Quick Takes (v69): The Wrong Apology

Hmm... 

Some of the folks at Fox News seemed surprised that the newly-released videos of Paul Pelosi being attacked with a hammer showed, um, Paul Pelosi being attacked with a hammer.  

Here's the scoop from the folks at Mediaite:

Harris Faulkner, the host of Outnumbered, apologized after the footage aired without a 'graphic content' warning.

"The producers are apologizing to me, but I want to apologize to you,” Faulkner said immediately after airing the footage. “We had no idea what that was going to look like and that should have had a warning and a graphic warning before we showed it and then on screen.”

"We had no idea what that was going to look like." Seriously? 

Pelosi's attack and injuries were widely reported; Faulkner's network covered it, from every conceivable angle (and a few inconceivable ones), for days after it happened, with its usual level of seriousness and respect. Of course, I'm kidding about that last part; I'm sure you can imagine how the coverage went. 

Not only that, but before Faulkner's show aired, the network had already shared the video under this headline.  

If that wasn't enough of a clue, the article states that the video is "of the" attack, and it included commentary on what the footage included. There was also a little back-patting.

Fox News was among the news organizations pushing for the release of the videos.

Clearly, the video should never have been shown without a strongly worded warning'  -Faulkner was right to apologize for that. I think Fox should apologize for showing it at all - there's no 'news value' in it. Unless, of course, the intention was to prove how wrong the network's earlier coverage was. 

And by earlier, I mean as recently as just a couple of days ago.  

That would be an apology worth hearing.  

In Case You Missed It (v116)

The writing was easier last week, at least for a while. Here's your recap of what made it out of my head. 

I opened the week with a Sidebar driven by all the attention received by What's-his-name, the guy who hosts Meet the Press. He "did his job," fans say, by having another on-air argument with Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI). 

I'm no Johnson fan; I think he's a partisan hack. Even as I dislike him, I admit he's not wrong on everything. For example, he and I agree, the American people deserve to hear about the bad behavior of government officials, and Congress deserves the chance to provide 'oversight' of the government, even if no criminal statutes have been violated. 

WHN thinks that's ridiculous.

So, I guess the problem that I feel like you run into with that decision is what you're saying is if the Justice Department decides a crime wasn't committed, they're not going to prosecute a crime, it sounds like you still want the information out there because you want to politically damage the person that was investigated?

I suggested that maybe we want these bad actors to be held accountable, even if they're not 'officially' criminals, and it led to these questions.

Would WHN say that if the subject of the investigation was Clarence Thomas? Brett Kavanaugh? Marjorie Taylor Green? Matt Gaetz? Ron Johnson? Has he ever said that about any Donald Trump investigation?

We all know the answer to those questions, don't we?

Next up? A Quick Take inspired by the latest classified document finding - a "small number" of them, at the new home of former VP Mike Pence. I caught wind of that via a breaking news alert, and as often happens, my mind started racing. My former boss and co-workers would call out, "Oh, look - a squirrel!" when this happened in staff meetings. Here's a bit of that.

Shortly after seeing the headline, I had sketched out a perfect solution.

The houses, garages, car trunks, libraries, golf bags, duffel bags, diaper bags, bar carts, and sock drawers of every member of Congress, as well as every living president and vice president, must be searched for classified documents or other absconded-with items; the search must happen as soon as possible, to protect our national sanity, er, I mean, our national security.

And Ivanka's grave, too, must be searched - don't forget Ivanka's grave. I mean, who buries his ex-wife on his golf course while under investigation for missing documents?

Who does that? Donald Trump does, that's who.

If we need that kind of document-hunting effort, we'd need funding, which I figured out; and we'd need people to do the work. I had an answer for that, too.

Call up the Texas bounty hunters.

There's a reason they'd be perfect for the job - and it's in the post.  

I spent some time in the Sunday School classrooms, looking for discussions on the debt ceiling, which seems at least as important as worrying about which potential presidential candidate is hurt more by the politics of their document handling.  

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) had some thoughts on the debt, how we got where we are, and a possible solution, which he shared on CNN's State of the Union.

Everybody believes -- I mean, my goodness, when you have $31.4 trillion, and we have thrown caution to the wind, and to blame the Republicans, Republicans to blame the Democrats, who's at fault? Everybody's at fault. We don't have a process. I have been there 12 years, no budget.

He thinks the government needs to have "guardrails" on spending; having a budget, and trying to stick to it, is a good start.  And, while some have suggested forming a commission to develop recommendations, he's not a fan.

Can't you look and find out in government where you can be more efficient, more basically prudent with the taxpayers' money and quit wasting it, don't you think? And we all talk about waste, fraud, and abuse. That's an easy thing to do. But no one looks at it.

Hear, hear! 

It took me until Thursday morning to get the post out, but I did do some Wondering on Wednesday, on hypocrisy and indifference, among other things. Here's the hypocrisy wondering.

One thing I don't have to wonder about? Whether the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability will be asking for Mike Pence's visitor logs. I'm pretty sure that's not going to happen - but I wouldn't be surprised at all if they asked for Jimmy Carter's. 

The indifference part? Mass shootings, and guns. There were three mass shootings in California in a matter of days. One was plastered all over the news; another was pretty widely covered. The other one?

You probably didn't hear much about the third one; it was likely gang- or drug-related, which means, you know, "it was their own damn fault" that young mom and her baby were executed along with several other family members. I wonder why the media doesn't talk about that kind of mass shooting so much? Is it because they wouldn't have time to tell us about storms headed for the I-95 corridor?

