Sunday School 1/29/23

In this week's Sunday School, I've got recaps of a few discussions on the Tyre Nichols case and on policing more generally. 

We'll start with Dana Bash and her panel in the State of the Union classroom: Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA), author/CNN pundit Bakari Sellers, former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), and CNN's Scott Jennings.

Lee said people talk about public safety, but "where we stop short every single time is talking about, how do we invest in communities that have been underinvested," and mentioned education and jobs as the kind of investments needed.

We have data. We know what makes communities safe. But, every single time, we defer, we kind of go back right to, well, 'policing in and of itself is public safety.' Public safety doesn't begin or end with policing.

She said the conversation needs to move a lot more quickly than it is right now, and that 

We need to start "looking deeply into our culture, looking deeply within ourselves and figuring out why we make policy decisions that we know have adverse impact on these communities, that we know are setting communities up for failure." 

Jennings had many more questions than answers after seeing the videos. He said, "we have an epidemic of hard hearts in this country." Among his questions?

how these officers were hired. And what were the standards? Where do they come from? What was the testing? And what kind of people are we putting with such power in our communities that they feel like they could drag you out of a car and beat you to death? I mean, these -- this is not protecting and serving. This is not law and order. 

Sellers said even if police reform legislation had passed and everything had been implemented, it wouldn't be enough.

(W)e still... have to have a conversation about culture because what we saw and the conversation that we have to have is about the nuance around systems in this country. And systemic racism is a word that people don't want to hear... we're so anti-intellectual that they clench up when they hear it, but it's a conversation that we have to have.

Police have been given more training, resources, and equipment- which didn't prevent this from happening. He said we need to have a real conversation, 

whether it's a 'hard heart' conversation, or a 'cultural conversation', or a... 'black folk don't get the benefit of their humanity' conversation, this is where we have to have this difficult conversation. 

Sellers draws a "direct line" from this incident to things like the lack of safe drinking water in black communities, poor and unsafe schools, and healthcare disparities for blacks, saying, "That is systemic racism across institutions."

Kinzinger acknowledges that we need to have "real conversations" but hates the term. You start the discussion on how to fix things, he said,

And then what happens is the online kind of profit machine kicks up. And, on the right, it's all the sudden, like, we have to back the blue and not talk about any reforms. And sometimes, on the left, it ends up being basically -- you saw it to the extreme, defund the police. And then you end up hating each other, not talking about it, not solving problems. This is a moment where I think, if we can actually be like, OK, look, neither side is going to get exactly what they want in policing or in reform, but we can make a huge difference, sort of like the Justice for George Floyd Act, we can make a difference. But everybody's got to get away from just default(ing) to their corners.

In Case You Missed It (v100)

Gather 'round, friends - it's time for your recap of last week's posts, in case you missed anything.

The week started with your Sunday School lesson, from ABC's This Week, with Jon Karl sitting in for George Stephanopoulos. Rep. Adam Kinzinger was one of the guests. Karl talked about AG Merrick Garland's statement that no one is above the law, not even a former president. Kinzinger agreed that it seems "more likely now" that we'll see the prosecution of a former president, and that he "hopes they're moving forward on it." 

Here's what came next.

Karl's response? 

So, you -- you hope that there will be a prosecution of Trump himself. Even -- I mean, this is -- I mean, you just have to take a step back here. This is a guy who is sounding like he’s going to run again, so he would be being prosecuted by the president that he is potentially running against.

Kinzinger was clear when he answered.

Look, I worry about everything that has happened for the last few years. And really, I worry about everything that could happen in the future, and that includes things like, you know, what happens if a president’s running for office and he’s indicted, how does that feel? But, the converse of that is, what happens if we don’t do anything? What happens if we look and say, well, he’s running again, we’re concerned how it’s going to look, so that, like, whole coup attempt thing, let’s just up that behind us and hope it never happens again? Because it will happen again.

We all should be worried about this, including those in the House and Senate who were active participants. 

For your Extra Credit, we checked in on Karl's chat with term-limited Gov. Larry Hogan (R-MD); I've often referred to him as my favorite Republican, mostly because he is a Republican, not a Trump-pandering RINO. Here's a bit of the conversation after Karl's comments about one of them, Dan Cox (Hogan's called him a "QAnon whackjob"). He won the GOP gubernatorial primary.

Cox had support from the moronic Democratic Governors Association, and after playing one of the DGA ads, Karl said that even though the ad was "a cynical effort" voters responded to it.

Hogan said that's not quite correct. 

So, first of all, only 20 percent of the people in Maryland are Republican, and 20 percent of them showed up to the polls. So about 2 percent of the people in Maryland voted for this guy. It's not going to be the same in November, I can tell you that. So, it's not a big win. It's really a loss. 

And, obviously, Hogan won't be supporting Cox.

I would not support the guy. I wouldn't let him in the governor's office, let alone vote for him for the governor's office.

Hogan's planning on staying involved after he's out of office, which I think is good. 

On Tuesday, I did a Quick Take on the failure of the Secret Service to secure texts (and frankly, who knows what else) from December 2020 and January 2021. It's inconceivable to me that, in response to a DHS OIG request, there was only a single relevant text during that time period.

The Secret Service submitted the responsive records it identified, namely, a text message conversation from former US Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund to former Secret Service Uniformed Division Chief Thomas Sullivan requesting assistance on January 6, 2021, and advised the agency did not have any further records responsive to the DHS OIG's request for text messages.

For a full month, there was only one text? Seriously? And that text was from a former employee of the Capitol Police to a former Secret Service employee? How incredibly convenient that all seems.

I've done so much wondering lately - way more than makes it into the weekly Wondering on Wednesday posts. This week, I decided to give myself a break from the head-banging and from doing any heavy lifting about the House Oversight Committee's hearing with gun company execs. 

Instead, I shared a few memes from my files; here's one of them.

I also included some clips from the hearing, including a couple from Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA).

