Wondering on Wednesday 3/20/24

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Huh... A billionaire can't pay his bond, and can't find people to help him; I wonder how that happens? And I wonder whether at least some of the companies that won't help aren't helping because they simply don't want to be involved with him, rather than because they really can't help him? I'm also wondering, a bit, why the family doesn't tap their Russian connections, where they used to get 'all the money they need' for the business, or why Jared doesn't message his BFF, the Saudi Crown Prince, for help?

Speaking of help, the GoFundMe to raise money towards the penalty has crossed the $1.5M threshold, with over 26,000 donors contributing to the cause. I really wonder who contributes to something like this - it takes a special kind of person to want to donate money to help a billionaire meet his legal responsibilities, I think.

Dartmouth men's basketball players voted to unionize earlier this month after they were deemed to be employees of the school by a regional National Labor Relations Board office. Needless to say, that prompted a whole lot of discussion on what this means more broadly for the NCAA: how will athletes be paid, how much, and would it be only for their season, or for the entire year, what about NIL, and so on. 

Me? I can't help wondering what the $3.6B in scholarships given to 180,000 DI and DII student-athletes is for, if it's not payment for their services?  

And since we're talking about the NCAA, I also wonder why it insists on opening Pandora's Portal of Program Doom before the seasons are officially over? It happens with football, and now basketball. What on earth is the point of encouraging players to end their season before their season ends?  

Finally, I wonder whether NCAA executives have considered changing careers?  They would make, um, "perfect" additions to pretty much any political office, right? They have all the critical experience: they know how to grab as much money as possible from sponsors and donors, make ridiculous rules that even they don't understand, ignore how those rules impact their constituents, and wait for someone else to fix the mess for them, like they're doing with NIL. If that's not a perfect fit, I don't know what is. 

Back to the billionaire. Donald 'Orange Jesus' Trump, a man alleged to have shared our national secrets with members of his residence/private club, is now eligible to receive national security updates as the presumptive Republican nominee. Given his propensity for blurting out whatever the hell crosses his mind, creating alternative facts at the drop of a hat, and his um, alleged inability to differentiate what's his and what's government property, I'm wondering if we should limit what's shared to only weather forecasts with national implications.

Think about it: the forecasts are specific as to locations, risks, potential damage, and populations impacted. Depending on the situation, forecasts even include global modeling. Surely, they should count as 'national security,' right? I wonder - only a little bit, though - what else a narcissist like the OJ would need. Shouldn't knowing how many of his followers, how many "real Americans," are in the path of a storm, or at least within the Cone of Uncertainty sponsored by Sharpie, be enough? 

Trump is suing George Stephanopoulos (and ABC News) for defamation because Stephanopoulos called him a rapist during his incredibly embarrassing interview with Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC). In the interview, Stephanopoulos repeatedly said that Trump was "found liable for rape" by a jury, which is untrue; the jury in the first E. Jean Carroll case found that he did not commit rape under the definition in NYS law at that time. It was Judge Lewis Kaplan who determined that Trump committed rape 'as commonly understood.' 

I wonder if George has considered that he could lose this case? After all, his interview was dripping with malice, towards Trump and Mace. I also wonder if he has second thoughts about inviting a Congresswoman on his show, specifically because she publicly talked about her own rape, specifically to shame her about her political decisions? And the one I wonder the most about: did his wife welcome him home with open arms after that grotesque interview?  I sure as hell hope not.

One last little bit of wondering on this one, now that NY has changed the definition of rape to match what Judge Kaplan said people understand 'rape' to mean, is someone responsible for updating the myriad references to sexual assault in the NYS criminal code before this change goes into effect in September? Are sentencing guidelines being updated? Are DAs receiving training on how to present cases to grand juries? 

What's on your wondering mind tonight?

Sunday School 2/4/24

The classrooms were rocking yesterday. Let's dive in, starting with Kristen Welker and her catfight with House Speaker Mike I'm Calling the Shots Here Johnson (R-LA) on Meet the Press.

The two repeated themselves multiple times and often spoke condescendingly to each other; here's what I gleaned from the interview on the hot topics of the day.

Johnson thinks we need to take a Reaganesque/Trumpesque approach with Iran - peace through strength - and he said "We should not be appeasing Iran..."

We need to act to decimate the Iran Central Bank, the assets that they've held there. We need to lean on international banks to seize the assets of Iranian proxies. We need to – to put big-time pressure, maximum pressure, on their oil exports. There's a lot that we could do to Iran to send a message instead of this appeasement strategy. 

We need to 'Soleimani' them, like under Trump, when "we used a drone and three missiles" to take out a single bad guy, instead of "using potentially hundreds of munitions to strike close to 100 targets so far." I guess he thinks we're using too much ammo or something.

The House proposed a separate Israeli funding bill because the Senate isn't doing anything; in fact, HR2, "which is our signature bill right out of the beginning, right out of the block" could have solved the border problem if it hadn't "been sitting on Chuck Schumer's desk collecting dust..." And, if you didn't know, Senate bills are DOA in the House, and vice versa.

Johnson hasn't been briefed by his Senate counterparts, and to date he's only heard the same rumors as everyone else. I get the sense that he thinks the bill doesn't matter. 

But here's the essential point... We documented 64 specific actions that Joe Biden and his agencies have taken to create this catastrophe. They did it intentionally... The American people are done with this. The border has to be secured. The president has the authority right now. He doesn't need another act of Congress. He could do it right now. But he's unwilling to do it.

At some point, I stopped listening, but I perked up when I heard them mention Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and his impeachment. Johnson previously said he's very much against a one-party impeachment, as we saw in a clip. He said three times, "The founders of this country warned against single-party impeachments. 

You guys know why. Because they feared it would bitterly and perhaps irreparably divide our nation.

What they're doing with Mayorkas is not that, and it's not a 'policy disagreement,' either. "It's very different, Kristen, in many ways." Let me mansplain "the many ways."

For one, the House has methodically, slowly, deliberately gone through the impeachment process, impeachment inquiry, impeachment investigation on Mayorkas and – and President Biden himself. We've involved three different committees of jurisdiction: Judiciary, Oversight, Ways and Means. We –we have followed the facts where they have led. Not for political purposes. Not because we take pleasure in this. It's, again, a heavy thing to look at the impeachment of a president or a Cabinet secretary. But these facts require it.

I snickered - I mean, wasn't that the same speech Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi gave? Johnson says his GOP team has done a very careful, methodic, nonpartisan investigation.

And it is exactly the opposite of what the House Democrats did in the previous administration. That is a fact, and we can follow those facts and understand them for what they are.

"And that's the truth," said Edith Ann.  

Moving down the hall, George Stephanopoulos was in the chair for his own show; one of his guests was Sen. JD Vance (R-OH YEAH, I'm in the Cult!). Vance is unofficially campaigning to move into Number One Observatory Circle, but he'll have to outlast dozens of others in the Donald J. Trump VP Hunger Games to get the keys.