So, that's a wrap on last week; as always, feel free to drop a comment on any of the posts. 

Wondering on Wednesday 1/25/23

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Tonight, I'm wondering how many lawyers out there are experienced with classified documents, and how many of them have been retained by current or former government officials? I mean, even former President Jimmy Carter had classified documents found in his house once - and if it can happen to him, is anyone really in the clear?

According to the Associated Press, 

It turns out former officials from all levels of government discover they are in possession of classified material(s) and turn them over to the authorities at least several times a year, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of classified documents.

And sometimes, the folks in charge of handling them correctly are guilty of allowing the documents to be mishandled, which leads me to wonder which group should be under investigation: the handlers or the mishandlers? 

One thing I don't have to wonder about? Whether the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability will be asking for Mike Pence's visitor logs. I'm pretty sure that's not going to happen - but I wouldn't be surprised at all if they asked for Jimmy Carter's. 

I will never stop wondering about mass shootings - they've become a familiar fixture here (and only here.) We've had school shootings, Walmart shootings, and house of worship shootings. We've had medical office shootings, entertainment venue shootings, and grocery store shootings. And this month alone, California has seen three mass shootings, with nearly 30 dead. 

You probably didn't hear much about the third one; it was likely gang- or drug-related, which means, you know, "it was their own damn fault" that young mom and her baby were executed along with several other family members. I wonder why the media doesn't talk about that kind of mass shooting so much? Is it because they wouldn't have time to tell us about storms headed for the I-95 corridor?

I also wonder why Democrats rarely mention that kind of shooting? They're very quick to mention 'hate' and 'racism' whenever a shooting involves people of color, even before details are available. Some did that with the Monterey Park shooting; there were no retractions after we learned the shooter was a septuagenarian Asian man. I'm sure they were tempted to do the same with the Half Moon Bay shooting, where another Asian man was behind the killing of Hispanic and Asian farm workers.

Republicans will always mention Chicago when they're in front of microphones, as Rep. Mike McCaul did on CNN's State of the Union, suggesting that red flag laws and strict gun laws aren't the solution. Why don't Dems mention Chicago more, I wonder?

One last thing on guns and another part of my wonderment on all of this. The Virginia teacher who was shot by her six-year-old student is planning on suing the school district for its failure to act on multiple concerns raised, by teachers and staff, that the child who did have a gun might have had a gun.

NEWPORT NEWS, Va. (AP) — Concerned staff warned administrators at a Virginia elementary school three times that a 6-year-old boy had a gun and was threatening other students in the hours before he shot and wounded a teacher, but the administration “was paralyzed by apathy” and didn't call the police, remove the boy from class, or lock down the school, the wounded teacher's lawyer said Wednesday.

“On that day, over the course of a few hours, three different times — three times — school administration was warned by concerned teachers and employees that the boy had a gun on him at the school and was threatening people. But the administration could not be bothered,” Toscano said.

Among the reasons the warnings were ignored? He had little pockets, presumably too small to hold a gun, and it was almost the end of the school day, so there was no need to look harder for the weapon - even though he had threatened another child on the playground. I wonder why, and how, after Uvalde, any school district employee could have such a dismissive attitude about this.

Finally, we learned Pope Francis said that "being homosexual is not a crime" even though "Catholic teaching holds that homosexual acts are a sin." He said the Church "should work to put an end to" laws criminalizing homosexuality. Importantly, he also

stressed the need to distinguish between the two, and said, for example, that lack of charity with one another is also a sin. 

I can't help wondering if anyone will take that part to heart. 

What are you wondering about?

Sunday School 1/22/23

The classrooms were full of talk about documents, even before Mike Pence found some at his house, but I did find some folks discussing the debt ceiling.  

We'll start with Dana Bash and her guests on CNN's State of the Union. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) thinks President Biden shouldn't negotiate with the Republicans. 

...the MAGA Republicans should note one important fact. Almost 25 percent of all of the national debt accumulated over the history of the United States, 230 years, was accumulated during the four years of Donald Trump.

He says they need to accept responsibility for paying for the debt, and they need to understand the consequences of not doing that.

And if we play games with this, if we delay this, if we have short-term extensions of the national debt, we run the very risk of a recession in this economy, millions of Americans out of work and interest rates going even higher, denying people an opportunity to buy a home or a car. And this economy will be stalled. We shouldn't play games with the national debt.

Bash recalled when Senator Biden was "the lead negotiator" on spending cuts in exchange for a debt limit; Durbin thinks it's different now, because of "the Trump years" and the "15 ballots to choose the speaker."

... he gave the authority to each member of the House to initiate a vote of no confidence on a daily basis. I mean, this is a House of Representatives which is under control of the MAGA Republicans at this point. And I'm fearful that very few constructive things will emerge.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), who disagrees with Durbin, thinks not negotiating is a "mistake." 

...we should be able to talk and find out where our differences are. And if they are irreconcilable, then you have to move on from there and let the people make their decisions. Using the debt ceiling and holding it hostage hasn't worked in the past, OK? And anyone who wants to look at what happened in 2011 and 2013, then go ahead. It didn't work out well. 

Bash asked who was holding it hostage; sounds like the GOP. He said 60% of retirees in West Virginia are on Social Security and Medicare, and he doesn't like people scaring "the bejesus out of them" by putting cuts on the table. Rather, they need to "set a target" and look for wasteful spending that can be cut. 