On Thursday, I shared a throwback Sunday School post from July 28, 2019. Why that post? Because it featured two people who are currently in the news. 

One's Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) who appears to be lobbying to become the next Speaker of the House, assuming the Dems hold their majority and that Nancy Pelosi stays true to her word to not stay in the role. Back in 2019, though, he was talking about impeachment. 

The other? Andrew Yang, then a presidential candidate, and now one of the founders of the Forward Party. His conversation with Chris Wallace, former host of Fox News Sunday, was interesting, and it's in keeping with his vision for the new party.

Wallace wondered if Yang would attack the front-runners, as a way of getting more air time.

 I don't think that we benefit if I'm throwing rocks at other candidates when, frankly, I agree with them on many, many issues. And I think right now my focus really is on introducing myself to the American people. 

You can read more about his new idea in our TGIF entry, where I credited him with a mixed week. Another in the same boat? Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. He spoke at a conference in Rome, hosted by Notre Dame, the university in Indiana, and talked about the global reaction to his decision in the Dobbs case.

He also spent time talking about religious liberty, saying

It is hard to convince people that religious liberty is worth defending if they don’t think that religion is a good thing that deserves protection...  Our hearts are restless until we rest in God. 

So, what list did he end up on? 

Alito the man had a good week, I guess, for finding a place where his beliefs are widely accepted. Alito the justice? Bad week. As with the other justices, the less time they spend before partisan groups espousing their beliefs, the better.

I'll see you back here later with a Quick Take or two, Sunday School, and maybe more.

Sunday School 7/24/22

The winning classroom for your Sunday School and Extra Credit this week? ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos (well, with Jon Karl).

His first guest was Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House Covid-19 Response Coordinator. After talking about President Biden's health and treatment, and White House protocols (yes, they follow CDC guidelines, Jha said), Karl got down to the important stuff: why aren't they hearing from Dr. O'Connor, Biden's physician? Jha explained that they are hearing from O'Connor, and Fauci, and Jha and Biden himself, but Karl's complaint was 

we're not able to ask him questions. We don't -- we see a written statement, we're not actually able to question the president's doctor. 

I'd be willing to bet a dollar that Karl and the rest of the media really want to know what Biden's health is going to be in 2024, not what his health is now. And, I'd bet a second dollar they're wishing that Dr. O'Connor was more like Dr. Ronny Jackson, who recently declared former president Trump "is in the pink of health," and who said previously that if Trump had only eaten healthier, "he might live to be 200 years old."

Next up was Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Not Pulling Any Punches), who talked about the January 6th investigation. Here are some highlights.

Of his House Republican colleagues, he said he's "ceased to be amazed at how much they're willing to accept" and not push back on. He also said the hearings might not be having "a ton of impact" on regular Rs, and that "Trumpism isn't dying even though Trump is becoming irrelevant," but that in the long term 

in like five years I still believe that it's going to be hard to find somebody that will admit they were ever a Trump supporter. And I think that's where this impact comes in, as future history.

Karl mentioned the "quite emphatic" AG Merrick Garland saying that no one is above the law, and asked Kinzinger if he thinks "it is more likely now that we'll actually see something, again, we've never seen in American history, a former president, maybe a president candidate again, under -- being prosecuted by the Justice Department?" 

Kinzinger said it does, and he was clear to say they've got "no special indication" of anything the DOJ is doing, but said "it does feel like" there's been a lot of movement on things on the DOJ side since the Committee hearings started. He said he's "not going to complain," saying

we never want to get in a position as a country, what you see in failed democracies, where every last administration is prosecuted. But there is a massive difference between 'I'm going to prosecute the last administration for political vengeance' and not prosecuting an administration that literally attempted a failed coup. That is a -- that is a precedent I'm way more concerned about, is, if there is evidence that this happened from a judicial perspective, if there's the ability to move forward on prosecuting, and you don't, you have basically set the floor for future behavior of any president. And I don't think a democracy can survive that. So, I certainly hope they’re moving forward. I certainly think there’s evidence of crimes. And I think it goes all the way up to Donald Trump.

Karl's response? 

So, you -- you hope that there will be a prosecution of Trump himself. Even -- I mean, this is -- I mean, you just have to take a step back here. This is a guy who is sounding like he’s going to run again, so he would be being prosecuted by the president that he is potentially running against.

Kinzinger was clear when he answered

Look, I worry about everything that has happened for the last few years. And really, I worry about everything that could happen in the future, and that includes things like, you know, what happens if a president’s running for office and he’s indicted, how does that feel? But, the converse of that is, what happens if we don’t do anything? What happens if we look and say, well, he’s running again, we’re concerned how it’s going to look, so that, like, whole coup attempt thing, let’s just up that behind us and hope it never happens again? Because it will happen again.

And then there's Kevin McCarthy. Karl said "McCarthy clearly didn't believe this stuff" - Trump's Big Lie - and he wondered if things would have been different if McCarthy had stood up and said so. Kinzinger's answer was spot on. Here's how he started out.

But the question is, what are you going to stand for in your life, you know? Are you going to go out being known as the guy that enabled a failed coup, or are you going to be the guy that goes out standing up, right? Goes out saying, I'm going to do what’s right?

He said McCarthy "very likely could have survived this" - but he made the wrong choice. After January 6th, Kinzinger said, Republicans were stuck in a "what do we do? Where do we go from here?" situation. And then, McCarthy went to Florida, and single-handedly resurrected Trump, "like an ambulance driver that took those paddles and brought Donald Trump back to life." At that time, "the fear that went through the Republican ranks" was palpable. 

And he had a message for everyone.

... ladies and gentlemen, and particularly my Republican friends, your leaders by and large have been lying to you. They know stuff that’s very different than what they’re telling you. They know the election wasn’t stolen, but they’re going to send out fundraising requests, they’re going to take your money from you and they’re going to use you to stay in power. You’re being abused. You can be mad at Liz Cheney and I. That’s fine. We’ve been taking this for a while. We’re not the ones lying to you. It’s the people you think are telling you what you want to hear. They’re the liars. And Kevin McCarthy is among them.

