In Case You Missed It (v83)

Lots going on out there, right? In case you missed anything, here's a stroll through last week's posts. 

Sunday was the night Will Smith killed his career and won an Oscar, in that order. It was also the night I resurrected an old theme: the Dirty Snowpile Awards. Unlike the Oscars, there aren't any defined categories for the DSAs - it's whatever strikes me when I look at the filthy things. 

Here's one of this year's winners. 

 The My Snowpile's So Small It Fits on this T-shirt award goes to the thousands of politicians, their advisors, or whoever it is that decided we should have a government of the t-shirt, by the t-shirt and for the t-shirt. You know what I'm talking about, right? Policies and positions that fit on a t-shirt are great; anything else, we don't give a hoot about. And don't forget how those slogans get twisted and turned into opposition missiles, either.

I gave a few examples; My Body My Choice came immediately to mind (that'll make sense when you see one of other awards), and there were many others I'm sure would be familiar to you. And I would have been remiss had I not mentioned this last part. 

Sadly, one of the most important things with all this 'governing by slogan' stuff is that you buy the t-shirt, literally or figuratively.

Your Sunday School included highlights of a Fox News Sunday interview host John Roberts had with Sen. Rick Scott (R-Florida Man). One of the questions Roberts asked was why Scott included a requirement that all legislation sunset after five years in his 'plan to rescue America' during an election year.

Scott complained that Roberts was just dishing out "Democrat talking points," but that's not the case. Roberts said that was in the plan, he's right. Scott tried to deflect, saying 

Also in the plan, it says we ought to, every year, talk about exactly how we're going to fix Medicare and Social Security... No one that I know of wants to sunset Medicare or Social Security, but what we're doing is we don't even talk about it. Medicare goes bankrupt in four years. Social Security goes bankrupt in 12 years. I think we ought to figure out how we preserve those programs. Every program that we care about, we ought to stop and take the time to preserve those programs.

I added the emphasis to Scott's answer; find out why in the post.

It was nice to spend some Extra Credit time with Sen. Cory Booker (D-No One's Going to Steal My Joy!), who chatted with What's-his-name on Meet the Press. They talked about the #KBJ hearings, and about G-G-G-Ginni and The Texts. 

What's-his-name talked about former AG Loretta Lynch, who recused herself from involvement with any Hillary Clinton investigations after her meeting on the tarmac with Bill Clinton, and he asked Booker 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.)

I wonder why What's-his-name is still hosing the show, I really do.

Speaking of wondering, I did plenty of that on Wednesday, including some about the document-challenged Trump administration and the "bigly gap" in the phone logs on January 6th. 

How bigly, you're wondering? Here's what CBS News is reporting.

The lack of an official White House notation of any calls placed to or by Trump for 457 minutes — from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m. — on Jan. 6, 2021 means there is no record of the calls made by Trump as his supporters descended on the U.S. Capitol...

I also did some calculations to help you understand what the gap means in yoga pose terms, in case you wondered about that, like I did.

And almost before I realized it, it was TGIF time again. And surprisingly, I had Hillary Clinton in the second post of the week. Hard to believe, right? She

...had a teeny little bit of a bad week, after she was fined $8000 by the Federal Elections Commission for funding the Steele dossier back in 2016. The DNC was fined $105,000 as well. The fines resulted from a 2018 lawsuit filed by the Coolidge Reagan Foundation, a 501 (c)3 organization with the flimsiest website I've ever seen for this type of group. I'd be surprised if they could even pay for the filing fee for the lawsuit. 

Pretty sad when that's what the FEC is focused on these days. It would seem there's a whole lot more current stuff happening, but that's a story for another day. 

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 9/20/20

Where to hang out today for Sunday School... let's see... how about with a bunch of senators? 

Let's start with New Jersey's Cory Booker, who joined Margaret Brennan in the Face the Nation classroom on CBS. Here are some highlights.

He's not sure how things will play out, with Mitch McConnell controlling things, but that "we've seen moments like this before," where some of his colleagues listened to the American people and changed their vote and did the right thing.

As to what the Dems might do to stop things, what leverage they have, Brennan mentioned the upcoming spending bill, but Booker kept to the high road, saying one thing 

is to appeal - a moral appeal to people who clearly stated what they would do under these circumstances. For them to go against their word is pretty significant in the public space in terms of their own honor and legitimacy. 

And what's different, in his eyes, now vs. back in 2016?  Back then, we were 269 days from the election, not already in the process of the election, and for his Republican colleagues to violate their own words, "does a tremendous amount of damage to the institution of the Senate as well as to the legitimacy of the court."

This is one of those moments where I wish we would step back and take a beat and understand what we're doing and the consequences and how they could radiate throughout time.