Everybody believes -- I mean, my goodness, when you have $31.4 trillion, and we have thrown caution to the wind, and to blame the Republicans, Republicans to blame the Democrats, who's at fault? Everybody's at fault. We don't have a process. I have been there 12 years, no budget.

He thinks that's wrong. After all

...every American has to live within a budget. If they don't, they're in trouble financially. Every business that is successful has to live within a budget. Every state has to live within a budget. Shouldn't the federal government have some guardrails that say, hey, guys, you're getting over -- you're overreaching here and you're overspending? 

He says we have to pick the priorities, including "the security of our country, opportunities for people and taking care of the most vulnerable, and making sure the people that have earned it through basically their Social Security and Medicare are protected."

He doesn't want cuts to benefits; rather, raising the income cap for the FICA tax is "the easiest and quickest thing" they can do. And the last thing we need is a committee to look at this stuff; he agrees with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on that. 

Can't you look and find out in government where you can be more efficient, more basically prudent with the taxpayers' money and quit wasting it, don't you think? And we all talk about waste, fraud and abuse. That's an easy thing to do. But no one looks at it.

Rep. Mike McCaul (R-TX), who voted to raise the debt ceiling three times since '17, says if they don't do it again, there'd be "catastrophic economic consequences." And, we don't have any time to waste.

The fact is, we should be having these conversations right now. We know that Secretary Yellen is going to put -- she can put this off until June. June's going to be the target month. But the speaker of the House is willing to sit down today with the president of the United States and try to work this out. And I would encourage him to do that.

In the Face the Nation classroom, Margaret Brennan asked Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) if it's a mistake for the White House not to negotiate with the Rs. 

We should have a "clean lift of the debt ceiling," he said, and he doesn't think anyone should "flirt with not paying" our credit card. The Republicans should come out with what they want to cut.

Is it the cutting Social Security and Medicare that Rick Scott wanted to, is it cutting aid to Ukraine in the middle of a war between a democracy and an illegally invading dictator? Let them put on the table what they want to cut so that the American public can see what their priorities are.

Kaine and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) have sponsored the Protect Our Credit Act; it says

the president has got to cover the debts of the United States. And if that includes raising the debt ceiling, the president can do that. But if Congress disapproves, then you can have an expedited up or down vote in Congress.

It's similar to an Obama-era move by Sen. Mitch McConnell back in the day, Kaine said. Maybe that means it'll get bipartisan support?

See you around campus. 

Quick Takes (v68): Bring on the Bounty Hunters

Breaking News Alert: Pence has classified documents, too!'

From the article:

Lawyers for former Vice President Mike Pence said a “small number” of classified documents were found at his home in Indiana last week.

Pence’s lawyers notified the National Archives and Records Administration of the discovery on Wednesday, according to a letter obtained by CNBC. The news was reported earlier by CNN.

The classified documents were discovered on Jan. 16 after Pence had outside counsel “with experience in handling classified documents” search his own home and records “out of an abundance of caution” following the news that classified documents were found at President Joe Biden’s home and office.

I'll let you put your own spin on why Pence waited until documents were found at President Biden's property and his old office, instead of doing that when they were found at his old boss's place.  

My spin? He realized that if it can happen to Biden - a regular, church-going guy - it can happen to anyone.

And what happens now?

• Does the press go back to slamming the Rs for their carelessness, and give Biden five or ten minutes of breathing room? 

• Does the media now invest air time trying to determine the political viability of Pence, who many think might be running for president against Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis, and that other guy?

• Will the House Oversight and Accountability Committee decide we need to know who's been in Pence's house? Who wouldn't love to see that visitor log, right? And why he waited so long to disclose the finding? And why the documents weren't already in a locked safe? And why he hired a lawyer to search, instead of inviting the FBI to tea? And what, exactly, constitutes a "small number" of documents? Is that Joe Biden literally a small number, or is that a Trumpian small number? And did Mother know he had them? 

• Will the Ds put their rising young stars (or their ancient ones) in front of the cameras to read their Republican colleagues' scathing tweets and press releases about how horrible it is when Democrats mishandle documents?

Shortly after seeing the headline, I sketched out a perfect solution.

The houses, garages, car trunks, libraries, golf bags, duffel bags, diaper bags, bar carts, and sock drawers of every member of Congress, as well as every living president and vice president, must be searched for classified documents or other absconded-with items; the search must happen as soon as possible, to protect our national sanity, er, I mean, our national security.

And Ivanka's grave, too, must be searched - don't forget Ivanka's grave. I mean, who buries his ex-wife on his golf course while under investigation for missing documents?

Who does that? Donald Trump does, that's who.

I realize this would be an expensive search, given the whole debt ceiling and fiscal cliff and whatnot. I also understand we have a shortage of law enforcement officers across the country, so we certainly can't repurpose any of them for this. But I have a plan for that.

Pull all of the Republican pork-barrel spending from the omnibus spending bill passed last month. There's at least $900M in there that they don't want, and think is wrong, and I expect they'd be delighted if it didn't get spent in their districts.

Now that we've got the funding lined up, how do we spend it?  

Call up the Texas bounty hunters.

Pay them on a graduated scale, starting at $2K per page for the lowest level of classification, and up to $10K for the highest level: top secret - classified - eyes only - compartmentalized - secured room - share under penalty of death - don't even think about burying this with the mother of your favorite kids - or sharing it with your financially impaired son - yada yada yada.