George opened the interview by playing a video clip of Vance acting very RINO-y back in 2016 when he said he was "a Never Trump guy." George wanted to know why he had changed his mind. 

When you compare Trump's term and Biden's term, Vance says there's a clear difference, and

... It's hard not to conclude that I was wrong and so many were wrong about Donald Trump back in 2015. He delivered, George, he did a good job. And I think it's why we ought to give him another run at it.

George countered with some positive Bidenomics data, then turned to what's happened since then: Trump's 2020 loss, January 6th, the indictments, and the verdicts in the E. Jean Carroll sexual assault and defamation cases. And he asked if being a Trump supporter means that he's "sanctioning that kind of behavior, sexual assault, and defamation?"

Well, I think it's actually very unfair to the victims of sexual assault, to say that somehow their lives are being worse by electing Donald Trump for president, when what he's trying to do, I think is restore prosperity. So, I think it's insulting to victim -- victims of sexual assault.

Wait, what? What the actual hell?  

Trump is trying to restore prosperity, and damn those pesky sexual assault victims for being insulted that so many people are willing to look past not only how Trump talks about sexually assaulting women, but the actual sexual assault he was found guilty of committing. Can't they just be happy he's trying to make them more prosperous? 

Honestly, that's preposterous, and insulting to pretty much anyone other than a MAGA Camper. Vance went on to say most of the cases are "not about prosecuting Trump for something that he did, it's about throwing him off the ballot because Democrats feel that they can't beat him at the ballot box. And so, they're trying to defeat them in court."

That's exactly what Trump did in 2020, with five-dozen-some-odd losing court cases, his Kraken legal team, and the presser at Four Seasons Total Landscaping. Vance didn't mention those, but he argued that fighting an alleged criminal in the courts isn't the right way to go - we should fight over policy in the election.

When George pointed out that it was juries making the decisions, Vance noted

George, if you look at all of these cases, the through line, two-fold. Number one, they’re funded by Donald Trump’s political opponents, and the goal here is not to help us actually have a real conversation about how to advance the country forward. Their goal is to defeat Trump at the courts because these people know they can’t defeat him at the ballot box. 

There was no second fold in "the through line," and George moved on - or, I should say, moved backward - and asked if Vance would have certified the election had he been VP on January 6th. Vance said it was "such a ridiculous question," which it was. George reiterated he wasn't looking forward, he was looking over his shoulder, which prompted Vance to say

I have to make a point here. You constantly say to people like me, 'why do you talk about January the 6th, why do you talk about the election of 2020,' and then you ask about this multiple times during a six-minute interview.

After listing his concerns with the 2020 election, Vance said there was a "political solution" to the problems, and "litigating which slate of electors were legitimate I think is fundamentally the political solution to the problems that existed in 2020."

And I find it weird, George, that people like you obsess with what I call 'what happened in 2020,' you're so incurious about what actually happened in 2020, which is why so many people mistrust our elections in this country. We’ve got to do better, George.

George pushed the 'you'd do what Trump said' point a few times, while Vance maintained that wasn't why he'd have done it - and he continued to hit on the media's obsession. He thinks what's happened since 2020 - instability, the border, and so on - is more important, and said

We need to litigate the 2024 election about those issues. You guys are obsessed with talking about 2020. I'm happy to answer the questions, but I think it's a disservice to the American people that you're so preoccupied with it.

 Next question? What about this advice Vance has for Trump? Roll tape, George!

... if I was giving him one piece of advice, fire every single mid-level bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state. Replace them with our people. And when the courts -- because you will get taken to court -- and when the courts stop you, stand before the country like Andrew Jackson did, and say "The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it." 

George asked if Vance really wanted to fire "everyone in the government" and if it was really "OK for the president to defy the Supreme Court?" Vance argued everyone didn't need to be fired, just that Trump should replace "the mid-level bureaucrats with people who aren't responsive to the administration's agenda. That's called democracy."

And then there was a pissing match, with George quoting Vance directly, and Vance trying to clarify that what he meant was

...the president has to be able to run the government as he thinks he should. That's the way the Constitution works...

And, the SCOTUS can make an "illegitimate ruling" and if it did, "the president would have to respond to it."

Eventually, Stephanopoulos said, in effect, "Thanks very much for playing," and closed the interview as Vance was still talking. 

Honestly, I would have sent all of them to after-school detention. 

See you around campus.

Sunday School 8/28/22

Let's dive right in with your Sunday School lesson with Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) in the This Week classroom with George, who started by asking if there should have been any documents at Mar-a-Lago. 

Blunt said "we need to know more" about what was found, and wondered why the Intelligence Committee he sits on didn't know anything about this before the top-secret poop hit the fan. He did say they are expecting a briefing soon.

George tried again, and a third time, at which point Blunt said he's careful with documents, butwhatabout Hillary Clinton and James Comey? The fourth time, Blunt said "he should have turned the documents over and apparently had turned a number of documents over." And, he wondered

why this could go on for almost two years and less than 100 days before the election, suddenly, we're talking about this rather than the economy or inflation or even the student loan program you and I were going to talk about today?

On student loan forgiveness, Blunt's a no - he thinks the plan is "monumentally unfair" to folks who didn't attend college because they couldn't afford to go, and to people who paid back their loans, and to people got educated without loans. Besides, it's

just bad economics... I think it's going to have a long-term, devastating effect on a student loan program that worked pretty effectively until about ten years ago when the federal government assumed responsibility for that program.

That Guy from Vermont was up next, offering his take on loan forgiveness. He explained 60% of the benefits will go to folks with Pell grants, and 87% is going to folks making less than $75K a year. He noted how "shocking" it is to some GOP colleagues when "the government actually... does something to benefit working families and low-income people."

He said there wasn't any squawking about "massive tax breaks to billionaires," adding 1%ers "have a lower effective tax break than working people;" and of course, there are corporations that, "in a given year don't pay a nickel in federal taxes." The fact that both Rs and Ds are unhappy? Well, "... the answer is not to deny help to people." 

The answer is maybe to create a government where -- which works for all people and not just for wealthy campaign contributors.

George asked if that can get done "without more Democrats in the Senate," Sanders suggested the Dobbs decision will have an impact, as will "the gun violence we're seeing."

So, I think there is a reasonable chance that Democrats will retain control over the Senate. I certainly hope we get more than 50 in the Senate, that we get at least 52, so we can start going forward and protecting working people in a way we have not been able to do up to now.

Down the hall, Dana Bash had Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Gov. Chris Sununu (R-NH) in the State of the Union classroom. 

Bash asked if AG Merrick Garland should indict FPOTUS. Warren thinks "it's powerfully important" that DOJ can follow the evidence, and if they have it, "they will bring charges and prosecute appropriately. And I support them in that."