Two final points. First, the "door is wide open" for Secret Service folks - Trump's driver and head of detail among them - to come and testify; it's not the Committee's decision that they haven't done so yet. He said anonymous sources - "some of which may actually be the people of interest themselves" who are unwilling to testify under oath don't take away from Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony.

Cassidy Hutchinson will go down in history as a hero, and she never sought to. She’s just a young woman telling the truth with more courage than the vast majority of men in politics today.

He also said there's more information that we haven't heard yet from the Secret Service, and they can "explore more in depth all of that" in their report, future hearings, or both.

And, about Steve Bannon being found guilty?

It’s good. I mean justice, right... come in. you can plead the Fifth if you want in front of our committee, but you can’t ignore a congressional subpoena, or you’ll pay the price. That’s to any future witnesses too.

I figure there are a few people who will do that voluntarily, without waiting for a subpoena. 

See you around campus. 

TGIF 7/22/22

Let's do an all good-week list today - you up for that?

Here are just a few of the notables who made this a good week, in my opinion.

The jury in Steve Bannon's contempt of Congress trial. 

They took about two hours to reach a verdict and it was the right one.

Steve Bannon, ex-White House strategist and adviser to former President Donald Trump, was found guilty by a jury Friday of criminal contempt of Congress for refusing to appear before the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol. 

Bannon was found guilty of two counts of criminal contempt — one for refusing to appear for a deposition before the panel and the other for refusing to produce requested documents. Each count carries a minimum potential sentence of 30 days and a maximum of one year in jail, as well as a fine of $100 to $1,000.

Naturally, he plans on appealing, but I don't care. I'm going to relish his conviction for as long as I can.

The tech team for the January 6th Committee. 

Last night's hearing was very well put together, and the video clips that were shared were carefully chosen and fit the moment perfectly. Among the highlights: Trump's Rose Garden message on the sixth, and the taping of his message on the seventh; the matching up of video from the Capitol and other testimony from the same time period, and the clips from Fox News and Fox personalities. And yes, the Josh Hawley clips - the fist pump, and the running clips, in full speed and slow motion, too. 

Mallory Nees (@The_Mal_Gallery on Twitter), who was the creative user behind several Josh Hawley running-to-music clips. 

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) may have broken a Guinness World Record on Thursday — if there’s one for guest starring in the most movies and music videos in a single night...

But the footage of Hawley was all the same: two clips that aired in prime time during the most recent hearing of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Both showed Hawley running from rioters as they poured into the building, according to the committee.

Rep. Liz Cheney, vice chair of the January 6th Committee. 

Her closing remarks at the end of last night's hearing? I don't think I'd change a single word. There were many quotable parts, certainly; here are a couple of the most meaningful. 

Here is the worst part. Donald Trump knows that millions of Americans who supported him would stand up and defend our nation were it threatened. They would put their lives and their freedom at stake to protect her. And he is preying on their patriotism. He is preying on their sense of justice. And on January 6th, Donald Trump turned their love of country into a weapon against our Capitol and our Constitution. 

And, perhaps the most important of all: the Thatcher quote. 

This room is full of history, and we on this Committee know we have a solemn obligation not to idly squander what so many Americans have fought and died for. Ronald Reagan’s great ally, Margaret Thatcher, said this: “Let it never be said that the dedication of those who love freedom is less than the determination of those who would destroy it.”  

The many Republicans who have testified including the two we met last night.

Among the Rs testifying in person? 

• State officials from Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Arizona. 
• A retired, highly respected conservative judge. 
• Multiple lawyers. 
• Former staffers for Trump and Mike Pence. 
• A disillusioned Capitol rioter.
• A former spokesperson for the Oath Keepers.

And, from taped testimony or news reports?

• The contemptuous Steve Bannon. 
• More lawyers, more staffers.
• Members of Trump's family.
• The House Minority Leader.
• The Senate Minority Leader.

The case against Trump is being shared by a mostly-Democratic committee, but it's being made by the Republicans. Nothing here is meant to relieve them of their complicity or their acquiescence. And, certainly, nothing forgives them for quickly dropping their facades, their anger or frustration, and traipsing off to Mar-A-Lago to kiss the ring of the man they all fear.

But without the Republicans - Cheney, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger, of course - and all who we've heard from, we wouldn't know what we know. 

TGIF, everyone.

In Case You Missed It (v97)

Here's your recap of last week's posts, in case you missed anything. 

Sunday brought two posts. First up was A Future Tale (Part One), which spilled out of my head back in May, and sat waiting until I figured out what was going on. In it, the narrator tells of a walk around a city, somewhere out there. Here's how things kicked off.

I walked slowly down the main drag, as I've done a million times, looking through the slightly dingy windows of the shops, observing the customers inside. 

Many of them appeared disengaged, as if they were only going through the motions. They sported the worn-out look that comes from reading and hearing the same thing over and over, from the same people in the same echo chamber over and over, watching the same news for hoursdaysweeksmonths on end. They looked beaten down by it all. 

Later in the post, the people were pretty much the same, but the area had changed a bit.

My pace slowed as I neared the alley halfway down the block, tucked in between a 1970s-era office building and an 1870s-era beauty. Empty but still defiant, figuratively lifting its chin in the air, brandishing the chip on its shoulder, as if daring someone to smash the windows, destroy the inside, or tear it down. 

"Try me," it said. "Just try me."

Part Two, which'll be out later today, picks up as the narrator begins an interesting journey down the alley.

For your Sunday School, I took a new approach: throwing the classroom names in a pot and focusing on just one for your lesson. Last week, CNN's State of the Union had the luck of the draw and we got to spend some time with South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem. A lot of her chat with Dana Bash was about a woman's right to choose. 

Bash tried to get answers to several questions on reports of a 10-year-old Indiana girl who was three days too pregnant to get an abortion at home, and was said to be traveling to Ohio to get one. Noem dodged repeatedly, but finally answered when Bash asked if the danger physically, mentally, and emotionally for the child wouldn't be putting her life at risk. 