 I'm thinking that $900M would be a tasty enticement for these folks.

Why the Texas bounty hunters, you ask?

Anyone who can determine the date of a random woman's last period as she walks past them into doctor's office surely would be able to determine if a document has a classified marking on it. This should be a piece of cake for them. 

Got an idea for how to bring this all to an end? Drop a comment!

Sidebar: Sunday School 1/15/23

Last week, Meet the Press host Chuck Todd aka What's-his-name (WHN) received a lot of attention from folks on the left for his interview with Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson. 

Cheers rang out for how Johnson was 'handled' and how WHN was 'finally doing his job.' The video of the interview was widely shared, too. (Here's the transcript if you want to follow along.)

Give the accolades, you'd think it was a journalistic powerhouse of an interview, right? Well, not unless you think that mocking, laughing, taunting belligerence is the right way to conduct an interview. I don't agree; I think prior hosts of the show would be appalled, and I think WHN is the wrong person for this job.

I'm no Johnson fan; I think he's a partisan hack. Even as I dislike him, I admit he's not wrong on everything. For example, he and I agree, the American people deserve to hear about the bad behavior of government officials, and Congress deserves the chance to provide 'oversight' of the government, even if no criminal statutes have been violated. 

WHN thinks that's ridiculous.

So, I guess the problem that I feel like you run into with that decision is what you're saying is if the Justice Department decides a crime wasn't committed, they're not going to prosecute a crime, it sounds like you still want the information out there because you want to politically damage the person that was investigated?

Or - maybe - we'd like to see bad actors held accountable for their actions? 

Would WHN say that if the subject of the investigation was Clarence Thomas? Brett Kavanaugh? Marjorie Taylor Green? Matt Gaetz? Ron Johnson? Has he ever said that about any Donald Trump investigation?

That leads to another point on which Johnson and I agree: there is a lot of bias in the media, and in politics, of course. We know Johnson and the Rs have no interest in investigating their own guys, or Jared Kushner, or Trump, even as they relish going after the other side; that was clear in this interview. The Dems aren't much different. 

In addition to bias, there's a striking inability by many to discern the difference between a news report and an opinion piece. And a good part of the blame for that belongs to folks like WHN, when they clearly, even eagerly, cross the line between fact-seeking and smoke-blowing in their interviews.

Here's an example; this exchange came after Johnson said the FBI suppressed information about Hunter Biden's laptop before the election. (I clarified which 'they' Johnson was referring to in his comment, and I added emphasis).

JOHNSON: Chuck, Chuck. My concern -- you know, Chuck. You know, part of the problem, and this is pretty obvious to anybody watching this, is you don't invite me on to interview me, you invite me on to argue with me. 

That's true - more on that in a bit. 

JOHNSON: You know, I'm just trying to lay out the facts that certainly Senator Grassley and I uncovered. They (the facts) were suppressed. They (the facts) were censored. They (the FBI) interfered in the 2020 election. Conservatives understand that. Unfortunately, liberals in the media don't. And that's part of the things that -- part of the reasons our politics are inflamed is we do not have an unbiased media. We don't. It's unfortunate. I'm all for free press.

WHN: Well, Senator -- JOHNSON: It needs to be more unbiased. WHN: Senator, look, this is -- JOHNSON: There's misinformation on both sides -- WHN: Look, go to partisan -- JOHNSON: -- but the censorship and suppression -- WHN: Senator -- Senator -- look, we’re trying to do issues here and facts.  JOHNSON: -- primarily occurs on the left. WHN: Partisan cable -- JOHNSON: It's frustrating. WHN:  Look, you can go back on your partisan cable cocoon and talk about media bias all you want. I understand it's part of your identity. 

Notably, this exchange came after WHN said, "I am a journalist. I have to deal in facts." No one believes a word of that - or, I should say, no one should believe a word of that.

In Case You Missed It (v115)

Last week was one of those weeks. 

I had plans to get several timely posts out; I had made some progress on clearing out the drafts folder, cluttered with ideas dating back to last summer, for Pete's sake. And then life happened.

Instead of Wondering on Wednesday about politics, current events, and a couple of things that absolutely drive me to distraction, I was distracted by a frightening medical situation with my elderly mother, which ground writing - and pretty much everything else for the past several days - to a halt. She's on the mend, thankfully, and while things aren't yet back to normal, I've got time to share the posts that did go out, in case you missed anything.

For your Sunday School, I recapped two conversations from CNN's State of the Union. Jake Tapper had Reps. James Comer (R-KY) and Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the incoming Chair and Raking Member of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee.

On the Biden and Trump document handling issues, the Congressmen had distinct points to get across. For Comer? 

the key issue - because at the end of the day, as he puts it, there's only one issue... 

...this is the same type of investigation that the Democrats...launched and demanded happened to President Trump...   And we just want equal treatment here with respect to how both former President Trump and current President Biden are being treated with the document issue.

And Raskin? 

He didn't answer Tapper's question on why Biden's personal lawyers - with no security clearance - were searching in DC and Delaware for records, instead of the FBI or DOJ handling that. His understanding is that Biden's folks did the right thing. As to what the official procedure is, but he doesn't want this "turned into just a political football." 

... So, when my friend Mr. Comer says, we're just looking for equal treatment, that's all we're looking for. I think it's good that this is in the hands of special counsels on both sides...