Like Sanders, Warren's happy something's being done on student loans. Noting that 40% of folks with student loans don't have a four-year degree, she said the forgiveness "is about America investing in people who work hard, who play by the rules, and who just need a government on their side."

Bash wondered about fairness, and other kinds of debt that the government isn't helping with. Warren said she thinks "a lot about fairness," before reciting her own story of going to college when a semester cost $50, getting a part-time job and being able to pay for her education. That's not the case now, where "our public education system is no longer creating opportunities" for folks without financial means.

Instead, we're saying to these young people, you have got to get an education, but we are going to wrap the chains of debt around you. And, for many, you're going to be paying it for decades into the future, including getting Social Security checks garnished. That's not the America we want.

She didn't address the 'fairness' question, and Bash noted the package doesn't do anything about the cost of education. There are "a lot of problems in the whole system," she said, and this is one tool Biden had to help. She said the Dems "have put multiple plans on the table" to deal with the other issues, but the Rs won't get on board.

We'll close with Sununu, about whom there was some early talk of a presidential run; he's hoping to be re-elected as gov. Bash asked him how concerned he was about the Mar-a-Lago documents, including info related to 'human clandestine sources."  Sununu toed the party line, saying he's concerned about transparency.

...one thing I was very aggressive about was saying, look, if you're going to take unprecedented action and raid a former president's house, well, you better have a strategy for unprecedented transparency. So, I think we're all concerned about what might be in those documents, that some were classified, some weren't, what the serious nature was, but show us. You got to be able to show your cards when you're taking actions like this.

Bash said "you can't show all your cards when you're talking about top secret information," which is the point of the investigation. She asked if he was concerned about "the potential risk to American intelligence and national security."

I think we should -- we should absolutely be concerned. There's no question about that. But I don't know what to be concerned about. No one -- no one seems to. What's the subject matter? What's the dates? What's the times? What are we talking about here? Of course, you can't just open the whole investigation up.

He said he didn't want all the documents on the Internet, but "give us some sense " of what's in them and "what really drove us in there."

So, this is unprecedented. And they had to have an unprecedented strategy, which they clearly didn't have. They're on their heels. They don't know what to do. We just -- we want to see the information, so we can have this discussion, we can talk about the subject matter with some sense.

On the student loan program, here's the best part of his argument.

by the way, the debt is not going anywhere, right? Someone's got to pay it. And, in many instances, because there's no balanced budget, there's no sense of control on the $30 trillion in debt, here's the misery of it. Those individuals that think they're getting the $10,000 or $20,000 off their student loans, it's just getting effectively deferred into taxes down the road, higher taxes down the road, where they will have to pay interest on. This is a political shell game of money. 

 See you around campus.

Sunday School 6/19/22

I've got three interviews for you today, starting with Dana Bash and Rep. Fred Upton (R-Yes, I Voted to Impeach Him) in the State of the Union classroom. 

He said he thinks the January 6th Committee is making a dent with moderates and independents. While the economy and gas prices are the big issues, 

there's been real interest in what's going on... I think that it's had an impact on voters across the country. And we will see how this thing plays out. The committee has been very careful not to divulge any details in advance of their hearings.

He expressed frustration with folks who are talking to the committee now, saying

...where have they been for the last year-and-a-half? Why weren't they saying what they're saying now a year-and-a-half ago, particularly to those of us that actually witnessed what was going on, to back us up a little bit?

Upton said people "still like (president Trump) a lot... he's had a number of decisive wins, where he's endorsed candidates that they have won...he certainly entertains a majority of the Republican base, and will be hard to stop" if he runs in 2024.

And, frankly, as we look at the economy, we look at gas prices, all these different things, folks are not really happy with the Biden administration, which is why he is mired at a level even below where Donald Trump was at this point in his tenure.

Bash asked if there'll be anyone left who's willing to stand up to Trump, since half of the ten House Republicans who voted to impeach him won't be back next year, and "the remainder are facing some pretty tough reelection battles." Upton thinks there are.

And you've got to remember too, though there were only 10 of us that voted to impeach, there were 35 of us that voted for a bipartisan commission to look at this. And we know that there were a lot of folks who were, frankly, scared of their reelection, which is why they voted the other way as well... But we will -- that's why politics is so much fun sometimes. It's -- we will see how things all shake out.

Upton said he's hopeful the Senate can get a deal on guns, although he thought they'd have gotten there by now. And, he added,

Law-abiding folks, they shouldn't have any fears in terms of what's -- what's going on. It's been a rallying point, particularly for the NRA and the gun owners of America. You look at their Web site and they're, like, raising cash like you wouldn't believe in terms of their Second Amendment rights are being taken away.

That's not what's happening here, he said, but that thinking has "been elevated, for sure," mentioning that Texas Republicans Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Dan Crenshaw were both "accosted" at their state's GOP convention.

George talked with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in the This Week classroom. He mentioned a Wall Street Journal report that 44% of economists expect a recession. Both President Biden and Fed Chair Jerome Powell have made bringing inflation down a top priority, and she said

I don't think a recession is inevitable.

She pointed to still-strong consumer spending, while admitting "higher food and energy prices are certainly affecting consumers" and changing spending patterns. And, she said most folks "continue to have buffer stocks of savings" to help maintain spending levels, so she doesn't see that as a "likely cause of a recession" in the coming months. And, she said, the labor market is 

 arguably the strongest of the post-war period. Not only is the unemployment rate near historic lows but there are two job vacancies for every unemployed worker, so the labor market remains extremely strong; unemployment insurance claims near their lowest levels in history.

She said that having had high inflation "in first half of this year ...locks in high inflation really for the entire year," but she expects the pace of inflation will come down, and she cautioned, "there are so many uncertainties relating to global developments..."

George asked her to explain why in Europe the core inflation rate was under 4% but in the states it's 6%. I didn't think she answered that. She talked about "energy price spillover" being half of inflation, 

food and energy, and there are spillovers because energy is an important input into almost everything in the economy. It is true that we've had core inflation over and above that -- that is too high and the Fed will take steps to bring it down.

She mentioned Biden's "historic releases" from the strategic reserve, which have kept gas prices from being even higher, and said he's ready to work the with the oil industry and Congress to bring down "other costs that are burdening households," notably drug and healthcare costs and housing. 

She also countered some of what the oil industry folks argue, saying

I think that producers were partly caught unaware of the strength of the recovery... and weren't ready to meet the needs of the economy; high prices should induce them to increase supplies over time... The way in which we can ensure reasonable energy expenses for households is to move to renewables, to address climate change, as a medium-term matter. 

A gas tax holiday may be on the table (Biden said he might have a decision by the end of the week on that). And, Yellen said, he's "reviewing tariff policy toward China." 

We all recognize that China engages in a range of unfair trade practices that it's important to address. But the tariffs we inherited, some serve no strategic purpose and raise costs to consumers. And so, reconfiguring some of those tariffs so they make more sense and reduce some unnecessary burdens is something that's under consideration --

She wouldn't give any timeline for that. 