And I think that's something that -- yes, that situation, the doctor, the family, the individuals closest to that will make the decisions there for that family. That's what's interesting about the time we live in right now, is every state will have different laws on the books. The decisions will be made by the legislators that are closest to the people. That's appropriate. It's the way our Constitution intended.

It's important to note that, right before they talked about the 10-year-old, Noem said this about the trigger law in her state.

Now that that's the law, then we have to look at what we need to do to address who in those situations, if they do break the law, is punished. And that's the doctors, not the women. I want to make sure that that's appropriate and that the women are not punished in this situation, and that we do support them as we go forward.

That, folks, is a profile in hypocrisy. (Hmm... did we just uncover a new theme for veritable pastiche?)

Sticking with the classroom of the day for your Extra Credit, we heard from Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL). He had some interesting thoughts about Noem's interview, particularly the part where she and Bash talked about the recent January 6th Committee hearing. 

When Bash asked for his reaction to the governor's comments on January 6th, he didn't mince words. She was in the House with him, and he said he was 'blown away' by her interview, in which she questioned the truthfulness of Cassidy Hutchinson.

...it's like "Invasion of the Body Snatchers." This is not the Kristi Noem I served with. The Kristi Noem I served with was conservative, dedicated to truth, and I, at the time, would have thought (she) would have put her country above her political career at any moment.

They also talked about primaries, and voters, and Liz Cheney, and the Committee. Be sure to check out his name for Cheney's primary opponents - it's ridiculously appropriate, if ridiculously juvenile. 

When it was time for Wondering on Wednesday, I had the opportunity to reference another classroom - ABC's This Week. Martha Raddatz hosted, and for some reason that defies logic, she asked Mary Bruce this final question.

And, Mary, we really just have about 20 seconds, but I want to go back to Uvalde. What is President Biden doing about that?

Now, there are any number of people who may have responsibility and accountability to act on what happened in Uvalde, but none of them are named President Biden, for what should be obvious reasons. 

I'm not sure why (Bruce) dignified the question with an answer, but she did. And when she finally got around to talking about the feds and Biden, it was to note that "it's pretty unclear" how much the feds can do, adding 

But this White House continues to point to that gun legislation they’re passing. Would that have solved this? We just don’t know.

Remembering that this was Wednesday's post, I got back to the business at hand. 

Anyway, here's what I'm wondering: why didn't she say, "look, Martha, President Biden is much too busy causing global inflation, global supply chain issues, global food shortages, global immigration issues, and doing too much and not enough to help Ukraine, NATO, the EU, and others, to be able to focus his attention on a single mass shooting that happened months ago. Haven't you been to a gas station lately and seen his sticker?"

Thursday's breaking news shifted from the failures of the Biden administration to the crumbling of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson's government. Just weeks after surviving a no-confidence vote, he stepped down as leader of his party and assumed the role of 'caretaker' PM until a new party leader is chosen. 

And that reminded me of a post in which I suggested Trump should step down, which I shared for Throwback Thursday. I was surprised the post was from June 2016, barely a year after the famous escalator ride.

For a whole host of reasons I included in the post, I said 

Trump has proven himself unable to support the party’s sacraments and unable to garner full and active support of its leaders and faithful. He is doing perhaps irreparable damage to the party, damage that may take multiple election cycles to heal.

Donald Trump should step aside.

Republicans should demand it, so they can begin to recover from this horribly ill-advised, self-centered, pompous, short-on-content long-on-self-promotions candidacy before it’s too late.

As usual, nobody listened to me. And here we are.

I'll be back later; enjoy your Sunday.  

Sunday School 7/3/22: Extra Credit

CNN won the draw for your Sunday School lesson this week, so let's continue with Dana Bash and her guests in the State of the Union classroom.

 Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R- You Kidding Me? You People *Still* Support Him? -IL), the other Republican on the January 6th Committee, had the (ahem) privilege of following Gov. Kristi Noem in the classroom. Here's a recap.

When Bash asked for his reaction to the governor's comments on January 6th, he didn't mince words. She was in the House with him, and he said he was 'blown away' by her interview, in which she questioned the truthfulness of Cassidy Hutchinson.

...it's like "Invasion of the Body Snatchers." This is not the Kristi Noem I served with. The Kristi Noem I served with was conservative, dedicated to truth, and I, at the time, would have thought (she) would have put her country above her political career at any moment.

He said "it is clear she is running for president or vice president. She's scared to death of the base." He referred to Hutchinson as a "26-year-old patriot" and said that Noem calling her into question, but then avoiding

...saying that Donald Trump bore even an ounce of responsibility for January 6th, I get amazed still every day by what some of my colleagues do. This is one of the biggest ones. She used to be something very different.

After playing a clip from Rep. Liz Cheney's primary debate, and noting that Kinzinger called her opponents "a bunch of armpit farters," she suggested that one of them could "very well win."

So, Liz Cheney, you can disagree with her position on whatever, but she stood in front of her constituents and she said, 'look, here's where I'm at on these issues, these core democracy issues. Now you can make a decision whether or not to vote for me.' Frankly, that's what politics should be. That's what every election should be.

And, he said, "(h)er main opponent was a big supporter of Liz Cheney until she found out that maybe she could run against Liz Cheney." He said they're lying to voters, spreading conspiracies, and playing games, and "Americans have got to wake up and demand far better" because

...we have a primary system where somebody like Liz Cheney, a very professional, focused person, regardless of what you think of her politics... can be up against just lies and conspiracy, and 5 to 10 percent of... Wyoming, will actually show up and vote in a primary and make a decision...Look, Liz, God bless her. She is making a stand. I think she can win. But I hope this serves as a lesson to every American. Like, let's fix this system, because the primary system is failing.