My take on all of this? 

I was frustrated, of course... And, I'm not at all confident that we'll see anything other than politically motivated attacks for the next couple of years out of this Committee. 

For your Extra Credit, I went to the Meet the Press classroom to hear from Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, which was the more interesting of the two interviews.

Rosenstein, who previously said he wouldn't have appointed a special counsel for Trump's document problem, said

...Garland didn't really have a choice, unless the preliminary inquiry established that "there was no chance a crime had been committed." He said "that wasn't the case," based on what we know so far.

Jack Smith and Rob Hur, he said.

... are two professionals who spent extended amounts of time in the Department of Justice. They understand that their goal is to focus on the facts, and law, and apply department policy. And both of these men are not going to be influenced by political pressure.

They won't be influenced, but they will be attacked.

It's certainly true of these gentlemen, as it was with people like Ken Starr and Bob Mueller, that you pick people with sterling reputations who are known for being nonpartisan. But you're in the political arena where it's inevitable you're going to be attacked.

Of that, we can be certain. 

Back to distractions, for a moment. 

My mother's health scare coincides, almost to the day, with my father's passing sixteen years ago. I shared a couple of old posts about him last week.

Distractions of Dad tells of two unexpected events that in wonderful, fun ways reminded me of him. One came as I observed a couple in the grocery store.

... I saw a man start to toss something across a low display case to his wife, who was on the other side with their cart. He was gesturing with his hands, making a tossing motion, and she was gesturing right back at him, clearly indicating with both her facial expression and her hands that she wanted no part of his pitch and catch game. 

And just like that, I was back in elementary school, on any Saturday morning, with Dad, getting groceries. Let's just say that if anyone today did what we did back in the 60s and 70s they'd probably end up on the store's "Instacart Only" poster. 

The second distraction occurred when someone brought snickerdoodles - his favorite cookies - to work. It immediately reminded me of how my brothers and cousins responded to his annual gift from my aunt: a coffee can full of her delicious homemade snickerdoodles.

The second post was an early Wondering on Wednesday, and how my grandfather, my dad, and I are all victims of our own self-doubt, self-criticism, and our epic lack of patience. I had misplaced some papers - including some of Dad's writing from college, which

frustrates me, and in fact brings out the Dad in me. Patience with himself not being one of his virtues, he had a litany of mostly under-his-breath mutterings that I find myself repeating when I'm kicking myself for some minor failing or another...

I didn't find Dad's papers that day (I did, eventually), but I did find some of his dad's writing. 

So - my grandfather. My dad. And now, there's me: a third generation 'keep-the-day-job, try-to-be-a-writer' person, full of self-doubt, a mutterer and sputterer, apparently from way back. I'm wondering, this Wednesday, what Dad would tell me about his father, and his father's writing, and his own writing, and mine.

And I'm wondering, is this nature or nurture? Writer begat writer begat writer?

I still don't know the answer, and neither of them can tell me. Similarly, I don't know how many posts I'll get out this week; I hope you check back to find out. 

Sunday School 1/15/23: Extra Credit

Your Sunday School lesson, from the CNN SOTU classroom, was all about toeing the party line. 

For your Extra Credit this week, I chose to spend time in the MTP classroom, where What's-his-name talked with former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and with Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI). We'll start with the senator. 

The Biden document issue was front and center. WHN asked if the White House, by not coming clean right away, puts Dems in a tough spot of "not knowing what to defend and what not to defend." Stabenow didn't have an issue here, and she made a distinction between what's happening now and what happened with former president Trump.

They take it very, very seriously. And they're talking to all of the right people. They're not going to defy subpoenas or require FBI raids to be able to get the documents. The president isn't saying that somehow magically when he thinks about classified documents that he can declassify them. I mean, it's totally different right now. Both serious in terms of having classified documents. But the president is doing the right thing.

Stabenow said it was "certainly embarrassing" that they found a "small number of documents, certainly not on purpose," but reiterated they're working with DOJ and the National Archives to correct it. And, she said, her concern is the "chaos" the Rs love to create.

Let's not talk about the fact that we have a manufacturing renaissance going on in this country. More jobs created, lower unemployment rate, higher wages. And what they're proposing to do that would interfere with that would really put us on the edge economically. They don't want to talk with us about how to move the country forward. And I can tell you people in Michigan, they want folks that are going together, get things done, that care about their families and aren't interested in all of this just chaos and investigations. Which is where the Republicans feel comfortable, unfortunately.

WHN wondered if there were any issues Stabenow wanted to work on, now that she's free from the political pressures of reelection. She said she'll continue working across the aisle, as she has "on issue after issue." She pointed to the upcoming five-year farm bill, which has bipartisan support, and said it's about more than just farms.

It's the largest investment we make in land and water conservation for the country. And so that's incredibly important. And frankly, we need workers. And one of the things we need to do is comprehensive immigration reform so that our farmers have access to a legal system for their workers.

The next question - whether Dems should support Kyrsten Sinema's reelection bid - seemed to come out of left field. Stabenow said she and Sinema have worked together, including on gun safety and mental health, but said "we'll let that play out a bit," and that "it's very, very early" to be talking about that.

Stabenow says she finds it interesting that so many people think that Washington DC and Congress are 'broken.' Even given "all the division and chaos and everything that's happening and trying to pull the country apart, (to) stop us from governing," 

we actually, in the last two years with a 50/50 Senate, you don't get closer than 50/50 in the United States Senate, Democratic House and President Biden got more done than at any time, literally in our lifetimes. And that's not an exaggeration.