On whether Biden should release a list of potential nominees, Booker noted that Trump did it as an appeal to the far-right base, and that it broke with tradition. Biden doesn't have to follow suit, first of all, and if he chooses to release a list, that's "secondary to the urgency of this election" and to those who understand the issues, from health care to climate change to voting rights - and "what's important right now is the urgency of this election to a lot of the fundamental issues that affect our daily lives."

And finally, on calls to expand the court, Booker was clear.

Unless we win the Senate back, unless we win the White House, all these questions are just hypothetical and moot. We need to focus on what is at hand. We have already begun voting in a number of United States. Early ballots are going out across this country. We need to win this election. Everything is on the line and that should be, in my opinion, the focus right now.

Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar was also making the rounds, with a couple of appearances including one with Chuck Todd on Meet the Press.  Here are highlights of that conversation.

She's not interested in talking about the Senate rules and what the Dems might be able to do to stop a nomination from going forward, "for a very important reason."

I'm not going to concede that when you already have several of my colleagues saying that the way this happened, so close to the election, that the next president should be able to make the decision. The people pick the president, and the president picks the justice. That is how this works. Look at what Abraham Lincoln did the last time someone died this close to the election. He waited. He waited until after the election.

To me, the fact that you've got people voting right now, including in my state, everything is on the line here. Health care is on the line. There's literally going to be an argument on the Affordable Care Act, whether or not people will continue to have health care and not get kicked off for preexisting conditions, on November 10th. So I think my Republican colleagues are the ones. They have to decide, based on what they said before. They set this new precedent in the last -- in 2016, and they've got to follow their own words.

Chuck asked her about specifics, going further than Brennan did with Booker. He asked if 'nothing is off the table' meant packing the court, or getting rid of the filibuster, or granting statehood to DC and Puerto Rico. She again said she wasn't conceding this, referencing RBG, a woman who never gave up, and saying

Well, I'm not going to give up that some of my colleagues here, when we already have three of them, three of them, having said that they believe that the next president, whoever wins the election. They're not saying who that's going to be. Whoever wins the election should be able to pick the justice. Then we can talk about the reforms. Because what matters right now is what mattered three days ago before she died. And that is that people have to vote. And they vote. And they have to vote, as Michelle Obama said, like their life depends on it.

Also on MTP? Wyoming's John Barrasso, who four years ago said "I want to give the American people a voice in this."  This time around, he doesn't want to do that because, he says without evidence,

Well, first, let's be very clear. If the shoe were on the other foot and the Democrats had the White House and the Senate, they would right now be trying to confirm another member of the Supreme Court. What we're proposing is completely consistent, completely consistent with the precedent. What happened in 2016, and let's go back, we were following the Joe Biden rule.

The "Biden Rule" is something the Democratic nominee said back in 1992, when addressing a hypothetical vacancy on the court. It is not a rule, and it did not have any practical application when he said it.  

Todd says he had scoured all of the notes from 2016 looking for any reference to this new explanation they're using now, and he quoted Barrasso extensively.

When an election is just months away in 2016," you said that, "people should be allowed to consider possible Supreme Court nominees as one factor in deciding who they'll support for president. This shouldn't even really be controversial." Then you said, "This is not about the person. It's about the principle involved, and I want to give the American people a voice in this." Republicans have said there should not be a bitter political fight. "We have called on the president to spare the country this fight. The best way to avoid the fight is to agree to let the people decide." Senator, these are your words. Not once did you say, "Oh, it depends on what party the Senate holds versus the party of the president." This just sounds like a power grab, pure and simple.

Well, Barrasso said, "it is the Biden rule" and precedent and Schumer and Harry Reid and

I'll tell you what's going to happen here I'll tell you what's going to happen.  The Senate is going to be back in session and the president's going to make a nomination I believe this week.

And whether viewers should "Just not believe anything you're saying today because whatever you're saying today will change depending on the politics of the moment?"

Well, I can tell you what's going to happen, Chuck. For viewers who are watching, the president is going to make a nomination. I believe it's going to be this week. And Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, we will hold hearings. And there will be a vote on the floor of the United States Senate this year. The president has a list of 20 potential nominees. He's mentioned several of them last night. And I think, I really do think that if the president really wanted to make a powerful positive statement by coming forth with a woman nominee, there are many qualified women on his list, somebody who could then be a role model for future attorneys, for young women and young men looking into the law --I think that would be the right move for this president, soon.

He did say that

Every Senate candidate and every senator speaks for himself or herself. As chairman of the conference, I have great respect for that. But each one is going to be called upon to make a decision in their role as advise and consent. The president is going to nominate, and we're going to vote this year, Chuck.

Sunday School 8/16/20

What to do, what to do?  Full classrooms today, and I have to pick what to share with you...