He also talked about "typical for Trump world" behavior - the process of distracting people from what's important. He's talking about all the attacks against Hutchinson (like Noem's, really) for testifying to what Tony Ornato told her about Trump's actions in the SUV on January 6th. What no one's refuting, Kinzinger said, is that Trump knew his supporters were armed, and that he really wanted to be at the Capitol with them. 

He said Ornato's welcome to testify under oath, and that the Committee hears from people regularly.

Every day, we get new people that come forward and say, hey, I didn't think maybe this piece of the story that I knew was important, but now that you guys are talking -- like, I do see this plays in here.

And, he said, although it's not what she wants, Hutchinson will be remembered long after the names of Committee members have been forgotten.

She doesn't want to be out in the public spotlight. But she has a commitment to truth that somebody like Kristi Noem, for instance, and most people in our party, would actually benefit to take just a 10 percent ounce of.

Finally, we heard this from Kinzinger: the Committee's not done yet.

There will be way more information. And stay tuned.

 One last note, from Bash:

I want to show our viewers what 'The Washington Examiner' said in an editorial. 'The Washington Examiner' editorial board is conservative:

Trump is unfit to be anywhere near power ever again. Republicans have far better options to lead the party in 2024. No one should think otherwise, much less support him ever again.

And yet he is, according to our sources, likely to announce he is going to run in 2024 as soon as this month.

If you want some extra Extra Credit points, see how many "if he runs, I'll support him" comments you can find from prominent members of the GOP.

See you around campus. 

In Case You Missed it (v88)

I'm not sure why I was so busy last week, but I only managed three posts. Here's your week in review, in case you missed anything. And if I missed anything important last week, someone give me a heads up? Thanks!

For Sunday School, I dropped by three classrooms: Meet the Press, where Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) talked about COVID funding; Face the Nation, where Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) talked about the January 6th Committee, and State of the Union, where Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R-AR) talked about all kinds of fun stuff. Here's a bit of that. 

He said that cancelling student debt is a bad idea. Bash asked if doing that wouldn't be helpful to Arkansas families that are hurting now, even though he said his state is generally doing OK. 

Well, sure it'd be helpful to them. It would be helpful to cancel rent for them. It'd be helpful to pay all their utility bills. It'd be helpful to help on mortgage payments. But the question is, what is the right solution?

He also said that he's in the game for 2024, no matter what a certain orange-haired menace decides to do.

That's why he went to New Hampshire, and why he plans on being engaged this year in the national conversation, not just on the economy but on border security, going after the cartels, helping the states, and so on. And, what Trump does or doesn't do has no impact on Hutchinson. 

I have made it clear I think we ought to have a different direction in the future. And so, I'm not aligned with him on some of his endorsements, but also the direction he wants to take our country. I think he did a lot of good things for our country, but we need to go in a different direction. And so, that's not a factor in my decision-making process.

Also in the classrooms on Sunday? Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. His interview with  with Dana Bash in the State of the Union classroom, and one with What's-his-name on Meet the Press were featured in your Extra Credit. I wasn't that impressed, but I would have to give him an A+ for consistency, that's for sure.

He talked a lot about what's going to happen when Title 42 ends later this month, and he also talked about the latest free-for-the-asking talking point the Dems have put on the silver platter for the Republicans. I'm talking about the Disinformation Governance Board, or, as the GOP is calling it, The Ministry of Truth. Bash asked exactly what it'll do, and specifically if it will be monitoring Americans. On the latter, he said it will not be monitoring us, as it has no "operational authority or capability."

And so, what will it do? Well, after saying that they "probably could have done a better job of communicating" about the program, he delved into the whys and the whats.

So, what it does is, it works to ensure that the way in which we address threats, the connectivity between threats and acts of violence are addressed without infringing on free speech, protecting civil rights and civil liberties, the right of privacy. And the board, this working group, internal working group, will draw from best practices and communicate those best practices to the operators, because the board does not have operational authority.

...What it will do is gather together best practices in addressing the threat of disinformation from foreign state adversaries, from the cartels, and disseminate those best practices to the operators that have been executing in addressing this threat for years.

And, in response to What's-his-name's same general question?

So, we've set up essentially an internal working group. And I must say that we could have done a better job in communicating what it is and what it isn't. It's a working group that takes best practices with respect to our work that has been going on for years. Best practices on how to do that work, the work of addressing disinformation that presents a threat to the security of our country, how to do that work in a way that does not infringe on free speech, does not infringe on civil liberties. So, this working group takes best practices and disseminates those best practices to the operators.

He was bad; the interviewers were worse, I think, focusing on the stuff that doesn't matter much at all, other than for sound bites, and not asking hard questions about what the hell the administration's going to do about immigration - not because of the midterms, but because we need to do something about immigration... Of course, if anyone really cared about that, other than for the midterms, we'd be doing something. So a pox on all their House and Senate seats, or something.

Finally, I was Wondering on Wednesday about the leak heard 'round the world - and for a change, it wasn't anyone's January 6th texts. 

No, I'm talking about the Alito Draft, the "it probably shouldn't be released, except that we have to make sure the conservative justices toe the line, so we'll leak it and clutch our deeply rooted pearls and everyone on the Right will blame a clerk for one of the liberal justices, and that'll work for us too, so what the heck, drop the darn thing and let's sit back and watch" bombshell opinion eviscerating Roe and Casey and all of the other abortion-related cases of the past nearly 50 years.

I offered two quickly conceived and silly brain dumps of how it got out, because, as we know, wonderment and entertainment begin at conception and, on a more serious note, wondered

What else will fall? If the standard is things that are deeply rooted in our history, clearly additional attacks on voting rights will be affirmed, and encouraged.

Interracial marriage, and marriage equality, of course, are obvious targets. but there's more.

Another issue about which we can wonder? Can any of the alleged privacy protections in the Constitution actually protect women who want to use contraception? I mean, think about it. 

Our life expectancy is falling. 

The birth rate is falling. 

We're projected to be a minority-white country - by 2045.  

