernie, Harris), Tier 2 (Pete B, Booker, Beto, Castro, Amy K) and Tier 3 (most others, mostly hopeless). But then also`problematic’ tier (Yang, Steyer, Tulsi, Marianne).”

The big difference I’d have with Skinner’s analysis is that I can’t see Bernie Sanders in the top tier. In fact, I’d put him at the bottom of the second group, making him (more or less) the ninth-most-likely Democrat to win the nomination. It’s true that Sanders is still second in the RealClearPolitics polling average. Yet he’s sixth in the FiveThirtyEight index of high-profile endorsements, and Seth Masket’s interviews with early-state activists portray him as a factional candidate. Could I see a scenario in which Sanders wins? Just barely. Iowa and New Hampshire were unusually good for him in 2016 and appear to be this time as well; if he can manage to win in both, perhaps opposition within the party melts away after all.

Separating the rest of that top group – Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris – seems impossible to me. They each have advantages and disadvantages, but they’re all plausible nominees. Each has support from party actors, but none has a clear lead. Biden leads in overall endorsement points, but both Harris and Warren can claim to have landed more signs of party support recently.

I still think that makes everyone in the next group – Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, Beto O’Rourke, Julian Castro and Amy Klobuchar – a bit more likely than Sanders. They’re behind in the polls, to be sure. But each has signs of party support, while none looks like a factional candidate. What they each need is to separate their image from the crowd. It would be no surprise if they all fizzled, the way that Biden, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson all did during the 2008 campaign despite having solid credentials. But each appears able to capitalize if they do demonstrate solid gains.

The remaining candidates seem unlikely to come anywhere close to the nomination. Failing to qualify for the September debates is a real blow. And no one in the “problematic” group Skinner identifies – including Andrew Yang, who has qualified for the next round – appears to have much party support, suggesting that even if they can move up temporarily in the polls, they’re unlikely to ride that to victory.

So we’re likely down to nine plausible nominees, with some small percentage chance for the remaining field combined. (This is the column in its entirety.)

As I'm writing, at about 10.30 a.m. Wednesday, the Washington Post says 10 candidates have qualified for the upcoming September debate, the nine on Bernstein's list above, plus Andrew Yang. Today is the deadline to qualify; if anyone else slides in at the last minute, I'll update this post. (Read the WaPo article here.) 

 Update on Wednesday afternoon. NY Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has dropped out of the race for president. I've moved her name to the "I'm Not Running Anymore" list:

I'm Not Running Anymore: Declared candidates who have dropped out:

  1. Richard Ojeda (1/25/19)
  2. Eric Swalwell (7/8/19)
  3. John Hickenlooper (8/15/19)
  4. Jay Inslee  (8/21/19)
  5. Seth Moulton (8/23/19)
  6. Kirsten Gillibrand (8/28/19) 

This is a tweet from 2013, I'm posting it here just in case: 



Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

This Day In History, 2014: Obama's Tan Suit




From the article at the Washington Post: 

 Ronald Reagan wore tan suits during his presidency. So did Dwight D. Eisenhower, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

But on Aug. 28, 2014, when President Barack Obama showed up for a White House news conference dressed in beige, the light-colored suit became a matter of national import. Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.) fumed that the suit pointed to a “lack of seriousness” on the president’s part, cable news shows held roundtable discussions, fashion critics and image consultants weighed in, and TV news reporters conducted man-on-the-street interviews to find out what the people of Northeast Ohio thought of the controversial look.

Five years later, however, Tan Suit Gate has taken on a different meaning, coming to symbolize the relative dearth of scandals during the Obama administration. On social media, just about every news item about potential conflicts of interests within the Trump administration and the president’s flouting of norms is met with some variant of “Remember when Obama wore a tan suit?” In the past week alone, the tan suit comparison has been leveled against President Trump’s assertion that he is “the chosen one,” his demand that U.S. companies leave China, and his desire to hold next year’s Group of Seven summit at his Florida golf resort — just to name a few examples. (Read the article here.)
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Monday, August 26, 2019

#MelaniaLovesTrudeau



There was some interesting body language at last year's G7 too:

 
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Sunday, August 25, 2019

This Day In History, 1994: My So-Called Life





The cast of 'My So-Called Life' - Jared Leto (Jordan Catalano), A.J. Langer (Rayanne Graff), Wilson Cruz (Rickie Vasquez), Lisa Wilhoit (Danielle Chase), Devon Odessa (Sharon Cherski), Claire Danes (Angela Chase), Devon Gummersall (Brian Krakow), (Photo by Mark Seliger/Walt Disney Television via Getty Images)
photo credit: Mark Seliger/Walt Disney Television via Getty Images

It's been 25 years since My So-Called Life debuted on ABC, and CNN says it "still may be the best teen drama ever." In the 1994 Fall Preview Issue, TV Guide called the show one of the best of the new season, saying "The show has just enough of a dark, gritty edge to be convincingly realistic. There's no shortage of angst, but it doesn't have that grating thirtysomething whine. And it could go over with junior-high and high-school kids." If that has you feeling nostalgic, click on the following:

CNN: 'My So-Called Life' debuted 25 years ago and still may be the best teen drama ever

Mental Floss: 19 Facts About My So-Called Life on Its 25th Anniversary

People: The Cast of My So-Called Life: Where Are They Now?