In the Face the Nation classroom, Margaret Brennan talked with Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the network's go-to guy for COVID stuff, about the newly authorized vaccine for kids five and under. 

Gottlieb anticipates this rollout will be "more complicated" than previous ones, saying people skilled with giving kids this age need to be involved. He thinks most kids will get them at their pediatrician's office, and that might make it take longer to get doses distributed.

He also said "it's continued to concern" him that that "only about 30% of kids ages 5-11 have been vaccinated" with two doses, which is lower than original estimates. And, he said

there are surveys showing that about 20% of parents plan to vaccinate children under the age of 5. I suspect it may end up being lower than that...a lot of parents may choose to take a wait-and-see attitude and reconsider this in the fall. 

They also talked about Florida, which is "affirmatively against" vaccinating kids in this age-group. Gottlieb thinks that was the wrong move. "They could have taken a neutral stance and just merely said, we're not recommending the vaccine for children." He clarified that they're not blocking access to the vaccine, just "not facilitating access."

See you around campus. 

Sunday School 5/15/22

Unsurprisingly, the Sunday School classrooms were full of discussion on the mass shooting in Buffalo, NY. 

I'll start with my Governor Kathy Hochul, a Buffalo native, who gave several interviews. Here's a recap of her conversation with Dana Bash in the State of the Union classroom.

Bash described the state of the union as "heartbroken and horrified," not just because of the lives lost, but because the shooter apparently had published a lengthy, hate-filled, racist manifesto before embarking on his mission. 

Hochul talked about that a bit. 

... what is so bone-chilling about it, is that there is the ability for people to write and subscribe to such philosophies filled with hate, the white supremacists acts of terrorism that have been fermented on social media. And to know that what this one individual did has been shared with the rest of the world, as well as the livestreaming of this military-style execution that occurred... in the streets of my hometown, and that is what is so fundamentally disturbing about this, that this is not just a long time ago, members of the KKK would sit in a hall and plot what they're going to do in their community. This spreads like a virus.

She wants social media platform execs to "examine their policies and to be able to look me in the eye" and say they're doing everything possible to prevent the spread of this stuff, and that they're able to take it down immediately. (Twitch, the Amazon-owned gaming platform on which the shooting was streamed, said the video was removed in less than two minutes, but it was available on other platforms where it had been shared hours later.) 

Bash asked how this hate, things like the Great Replacement Theory, which was included in the published screed, is not just spreading online, "it's being pushed by some prominent right-wing voices, and it's been done so for years," can be stopped. The gov said the folks who spread this "need to be called out," and party officials need to

stand up at this moment and call it out and just shame it and to make sure that these people crawl back into their holes and stay there. This cannot be part of our mainstream dialogue here in the United States of America. So, leaders have a responsibility to call it out.

She also talked about her responsibility to protect people when it comes to guns. The laws here are "some of the toughest" in America, 

but the guns are coming in from other states, or the enhanced magazine, which is exactly what happened here, the high-capacity magazine that led to the slaughter of people in my hometown.

There are also illegal guns, purchased legally in other states and brought to NY.

... they end up in someone's trunk. They bring them up I-81. They head into New York State, head over to the Bronx, head over to Brooklyn, head over to the city, or they go to places like New York, Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester. So, that's how it's spreading. Other states do not have the same laws that we have, and people are just crossing those borders.

Hochul's not the first to mention that problem. NYC Mayor Eric Adams mentioned the so-called Iron Pipeline in one of his recent classroom visits. It's an issue impacting cities in multiple states. Sadly, knowing these trafficking routes exist, and doing something about them, are vastly different things.

Down the hall, George Stephanopoulos led his panel in a discussion on the shooting and the hate that drove it in the This Week classroom. Sitting around the table were ABC regulars Donna Brazile and Chris Christie, along with Julie Pace (AP) and Molly Ball (Time Magazine). 

Brazile noted that FBI Director Chis Wray "warned us almost two years ago" that domestic terrorism by white supremacists was a big concern, but that we're not doing much about it. 

 We've got to talk about white supremacy. We've got to talk about the radicalization of -- of kids in this country. We cannot do a "both-sides" argument on this one here because, if we don't begin to address what is happening, it's going to continue to happen. El Paso, what we saw in Charlottesville, what we saw down in Charleston. We have to address it. We have to be vigilant. And we have to root out this type of extremism in our society. 

Christie said this wasn't on his radar when he was a US Attorney (from 2002 - 2008), but it was - "a little bit" - near the end of his second term (in 2018) as New Jersey's governor, where he said law enforcement folks 

started to see more people willing to act out violently, seemingly without any type of heads-up, because they're acting alone. And that's what makes it so difficult for law enforcement. Because, even with good intelligence work, it's really hard if someone is a crazy person who is not doing things overtly, publicly. It becomes harder.

He said it'll be interesting to learn why "we didn't see some of the stuff he was writing and...  posting, and why he wasn't flagged." And he said Wray pointed out the need for all levels of law enforcement to work together, "in a way that flags some of the stuff that's happening on social media and keeps a watch on some of these folks who are going to act out violently." 

Pace responded to George's question about the apparent amount of planning in advance of this, pointing out that it "seemed to happen in spaces where other people were, you know, these online communities right now are really robust" and where, as Christie said, often out of sight of law enforcement. And, she added,

I think it's going to be really interesting to see where the debate goes in terms of what the responsibility of the tech companies will be here but also other people that just exist online in these communities, what is their responsibility? We all get so used to flagging things when we see them in person, but this is sort of the next space, I think, where people need to be more alert. 

Ball, who's a political correspondent, talked about the conversations she has with "everyday voters" and how many bring up how "mad" and "divided" we are.

And this is something that, I think, politicians see it as sort of just cheap, political rhetoric, everybody says, oh, well let’s come together. But people are really taking this seriously, this sense of division and hatred and just all of the strife that we feel. And I think particularly, you know, coming out of COVID, reemerging, trying to come back together as a society, there's so much we need to be doing just to try to knit people together and feel like a country again, feel like a community together...

Christie seemed to suggest we probably won't hear a lot of kumbaya over the coming months, noting that "midterms are particularly divisive." The typical midterm voters are the "true believers" on both sides, which means the pols are talking to folks who aren't as likely to be looking for unity or healing the divide. Rather, we'll likely see candidates doing more hardcore progressive or hardcore conservative communication over the next few months, but said

I definitely sense from being out there and talking to voters, that as we turn the clock from '22 to '24, I think there's going to be a new desire among voters to say, I want to hear from people who have the ability and the record to be able to bring people together rather than divide us. I think there is a desire for that in the country.

Brazile mentioned one of my least favorite things about politicians - "they speak in sound bites. They don't speak in the everyday ordinary language..." 