Here's what I'll do:  Bernie Sanders - That Guy from Vermont (TGFV), remember him?  - made appearances with Chuck Todd, Jake Tapper and George Stephanopoulos - so we'll see how the three interviews stack up in tomorrow's Extra Credit.

Today, we'll hear from the president's 4th Chief of Staff Mark Meadows (a decision I might regret, we'll see), his 4th National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien, and I'll see if I can fit in his 1st son-in-law, the ever-whiny Jared Kushner, and the ever-hopeful Sen. Cory Booker.

Let's start with O'Brien, who talked with Chuck Todd on MTP. The conversation started with the agreement to normalize relations between the UAE and Israel; they've been working together for years, but this made all of that official. 

• On when Saudi Arabia might make a similar arrangement: It's possible they could be next. With this deal, you're now going to have direct flights from those fantastic airports... we're going to have Arab and Muslim pilgrims coming to Jerusalem and going up to the Mount and worshiping at the Al-Aqsa Mosque. And we think that's something that will be a great confidence builder. 

• On the annexation question: ...we're pretty confident, the UAE is confident, that Israel will not unilaterally extend sovereignty or Israeli law to parts of the West Bank. And that's what part of this deal is about. 

• On whether the US would be in a better spot vis-a-vis the Iranian arms embargo if we were still part of the nuclear deal (the JCPOA): I think getting out of the JCPOA was the predicate for this fantastic deal between UAE and Israel. 

• On whether it's a policy failure that Russia is still interfering in our election: the DNI report...detailed the influence and the efforts of China and of Iran to denigrate President Trump and to make sure that he's not re-elected. It also talked about the Russian interference...we've spent millions and millions of dollars hardening election infrastructure, working with 50 secretaries of states on cyber security. And we've also sent very strong messages to all these countries. With respect to Russia, I mean, we've put so many sanctions on Russia, there's almost nothing left to sanction. 

And now, Meadows, who spoke with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union.

• On why the president is trying to prevent Americans from voting by mail: The president doesn't have a problem with anybody voting by mail, if you would look at it in terms of maybe a no-excuse absentee ballot.. this debate is really over a process. A number of states are now trying to figure out how they're going to go to universal mail-in ballots. That's a disaster, where we won't know the election results on November 3, and we might not know it for months.  And, for me, that's problematic, because the Constitution says that then... a Nancy Pelosi and the House would actually pick the president on January 20. So, we need to make sure that we do it right.

• On whether the president would support a standalone bill to fund the Post Office: Let's -- let's put it with enhanced unemployment extension. Let's put it with small business reform in terms of the PPP and extending that. Let's get that. Will the president sign that? Yes, he will sign that. And I'm certain...

• On whether Meadows would tell Louis DeJoy to respond to the bipartisan group of Secretaries of State who have requested a meeting with the him: Well, what I will tell him, and as he's already mentioned to Senator Schumer and Speaker Pelosi the other day, is -- is that he's willing to put the resources necessary to make sure the mail process -- is processed. 

• On the difference between voting by mail in Florida and say, voting by mail in Pennsylvania: So, here's the difference. I can't tell you about Pennsylvania, because I don't know the difference there. All I do know is, the governor of Pennsylvania is talking like he doesn't have any money to pay for enhanced unemployment and some of these other things, when he's got $3.6 billion sitting in the bank. So that was -- was a misnomer. But, as we look at that, here's what I can tell you, is absentee no- excuse, what I call no-excuse absentee, say, listen, I'm concerned because of the pandemic, will you send me an absentee ballot that comes directly to me, I certify that, I have a signature requirement that makes sure that it's me that's actually voting, and I send it back...

• On the fact that there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud: There's no -- there's no -- there's no evidence that there's not either. That's the definition of fraud. Jake. When we look at that, what we have seen are a number of mail ballots that get lost.

I can't take it anymore. I've cut out a lot of the stuff in between the bullets here, because it was all just more of the same. And there was more of the more of the more of the same. Let's have this one last exchange on voting.

• On whether the president will guarantee that he will do everything he can to help people vote: No, no, I'll give you that guarantee. I'll give you that guarantee right now. The president of the United States is not going to interfere with anybody casting their vote in a legitimate way, whether it's the post office or anything else.

And I'll close this part with the actual definition of fraud, from the good folks at Merriam-Webster:

And now, Sen. Cory Booker, also with Tapper:

• On whether he stands by his previous criticism of Joe Biden: As far as Joe Biden is concerned, I'm proud of the hard-fought primary that we had. He emerged from a wide field of people as our choice, as our champion. And I'm proud of that. And I'm proud of the dialogue that we had, rich, vibrant dialogue.

And now I am confident, looking at their criminal justice plans and partnering, especially now, as he's done, with Kamala Harris, one of the champions on criminal justice. I have no worry about the degrees at which Joe Biden will be tearing down the awful institutions of mass incarceration in America, that he will be a champion to help get the bill that Kamala and I wrote on the Senate side done that creates just -- excuse me -- police accountability.