In addition to My So-Called Life, Touched By An Angel, Friends and ER all made their debuts in the Fall of 1994. And do you remember a show called On Our Own? It was Jussie Smollett's big break, in which he and his five siblings played a family trying to stay together after they're orphaned. TV Guide said "The Smollett kids, who have been compared to the young Jacksons, are about as cute as they come," but "We're not talking about high-voltage scripts or cutting edge comedy--the show rides almost entirely on the appeal of the kids." The show only lasted one season.

There were also two significant political deaths that happened on this day in history. On August 25, 2009, Senator Ted Kennedy died of a brain tumor; nine years later, on August 25, 2018, Senator John McCain died of the same disease.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Saturday, August 24, 2019

Pathetic





Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Nikki Haley And Mike Pence: The 2024 Republican Primary?

Did you see this tweet?




Sweet, right? Maybe not. In an article posted today titled Haley-Pence rivalry heats up as GOP weights post-Trump future, and with a subtitle that says Interviews with top Republicans reveal they're watching each other warily ahead of a potential 2024 showdown, Politico ponders what will happen when Donald is no longer president. It starts with this: 

When top Republicans convened at the St. Regis resort in Aspen, Colo. last month for an exclusive donor retreat, several attendees said there was palpable tension in the room as the gathering’s two headliners prepared to speak: Vice President Mike Pence and former United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley.

The assembled group of governors, high-dollar donors, and operatives were well aware that the two have big ambitions; to some it seemed as if Pence and Haley, who spoke on back-to-back days, were vying for their attention. Some in the audience found themselves parsing and comparing the two speeches and buzzed they were getting a sneak preview of a 2024 Republican primary. Others recalled something peculiar: Neither Pence nor Haley acknowledged each other in their presentations, even though they gave shout-outs to others attending the retreat.

At a time when Republicans are starting to contemplate what their party will look like after Donald Trump leaves office, a rivalry has developed between the two politicians who cut markedly different profiles — and signs of strain are bubbling to the surface.

Pence and Haley aren't openly sniping: Publicly, both sides maintain there's nothing but mutual respect between them. But interviews with nearly two dozen top Republicans revealed that the opposing camps are closely tracking each other's moves, and remain deeply suspicious of one another.

... includes this: 

“The two of them have absolutely been friends and worked well together over the years, but you have to suspend disbelief to say that their relationship going forward won’t be viewed within the context of the presidential election after next,” said Rob Godfrey, who served as a senior aide to Haley during her six-year tenure as South Carolina governor.

... The recent divisions have been fueled partly by the rumors that Haley could replace Pence on the ticket and the fact she took so long to address them. Some top Pence aides said they think Haley or an ally was behind the Wall Street Journal op-ed, which a representative for the former ambassador denied.

The White House has pushed back against the idea that Pence will get booted. Trump privately told Pence he was irritated by the Wall Street Journal article, and last weekend the president told reporters he was “very happy” with the vice president and “wouldn't be thinking about” removing him from the ticket.

Erick Erickson, a prominent conservative commentator who is close to Pence and Haley, said the former ambassador was wise to shoot down the VP speculation. The rumors had intensified so much that two governors had recently reached out to him to ask whether Pence was about to be canned, Erickson said.

... and concludes with this: 

The skirmish offers a potential preview of what’s in store for the GOP after 2020 — a fight over the direction of the party. Pence has been the president’s most unwavering ally since he joined the ticket in 2016, even when Trump’s policies and personal conduct veered far from the principles Pence had long been known for. Haley, who endorsed Marco Rubio in 2016 and was critical of Trump during the campaign, has shown a willingness to break from the administration. She has urged the GOP to be more inclusive, representing potentially a new direction for the party.

Haley’s forthcoming memoir, to be released in November, may offer a hint of her approach. While the book isn’t expected to take direct shots at the White House, its promotional materials describe her as “a leader who seeks to bring Americans together in divisive times.” (Read the entire article here.) 

 This isn't the first time the possibility of booting Mike Pence off the ticket has come up. In December there was reporting that said Donald was questioning his VP's loyalty: 

  


 I wrote about it here. 