They're not speaking to open the hearts and minds of a young man, 18 years old -- what drove this child to write a 110-page manifesto where he talks about his hatred of Jews, he talks about starting a war, Jews against non-Jews, and then he starts talking about black people? I'm, like, have you met one? Have you talked to anybody unlike anything you’ve ever seen? No, I don't want politicians to control this conversation.

She thinks the conversation belongs in the hands of teachers, business leaders, and the like, and said "the media has to understand that they cannot be complicit in this conversation. "

We need to have a conversation that doesn't go about the next election. It's just like on abortion. People call me, what do you think about Democrats and abortion? I said, before I was a Democrat, I was a human being, and why not talk about that and not just the next election? No, we need more than politicians to have this conversation. 

Christie's next comments have me wondering what the heck he's smoking. He said he really believes there'll be

a different desire come '24 in terms of hearing something different from people who want to pursue high office because of the violence that we're seeing, because of the division that you are talking about. People are feeling it. They're feeling it at their dinner table. They're feeling it with their own children. They're feeling it at cocktail parties, at sporting events. They don't want to see it. 

Um, does 2020 ring a bell, Governor? The Big Lie? Or 2021, and the insurrection? We've got the former president still spouting the former, and we've got Republicans still denying the latter. Current Republican officeholders, and wanna-be Republican officeholders traipse off to Mar-a-Lago to kiss whatever he demands them to kiss, looking for endorsement, or at least not opposition. And, he's a threat to what Christie's suggesting. Pace seems to agree, saying

-- it's great to think about the prospect of a 2024 campaign that is focused around unity in this country, but, I think, the reality is that we will have some very powerful forces, potentially the former president who doesn't really speak that language and has enormous support from within the Republican Party. So, I think there's a long way to go before we get to that place where we might really have that national conversation that is more focused on unity.  

She's spot 0n with that thinking. After all, we just had a campaign in which the winner, Joe Biden, ran on trying to unite us, and ran into the other party's fully-dug-in position of stopping his administration.  

There's a long way to go, for sure. See you around campus

Sunday School 4/17/22: Extra Credit

In your Sunday School, we learned about Senate struggles to agree on COVID aid, tales from the House Minority Leader, and we listened to two dads talking about kids and legacies.

For your Extra Credit, we're talking crime - something Democrats are running from, and Republicans are running on in this year's elections.

George Stephanopoulos hosted This Week; he spoke with New York City Mayor Eric Adams and Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell. 

George asked if we need better tracking of folks like Frank James, the suspect in the recent gas-and-shooting attack in the subway, who had hated-filled videos and "suggestions of violence" posted online. Adams believes we do, and that social media companies have a role to play.

There's a corporate responsibility when we are watching hate brew online. We can identify using artificial intelligence and other methods to identify those who are talking about violence. And you know my concerns around even what's called drill music. Not all drill music, but those that talks about inflicting violence on rival gangs. That is driving some of the shootings we're seeing in the parts of the Bronx.

Sewell said they've been working to "convince people that subways are safe," saying that patrols have been enhanced since January when she and Adams took the reins.

We've done over 280,000 additional inspections by uniform personnel in the subway system. Couple that with our subway safety task force. As it stands now, crime in the subway is actually below pre-Covid numbers.

She said more officers are being surged into the subway, recognizing that "people need to see a visible presence of police..." There's stuff we don't see, too, she said. 

Speaking to the continued increase in major crime since his election, Adams noted that it's a national problem, not just a problem in NYC. 

It's not a red state, blue state. In fact, red states are experiencing a higher murder rate than blue states. Tulsa is three times the murder rate of Los Angeles. Mississippi, Kentucky, Louisiana, those are the highest murder rates in our entire country.

He mentioned the 'defund the police' narrative that was heard before President Biden got elected, but turned that into a message for Republicans.

Let me tell you what the de-funders of police are... those who did not vote on the Build Back Better bill. Money was in that bill for police officers. We have 2,400 ATF agents in our country. Only 80 are in New York. We need to double that amount. We need to go after the ghost guns. We need to put a head to ATF in place. Put in place a real gun-tracing program. 

Sewell said police need to rebuild trust and work with the public to do that. It's something she and her officers do, every day, she said,

because we need them. And I think we keep saying that public safety is a shared responsibility. This recent case illustrates just that. And everyone came together. So, we need to build strength in our communities with the police.

George played a clip of former NYPD Commish William Bratton talking about reforms, and asked Adams if Bratton was right.

The scales right now are tipped very heavily in favor of the reforms of the progressive left. Well intended, some needed, but a bit too far. And what we have as a result is this growing fear of crime, this growing actual amount of crime, as evidenced in almost every major American city.

The mayor - a former NYPD captain - said yes. He admitted "major mistakes" had been made in the past, and he agreed with Sewell that they need to rebuild trust with the community. They can't do that 

by allowing those who are dangerous and that have... a repeated history of violence to continue to be on our streets. We have to un-bottleneck the courts. Too many people during Covid, when courts closed down, have not served their time or have not been in the courtroom. And then we have to be honest about some of the things we're doing generationally that has created the crime problem that we are facing right now. And that is why we believe in intervention and prevention to solve this issue that we're facing.

Sewell added that they can't "lose sight" of crime victims, either.

We believe the system has to be fair and balanced, but when we lose sight of the victims of crime, we are not doing what public safety is intended to do.

In the panel discussion, Democratic strategist Donna Brazile admitted the Rs will run on crime. It's a problem across the country, she said, because "we have a problem with gun violence... people are just shooting, shooting, shooting... It's not a Democratic problem. It's an American problem."

And, she said, it's going to take a "...'whole of government' approach" and private sector involvement,

because we’ve got to deal with the fact we have a lot of teenagers, a lot of folks who are just disconnected from society and we have to bring them back in. And if we don't bring them back in, crime is only going to increase.

Speaking of NYC specifically, where she had relatives in uniform, she said the crime budget is $11B, higher than the Ukrainian budget.

So, let's be clear that we can increase the number of policemen. We can increase the budget for police. But you’ve got to bring in Social Service workers, you’ve got to bring in the Youth and Child Department. This is a huge issue...

Former Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) appreciated Adams agreeing with Bratton that it was "progressive policies that have caused this wave in crime" (an over-simplification of what Bratton said and what Adams agreed with), but he thinks Adams, who ran on fighting crime, is "sticking to his word" and he thinks New Yorkers will "give him the benefit of the doubt" for that. 

Biden, on the other hand, doesn't get a pass. He was against 'defunding the police,' but

he was also standing with a lot of these reforms that have made - that have turned out to be a mistake. And it's not only reforms, it's the attitude of local prosecutors that have been elected, in places like Manhattan, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago who are refusing to prosecute some of these crimes.

The result of all of this is that "crime is going up. And Democrats are going to pay the price for it because it's their policies that changed us from a low crime country to a higher crime country."

George gave the last word to Maria Salinas, an ABC News contributor.