She believes the reason the Dems gained a seat in the midterms, and why they'll keep the majority in 2024 "is because we are actually focusing on the things that people care about." 

Sunday School 1/15/23

There was a lot going on in the classrooms yesterday, with What's-his-name getting lots of credit for "doing his job" on Meet the Press. I'll have more on that, I promise. 

For your Sunday School, I wanted to focus on Jake Tapper's visits with House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) and Ranking Member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) on CNN's State of the Union.

The new scandal over classified documents was top of mind, and I'll do my best to summarize the key issues Comer raised, or, I should say, the key issue - because at the end of the day, as he puts it, there's only one issue. Here are a few of the ways he brought it up.

We want to know the visitor logs to the residence. We want to know who had access to the Biden Center for Diplomacy...this is the same type of investigation that the Democrats...launched and demanded happened to President Trump...  And we just want equal treatment here with respect to how both former President Trump and current President Biden are being treated with the document issue.

Comer and others, from both sides of the aisle, are concerned by the lack of transparency -and hypocrisy from the administration. Before the election, Biden talked about Trump mishandling documents, apparently knowing he had done the same thing.

So, the hypocrisy here is great. We're very concerned about a lack of transparency. We're very concerned, as I have said many times, about a two-tiered system of justice in America. And we just want equal treatment. 

Comer apparently considers any statements from the administration are nothing but a bunch of malarkey. 

... It seems political here. It seems hypocritical. It seems like a double standard. And that's our concern... We have asked questions about what went on with Mar-a-Lago. Why was Mar-a-Lago raided, but the president's home not?  Why are the president's lawyers still allowed to go rummage through, looking for documents, after a special counsel has been appointed? It doesn't make sense. It's not fair. We just want equal treatment.

Tapper reminded Comer of some key differences between Trump's document-gate and what we know, so far, about Biden's document-gate: the difference in volume, the subpoena, the lawyers saying everything had been turned in when it hadn't been. And then he rolled tape of Comer from last November, talking about the Trump situation.

I don't know much about that. That's not something that -- we have requested information just to see what was going on, because I don't know what documents were at Mar-a-Lago. So, that's something we're just waiting to see what comes out on that. QUESTION: But is it fair to say that investigation won't be a priority? COMER: That will not be a priority. 

His response to the question, "Do you only care about classified documents being mishandled when Democrats do the mishandling?"

Absolutely not. Look, we still don't know what type of documents President Trump had. That's one of the questions we have asked the National Archives. Just because Joe Biden's lawyer said they turned over five documents doesn't mean they just turned over five documents. They could have turned over 500 documents. I'm sorry, but I don't have a lot of confidence in President Biden's personal lawyers...

He also apparently hasn't seen a single news report, or any of the excuses widely publicized by the right, or even had a conversation with a colleague since the Mar-a-Lago raid. And that's good, because he doesn't give a rat about mishandled documents.

My concern is how there's such a discrepancy in how former President Trump was treated... vs. Joe Biden... That's not equal treatment. And we're very concerned. And there's a lack of trust here at the Department of Justice by House Republicans. That's the outrage.

There's all kinds of outrage, here, to be sure. 

In Case You Missed It (v114)

Week two of 2023 is in the books. Here's your recap of last week's posts. 

On Sunday, I posted a Sidebar to the post on the election of Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker, and the promised first piece of legislation from his caucus.

 As I noted in my Mr. Speaker post, he told us

I know the night is late, but when we come back, our very first bill will repeal the funding for 87,000 IRS agents. You see, we believe government should be to help you, not go after you.

And, in case you didn't know this,  

Their first order of business is worse than a solution in search of a problem - it's a solution in service to a lie.

There are many good reasons for the funding, which will bring on IT staff and customer service folks - the government employees "who should help you," as McCarthy said. And yes, there will be auditors, who "would be largely tasked with cracking down on corporate and high-income tax evaders." According to folks at Treasury, 

It is wholly inaccurate to describe any of these resources as being about increasing audit scrutiny of the middle class or small businesses.  

I included several ways the funding would help us, something McCarthy pretends he wants to do, and then I closed the post with a really obvious reason.

McCarthy's starting his tenure with a lie; I'll end this post with a truth. In a December 15, 2022 report, the Government Accountability Office said the IRS

... addressed its backlog of 2021 paper returns. However, as of late September 2022, IRS had about 12.4 million returns to process, resulting in refund delays for millions of taxpayers.

 That's a two-million-plus increase in the backlog - since last July. It's only going to get worse if this funding is cancelled.  

Your Sunday School included chats with three House members, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who offered partnership with the Rs, while making it clear it has to be a two-way street. 

We will oppose extremism, of course, whenever necessary. And there are Republicans who are interested in governing. And they're going to have to break from the extreme wings of their party at times around some important issues. And we'll see how that all unfolds.

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) talked about the Speaker vote, his disagreement with some of his GOP colleagues, and why he had called some of them 'terrorists. Among other things, he said, 

There was no reason for us to keep voting... keep allowing these speeches that just degraded and diminished and insulted Kevin McCarthy. We didn't have to keep doing that. We could have just adjourned for the whole week and just kept negotiating...  And it seemed very, very pointless.

I can't argue with that sentiment. 