There really will come a day when Donald is no longer president. Who will lead the Republicans, and possibly the country, in the post-Trump era is one of the most intriguing questions in politics. You bet I'll be watching closely.  
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, August 23, 2019

Another Bad Day For Jussie - Updated

A special prosecutor has been appointed to investigate the Jussie Smollett case:


Here's what the State's Attorney's office said:



And here's how the local NBC station is covering it: 

An Illinois judge appointed a special prosecutor Friday to look into why state prosecutors abruptly dropped charges against actor Jussie Smollett, accused of staging a racist, anti-gay attack against himself.

Cook County Judge Michael Toomin named former federal prosecutor Dan Webb as the special prosecutor in a hearing Friday after his surprise ruling in June that one was warranted.

Webb is the former U.S. attorney who led the "Operation Greylord" investigations into judicial corruption in Cook County, and is currently the co-executive chairman of Winston & Strawn LLP, according to his bio on the law firm's website.

Webb said at a news conference after the hearing that he believed Toomin had assigned him to complete three main tasks.

"First, to investigate if any persons or offices involved in the Smollett case engaged in any wrongdoing," Webb said.

"Number two, determine if reasonable grounds do exist to further prosecute Mr. Smollett," he continued. "And number three, to submit a written report to the court of our findings and conclusions at the end of the special prosecutor's investigation."

Webb said one of the first things he believed he and his team would do in the investigation would be to file a motion before Toomin requesting the appointment of a special grand jury.

He also said he didn't want to "reinvent the wheel," and would thus quickly reach out to the four government agencies who have investigated the situation: the Cook County state's attorney's office, the Chicago Police Department, the inspector general of Cook County and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Webb added that he would also reach out to Smollett's legal team early on, as well as set up interviews with key witnesses in the case.

Webb noted that he and Winston and Strawn would complete the investigation pro bono, without charging the county (and subsequently, taxpayers) any legal fees beyond out-of-pocket expenses.

This marks Webb's sixth appointment as a special prosecutor since he left the U.S. attorney's office in 1985, he said. He was the special prosecutor appointed in the 2004 death of David Koschman, who died after former Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley's nephew Richard Vanecko punched him and he hit his head on the pavement.

"I don't know where this case is going," Webb said in discussing a potential timeline for the investigation. "I'm going to take it one step at a time. I gotta master the facts. I gotta learn the legal issues and I gotta be fair to everybody. But I can tell you right now our strategy and our plan is to expedite it and move forward very quickly."

The office of Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx charged Smollett in February with 16 counts of disorderly conduct for purportedly orchestrating the incident the previous month. A month later, prosecutors dropped all charges with little explanation.

"While the court previously concluded that our office had no conflict of interest in this case, public trust is paramount to our work," the Cook County state's attorney's office said in a statement following Webb's appointment. "We pledge our full cooperation to the special prosecutor appointed today to review this matter. "

"We are proud of the dedicated women and men of the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office who work hard every day on behalf of victims and communities affected by crime," the statement continued. "As we continue our focus on efforts to increase public safety and reduce violence, we remain committed to justice, transparency, and fairness for those we serve."

Among the options available to Webb would be to restore charges against Smollett, who continues to maintain the January incident wasn't staged.

A former state appellate judge, Sheila O'Brien, petitioned for a special prosecutor, leading to Toomin's ruling.

It can't be easy being Jussie Smollett right now. The appointment of a special prosecutor puts his story back in the national news, with coverage from the New York Times: Dan K. Webb Is Named Special Prosecutor in Jussie Smollett Case to USA Today: Special prosecutor named to look into dropped charges against Jussie Smollett to Page Six: Special prosecutor who will re-investigate Jussie Smollett announced.

The fact that a special prosecutor has been appointed reminds everyone that Jussie sure looks guilty of staging a hoax, which is why dropping the charges against him was so controversial in the first place. He doesn't appear to be in any immediate legal danger, and obviously I say that as a non-lawyer, but even the possibility of "further prosecution" has to make him nervous.

Jussie Smollett's life and career are screwed up so far beyond what he could have possibly imagined when he decided to stage his little hoax that I almost find myself feeling sorry for him, but only almost. He set this thing in motion, for the most craven of reasons and apparently without even the slightest consideration of the impact it might have on the community around him. He doesn't appear to have even considered the possibility that his plan was less than foolproof. (My first post about all this was titled "What Jussie didn't know;" read it here.) He continues to profess his innocence in spite of the tsunami of evidence against him, and he has thrown the Osundairo brothers under the bus, claiming that they attacked him of their own volition out of hatred for him as a gay man. So, no, not much sympathy for Jussie Smollett.   

Finally, at least for now, regardless of how this ultimately ends for Jussie, his hoax will live on in infamy at UrbanDictionary.com, where "Smolletting" is now a verb. It's defined as "Giving of an elaborate, contrived story delivered with complete conviction for the purpose of personal gain." Read more here.

As I've said before, this has been another bad day for Jussie Smollett.

Update on Saturday morning. The local view of things, from the Chicago Tribune, in an article posted this morning:

[Former U.S. Attorney Dan] Webb’s appointment adds more star power to a case that already has made national headlines for months and touches on issues of race, politics and celebrity, even though it stems from a low-level felony charge of disorderly conduct.