So, as a United States senator, as an African-American, I am excited about what Biden and Harris will do for advancing criminal justice, rolling back mass incarceration, an really, frankly, having a broader view of what public safety is by investing in things like health care, environmental justice, education, and more.

• On whether he was surprised by the 'birther' attacks against Sen. Kamala Harris: ...when you have African-American women who are rising up in positions that there have never been African-American women in before, that people are going to viciously attack them on gender and race.  

...the gendered words that this president has been using about Kamala, attacking her in extraordinarily awful ways, just reflects the demeaning and degrading language he's used about blacks, about black and brown places, about congresspeople, telling them to go back where they have come from, when they were born in this country. This is nothing new, nothing surprising.

What I don't think Trump understands is that Kamala Harris has been fighting this fight her entire career, rising to positions where she was the first African-American woman in -- time and time again. So, if there's anybody that's ready for this kind of mess, it's Kamala Harris. 

And just like that, Jared ends up on the cutting room floor.  Sorry/not sorry. Don't forget the all-TGFV Extra Credit coming up tomorrow.

I'll see you around the virtual campus. You'll know it's me because I'm wearing a mask and keeping my distance - and I'll know you, because you're doing the same thing. 

Email of the Week (v9)

Thursday is 'Email of the Week' day, when I plow through a hundred or so emails from the handful of Democratic presidential candidates I'm following to see what's going on.

I received 160 emails this week from the gang of eight candidates I'm following.As usual, Mayor Pete led the way with 48 emails,  followed by Elizabeth Warren (29) Amy Klobuchar and That Guy From Vermont (24 each), Andrew Yang (20) the new guys, Mike Bloomberg and Deval Patrick (7 each) and Tom Steyer (1).

Fundraising, Iowa (pre- and post-caucus), upcoming debates, and New Hampshire were hot topics, as were pointed barbs at each other. 

There were even a couple of emails from Cory Booker, who's now running for his Senate seat instead of for President.  Here's one of them, with the subject line Trump is tearing our country apart.

I just walked out of the President’s State of the Union address.

What we heard from Donald Trump tonight was more of the toxic division that we’ve become accustomed to. He’s tearing us apart instead of bringing our country together.

I’ve always believed that the ties that bind us are stronger than the lines that divide us. As we work to elect a President and members of Congress this fall, it’s important that we choose candidates who will help unite us instead of pushing us further apart.

That’s where you come in, Sue.

I’m running for re-election to be one of those leaders. Please send in a donation now so I can keep a message of unity at the forefront of our national politics.

Our country is deeply hurting right now -- and the past three years of Trump’s hatred and bigotry have only added to the pain that millions of Americans are feeling.

As I said often during my campaign for president, defeating Donald Trump is only the floor -- not the ceiling. Once he’s out of office, we’ll then have to begin the hard work of healing a country so wounded that it elected someone like him in the first place.

I’m ready for the challenge before us, but I’m going to need your help. Invest in our campaign today to send me back to the Senate for another term.

Let’s also do everything we can to ensure that this was the last State of the Union address Donald Trump will deliver as our president.

Sincerely,
Cory

That was almost the winner, but since Booker is no longer running for president, I went back through everything, and that's when I found this one Andrew Yang. Short and sweet, it earned the coveted Email of the Week recognition.

Sue --

Last night during the Iowa caucuses, the entire nation realized something the Yang Gang has known since the beginning -- we desperately need a president who actually understands technology.

This is a HUGE opportunity for our campaign to win over every single voter who saw what happened in Iowa last night and is now looking for a president who is ready to lead us into a future that is already here.

If we act now, we can make sure all these voters know that Andrew will be that president. So make a rush donation before the end of the day to help us reach these voters!

Sure, he's asking for money - but in that first sentence, he hit the nail on the head.

We don't need someone who merely knows how to tweet and who thinks that Rudy 'The Butt-Dialer' Giuliani is a tech security expert - we need someone who understands that whatever the heck ends up being the result from Iowa, whenever we get it, we can't have leaders who don't understand how critical it is that our election technology is both world-class and works as intended.

And, honestly, that whatever we do, it cannot fall victim to something as simple as a bunch of goofballs calling in, jamming the lines, and preventing votes from being reported.

Users on a politics-focused section of the fringe 4chan message board repeatedly posted the phone number for the Iowa Democratic Party, which was found by a simple Google search, both as screenshots and in plain text, alongside instructions.

"They have to call in the results now. Very long hold times being reported. Phone line being clogged," one user posted at about 11 p.m. ET on Monday, three hours after the caucuses began.

"Uh oh how unfortunate it would be for a bunch of mischief makers to start clogging the lines," responded another anonymous user, sarcastically.