All right. But is it really -- does it have to do with policy or does it have to do -- especially the increase in the last couple of years, increase in crime, does it have to do more in the fact that people -- were in pandemic, people were locked up?

Doesn't mean that people locked up commit crimes once they come out, but all that frustration, losing your job, having the prices of everything being higher, doesn't that affect people? And you combine that with the access to weapons does not -- doesn't that increase a crime?

I've got thoughts on what Salinas said, but that'll have to wait for another day.

See you around campus.

Sunday School 4/3/22

There were some interesting conversations in the classrooms yesterday, including the one between Margaret Brennan and NYC Mayor Eric Adams on Face the Nation. 

Brennan seemed hell-bent on hitting him from both the left and the right on crime. Noting NY has "some of the toughest gun laws in the country," she first asked "where are the guns coming from?" Her next question, such as it was? 

But you know that acknowledging that and having some of the toughest gun laws in the country will have critics say, well, look, it makes no difference if you have tight gun laws.

That was followed up by "So why aren't the laws working?" and, finally, "It sounds like you're expecting more executive actions or orders from the president to do this because none of it's going to get through Congress."

I think Adams, a 22-year veteran of the NYPD, did a poor job with her questions. He didn't mention the Iron Pipeline, which is how illegal guns get to NYC and the rest of New York. He said his anti-gun team had "removed over 20-something guns off the street," while other reports show 85 'ghost guns' alone - not counting other illegal guns - had been recovered by early March. 

Worse than that, he didn't push back at all on her ridiculous suggestion that gun laws weren't working. He said "We need to stop criticizing good, proper law enforcement with the proper proactive things to keep guns out of the hands of young people..." But what he didn't say - and what no one else says, either - spoke louder than what he did say. 

This is how people must answer this question, every time it's asked.

Show me a single law that is 100% effective. Laws against voter fraud, DWI, white collar crimes, child abuse, drug possession, motor vehicle laws, rape and murder, insurrection, other violent crimes... no law is 100% effective - but they still work, either as a deterrent to prevent crimes, or to get criminals off the streets. Critics should imagine a world without any of these "ineffective" laws, and tell us how much they'd like living in it.

He also failed to call out Congress for their inaction, another opportunity missed. 

George Stephanopoulos talked with Ron Klain, President Biden's chief of staff, on This Week. Crime came up in that classroom, too. Here's the bizarre first question on this topic. 

How did Democrats get on the wrong side of the crime issue that's coming up right now, especially in the wake overnight another killing in Sacramento, at least six dead in a mass shooting?

Hmm... Do we even know the party affiliation of the perps, or the victims, in this shooting? And is there a specific policy that got the Dems "on the wrong side" of this crime? George didn't elaborate on any of that, so we may never know. 

Klain doesn't think Dems are on the wrong side of it; he pointed to Biden's plans for "for robust funding of police," part of which was in the omnibus bill Congress passed last month.

We also want to make sure we have in place police reform and community violent intervention to help reduce crime. We have a plan to fight crime. Congress is making progress on that.

He also said the administration's 

working very hard to be at the forefront of efforts to both control crime and have balanced and sensible policing. We think we can do both. That's what we stand for. And that's the plans we put forward to the Congress.

On crime of a different type, George asked if a NY Times report saying "Mr. Biden confided in his inner circle that he believed former president Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted. He has said privately that he wanted Mr. Garland to act less like a ponderous judge and more like a prosecutor" was true.

Klain said he's never heard Biden say that, or "advocate the prosecution of any person." And, he reminded George that that Biden promised decisions on who gets prosecuted would not be handled in the White House.

Only Richard Nixon and Donald Trump, in the modern era, believed that prosecution decisions should be made in the Oval Office... We have returned the practice that every other president, Democratic and Republican, has had since Watergate, other than Trump, to let those decisions be made at the Justice Department. The president has confidence in the attorney general to make those decisions, and that's where those decisions should be made.

When asked, Klain confirmed that POTUS: hasn't had any contact with DOJ on the Hunter Biden investigation, was "confident Hunter Biden didn't break the law" and was "confident his family didn't cross any ethical lines." 

Finally on G-G-G-Ginni and the Texts, any pending legislation on ethics for the Supreme Court, and whether Clarence Thomas should recuse himself from January 6th-related cases, Klain said he wasn't familiar with the specific legislation; the administration's position continues to be that the January 6th Committee and DOJ are the right places for exploring the insurrection and should be allowed to do their work; and that it's not the White House's place to stick its nose into what the Supremes do.

What's-his-name talked with Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press. The only 'crime' they talked about was Crimea. I was kind of surprised; after all, she's a Dem, and part of a major international child sex trafficking crime syndicate, and she and Bill have had all those people killed over the years.

Asked about the "moment" the Dems are having, on "what the party stands for," and where it stands - to the left, to the left, or closer to the center, Clinton said the hand-wringing "was in their DNA" and that it happens whether they're in power or not.

She thinks Biden is doing a good job, and said she's

not quite sure what the disconnect is between the accomplishments of the administration and this Congress and the understanding of what's been done and the impact it will have on the American public, and some of the polling and the ongoing hand-wringing. I've always thought that the best politics is doing the best job you can do. And there's a lot that Democrats can talk about in this upcoming midterm.

Of course, she's "well aware that midterms are obviously always difficult for the party in power." But, 

we've got a great story to tell. And we need to get out there and do a better job of telling it. And for those who, you know, say it hasn't gone far enough, that's always the chorus in Democratic Party politics. But I would add that in Republican Party politics, you have an even greater disconnect. Unfortunately, most of that party has now gone to the, you know, to the extreme and are saying and doing things that have no basis in reality. So, we've got a good case to make if we get our focus in the right place to do it.

They surely do need to get out there and tell the story! And, there was another thing the Dems need to do. 

And, frankly, standing up to the other side with their craziness and their calls for impunity and nuttiness that we hear coming from them, I don't think the average American, frankly, wants to be governed by people who live in a totally different reality.

If only...

See you around campus. 

Sunday School 3/20/22: Extra Credit

This week's Sunday School lesson focused mostly on the war in Ukraine, so I'm going to share some of the other stuff that made the list.  

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) was a guest in ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom, where he was asked by the host about China, and its support for Russia. Durbin said China's president 

has to decide his place in history and China's place in the world. If they are going to be part of Putin and his barbaric conduct in Ukraine, he's going to run the risk of discrediting his own nation. He has to think twice about that.

George, like all the other pundits in the universe, was unable to resist talking about "inflation, higher gas prices across the board." He played a clip of Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), who was also on the show, saying

Biden would rather turn to dictators like those in Iran and those in Venezuela rather than turn against the climate elitists who dictate the energy policy of that Democratic Party and of his presidency. So now he's trying to pass the buck to Vladimir Putin.

Durbin said it was "hard to deny" that our cutting off Russian oil has impacted Americans, and he mentioned some of the steps being taken to help alleviate that. And, about Barrasso's comments?