... The allegations at the center of Smollett’s case are comparatively minor. Smollett was accused of orchestrating a fake hate crime attack on himself; the charges were later dropped by State’s Attorney Kim Foxx’s office with little explanation and to great public outcry.

In signing the order for a special prosecutor in June, [Judge] Toomin said Foxx overstepped her authority when she put her top deputy in charge of Smollett’s prosecution after she recused herself.

Foxx had spoken with a relative of Smollett’s in the early phases of the investigation after she was contacted by Tina Tchen, formerly Michelle Obama’s chief of staff — sparking speculation that the case’s ultimate outcome was tainted by political clout.

Webb’s appointment will open the whole matter anew, and his mandate is far-reaching. He has the power to investigate not only Smollett but any other people or agencies who touched the hot-button case since it exploded in January.

Webb’s team could reprosecute Smollett. Since he never entered a guilty plea or went on trial, new charges would not violate his right against double jeopardy, experts have said.

And Webb has the power to investigate Foxx’s handling of the case, which could put a cloud over her run for reelection in the March Democratic primary.

... Webb on Friday immediately said he’d likely impanel a special grand jury in the Smollett case, which could hear sworn testimony from witnesses and deliver criminal indictments. (Read the article here.) 
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Monday, August 19, 2019

Anthony Scaramucci: "I Was Wrong About Trump. Here's Why" - Updated

The Mooch explains, in an Opinion piece at the Washington Post. This is the article in its entirety; the tweets he refers to are posted below:

President Trump’s online insults directed at me on Monday were predictable after I publicly said that he’s unfit for office. The tenor of his abuse only reinforces my thinking: I can no longer in good conscience support the president’s reelection.

This isn’t a Road to Damascus moment; my concerns have been building publicly for a while. And I’m not seeking absolution. I just want to be part of the solution. The negatives of Trump’s demagoguery now clearly outweigh the positives of his leadership, and it is imperative that Americans unite to prevent him from serving another four years in office.

When I decided to support Trump’s candidacy and later to work in his administration, it wasn’t because I agreed with all of his policies or liked every aspect of his personality. As former New York mayor Ed Koch used to say, “If you agree with me on nine out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12, see a psychiatrist.”

My public praise of the man was over the top at times, but my private estimation of him was more measured. I thought Trump, despite his warts, could bring a pragmatic, entrepreneurial approach to the Oval Office. I thought he could be the reset button Washington needed to break through the partisan sclerosis. I thought he would govern in a more inclusive way than his campaign rhetoric might have indicated, and I naively thought that, by joining the administration, I could counteract the far-right voices in the room.

I thought wrong. And, yes, many of you told me so.

Even after leaving the administration, I supported the president based on my belief that the positive results achieved during his time in office, especially concerning the economy, outweighed the corrosive effects of his unpresidential behavior. Most notably, his pro-business governance has driven unemployment to record lows for almost every segment of the population and boosted wage growth — even if his lack of tact in trade negotiations with China now threatens to cause a recession. However, in the yes-or-no matter of supporting the president, I have reached a tipping point.

For those paying attention, my public criticism of the president has been mounting over the past two years. His response to the neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville was repellent. I was appalled by the administration’s child-separation policy along the southern border. His ranting about the news media as the “enemy of the people” was dangerous and beyond the pale. But the final straw came last month when Trump said on Twitter that four congresswomen — all of them U.S. citizens, and three native-born — should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

While it’s difficult and embarrassing to admit my errors in judgment, I believe I still have the ability to make amends.

I’ve been accused of turning on Trump only because he turned on me. If that were the case, the time to be vindictive would have been after I agreed to sell my company to serve in the administration, only to be used as a hatchet man and then summarily fired after 11 days as White House communications director simply because I used naughty words to tell a reporter, whom I had mistakenly trusted, the truth about bad people.

I broke from Trump because not only has his behavior become more erratic and his rhetoric more inflammatory, but also because, like all demagogues, he is incapable of handling constructive criticism. As we lie on the bed of nails Trump has made, it’s often difficult to see how much the paradigm of acceptable conduct has shifted. For the Republican Party, it’s now a question of whether we want to start cleaning up the mess or continue papering over the cracks.

I challenge my fellow Republicans to summon the nerve to speak out on the record against Trump. Defy the culture of fear he has created, and go public with the concerns you readily express in private. Hold on to your patriotism, and help save the country from his depredations. And to members of the so-called resistance, please leave room on the off-ramp for those willing to admit their mistakes.

My personal odyssey took longer than it should have, but I’m not concerned with being on the right side of history — I’m determined to ensure that good people are the ones who end up writing it.