Some users chimed in, posting alleged wait times on hold, imploring others to “clog the lines [and] make the call lads.”

Because if the goofballs can take us down so easily, can you imagine what the professionals can do? 

Email of the Week (v6)

Thursday is 'Email of the Week' day, when I plow through a hundred or so emails from the handful of Democratic presidential candidates I'm following to see what's going on.

This was crunch time for many of the candidates, and let me tell you, there were an awful lot of emails were filled with 'Donate' buttons and 'could you just send a little something before midnight/before tomorrow/before it's too late?"  That's what usually happens right before a debate -- and then after the debate, there's the 'I just got off the stage' email, which - you guessed it - also asks for money.

I thought about giving a team email award, to whichever candidate's team asked me for money the most; and I thought about giving this week's recognition to Cory Booker's suspension email, but I just did that for Julian Castro. So,I read through all 95 emails, and finally found something that was more than just a bald-faced ask for cash.

So, without further ado, here's the coveted email of the week, which echoed one of the sound-bite moments from Tuesday's debate.

Thank you for being part of this grassroots movement. I hope I made you proud on the debate stage tonight.

One of the most important issues we talked about was how we’ll beat Donald Trump. There’s a question out there: Can a woman win? Let’s tackle that question head on:

Collectively, the men on the debate stage tonight have lost ten elections. There were only two people on this stage tonight who have won every single election that they've been in — and they were the women.

Since Donald Trump was elected, women candidates have outperformed men candidates in competitive races. And in 2018, we took back the House and state houses across the country, because of women candidates and women voters.

Here's what I know: the real danger that we face as Democrats is picking a candidate who can't pull our party together, or someone who takes big parts of the Democratic constituency for granted. We need a candidate who will excite all parts of the Democratic party, bring everyone in, and give everyone a Democrat to believe in. And I’m ready to do just that.

Hope and courage win elections. That’s how I will make you proud, every single day, as this party’s nominee — and as the first woman president of the United States.

We're building a grassroots movement together - and together, we will win. Can you chip in tonight and help power this campaign forward? 

Thank you for being a part of this.

Elizabeth  

I'm going to add Tom Steyer to the mix, I think - but I'm not budging on Deval Patrick and Michael Bloomberg - at least, not yet. Maybe the self-funded campaign will bring us some new email panache.

Email of the Week (v5)

Thursday is 'Email of the Week' day, when I plow through a hundred or so emails from the handful of Democratic presidential candidates I'm following to see what's going on.

Since last week, I've gotten another 94 emails from the six candidates I'm following: Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, that guy from Vermont, Andrew Yang, Mayor Pete, and Elizabeth Warren. The latter two, with 26 and 22 emails, respectively, accounted for more than half this week's total.

For the most part, the candidates were all about their Q4 fundraising - or their opponents' Q4 fundraising, as the case may be, and all about caucusing in Iowa, less than a month away now.  They're buying ads, they're getting endorsements, they're getting positive press, want to give me stickers, and want me to give them my opinions. All of that made it hard for me to find an email of the week, until boom - there it was. The email that was to the point, was unique, spoke to people in simple terms, and left no questions about what the candidate was up to.

And so, without further a-doobie, here's our coveted Email of the Week.

Quite frankly, our criminalization of cannabis is stupid and racist. 

Cannabis has been legalized in 33 states and the District of Columbia. It is short-sighted and illogical that it is still considered a controlled substance by U.S. federal law.

What's worse is that thousands of Americans are in jail for marijuana-related offenses, particularly people of color.

If you agree that we should proceed with full legalization of marijuana and pardon those in jail for nonviolent marijuana-related offenses, add your name to our petition:

ADD YOUR NAME

As president, Andrew Yang will:

Support the full legalization of marijuana at the federal level and remove it from the controlled substances list. 

Expunge the federal convictions of all marijuana-related use or possession offenses. 

Identify non-violent drug offenders for probation and potential early release.  

Stand with Andrew by adding your name to this petition.

Let’s keep putting Humanity First,

Team Yang

What is it they used to say, smoke 'em if you've got 'em?

In Case You Missed It (v16)

Given the holiday, family time, and of course the sitting around basking in the nothing-doing, this was a light week for posts. Let me bring you up to date.

I got to a few of the Sunday School classrooms, chasing Cory Booker and Amy Klobuchar as they made the rounds. The post  started with Booker's visit to Meet the Press.

They talked about Speaker Nancy Pelosi holding the articles, not sending them to the Senate. Booker said he feels she's really trying to do what she can to ensure there is a fair trial in the Senate. And, in response to Todd's question about whether calling the Bidens to appear was just a plan to "sort of make the witness requests a mutual assured political destruction?"

Booker's answer was perfect:  I'm exhausted, frankly, of the Biden aspect of this.