We’ve got to make sure that we’re sensible not only about Putin, the war, and these Russian oil supplies, but also sensible in what my friend John Barrasso calls these 'climate elitists.' We are fighting and waging a war against climate change. It is a war which will decide what... the world looks like for the next generation. Let’s take both of these very seriously.

George wondered about the tone of attacks on Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, specifically mentioning those of Sen. Josh Hawley (R- Insurrection Lunatic Fringe). Durbin said 

Judge Jackson has been scrutinized more than any person I can think of. This is her fourth time before the Senate Judiciary Committee. In three previous times, she came through with flying colors and bipartisan support, the last time as soon as just last year.

As to the accusations, "there's no truth to what he says." And, to Hawley himself?

... he's part of the fringe within the Republican Party. This was a man who was fist-bumping the murderous mob that descended on the Capitol on January 6th of the last year. He doesn't have the credibility he thinks he does.

George picked up with Sen. Barrasso where he left off with Durbin, asking if Hawley was engaging in what Barrasso specifically said should not happen with Jackson: "a process of character assassination." Barrasso said "the whole process is going to be fair, respectful, and thorough." And he offered an attack on Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

I’m less concerned about her statements than I am about Chuck Schumer's statements. He said she's going to rule with empathy. A judge ought to be making decisions based on the law as written, not the way they feel about it. So, he also said check her record. And going through the record, there are some concerns that people have about her being perceived as soft on crime. That's all going to come out with the hearings but they're going to be respectful, they’re going to be thorough and they’re going to be fair, George.

On the fairness of Hawley's attacks, Barrasso was about as forthcoming as then Judge Brett Kavanaugh in his hearing before the same committee. 

Well, he's going to have his opportunity to question the judge as will all the members of the committee. The last time we had a hearing with Kavanaugh, he was accused of being a serial rapist with no evidence whatsoever. So, I think we're going to have a fair process and a respectful process, unlike what the Democrats did to Justice Kavanaugh.

Back to gas-passing we went; Barrasso was asked about Durbin agreeing with the so-called "climate elitists" that we must take climate change seriously. Here's his, um, "response."

Well, Joe Biden can't hide from the fact that he is the president of high gas prices. And they're looking for anyone to blame, whether it's Putin, whether it's Republicans, whether it's the energy companies, whether it's COVID. The Democrats have a very big problem with 40-year high inflation, highest gas prices ever. When Joe Biden came into office, it was $2.38 a gallon for gasoline. Americans paid $1,000 more for energy last year than the year before. And on polling last week, 70% of Americans say more American oil and gas, and less emphasis on climate.

"Good answer, good answer!" said the GOP Family Feud fans.

George finished the interview by offering Barrasso the opportunity to spell out the "three specific things" President Biden needs to do if he wants to lead from the front.

Well, number one is, he needs to tell NATO that we collectively are going to supply the people of Ukraine things that they know how to use, whether it's drones, planes, missile systems.

Number two, he has to say that he is going to go from Brussels to the eastern front of NATO to show the resolve of NATO and the United States' commitment as well.

And, third, he needs to say to the people of Europe who are really in a tough situation with regard to energy and the dependence that they have on Russian energy, that we are going to increase the exporting of liquified natural gas from America to them.

"Even Germany," he said, realizes that "energy security is much more important than climate zealotry." And, Barrasso said, he's got bipartisan legislation to make this happen. 

Truth be told, the gentleman from Wyoming has been introducing variations of his bill at least since 2013. For those in the back of the room, that's years before Biden started "leading from behind." And, of course, all this happens because his state has a boatload and a half of natural gas buried within its borders, not for any altruistic reason whatsoever. 

One final note: as I write this, a screeching Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-?????) has stormed off the dais shortly after his first few minutes of questioning in Judge Jackson's hearing were over. Several of his questions pertained to his choice, Judge Michelle Childs, not being the person sitting at the table in front of him. I think we can take that "fair and respectful process" idea with a grain of salt. 

See you around campus. 

Sidebar: Sunday School 3/6/22

I'm just going to say it: I've never been a big fan of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-The Other Florida Man). 

Like many people, I was introduced to him when he made "the sip" in 2013's Republican response to the State of the Union address. Using that as a launch pad, he had his failed run for the GOP nomination in 2016. Since then, I haven't seen a lot of leadership out of him; to the contrary, what I've seen appears to be more 'followship' and 'evasiveship' than anything else. 

Could I be doing him a disservice? Sure - he may be way more better, as we say, than I give him credit for, but I honestly don't pay enough attention to him to form a more nuanced opinion. If you want, drop a comment on why I should, and I'll consider it. 

The reason why I'm talking about him at all today is because he was in two Sunday School classrooms this week, ostensibly because he's vice-chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, but also because of something he tweeted - and no, I'm not talking about his daily Bible verse; I'm talking about the screen shot heard 'round the echo chamber. 

Rubio was one of 300-some-odd senators and House members participating on a Zoom call with Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy - and one of two who shared a screen shot of Zelenskyy while they were on the call. 

Here's how that conversation went down, first on CNN's State of the Union with Jake Tapper.

JT: You tweeted a photo of Zelenskyy during the virtual meeting. Democratic Congressman Dean Phillips said that the Ukrainian ambassador had explicitly asked lawmakers not to share anything on social media until after the meeting ended just for Zelensky's security. Is that true? Was it a mistake for you to tweet that picture?

MR: Well, first of all, she asked that like 30 minutes into the call, after I had already done it. The second is, I think she's under the impression that no one knew that call was happening. That call had been widely reported. Actually, the specific time had been reported. There were over 300 people on it. All the call details had been e-mailed. So, there was nothing secure about that call. And the picture is just a nondescript picture. It looks just like any of the other ones that you have seen out there publicly. So, I -- there's no risk posed. But you're always going to have a couple of people that want their name in an article somewhere and mentioned in the press. So...

And, here's how it went on This Week with George Stephanopoulos:

GS: You were facing some criticism from fellow legislators for tweeting out a picture of President Zelenskyy during his Zoom with Congress yesterday. The ambassador asked members not to do that because it would endanger Zelenskyy. Why did you ignore that request?

MR: First of all, she said that well into the call. Second, there was no security risk in that at all. I'm -- perhaps she was under the impression that the Zoom call was a secret. It had been broadly reported like multiple outlets, maybe even ABC had tweeted it was at 9:30. There were over 300 people on this call. The details of the call were emailed to a bunch of people. And it was a nondescript picture unlike any of the other -- just like the other ones you've seen on the air. So, there was no security risk there.

GS: You don't believe you put him at risk?

MR: No.

So, a US senator felt compelled to screenshot and post a "nondescript" picture, one that "looks just like any of the other ones that you have seen out there publicly," and neither anchor asked him why he felt the need to do that?

I mean, it's not like it was a side-by-side of Rubio's 'resting Intelligence Committee face' and Zelenskyy - it was a solo shot of the Z-man, one that's almost certainly hanging on the walls and ceilings of bedrooms around the world - probably next to one of Andrew Cuomo.