Update on Tuesday evening. The Mooch is on the warpath:
Note: There's a grammatical error in Mike Murphy's tweet. He gets it: 






Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, August 18, 2019

Catching Up With The Candidates - Updated

There have been some changes in the race for the Democratic nomination since my last "2020 Pres D" post, which was written when Steve Bullock joined the race, then updated two days later when Bill de Blasio jumped in. (Read that post here and yes, I admit that my attention has wandered a bit over the last three months.) I'm still interested, of course, so let's update the lists:

Eric Swalwell and John Hickenlooper have departed the race; I've added their names to the "I'm Not Running Anymore" list. Stacey Abrams announced recently that she's not running this time around, so I added her to the "I'm Not Running" list. I also deleted the "Potential Democratic Candidates" and the "I'm Probably Not Running" lists. (You can see the most recent version of those lists in the post linked to above.) When de Blasio entered the race in May I said that it appeared the field was set, but to my surprise, there are now a couple of last-minute entries to the race.

Billionaire Tom Steyer, who said back in January that he wouldn't run, has now changed his mind and declared himself to be a candidate. Why? Apparently he believes that none of the other candidates are taking a strong enough stand against Donald. He joined the race after the first debates, but didn't qualify for the second, which took place in July. Currently he has met the donor threshold, but not the polling threshold, for the third set of debates, which will be in September. (As of right now, Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Beto O'Rourke, Amy Klobuchar and Andrew Yang have qualified for the third debates.)

The other new name is former Pennsylvania congressman Joe Sestak, who joined the race in June and didn't qualify for the July debates. So far he hasn't met either of the qualifications for the September debates. I've added Steyer and Sestak to the ''I'm Running" list. 

I'm Running: Declared Democratic Candidates, in order of their announcement
  1. John Delaney (7/28/17) 
  2. Andrew Yang (11/6/17) 
  3. Elizabeth Warren (12/31/18)
  4. Tulsi Gabbard (1/11/19)
  5. Julián Castro (1/12/19)
  6. Kirsten Gillibrand (1/16/19)  
  7. Kamala Harris (1/21/19)
  8. Pete Buttigieg (1/23/19)
  9. Marianne Williamson (1/30/19)
  10. Cory Booker (2/1/19)
  11. Amy Klobuchar (2/10/19)
  12. Bernie Sanders (2/19/19)
  13. Beto O'Rourke (3/14/19)
  14. Tim Ryan (4/5/19)
  15. Joe Biden (4/25/19)
  16. Michael Bennet (5/2/19)
  17. Wayne Messam (Declared 3/28, added to this list on 5/2/19)
  18. Steve Bullock (5/14/19)
  19. Bill de Blasio (5/16/19)
  20. Joe Sestak (6/22/19) 
  21. Tom Steyer (7/9/19)

 And what about Howard Schultz? He doesn't appear to be doing any of the things candidates normally do but he also hasn't definitively said he's not running anymore. For now I'll leave him on his own little list:

Running as an Independent: 
  1. Howard Schultz (1/29/19)  

I'm Not Running: People on this list considered running, or were mentioned somewhere, anywhere, as potentially being interested in running. They got enough attention that they felt the need to formally announce their non-candidacy:  

  1. Oprah Winfrey
  2. Andrew Cuomo
  3. Sheryl Sandberg, added Sept. 8
  4. Jason Kander, added Oct. 17
  5. Robert Iger, added Oct. 22
  6. Michael Avenatti, December 4, 2018
  7. Deval Patrick, December 5, 2018
  8. Martin O'Malley, January 3, 2019
  9. Luis Gutierrez, added January 7, 2019
  10. Bob Casey, January 19, 2019
  11. Eric Garcetti, January 29, 2019
  12. Andrew Gillum, January 29, 2019
  13. Mitch Landrieu, added February 11, 2019
  14. Eric Holder, 3/4/19
  15. Jeff Merkley, 3/5/19
  16. Sherrod Brown, 3/7/10
  17. Terry McAuliffe, 3/17/19
  18. Stacey Abrams 8/13/19

I'm Not Running Anymore: Declared candidates who have dropped out:
  1. Richard Ojeda (1/25/19)
  2. Eric Swalwell (7/8/19)
  3. John Hickenlooper (8/15/19)
  4. Jay Inslee  (8/21/19)
  5. Seth Moulton (8/23/19)

And one more thing: A look back. In July, 2015, former Virginia governor Jim Gilmore declared himself to be a candidate for the 2016 Republican nomination. He was the last Republican to declare; do you remember all 17 of the distinguished statesmen (and one woman) who ran to be the 2016 GOP nominee?