Is it really beyond our wildest imagination, I wonder, for some red-state pseudo-religious legislature to decide that what we need more than anything is more cute white babies, and act to make sure that happens by restricting access to contraception?

I know Alito said, in the draft, that this was just about abortion, but we know we can trust that about as far as we can throw him, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, or Coney Barrett.

That's all I had for you - hope your week was otherwise full. 

Happy Sunday, and Happy Mother's Day to those who celebrate. 

Sunday School 5/1/22

Lots happening in yesterday's classrooms, including multiple appearances by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. I'll address those in your Extra Credit.

For Sunday School, we'll listen in on a Congressman, a Governor, and a Senator, which is where we'll start. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chatted with What's-His-Name on Meet the Press, who asked if we needed to change our posture if the Russia expands beyond Ukraine into Moldova. Menendez said it wasn't going to "change our calculus" about direct engagement.

We need to keep our eye on the ball. And that is about helping Ukraine and Ukrainians ultimately be able to defeat the butcher of Moscow. And if we do that, the world will be safer... and others who are looking at what is happening in Ukraine will have to think twice. 

And, whether there's "a limit in how much support we're going to give" Ukraine, Menendez thinks we'll do whatever it takes, because it's not just about Ukraine. 

If Ukraine does not win, if Putin can ultimately not only succeed in the Donbass but then be emboldened maybe to go further, if he strikes a country under NATO, under our treaty obligations with NATO, then we would be directly engaged.

Stopping that from happening is critical, Menendez says,

so that we don't have to send our sons and daughters into battle. And I think that ability not to have to send our sons and daughters into battle is priceless.

Moving down the hall to the State of the Union classroom, Dana Bash talked with term-limited Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R-AR), who said that the lack of growth in the last quarter, coupled with other issues, could be a sign of a coming recession.

Whenever you have high inflationary pressures, whenever you have interest rates going up to slow the economy down, these are stressors on it. You add that to the supply chain woes that we have, we have got challenges...this administration needs to address those. And they need to do it quickly.

He said that cancelling student debt is a bad idea. Bash asked if doing that wouldn't be helpful to Arkansas families that are hurting now, even though he said his state is generally doing OK. 

Well, sure it'd be helpful to them. It would be helpful to cancel rent for them. It'd be helpful to pay all their utility bills. It'd be helpful to help on mortgage payments. But the question is, what is the right solution?

He said his approach is different. 

... we're looking at not providing more relief, but trying to return more of what we're collecting in terms of taxes back to the taxpayers. That will help them. And it's a more long-term solution as well.

Here are his thoughts on other hot topics. 

• Kevin McCarthy (R-So What if I'm a Liar? I'm YOUR Liar!) will have some work to do if the Rs win and he wants to be Speaker. Hutchinson, a former Congressman, said "it all depends upon who the alternative is" when asked if he would vote for McCarthy if he had the chance.

• He feels the "tone has changed" in the GOP, from where people stood right after the insurrection to where they are now; he believes "that's an error." It won't be helpful for the folks who have "diminished the significance of that event," when we start having public hearings on it this summer.

• He thinks Disney handled the "Don't Say Gay" bill situation "very poorly." And, while he thinks we shouldn't be "teaching sexual orientation" in the lower grades, he doesn't buy into the government being "punitive against private businesses because we disagree with them." It's fine to debate special tax deals, but going after businesses is principled Republican behavior. 

And, the big question, "Are you seriously considering running for president?" He said yes, "that's an option that's on the table."

That's why he went to New Hampshire, and why he plans on being engaged this year in the national conversation, not just on the economy but on border security, going after the cartels, helping the states, and so on. And, what Trump does or doesn't do has no impact on Hutchinson. 

I have made it clear I think we ought to have a different direction in the future. And so, I'm not aligned with him on some of his endorsements, but also the direction he wants to take our country. I think he did a lot of good things for our country, but we need to go in a different direction. And so, that's not a factor in my decision-making process.

Finally, a recap of a Face the Nation conversation Margaret Brennan had with Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Stands for REAL Republican) about the January 6th Committee, and more.

• He expects we'll hear new information once the public hearings get under way. He made it clear the DOJ will make decisions on the legality of things; it'll be up to us "to take the work (the Committee has) done and decide what they want to do with it or what they want to believe after that."

• He'd love to talk to everyone they've asked to testify, but didn't offer anything specific on additional subpoenas, calling that "both a strategic, tactical decision and a question of whether or not, you know, we can do that and get the information in time." 

• If some of the, um, interesting candidates Trump has endorsed end up winning, he agrees "it would be a sign" of Trump's continued hold on the party (Brennan used the term "still the leader and kingmaker within the party"). 

• He said his organization, Country1st.com, is focused on "playing in some of those primaries to bring at least reasonable people to the forefront" and encouraging people - particularly if they're in a guaranteed red district -  to vote (and vote against the Trump people, of course).

• He also reminded us of Trump's tactics: "If somebody starts falling behind in the polls, he always finds a reason to un-endorse them, because he doesn't like having a losing track record." That's important to keep an eye on.

• He supports the $33B Ukrainian aid package, and hopes it'll pass. He's introduced an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) which would give President Biden "congressional leverage or permission to use it if WMDs, nuclear, biological or chemical are used in Ukraine." He said "also, it is a deterrent to Vladimir Putin." 

The all-Mayorkas Extra Credit should be fun - look for that later.

See you around campus.

Sunday School 3/27/22: Extra Credit

In this week's Sunday School we heard from a Right Winger and a Woke Lefty on issues unrelated to regime change and ethics. For your Extra Credit, we're going to look at the latter, starting with three guests John Dickerson had on Face the Nation. 

First up? Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Dammit, I'm a Republican; Trump is a Menace). The bulk of their conversation was about the Ginni Thomas texts, the January 6th Committee, and the Supreme Court. (Full disclosure: Thomas and her husband, Justice Clarence Thomas, recently received one of my Dirty Snowpile awards.)