I agree with him on that.

Because, he noted, the Bidens don't speak "in any way that's germane to the president's behavior," and he's 1000% right. This should be about the president, not about the Bidens.  

Klobuchar appeared in two classrooms; here's an excerpt from her conversation on Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan, 

who opened with a clip from SNL's cold open featuring, among others, Rachel Dratch as Klobuchar. The Senator thought Dratch did a good job. And, when Brennan asked about her "aggressive" performance, Klobuchar denied that she's changed her tactics since her middle-of-a-blizzard candidacy announcement. She also noted

I have passed over a hundred bills in the United States Senate during a really difficult time. And I have won in the reddest of red districts and won with suburban and rural voters and Republicans and independents and a fired up Democratic base. I think that's a good case to be made.  

I also had thoughts on how Congressman John Katko, who represents my NY district, communicates with constituents like me, which I shared in Asked, But Not Answered. That'll give you an idea of my frustration with Katko.

In a nutshell, I wanted him to respond to my specific questions about the statement his office released on why he was going to vote against impeachment. I knew he was a no vote, and indicated that in my comments to him - so I was quite surprised when he explained to me in detail how impeachment works, including the responsibilities of the House and Senate. Geez, Louise: first, I already know that, and second, that's not what I asked!

It didn't get any better after that, I can assure you. Which left me thinking.

This response could have written to you, the person sitting next to you, or the person sitting on the other side of them. It's remarkably similar to the response a friend of mine received, after she reached out with very different questions touching on the impeachment inquiry.

It's funny - she's now a former registered Republican, and I'm a former registered Democrat. We've both voted for Katko in the past.

We won't be doing that again.

No, we won't. 

And finally, I tackled the heavy lifting that is determining the Democratic presidential candidate Email of the Week.  And I wimped out - sorry!

Because we're in the midst of holiday season - Hanukkah, Festivus, Christmas, Kwanzaa and the upcoming New Year, etc. - I decided to see how the candidates referenced the holidays. Instead of singling any one of them out for the coveted honor, I'll share all of their emails in full.

That's right - I decided to be kinder for the holidays, and share the whole shebang.

I received messages from all of the candidates I'm still following - well, all of them except Bernie Sanders. He was also the only one from whom I didn't receive Thanksgiving greetings, so at least he's consistent. 

Two candidates sent Christmas Cards; two sent Christmas messages, and one was sort of a combo. Here are excerpts from the 'message' emails. Can you figure out who's who? Here's a hint for you: two are senators, one is not. Two are men, one is not.

It’s a time of joy and a time you get to spend with loved ones. This year, I’ll be with my wonderful family, my friends, and girlfriend. We’ll enjoy a few nice meals, relaxed days, and best of all, vegan eggnog (for anyone who’s not down with dairy, it’s a game-changer, check it out). 

Happy Holidays! The holiday season is upon us, and whether you celebrate these holidays or something else, or nothing at all, I hope you take these next few days as an opportunity to rest and reflect, to spend time with loved ones, to practice kindness, and, most importantly, to make room for joy.

The holidays are a wonderful opportunity to spend time with those we love. And for me, this season feels even brighter than usual: I’m so uplifted and encouraged by people all over America who share my optimism for the future of this country. 

That's it for the week, but have no fear - we'll be back to full form next week, and I'll have a recap of the 2019 posts.  I'm looking forward to that stroll down memory lane; I hope you are too.

Email of the Week (v3)

Thursday is 'Email of the Week' day, when I plow through a hundred or so emails from Democratic presidential candidates I'm following to see what's going on.

Because we're in the midst of holiday season - Hanukkah, Festivus, Christmas, Kwanzaa and the upcoming New Year, etc. - I decided to see how the candidates referenced the holidays. Instead of singling any one of them out for the coveted honor, I'll share all of their emails in full.

I received messages from all of the candidates I'm still following - well, all of them except Bernie Sanders. He was also the only one from whom I didn't receive Thanksgiving greetings, so at least he's consistent. I also receive a rather long message from Julian Castro, but since I've stopped tracking his emails, I didn't include that here.

Here we go - in alphabetical order, holiday greetings to one and all.

I love the holidays, Sue. 

It’s a time of joy and a time you get to spend with loved ones. This year, I’ll be with my wonderful family, my friends, and girlfriend. We’ll enjoy a few nice meals, relaxed days, and best of all, vegan eggnog (for anyone who’s not down with dairy, it’s a game-changer, check it out). 

Nogs aside, this time of year always makes me reflect on what I’m grateful for -- and this year, that’s people like you. I don’t know where I’d be right now without you. 

Whether it’s making a donation, signing up to volunteer in early states, or even just sharing one of my posts on social media, I’m blown away by how many people have stepped up to be a part of this effort.