Declared GOP Candidates in 2015, and the date they entered the race:
  1. Ted Cruz (March 23) 
  2. Rand Paul (April 7)
  3. Marco Rubio (April 14)
  4. Dr. Ben Carson (May 3) 
  5. Carly Fiorina (May 4) 
  6. Mike Huckabee (May 5) 
  7. Rick Santorum (May 27)
  8. George Pataki (May 28)
  9. Lindsey Graham (June 1) 
  10. Rick Perry (June 4) 
  11. Jeb Bush (June 15)
  12. Donald Trump (June 16) 
  13. Bobby Jindal (June 24) 
  14. Chris Christie (June 30)
  15. Scott Walker (July 13) 
  16. John Kasich (July 21) 
  17. Jim Gilmore (July 30) 
Rick Perry, who's now the Secretary of Energy, was the first to drop out, on September 11, followed 10 days later by Scott Walker. Four of the men on this list are still in the senate (Cruz, Paul, Rubio and Graham;) in addition to Rick Perry, Dr. Ben Carson is also a member of Donald's cabinet.

Update on Thursday morning: Washington State governor Jay Inslee has ended his presidential run; he will now run for reelection as governor. I moved him to the "I'm not running anymore." list.

Parting words from Governor Inslee:




 Days until the election: 438

Update #2 on Friday morning. Rep. Seth Moulton is dropping out of the race, as reported by Talking Points Memo: 

Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA), a 2020 presidential hopeful and veteran who focused his centrist campaign on military issues, will formally end his campaign on Friday.

In an interview with the New York Times, he said that the race is truly between former Vice President Joe Biden and Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and warned that “veering too far left” could cost Democrats the White House.

He cited Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, another moderate who also struggled to make the debate stage, as evidence that the primary was pulling candidates further and further left.

He was also open about his own missteps, as he did not enter the race until late April, just before Biden announced and completely overshadowed the rest of the field.

“Candidly, getting in the race late was a mistake,” Moulton told the Times. “It was a bigger handicap than I expected.”

Moulton declined to make any endorsements, though he spoke highly of Biden. He will run again for his House seat.

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee also dropped out of the race this week to run for another gubernatorial term; former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper exited last week and will run for Senate.

I've moved Rep. Moulton to the "I'm not running anymore" list.

Days until the election: 437
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Thursday, August 15, 2019

"Anthony Scaramucci Is How You Got Trump"--Rick Wilson - Updated

Once again, Rick Wilson is having fun with words, this time as he slices and dices "I don't love Donald anymore" former Trump sycophant Anthony Scaramucci:

As a card-carrying, O.G. never-Trump Republican, I’m almost tempted to cut Scaramucci some slack, welcome him to the fold and assure him that this was inevitable. His bromance with Trump could never last because Trump is an utterly faithless creature for whom support is never enough: Trump demands humiliation and subjugation, not counsel and insight. It only took Scaramucci’s mild chiding — that Trump’s unseemly response to the mass killings in El Paso and Dayton, Ohio, including his recent visits to those cities, was a “catastrophe” — for Scaramucci to hop off (or be tossed from, depending on your point of view) the Trump train and to dutifully sign up for The Resistance™.

Before Scaramucci gets his own #WokeMooch hashtag, let’s check his credentials.

Yes, he’s had it with Trump, but there’s something that grinds about the road-to-Damascus conversion narrative of the president’s former confidante and fellow New York blowhard. There’s a whiff of a reality-TV tease, the aroma of a pro-wrestling kayfabe, the faint stench of a canned I’m fired? No, you’re fired! melodrama, mostly because none of Trump’s character flaws was hidden from Scaramucci or anyone else in the enabler class: The short-fingered, short-tempered vulgarian occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. didn’t just spring his semi-literate, Twitter-raging, race-baiting, self-declared-private-parts-grabbing, logic-averse, serial-lying and crony-coddling governing style last week — he’s been this guy all along. And Scaramucci, and his ilk, have defended him, touting his alleged brilliance every step of the way. Here’s a gem from Scaramucci’s introductory news conference, in the White House press briefing room, at the start of his ill-fated 11-day run as Trump’s communications director:

“I was in the Oval Office with him earlier today, and we were talking about letting him be himself, letting him express his full identity. I think he’s got some of the best political instincts in the world and perhaps in history. When you think about it he started his political ascent two years and two months ago, and he’s done a phenomenal job for the American people.” 

Or a week later, on CNN:

“He’s our leader and one of the smartest people that I’ve ever met, if not the smartest. He’s just smart in a different way than maybe some of the people in the journalist community don’t like.”

It raises the question: Is Scaramucci on an all ‘shrooms and bootleg vodka diet? Does his circle of friends consist primarily of members of the Trump University dean’s list? Or is it more likely he always knew Trump was a trash-talking clod before getting behind him and later taking a West Wing job. Odds are Scaramucci had seen Trump up close and personal, the president actively governing as a policy-allergic windbag, when “The Mooch” gave him all those glowing reviews. So before deciding whether to stamp or yank Scaramucci’s never-Trump card, it’s also worth asking: Was Scaramucci’s shtick performative then or is it performative now? (From the Washington Post, read the article here.) 