Kinzinger wouldn't officially confirm or deny the texts existed, since they were leaked, but he said the Committee's bottom line was to get the facts and share them with us.

We're going to get to the bottom of this. And as we're seeing in Ukraine, people are willing to die for democracy. We at least have to be willing to put careers on the line for the same cause.

He's got a point there...  Sadly, he didn't offer much of value, other than his lack of confidence that Mark Meadows, the recipient of the texts in question, has been fully forthcoming. There's a reason why he's been turned over to the DOJ for a potential contempt prosecution.

I mean, he was cooperating with us for a little bit, and then... to make Donald Trump happy, he stopped cooperating. We gave him plenty of space to come back to resume that. He has not. And, in fact, he's waived executive privilege a thousand times by presenting us what he already has. So, no, I'm not convinced he's handed over everything to us. 

Next up? Bob Woodward (WaPo) and Robert Costa (CBS), who broke the story the texts. Dickerson asked for an explanation on the importance of the messages. Woodward compared them to Watergate, which was tampering on the front end of the election process. This is different because "they come after the election is over." 

Costa noted this "campaign, spearheaded by then-president Trump," crossed all three branches of government "in at least tangential ways." It wasn't just pressuring Pence and Congress to overturn the results, and pressuring the states to invalidate the votes.

... you had the executive branch doing everything possible to have a legal challenge that would maybe go all the way, as Trump said, to the Supreme Court. This was Trump pulling every lever of power. And one of those levers, it appears to be...his own chief of staff at least communicating on legal strategy with the spouse of a justice.

Woodward said that Chief Justice John Roberts "really has grounds for being worried" about the Court being seen as political. He pointed Justice Amy Coney Barrett's "remarkable speech" a few months back, 

She said, I want to prove to you that we are not a bunch of partisan hacks in the Supreme Court. And she said justices - all justices - must be hyper vigilant to make sure they're not letting personal biases creep into their decision since justices and judges are people, too. So, she made it very clear that this hypervigilance should be the condition in which justices operate.

And yet, we have Ginni Thomas and Mark Meadows texting about 'war' and 'good vs. evil' and 'not giving up' in their efforts to overturn the election, and Justice Thomas not recusing himself from January 6th-related cases... 

Costa appreciated the Committee's frustration by Meadows and what else he might have, and that includes any texts with Ginni Thomas after the end of November. I agree; it seems weird they would suddenly end. After all, she attended the Stop the Steal rally, until her feet got cold, and allegedly has ties with some of the groups behind the event. 

That said, The Committee has "done hundreds of interviews. They have thousands of pages of documents" from cooperating witnesses,

but they still feel in many ways they do not have enough. Steven Bannon has refused to cooperate. Mark Meadows has now refused to cooperate. So, the question facing ...Kinzinger and others is, where is the John Dean who's going to put the hand in the air and start outlining all of these different facets?

 Woodward said "there are always surprises," so it possible there's a John Dean out there. And

remember, the January 6th committee, in a filing in California, has said they have a good-faith conclusion that Trump and people around him engaged in a full-fledged criminal conspiracy to overturn the election. They rule this as criminal. 

And just yesterday, that judge ruled it was "more likely that not" that Trump "corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021." 

Costa said the "real test" for the Committee is whether they give Thomas a chance to speak voluntarily, or if they subpoena her. And, he said, it's not just about her conversations with Meadows. 

We just don't have the full picture at this point about her relationship with Justice Thomas and his knowledge of her exchanges with the chief of staff.

Ain't that the truth. 

Finally, let's hear just a bit from Sen. Cory Booker (D-No One's Going to Steal My Joy!), who chatted with What's-his-name on Meet the Press.  In addition to talking about the #KBJ hearings, the host brought up the text thing, using former AG Loretta Lynch and the meeting on the tarmac with Bill Clinton as an example of someone recusing themselves, and asked if Justice Thomas "should follow the Loretta Lynch precedent?" 

Booker ignored that example; instead, he offered a relevant one: Justice Elena Kagan.

Out of 70-some cases, she recused herself over 20 times... not necessarily because she was conflicted, but because she understood that even the appearance of impropriety would delegitimize the Court. And the Court needs that legitimacy in this nation. So clearly, Justice Thomas should have recused himself. That's not even at question here. (Emphasis added.)

He said he's frustrated with the Court "as a whole, that they have not taken better measures to police themselves." That includes holding lower courts to ethics rules that they "don't put upon themselves." And, he gave one my favorite examples of shady ethics: justices giving paid speeches to partisan groups that may have direct matters, or amicus briefs, before the Court.

There are a lot of ethics rules that they do not, have not put upon themselves that are just common sense and ultimately lead to a delegitimized court. And I think that they need to use this Thomas affair as an opportunity to change their ethics rules.

He didn't add "or we'll change the rules for them" - but that possibility is already on the table, as it should be.

See you around campus. Unless you need to recuse yourself for something. 

Sunday School 10/17/21

I spent all my Sunday School time in CNN's State of the Union classroom, where Jake Tapper was in the host chair. 

First up? Mayor Pete, er, I mean, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who was asked, re: the current supply chain issues, if "Americans need to prepare ourselves for it to get worse before it gets better?"  He said that "a lot of" the challenges from this year "will continue into next year," but said that it's not just supply issues, it's demand issues, too.

Demand is off the charts. Retail sales are through the roof. And if you think about those images of ships, for example, waiting at anchor on the West Coast, you know, every one of those ships is full of record amounts of goods that Americans are buying, because demand is up, because income is up, because the president has successfully guided this economy out of the teeth of a terrifying recession.

The ports are handling record volume, he added, but the supply chain - mostly private business interests - can't keep up. He said the administration's role now is "to be an honest broker," and bring everyone together, get commitments and "get solutions that are going to make it easier."

Tapper asked if President Biden would consider lifting the Trump-era tariffs on China, saying it's not a panacea but it would help alleviate some of the supply-side pressures. Secretary Pete said that "every idea is being taken seriously," but the focus now is on the operations side of things, including getting commitments to keep the ports of L.A. and Long Beach open 24/7. 