The third guy we heard from was one of Crenshaw's 'terrorists' - Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), who framed the shenanigans as being in service to all of us "very, very tired" Americans. 

You know, the American people are very, very tired of this gang of seven, gang of eight, literally seven or eight people, or just a few people in Washington, DC, running all of the policy for the American people. So, when we had a framework of an agreement where the American people can be in charge, when their representatives can actually bring amendments to the floor in good faith, I said, sure, if we can do that, then I'm all in.

By the end of his interview, I was

suddenly feeling very sleepy, after listening to Perry tell me how exhausted I am. 

I promised we'd hear from the punditry for your Extra Credit, and I chose the panel from ABC's This Week to highlight.

Donna Brazile  (ABC) thinks it may be hard to get a majority of the House to come together on critical legislation. 

... I don’t even know why I can put “unity” and “Republican” in the same breath. I mean, Hakeem Jeffries is going to have a unified caucus. I don't believe that Kevin McCarthy will be able to get the votes he need on the debt ceiling, on the functioning of government, which is to keep it funded, and on any major crisis that might come before us. 

Susan Page (USA Today )said there might be a better question than whether McCarthy can keep his caucus together. 

Could there be a coalition of the more moderate Republicans and the more moderate Democrats to get things through in the House? That's not something we saw happen in the speaker's fight. I think that is possible that we could see it...

I was Wondering on Wednesday about documents, and about Rep. George Santos (Fables 'R' Us). There was much wondering to be done, but one thing that struck me was why he might be so determined not to resign.

Now, I can't help wondering if the reason he's adamant about not resigning is that he feels a responsibility to his former co-workers at Goldman Sachs who may be laid off? The company's letting as many as 3200 people go.  

I wonder how many of them Santos could help develop kick-ass resumes, find great jobs, start their own companies, or even - dare I say it - run for office? 

I wanted to wonder about the committee that's supposed to be providing oversight on important stuff like the 'weaponization' of the government. I think the committee's name might need some work, though...

I'm investigating wondering if it would be worth wondering if the new House Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating - oh, never mind... 

Check the links for more detail on any of the posts, or to leave a comment. I'd love to hear from you!

Wondering on Wednesday 1/11/23

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

I'm wondering today, on a couple of fronts, about Rep. George Santos (Fables 'R' Us). 

On the one hand, the Nassau County Republicans are not pulling any punches in their criticism of him. Calling him "a joke, a disgrace, abnormal and a pathological liar," the GOP officials 

said the newly elected congressman needed to immediately resign, saying he ran a campaign of “deceit and lies.”

And while Santos threw a defiant "na-na-na-boo-boo" to the party bosses back home, he seems to be quite comfortable with the party bosses in DC. According to Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), Santos "addressed some of the concerns that we've had." Does anyone wonder if that went any further than "do you solemnly swear to go along with us, so help you whoever you believe in?" 

Santos-endorser Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Humiliationville), whose top aide was impersonated by a Santos campaign worker, doesn't appear to have concerns about him sitting in the House chamber, but committees are another issue. 

...McCarthy said Wednesday that embattled freshman GOP Rep. George Santos, who is facing growing calls to resign after admitting to fabricating much of his personal biography, should not be seated on any top committees.

Why, you might be wondering? Well, some think Santos is a national security risk, mostly because of his shady finances. There's chance he might not get any committee assignments; if that's the case, there will be no wondering needed as to why they're keeping him around: 218 votes are way more better than 217. 

Now, I can't help wondering if the reason he's adamant about not resigning is that he feels a responsibility to his former co-workers at Goldman Sachs who may be laid off? The company's letting as many as 3200 people go.

The cuts, totaling about 6.5 percent of Goldman’s workforce, stem from a restructuring plan the investment bank announced in October and the reintroduction of a ritual year-end culling of underperformers that was suspended amid the pandemic, the person said.

I wonder how many of them Santos could help develop kick-ass resumes, find great jobs, start their own companies, or even - dare I say it - run for office? 

I'm investigating wondering if it would be worth wondering if the new House Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating the Investigating Bastages that are Investigating Members of the Committee on Investigating - oh, never mind... 

If you're wondering whether the Biden document thing (and the late-breaking new Biden document thing) is the same as the Trump document thing, I'm comfortable saying that the issue - classified documents not being turned over to the National Archives as required - appears to be the same, but much of the rest of it doesn't.  And unless and until we have evidence of Biden 

• ripping up documents and trying to flush them down the toilet, 
• or burning them in the fireplace, 
• or eating them with ketchup, 
• or declassifying them by thinking about them, 
• and ignoring a months-long effort to get documents turned over before he left the VP's office, 
• and saying repeatedly that he had turned all of the documents he had over already, dammit, leave me the hell alone, 
• and after documents were found he argued about giving them back, 
• and that he had his lawyers attest that all the classified documents had been turned over,
• and that the National Archives identified that documents were still missing, 
• and asked to come and get them and he let them into his house but still didn't turn everything over, 
• and that he ignored a subpoena requiring him to turn them over, 
• and then his office was raided, 
• and we still don't know if everything was turned over,  
• and then he buried a relative on the front lawn at his summer home
• and then he claimed attorney-client privilege, executive privilege, and locker room privilege over the documents, 
• and demanded a special master be appointed to review the documents, 
• and had a court limit the review by the special master, 
• and had a court throw out the special master, 
• and then, hoping to forestall any further investigation, he declared himself a candidate for president conveniently just before a special prosecutor was appointed, then nope, it's not the same.