 Update: More from the Mooch. 


Here's the Vanity Fair story in it's entirety, written by William D. Cohan:

 New York financier Anthony Scaramucci, aka the Mooch, had his 15 minutes of fame back in the summer of 2017 when he spent 11 days as Donald Trump’s communications director in the White House. Even after John Kelly, then the chief of staff, fired him in the aftermath of his profanity-laced diatribe against other members of the White House staff that appeared in the New Yorker, Scaramucci stayed loyal to Trump, defending him publicly on TV spot after TV spot. But now, nearly two years later, the Mooch has soured bigly on Trump—and vice versa.

It all broke into the open a week ago during the Mooch’s appearance on the Bill Mahershow. Trump retaliated with a stream of tweets directed Scaramucci’s way. But the Mooch says that the president has met his match. A Harvard Law School graduate with working-class roots from Port Washington, Long Island, he’s not one to back down and is happy to go toe-to-toe with the most powerful man on Earth. I’ve been reporting on the Mooch for years, and so was curious about just what he is up to this time. What follows is a lightly edited and condensed version of our recent conversation, now that Scaramucci has decided to throw cold water on the man he calls “The Wicked Witch of the West Wing.”

William D. Cohan: You’ve had quite the last few days.

Anthony Scaramucci: Oh my god, this jackass. You know, it’s all good. I mean, it could be the best three or four days ever, actually.

You were on the Trump train for more than three years. Now, in the last week or so, you’ve very publicly gotten off. Why? Was there a catalyst?

Let’s go back, okay? I had always stated very clearly where I was with the president, okay? When I joined his campaign—I could send you a copy of my book, if you haven’t read it—I had an epiphany. He was talking to blue-collar people that have felt left out. They have felt a vacuum of advocacy from establishment politicians on the left and right for probably three decades. So when he descended in those areas to talk to them, he didn’t say they were deplorable; he didn’t say they were misfits; he didn’t say any of those things. He said, “Hey, you got a problem, and I’m gonna try to help you.” Okay? And he also identified and crystallized three or four things that have to be fixed.

Number one, we hollowed out our manufacturing, and we allowed these asymmetric trade deals which helped the global system to hurt a large percentage of people in our own country. We have to fix that, and we’re capable of fixing it. Second thing that he recognized—you may disagree with me on this, but I believe this—is that we have to have a propitious balance between regulation and releasing the animal spirits of the system. The third piece, which frankly he gets an incomplete on, is you had to reform the tax code. You had the highest corporate taxes in the industrial world. You had to reform the code. Now you could’ve scored it differently, and you could’ve put more middle-class incentives in there, and, you know, you didn’t—you don’t need to be doing this level of deficit spending, ’cause what you find about this level of deficit spending, it’s not necessarily increasing growth. So he didn’t get everything right, but at least he was trying to move in the right direction, okay? Those are the positives.

And the negatives:

Go look at the tweeting and the craziness and the fracturing of the alliances and the irrational Trump trade-tariff roulette. Okay, we’re putting the tariffs on; we’re taking the tariffs off; we’re putting them on; we may take them off. Hey, you can’t run a business like that if you’re a business leader. Business leaders large and small in the United States have said, “Hey, I gotta stop my capital investing. I don’t know what this guy is doing, because if he—if I start to invest in Mexico and he slaps a 20% tariff down there for some reason that I don’t understand, that’s gonna kill my business in Mexico. Let me wait this guy out.”

It’s a regressive tax. Okay, and moreover, it’s the least representative tax in our nation’s history, and let me explain why. We broke from England. We broke from them because our chant was no taxation without representation, and yet when you look at what Trump is doing with his tax, he’s using an arcane law that was established right after the Cuban Missile Crisis to give the president executive power to put on tariffs for national-security purposes, okay, and so you have one person deciding on this tax. It hasn’t gone through the legislature to be approved.

But what was the moment the scales actually fell from your eyes?

The red line was the racism—full-blown racism. He can say that he’s not a racist, and I agree with him, okay? And let me explain to you why he’s not a racist, ’cause this is very important. He’s actually worse than a racist. He is so narcissistic, he doesn’t see people as people. He sees them as objects in his field of vision. And so therefore, that’s why he hasbno empathy. That’s why he’s got his thumb up in the air when he’s taking a picture with an orphan. That’s why when someone’s leaning over the desk and asks [Nobel Prize–winning human rights activist Nadia Murad], “Well, what happened to your family members?”—they were murdered—he just looks at her and says, “Okay, when are we getting coffee here?”

You know, he doesn’t look at people—and by the way, if you and I were in his field of vision and he had a cold and the two of us had to die for him to get a Kleenex, you’re fucking dead. I mean, there’s no chance. You understand that, right?

And then there’s the mental element, right?

