In Case You Missed It (v11)

Ready for this week's recap?  Here we go!

In Sunday School, I spent some time listening in on Kentucky's Rand Paul on Meet the Press explaining what the issue is with the impeachment inquiry. Well, I should say, what the issues are - because he was all over the map on that, and Chuck Todd didn't help. Hearing a few minutes of the senator talking left me a bit confused.

So, fairness is the issue, except that it's not the issue,  it's getting into the head of the president, unless it's not that, it's a partisan attack on the results of the election. OK - fine -- let's go there, then, right Chuck Todd?

Well, let's see what happened. Did Chuck follow up?

Negative on that; the next question had nothing to do with Paul's answer, it had everything to do with giving the president cover. That's right - the question was whether a distinction should be made between Trump asking for a quid pro quo and his administration asking for one. You know, Mulvaney maybe?

It went on like that for a bit longer; fortunately, Connecticut's Rep. Jim Himes was there to add some sense to things. Check the post to see what Himes had to say. 

Monday's visit to the Update Desk closed the loop on a post I had done about Matt Beadnell, the Republican Onondaga County Comptroller and the allegations of  payroll theft (not double-dipping, which is what he called it) against Democratic Elections Commissioner Dustin Czarny.

It turns out that the Beadnell had estimated - grossly overestimated, that is - the hours that Czarny spent driving for Uber and Lyft, and the DA was not going to file any charges, because in some cases, an appearance is not in fact the reality. Beadnell was a bit retrospect in an interview with the local paper in advance of the election, and likely more than a bit disappointed after it. 

Beadnell admitted to the editorial board of the local paper that he was wrong to have notified the party boss about the audit, and said he's "gone back and forth" on whether he erred by not talking to Czarny - but making it look political was worse. He got the endorsement of the paper anyway, but Syracuse City Auditor Marty Masterpole won, becoming "the first Democrat elected to a major countywide office since 1991."

I also talked, in this Grains of Salt post, about the decision by Syracuse voters to have independent redistricting for Common Council districts. While the city was thinking ahead, the County Legislature did not make the same decision when the discussed it earlier this year. According to Legislature chair David Knapp,

We just felt it was adding another bureaucratic commission that really didn't have any teeth, to advise a commission that's already in place. In this really highly charged political environment we're in, finding nonpartisan groups is pretty tough these days. 

On the plus side? Read how most of the county legislators are now on board with this - including Knapp.

On Wednesday, I was considering the opening statements in the impeachment hearings from Committee Chair Adam Schiff in Part 1 and Ranking Member Devin Nunes in Part 2 of my Wondering on Wednesday post.

Schiff was long winded, taking us on a long and winding road to some questions, then landing here:

These are the questions we must ask and answer. Without rancor if we can, without delay regardless, and without party favor or prejudice if we are true to our responsibilities. Benjamin Franklin was asked what kind of a country American was to become, "A Republic," he answered, "if you can keep it." The fundamental issue raised by the impeachment inquiry into Donald J. Trump is: Can we, keep it?

Nunes was equally all over the map, reciting a long list of alleged offenses and misfires and attacks by the Democrats on the president, including this one, asking if we should

forget about them trying to obtain nude pictures of Trump from Russian pranksters who pretended to be Ukrainian officials; 

Fortunately, none have been shown, and we're all the better for it. Nunes and Schiff, the ultimate California odd couple, had a lot more to say; needless to say, so did I.

The Democrats are still hanging in, still sending emails, still desperate for money, still inching ever close to Iowa and New Hampshire, and still fighting folks who are buying their way in. We did, however, have a really good email of the week. Here's an excerpt.

I understand for many folks in both states this is a tradition that they hold very dear, and I have learned first hand that they take their role in vetting candidates seriously. But “this is how it’s always been done” isn’t ever a good reason to keep doing it.The current system does not give enough of a voice to people of color and it's long past time that we as Democrats practice what we preach and fix it. 

To be clear, this isn’t about which candidates voters in these states may choose, or have chosen in the past. This is about who gets to do the choosing. 

You can read who sent that one, as well as get some other news in this post from the Update Desk.

This week's TGIF focused mostly on the impeachment hearings, and the circus that surrounds them. We had gaslighting, lying, grandstanding, arguing, dumb questions, and more - and then we had the media trying to "report" on what was going on. It seems those folks are looking for a little more excitement from the witnesses, because apparently from a reality TV standard, these things are a snooze fest.

And yet Taylor and Kent failed - or perhaps succeeded, given their nonpartisan roles in government and the atypically serious postures struck by lawmakers of both parties - by dropping no bombshells and largely repeating the testimony they gave congressional investigators at depositions previously held behind closed doors.

Those words, from an NBC reporter,  prompted a slow burn.

So, instead, they should have changed their stories, to generate better headlines? Tweeted from their witness chairs to spark controversy? Pounded their shoes on the table, or Nicholsoned or something? Would that have been more 'pizzazzy' for everyone?

NBC wasn't the only offender - Reuters also 'contributed' to the conversation, which you can read in the post, and you can also see who else had a good or bad week.

Next week, we've got more hearings, which means we'll have more shenanigans, and we also have a debate.  Yay us!  

As always, I welcome comments on posts, and encourage you to subscribe so you don't miss anything - just look for the "Instant Gratification" box on the right sidebar. I promise you'll get posts and nothing but posts. 

See you next week.