What's on your wondering mind tonight?

Sunday School 1/8/23: Extra Credit

In your Sunday School, I promised a punditry recap for your Extra Credit. In the interest of our collective sanity, I'm only going to cover one classroom - This Week with George Stephanopoulos. 

The panel included regulars Donna Brazile and Chis Christie; Susan Page (USA Today); and author Maggie Haberman.

A. McCarthy's bid for Speaker.

Christie said Kevin McCarthy's victory, in a town where "winning is better than losing," he showed his toughness; he held onto 200 votes over the long slog, but now, he has to govern.

...the challenge is going to be, how do you lead a group like that to getting to 218 on a number of issues that you care about and a number of issues you want to play defense on? And that's going to be interesting to watch over the next two years.

Page noted that Nancy Pelosi won with fewer than 218 votes, too, but she did it behind closed doors - and without the concessions. 

I think the new speaker's problem is, he didn't resolve the divide in the Republican Party, he empowered the insurgents so that Scott Perry... is almost as powerful as Kevin McCarthy in this next Congress.

Brazil, noting Perry referenced Frederick Douglass, had a Douglass line, too: 'it's easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.' And, she maintains, McCarthy's caucus is broken.

It's broken because it has a split personality. The Freedom Caucus, unlike the Progressive Caucus that Nancy Pelosi could bring to the table, the Freedom Caucus held out because they want committee slots, they want to run the Rules Committee, which is a very powerful committee, they want to make sure that they're on... the Budget Committee. They are going to create havoc, not just for Kevin McCarthy, but for the United States of America.

Haberman was asked about her friend Donald Trump helping McCarthy across the finish line. She's not sure he had "a lot" of influence, but he definitely had some. She said Trump made his early "public push" for McCarthy not because wanted to, but "because he gave some mealy-mouth comment to an NBC reporter," but it didn't do much to shift the dial. In the end, though,  

he did make calls to people like Matt Gaetz and he did have some influence there. That's a problem for Kevin McCarthy... it’s not just Scott Perry and the House Freedom Caucus, it’s this Matt Gaetz group. And Matt Gaetz he kept his folks together. And he is now in a pretty strong position with McCarthy.

B. Can they govern?

On the looming battle over the debt limit, Christie thinks negotiation will be necessary, no matter what President Biden thinks.  

He lost the House. He's got to negotiate. And so, to say that the Republicans would be the obstructionists, well, now you have divided government and you have to -- both sides are going to have to give. Chuck Schumer is going to have to give. Joe Biden is going to have to give. And Kevin McCarthy’s going to have to give ultimately. So, if we have a fiscal disaster because of some of these things, it's going to be us judging who's been willing to negotiate and who hasn't. 

I think Biden said is he's not willing to negotiate on Social Security and Medicare, which is not the same as "refusing to negotiate" on anything; we'll have to see what happens. 

Brazile thinks it may be hard to get a majority of the House to come together on critical legislation. 

I do believe that Kevin McCarthy is going to have a very difficult job maintaining the unity of the Republican caucus – I don’t even know why I can put “unity” and “Republican” in the same breath. I mean Hakeem Jeffries is going to have a unified caucus. I don't believe that Kevin McCarthy will be able to get the votes he need on the debt ceiling, on the functioning of government, which is to keep it funded, and on any major crisis that might come before us. 

Page addressed the question of whether House & Senate Rs will be aligned. She said they don't often align "in either party," which I think we've seen to be true. She also said there might be a better question to ask than whether McCarthy can keep his caucus together. 

Could there be a coalition of the more moderate Republicans and the more moderate Democrats to get things through in the House? That's not something we saw happen in the speaker's fight. I think that is possible that we could see it...

Stephanopoulos seemed doubtful, since it didn't happen during the Speaker voting, but I think that was a different situation. That was the Rs having a family feud; it wasn't anything as universally important as financing the government.

C. What about 2024?

Trump's in, of course, and Haberman thinks Biden's in, too: "I think anybody who is questioning that Biden is actually running right now is kidding themselves." She says Trump "definitely still has influence; he's definitely still important, but he's not president anymore, and he's not what he was." That was made clear when representatives didn't want to take his call last week.

She said she's "certainly never seen anything like this," where some declares their candidacy and "then basically does nothing."

...he is still commanding a decent chunk of the Republican primary electorate. So, you can't say that he's done. But he is certainly not being handed anything. And as we saw over the past week, he just doesn't have the same fear factor with his party that he had once upon a time. I don't know if it's going anywhere or not.

And, she said we won't really know until we find out if any of the investigations will yield charges. 

Christie doesn't think any of this impacts people who might be considering running. He expects a "slow-moving race," and that Trump's early announcement gave everyone else time to wait and see what happens. He also doesn't expect a crowded field.

I don't think it's going to be more than seven or eight people, max. And so all that's going to take time to develop. I wouldn't expect a field to fully develop until the end of June. Because the RNC has said the first debates are going to be in July, in Milwaukee. And I don't think anybody is going to feel any compulsion to get in... 

He thinks folks will wait it out, and he said "to go in early, huge political strategic mistake." 

Feel free to chime in: who are your picks to challenge Trump and Biden? Will folks like Elise Stefanik - and Kevin McCarthy - continue to support Trump if any of the 'witch hunts' result in charges? Is Kamala Harris automatically the front-runner if Biden decides not to run?  

See you around campus.