So thank you for everything. From my family to yours, Merry Christmas, happy holidays, and here’s to a phenomenal 2020. 

Off to open the vegan eggnog to share with Ro,

Cory

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  

Happy Holidays! The holiday season is upon us, and whether you celebrate these holidays or something else, or nothing at all, I hope you take these next few days as an opportunity to rest and reflect, to spend time with loved ones, to practice kindness, and, most importantly, to make room for joy.

Joy is important to me, and to this movement -- in fact, it’s one of our Rules of the Road, the ten guiding principles that govern our campaign. Part of the Pete for America mission statement reads, “Amid the great challenge we have accepted, let us be joyful.” I want to echo that sentiment now, to all of you, in light of the holidays: Amid the challenges we face, let us be joyful.

For many Americans, I know this is a particularly divisive, and in many ways dispiriting, moment. The House has impeached the president. The contest to replace Donald Trump is heating up. Many Americans are struggling not even to get ahead, but just to hold onto what they’ve got. What I hope we remember in this moment is that we cannot give in to exhaustion and cynicism.

When the clock strikes midnight on December 31st, we’ll say goodbye to the second decade of this century and ring in 2020. Remember that this 2020 election is our chance to refuse to be taken in by helplessness or cynicism; to choose to define America not by exclusion but by belonging. The trajectory of our nation is still up to us -- and that is something to be joyful about. Because the way we keep going, the way we meet those challenges with strength and conviction, is by making room for joy.

Importantly, with joy, comes hope and resilience. Going into this critical year in the life of our nation, I can’t think of qualities we’ll need to draw upon more to fuel the work ahead.

So this holiday season, however you celebrate, I hope we all have a chance to spend some quality time with family, friends, and loved ones. I hope we take this chance to take a breath, remember the values we share, and recharge for the weeks and months ahead. And I hope we all make room for joy, however and wherever we can.

Pete

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Happy holidays to you and yours!

As my family gathers to celebrate today, we want to extend warm wishes for a season that is full of joy and peace.

The holidays are a wonderful opportunity to spend time with those we love. And for me, this season feels even brighter than usual: I’m so uplifted and encouraged by people all over America who share my optimism for the future of this country.

The year ahead will be an exciting one. Together we’ll meet every challenge, overcome every obstacle and go on to win the nomination and the White House. But for now, let’s enjoy the warmth and cheer of this special season.

Yours,

Amy

Donate now

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

All the best to you and yours this holiday season.

Sunday School 12/22/19

Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker made long-distance classroom appearances from Iowa, with Klobuchar on both Face the Nation (CBS) and State of the Union (CNN), while Booker did the Meet The Press (NBC) thing. Let's start there.

The Senator and Chuck Todd (recently referred to as "National Menace" Chuck Todd by a local college professor) talked about impeachment right off the bat, with Booker being asked what he thought a Senate trial should look like, with so many Senators having openly stated - or least signalled - how they're planning on voting. Among other things, Booker noted that

As a guy who's a big competitor, I want to beat Donald Trump mano a mano. I want to face him down on a debate floor. So this is not something that I want to do. And yes, I'm going to evaluate the facts objectively and honor the oath that I swore, even though I think Donald Trump has violated his oath of office.

They talked about Speaker Nancy Pelosi holding the articles, not sending them to the Senate. Booker said he feels she's really trying to do what she can to ensure there is a fair trial in the Senate. And, in response to Todd's question about whether calling the Bidens to appear was just a plan to "sort of make the witness requests a mutual assured political destruction?" Booker's answer was perfect:

I'm exhausted, frankly, of the Biden aspect of this.

Because, he noted, the Bidens don't speak "in any way that's germane to the president's behavior," and he's 1000% right. This should be about the president, not about the Bidens.  

Noting that Booker was not on the stage last week and my not be in January, as the DNC has raised the bar again, Todd wondered what "was missing" from the debate that Booker would have added. The senator didn't really answer the question, instead pointing to the strength of his campaign in Iowa and instead asking how it makes sense that he wasn't on the stage. 

Next up: Klobuchar and Margaret Brennan, who opened with a clip from SNL's cold open featuring, among others, Rachel Dratch as Klobuchar. The Senator thought Dratch did a good job. And, when Brennan asked about her "aggressive" performance, Klobuchar denied that she's changed her tactics since her middle-of-a-blizzard candidacy announcement. She also noted

I have passed over a hundred bills in the United States Senate during a really difficult time. And I have won in the reddest of red districts and won with suburban and rural voters and Republicans and independents and a fired up Democratic base. I think that's a good case to be made.  

She also said the tried to make the case that she should be the one debating Trump in the general election, saying 

And I think it is more than just the nitty-gritty of policy. It's also a value statement because so many people want a values check on this President. They want someone who gives them a decency check, a patriotism check.