I don't think anyone - Rubio's constituents or anyone else - benefitted in any way from seeing the picture. Like Rubio said, the call was widely publicized in advance, so people should have known he would be there. 

Oh wait - that's not necessarily true. He skipped President Biden's State of the Union address because he was too busy to get a Covid test first. Besides, he told CPAC attendees,

For the first time in American history, you now have people having to produce paper to go in somewhere, to sit somewhere, to go to the State of the Union.

You’ve got to show them I’m vaccinated, I took a test yesterday, they took my temperature, you know, all this stuff. This is, what’s happening now in America, is what happens after 20 years of infusing this Marxist thought process into every aspect of our lives and now we’ve come face-to-face with it.

And he does seem to miss an awful lot of votes - so, maybe his constituents did need evidence that he was working. 

And maybe I don't really need to reconsider my opinion of him.

Sunday School 3/6/22

Most of this week's classroom conversations focused on the Russian invasion of Ukraine; Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Rep. Mike McCaul (R-TX), Ukrainian Ambassador Oksana Markarova, and Florida Man Marco Rubio all made multiple classroom appearances. 

I decided to highlight three other voices, starting with Nadya Tolokonnikova, an activist and founder of Russian punk rock group Pussy Riot. She talked with Jake Tapper on a special noon edition of CNN's State of the Union. 

Tolokonnikova said that there's an "actually much higher" number of Russians who oppose the war than we're seeing on TV, which is amazing given the potential 15-year prison sentence associated any opposition at all, whether it's a social media post or participating in a protest. 

In the face of the ban on social media and independent news organizations, some folks use apps, such as Telegram; in addition, "we learned how to use a VPN over the last couple of years" because they knew crackdowns were coming. Unfortunately, 

...the problem is most of the people, they cannot afford it, just because they -- they don't have knowledge, or they just have to work a couple of jobs to feed their families, because the economic situation is not good in the country.

People she knows are both mad at, and terrified by what's happening in Russia. A 14-year-old friend of her daughter attended a protest and was beaten by the police. The girl's father stepped in, asking the police what they were doing. Unsurprisingly, the police started beating him; he ended up spending a couple of days in jail, "pretty brutally beaten."

And situations like that, they're unfortunately happening quite often. That's why I know that a lot of Russians are trying to leave the country. But, also, there are a number of people who are convinced that they should not leave, because they don't want to give Russia as a gift to Putin. They want to stand their ground.

Asked what might be behind Putin's actions - deteriorating mental health, or him not being held to account over the years for bad acts - Tolokonnikova points to the latter. 

...we have heard a lot of loud, big proclamations from the global community, but, unfortunately, it wasn't followed through. And Putin didn't really feel like he -- him and his closest -- closest oligarchs and cronies suffered from invasion of Ukraine. And I think, partly, what we're seeing right now in Ukraine is the result of complacency of the global community about a situation that happened in Ukraine in 2014.

Lots of people would agree, I think.

On the morning edition of CNN SOTU, one of Tapper's guests was European Union Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. He asked her about the potential that Ukraine would be joining the EU, referencing her own comments as well as thoughts from Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. 

You have said that Ukraine is -- quote -- "one of us and we want them in the European Union." President Zelenskyy is asking for immediate admission to the EU. His foreign minister tweeted -- quote -- "Historic times require big and historic decisions" -- unquote. Are you going to take such a historic step? And, if so, how long will it take Ukraine to be admitted? Are we talking weeks, months, years?

Seems the timeframe is imprecise. von der Leyen spoke of the Ukrainians fighting "for our common values, that they belong to our European family" and that, by filing the application, Zelenskyy "set a process in motion" that "will take some time." 

But we should not forget that, before this was started, we had already worked intensively together, for example, integrating the two markets, trying to support as much as possible Ukraine, not only financially, but also, for example, in energy security. So, a lot has been done. There has to be done still quite some work for any point of being more closer, but that this process is now in motion, this is without any doubt.

She couldn't say how soon it could happen; "it depends, of course, what - the development on the ground," among other things. The path is clear, but

at the moment being for us the most important is to support Ukraine as much as possible in this existential fight against Russia. This is not only a fight of between Ukraine against Russia, Russia that chose the war against Ukraine, but it's a bigger topic. It's also the democracies fighting the autocracies. And, therefore, it is for us existential really to support in every way possible Ukraine and its brave leadership.

Tapper wondered if a full ban of Russian oil was on the table. The long answer? von der Leyen said there's lots going on that's hurting the Russian economy, and "there's a strong strategy now" saying the EU must end its dependency on Russian fossil fuels.

Therefore, we are just discussing in the European Union a strategic approach, a plan, how to accelerate the investment in the renewables, how to diversify our energy supply, for example, with you, our friends in the United States, where LNG (liquified natural gas) is concerned and other friends around the world, how to invest heavily in biogas, for example, in hydrogen that is homegrown. And this is not only a strategic investment in our energy security, but it's also good for the climate.

Seems the short answer is no - a total ban is not on the table. 

Finally, a quick stop in ABC's This Week classroom, where George Stephanopoulos chatted with Vitali Klitschko, the mayor of Kyiv. Klitschko said it was "a little bit quiet" in his city, but there were some rocket attacks, and fighting is going on in several cities as the Russian moved closer. He also commented the patriotism of the people, saying they are "very, very motivated to defend our city."

What does he need from the West? It's not a long list, really: unity, pressure, sanctions, and weapons support. Russia's one of the strongest armies in the world, he acknowledges, but

Russians doesn't have so huge will and -- as we Ukrainians. We actually are very much ready. We defend our city, our houses, our families. We defend our lives and our future. And we need -- we very appreciate for the friends. We're very thankful for support, but we have to make much more pressure and help Ukraine. We need the help. We need the help. We're still fighting. We still fight for our country and more pressure, more pressure. And unity between all the democratic countries around Ukraine.

Overall, I think the West - NATO, the EU, and the US - are united in their support. Existing sanctions are crushing the Russian economy; heck, even some of the oligarchs are complaining. We're seeing protests against the Russian invasion around the world, including in Russia, as noted above. Collaboration is happening on how best to get more weapons to Ukraine. It's not perfect - some things just take too long, no matter how fast we start.

Klitschko expressed appreciation for all of that, for sure, but he wasn't shy about what's at stake, in case anyone needed a reminder. 

Ukraine was always friendly nation. We always was friendly country. We never was aggressive to anyone, but right now, we have huge motivation to defend our future, our country. Putin has huge ambition to rebuild Soviet empire. We wasn’t USSR and we don't want back to USSR. We see our future as democratic, modern European country. And we expect support from all world because we're fighting not just for Ukraine, we’re fighting for others. We're fighting for whole modern world. We have to stop Putin all together.

Anyone disagree?

 See you around campus.