I think the guy is losing it, mentally. He has declining mental faculties; he’s becoming more petulant; he’s becoming more impetuous. Okay, you see just by the way he’s sweating, his body’s not doing well. It’s obviously not a guy that takes care of himself, right? And he doesn’t listen to anybody. And just think about this, okay? There’s no one—there’s no Jim Mattis; there’s no Gary Cohn; there’s no one to check him anymore. Whatever my differences were with General John Kelly, after he left, this thing has completely unspooled.

What do you think people get wrong about Trump?

I don’t have Trump derangement syndrome, but what I do have is Trump fatigue syndrome. It’s a very different thing, okay? And I submit to you that the nation, my party members, all have Trump fatigue syndrome, okay?

Trump is crazy, everything about him is terrible, or we gotta do everything we can to defeat him. He wants that. The George Conway Twitter feed is an example—and I love George, and he’s absolutely right about everything—but Trump has anesthetized the country to George Conway’s Twitter feed. Right? You’re looking at George Conway going, Okay, he’s very emotionally attached to hating on Trump, and he’s lighting Trump up every day. Even though he’s 100% right.

Trump has figured out a way to push people so that the average person says, “Okay, wait a minute.” They’ve lost their—they’re too emotionally invested in hating. I don’t hate him. He needs to be dismantled because he’s un-American; he’s hurting our civics, and he’s hurting our culture; and he’s done a good job of proving that some of the policies he has work. Let’s get the policies in place. Same policies, less crazy.

So what’s your role in all this?

He has nobody that he’s going up against that can fight like him. And by the way, watch what I’m doing. I’m not calling him Small Hands or saying he’s got a small penis. I’m not doing any of that. I’m attacking him by asserting presidential leadership; this is where the bar is, this is where you are. You’re bullying. You’re angry. You’re detached. You can’t put a coalition together. You can’t delegate and form a managerial structure to run the country.

And why are you doing this?

I love my country. You may not agree with my political views, you may not like my demeanor or personality, but you can’t say I don’t love my country. And so the point is, you want to attack me, no problem. I want to show my fellow Republicans those are paper bullets coming out of that gun. They are not as piercing as you think, because if you change your attitude and you reflect back, you don’t absorb that and you reflect it back, you’ll demolish this guy. He’s a paper tiger, Bill. He can be completely dismantled and defeated. And unfortunately, this isn’t about a personal thing.

This is an observational objective thing: the guy’s nuts. We’ve gotta defeat him. Everybody in the Republican Party knows it. They don’t want to lose their mantle of power and their mantle of leadership, so let’s primary the guy. And by the way, let’s find somebody younger, charismatic, understands the issues, can reach into the population and say, “Yeah, I got it.” But come on, this guy is gonna take us off the rails.

His poll numbers are quite bad at this stage. Do you think he might drop out, like Lyndon Johnson in 1968?

Yes. He’s gonna drop out of the race because it’s gonna become very clear. Okay, it’ll be March of 2020. He’ll likely drop out by March of 2020. It’s gonna become very clear that it’s impossible for him to win. And is this the kind of guy that’s gonna want to be that humiliated and lose as a sitting president? He’s got the self-worth in terms of his self-esteem of a small pigeon. It’s a very small pigeon. Okay. And so you think this guy’s gonna look at those poll numbers and say—he’s not gonna be able to handle that humiliation. And by the way, he is smart enough to know that that entire Congress hates his guts.

So therefore, that’s why he amps up the bullying: let me show you what I’m gonna do to Scaramucci. I’m gonna disgrace and bully him, okay, and therefore he’s gonna now become a pariah, and that’s what I’m gonna do to you if you open your mouth about me. But what I've just proven, you can’t really disgrace me. I’m sorry. I don’t care, and I’m gonna now dismantle you, and I’m gonna explain to the American people what you’re doing to them.

You know me, I’m a happy warrior so it’s no problem. I make fun of my hair. You know, Nikki Haley was looking at a bruise on my forehead. I said, “That was from a Botox injection at 7 a.m.. Don’t judge it, Nikki. Don’t judge.” There was a little contusion there.

So what’s the logical conclusion of all this, do you think?

Well, he’s gotta be primaried, so we have to find somebody to primary him, and I think we will. And again, not that Bill Weld isn’t a great guy, but unfortunately Bill Weld doesn’t have the panache right at this moment. He doesn’t have the panache to light up that group. And again, remember, all you need is to get enough delegates to get in the game here and disrupt this thing. And so listen, there’s gotta be somebody in the Republican Party that’s worried about 2024 and the identity of the Republican Party.

You know, this is like Game of Thrones. We need an Arya Stark, okay? We gotta take this guy out because this is like the Night King. The minute the Night King is vaporized, all the zombies are gonna fall by the wayside, right? We had the Wicked Witch of the West, but he is the Wicked Witch of the West Wing. We gotta get some water thrown on him. He’ll start melting.

The Mooch is really on a roll. He even called Donald fat:


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)