But, he acknowledged, that's only a part of what's needed. We also have to get the containers out of the port, onto trucks, and off to where we need them. He said the Transportation Department is working with states on getting CDL licenses issued faster, "so we can get more qualified, safe truckers on the road." Passing the infrastructure bill would help, too.

Tapper pointed to the delay on that, and wondered if Buttigieg was "frustrated" by the delay, and if the progressives erred demanding the human infrastructure bill needed to be passed first. He said "the reality is" we need both bills, 

not only to make sure that we have the right kind of infrastructure, but to make sure that life gets better in this country for people trying to raise children and for people trying to participate in the work force. 

And on whether it would make sense for Americans to do their holiday shopping early, or if that would make things worse, Buttigieg was rah-rah about things - including that the holidays will be better this year than last.

... a year ago, millions of Americans were sliding into poverty who now have jobs. And a year ago, a lot of us were gathering with loved ones over a screen. It's going to be different this year because of the president's leadership, because of being able to get more and more Americans vaccinated and make that available free to every American. 

Finally, on the exceedingly rude comments made by Tucker Carlson about Buttigieg taking paternity leave, he said he wasn't apologizing to Carlson (or anyone else), and that all Americans deserve the same opportunity. He also said it was unnecessary to name an acting secretary while he was on leave, in part because he was available to them the whole time.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger was next. As one of the two Rs on the House January 6th committee, he's a guy everyone loves to hate, right?  

Wondering on Wednesday 6/30/21

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Let's dive in to today's wondering, shall we?

A Republican strategist on NPR suggested that because the Dems have only a five-vote majority in the House of Representatives as a whole, it would be grossly unfair to have a Select Committee on the 1/6 Insurrection with eight Democrats and five Republicans. And I wonder, if that consequence of the election is so unpalatable, why on earth didn't the R's jump at the chance to have an independent, 9/11-style commission? I mean, did they all get their Melania jackets from the dry cleaners at the same time?

Sticking with the House and the Select Committee, I wonder if any of the Rs that don't want an investigation have considered what Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) reportedly said - here's the meme that's making the rounds. 

I wonder, what's the argument against what he says? Either you want to know, because you think it was something other than what it appears to be, or you believe The Big Lie, and you don't want any more proof that it was supporters of Former Guy, just like it's been shown all along. Or, I guess, you're chicken and afraid of losing your job. 

Kinzinger, in a recent appearance on CNN, told Anderson Cooper, 

If people are willing, at a young age, to put their life on the line for this country, and we can't put our career on the line for the same thing, what's it worth? Why are you doing it, right? But if everybody just comes out and tells the truth, has differences of opinion or perspective, of course, we can fix this country. Short of that, we've got some trouble.

I wonder how many of his colleagues are willing to admit publicly they agree with him on that?

Speaking of 'we've got some trouble," we learned that South Dakota Gov. Kristy Noem, who might want to be Nikki Haley when she grows up, has promised to deploy her state's National Guard troops in Texas to help with border security. And, according to her spokesman, she's going to use private funds to "help alleviate the cost to South Dakota taxpayers."  The private funds are coming from a Trump-supporting used care billionaire from Tennessee, if that makes any sense at all.

And now, I'm wondering what would happen if say, Michigan's Gov. Gretchen Whitmer decided to send her state's National Guard to Texas to support asylum seekers crossing the border, and say it was Michael Bloomberg who was footing the bill. How'd that sit with everyone?

And are we going to see National Guard deployments up for bid on eBay and other auction sites, I wonder? Or Go Fund Me campaigns to send them to other states on a governor's whim? Think of all the money that could be separated from billionaires and used for defense. Or for The Wall. Anyone still have Steve Bannon on speed dial?

Speaking of Former Guy, he held a rally in Ohio the other day. and Amanda Uhle, a WaPo reporter, attended the rally out of her self-proclaimed inability to "stop probing Trump supporters, trying to understand exactly how they see the world and why they're not seeing it the way" she does. Speaking of his Ohio appearance, she wrote

This time, he was to be accompanied by all you might expect from an 88-degree evening at the Lorain County Fairgrounds — a dusty parking area, livestock stalls and creaky grandstands under the rich, dank odor of manure and surrounded by verdant fields. Air Force One would not be deployed. His lectern wouldn’t be adorned by the presidential seal. He’s not officially running for anything, even if all signs point to a bid in 2024. So, who would want to attend a Trump rally in 2021?

I almost stopped at "the rich, dank odor of manure" line - what could be more evocative of a Trump rally than that, I wondered? But I kept reading, and learned that the people who are attending now are the same people who attended his rallies before - he doesn't seem to have a new crowd, any more than he has a new message. I guess that's a good thing.

Finally, like most people, I've been following the story of the condo collapse in Florida. My heart aches for the families that have been forever changed by the tragedy, and for the community similarly forever changed

One thing I can't shake? Whether this, like so many other infrastructure collapses, was preventable, if only we had been paying attention. And paying attention from the very beginning, not just two or three years ago, or forty years later, or five or six months from now. 

Our appetite for building in coastal areas, on cliffs, in fire-prone forests, on fault lines, seems boundless, as does our appetite for ignoring potential signs of danger along the way, and for kicking the can down the road. 

We cringe, and duck, when we get an estimate on repairs, whether it's a condo or a bridge or a highway, and we don't act until the very last argument is made, literally dozens of times, and even then, half the time we make a temporary fix, as if the arguments will change when it comes time to pay the pipe. And pay we will, after a horrendous collapse, after people die, after families are forever changed by the tragedy, or even after a change in who holds the purse strings. 

And that's always the driver, right? Money up front to make growth happen; money in the middle to buy the view or the solitude or the speed to get from point A to point B; money on the back end to keep things standing (hopefully in time); and of course, money to distribute when our worst nightmares come to fruition.

I wonder about all of that, I do.

What are you wondering about?