Brennan wondered how the impeachment trial would impact her campaign. She pointed to how aggressive and active her campaign has been, said she doesn't need a lot of sleep and works very hard. She also mentioned her endorsements, and that she's got a lot of folks who can - and are already - standing in for her on the campaign and she's got Skype for town halls. 

Brennan wondered if Klobuchar's campaign was going to ask for a rescheduling of the January debate, noting that it could fall in the middle of the impeachment trial. Klobuchar noted that there has to be a January debate, even if it has to be moved closer to the caucuses - but "we have to have an Iowa debate." And is that currently being discussed, any kind of scheduling change?

I don't know - I have made it very clear that there should be no excuses. I am ready to debate at midnight if that's what we have to do. We have to have a debate before the Iowa caucuses. That would be to my advantage if it was at midnight. I'd be happy.

They also talked about how the Dems can get witnesses to testify. Klobuchar noted you need the key witnesses, and specifically mentioned Mick Mulvaney associate Michael Duffy, the guy who sent the email around saying the Ukraine aid needed to be held shortly after the call between president Trump and President Zelensky. 

He sent this email... And this is what he says: he says, "Given the sensitive nature of the request, I appreciate your keeping the information closely held to those who need to know." ...That's a question I want to have answered.

Brennan said the aid was on hold before that, but Klobuchar pressed on Duffy and his email, asking why was it sent, and noting that

If the President is so innocent and shouldn't be impeached, why is he afraid to have these people come forward? That's what people are asking me when I am at these town hall meetings.

And that's where they ended it.  So let's move on to Klobuchar's discussion with Dana Bash, who announced the state of the union being "at a stalemate." This conversation started with the stalemate surrounding the impeachment and the clash over witnesses (the Dems want some, the Rs do not). Bash wondered if Klobuchar would vote to start the impeachment trial if there was no agreement.

I think that there will be an agreement and this trial will go forward.I think what is shocking to me is, right now, despite the president claiming his innocence, claiming that he wants to present witnesses, he's the one blocking the witnesses...

She again referenced the Michael Duffy email, and also noted that even Richard Nixon had "all the president's men testify. He had major people testify from his administration." Klobuchar doesn't know if there will be separate votes on witnesses or how it will all go down, but knows they have "a constitutional duty to take on this very important case." And, 

I'm in the leadership team. And I'm being very clear. We should do whatever it takes. And I can still run for president. I'm a mom. I can do two things at once.

They moved on to the debate, particularly the point at which Klobuchar criticized Mayor Pete Buttigieg about his "lack of experience" and Bash played a clip of Buttigieg talking with CNN after the debate, in which he said he understands the ways of Washington, he just doesn't accept them, and that maybe it's time for "change to come from outside the Beltway.

Klobuchar reiterated her comment from the debate, that experience matters, because it has gotten results, pointing to work by Senators Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris.

I just think the fact that someone has experience can be a really good thing right now, when we have a president who went in there with no experience, and has done nothing when it comes to helping regular people.

Bash asked her about her votes on Trump judges, noting that one she voted for had "further dismantled Obamacare this week" and that Klobuchar has voted to approve around 50% of Trump's nominees, and wondered if that was a mistake. Klobuchar noted the the judge in question had been supported by President Obama, Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders and many others, too. 

So, my point here is, what's really going on is that the Trump administration brought this case. They're trying to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. And some of my colleagues on that debate stage want to actually start over with Medicare for all.

Bash pressed her, asking specifically if she regrets her votes. Klobuchar said she'd have to look at each of the judge votes, but noted she makes her best judgment, as the other candidates who are Senators do.

I don't carte blanche make a decision about each judge based on whether or not Trump nominated them... My track record of recommending judges to Barack Obama -- and he took every recommendation I made -- have been some excellent, excellent judges. 

Moving on to the January debate, and noting that "So far, only five white candidates have qualified," Bash wondered why Klobuchar thought that happened. 

Klobuchar said you'd have to look at each of the campaigns to understand that, while mentioning both Cory Booker and Andrew Yang and hopes they'd be there in January. And she pointed to the "huge momentum" around her campaign. As Klobuchar ticked off items pointing to that momentum, not just in Iowa but in New Hampshire and the Carolinas, Bash turned it to the SNL skit. Klobuchar laughed, noting the impression was good and looked back at last week's debate. 

Yes, well, that was a pretty fun part of that debate, actually, when I pointed out there -- that discussion that gone so long, so I suggested that maybe we should go to the Wind Cave in South Dakota, which is a national park. And what you would like to know, Dana, is, now I have a number of spelunkers, right, that are now really excited about my candidacy. So, you know, in a close primary like this... you just have to keep reaching out to these groups...

Bash joined in, saying "One constituency at a time," allowing Klobuchar the last word.

That is exactly how I'm going to win this. 

See you around campus.