What He Said, and What He Didn't

There was a prime-time gabfest last night, with the president talking about himself, of course, and about our country and others. The gist of it, after he got past the chest-thumping, was that our elections aren't safe and won't be unless Congress passes the SAVE America Act. 

I removed the chest-thumping, in the interest of everyone's sanity, and added commentary; you know I can't help myself, and if you didn't want commentary, you wouldn't be here.

But we still have a major challenge that must be urgently addressed, because no country can be great without fair and honest elections. You have to trust your country because, if there can be no trust, there can be no greatness.

And that's very simple — no trust, no greatness. For many years I've called for bold, swift and decisive action to protect the integrity of America's elections. And, of course, he's called the 2020 election rigged zillions of times. In fact, he said even months before the 2020 election that the only way he could lose was if it was rigged; he did lose, so it must have been rigged. And he's said that basically every election where anyone he endorses doesn't win is rigged. They are all rigged; just ask him! Every American deserves to know that, when they cast their vote, that vote will be counted accurately in a system, (and, despite my best efforts, a good number of people still believe that's the case) and that is to make that system secure. One where cheating and interference are not just difficult, but virtually impossible. Unfortunately, the system we have today falls catastrophically short of that standard. That is absolutely not true. Even the Heritage Foundation's data says so. Tonight, I'm announcing the immediate declassification and release of critical intelligence, revealing shocking vulnerabilities in our election infrastructure. 'Shocking vulnerabilities' and verified 'cheating and interference' are vastly different things. 

This evidence shows that the election system we have dangerously exposes and really exposes, like levels never thought possible, to hacking, exploitation, and foreign interference. Just as disturbingly, this vital information has for many years been covered up and hidden from you, the American people — our beautiful, our great American people. I wonder, does that include 'the enemy from within (Dems like Adam Schiff), and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia, and all these countries," the haters and losers, the Dumocrats, and all the other terms he's used to disparage anyone who doesn't agree with him? 

But that all changes right now. The documents we will release starting tonight have been gathered by the White House Government Transparency Task Force, a great group of people, along with the staff of the president's Intelligence Advisory Board, supported by our top intelligence agency chiefs who have all personally reviewed the findings we are presenting this evening and fully confirmed their authenticity.

You can see these documents for yourself at whitehouse.gov, that's whitehouse.gov, go check it out. Our purpose in disclosing this information is not to weaken confidence in elections, but to earn that confidence by confronting vulnerabilities and correcting them very, very quickly, and that's what we're doing. Um, no, that's not what's happening. You're identifying potential vulnerabilities, but you don't address them with your signature solution.

The documents cover five major areas of concern. First, they show that, over a period of years, starting during the 2020 election cycle, the People's Republic of China carried out what is believed to be the largest compromise of election data in history, resulting in China's illicit acquisition of 220 million US voter files. American voter data is readily available for a variety of reasons. 

That information includes names, addresses, phone numbers, political party preferences and other sensitive data that would be needed to register to vote and engage in other nefarious activities, which is exactly what was happening.  No evidence of nefariousness was presented. This data loss presents an unprecedented election security nightmare. The intelligence even shows that China assigned a data exploitation unit specifically to this new project. The information may present an 'election security nightmare,' but it is readily available in most states. And no evidence was presented that a security lapse or breach occured.

Compounding the travesty, the second set of documents we are releasing reveals that members of the Deep State — a very, very famous group of people, in many cases (and I can't WAIT to see who these famous people are! —  in our intelligence agency, worked to actively suppress and downplay information about the extent of China's sinister election meddling, covering it up from both the president and the American people like nobody thought was possible.

US spy agencies began learning about the compromise of voter registration files in 2020, when they discovered that tens of millions of voter data — think of that, tens of millions of voters’ data — in 18 states have been bought, stolen or hacked by China. Yet those responsible for sounding the alarm instead kept the information secret and hidden. Bought, stolen, or hacked - which is it? And if it was obtained illegally, why no threat or warning to President Xi Jinping? Maybe some new tariffs like the ones he's threatened to place on Canada for their border-hopping wildfire smoke?

They did not disclose to me as president or to anyone else. As widely reported at the time, he was notoriously uninterested in briefings and didn't even read his President's Daily Brief. Was this information hidden, or wasn't it on the list of things he liked to hear about? And to the best of our knowledge, they did not inform Congress. In fact, all they kept saying is, this is the most secure election in the history of our country — a standard, very pat line that was divvied out to say. And dozens of audits, performed by Rs and Ds alike, in states red, blue, and purple, have uncovered no significant fraud in the 2020, 2022, or 2024 elections.

The cover-up of this colossal security breach is even more disturbing in light of the additional information showing that China engaged in other election-related activities to undermine my first administration and our 2020 campaign. And at the same time, Russia Russia Russia was trying to influence our election to ensure that Trump won; that wasn't mentioned during his remarks, but it's supported by the evidence.

They did not want — and they just didn't want it. They fought like hell not to have it, Donald Trump to win, and for good reason. As the documents we are releasing show, CIA reporting explicitly stated, and I quote, in mid-2018, the Chinese Communist Party's policy was to leverage all domestic and foreign elements that were opposed to the US president in an effort to reduce the US president's votes and make him resign or prevent his reelection. Is this a good time to mention the US government's efforts to influence elections in other countries, such as sending the Vice President to Hungary to personally urge voters to keep Viktor Orban in office? Or efforts by Rudy Giuliani and others to get Ukrainians to dig up dirt on Joe Biden?

Isn't that nice? Also, in mid-2018, China was working to influence the results of the US midterm elections and later the results of the 2020 presidential election itself. Separately, in mid-2019, the Chinese government's strategy against the United States was focused on undermining domestic confidence in the US president.

They wanted to just make you sound like your president wasn't so hot, when actually your president has done a great job. His approval ratings tell a different story... And they did everything possible to do exactly that. Going on this document says, and this is by the CIA, the strategy included efforts to use Chinese contacts with big US companies to influence US business leaders to turn against the president of the United States of America. It would be hard to imagine this working; he maintained very strong support from business leaders throughout his first term.

The Chinese government sought to identify US journalists who had reported negatively on the US president and pay them large sums of money to write more negative articles about him, as many as they could and they didn't care what they said. The Chinese government wanted the US president to lose the next election. You probably don't know this, but sometimes, I seek an hourglass figure...  While the Chinese may have wanted to see more negative stories about Trump (as if there weren't enough of them flying around already), there's no confirmation they were successful in this alleged effort, just like there's no evidence I've been successful in my mission.

And the reason they wanted me to lose is because they knew I was wise to them. Charged them billions and billions of dollars' worth of tariffs and built the strongest military anywhere in the world. We have the strongest military anywhere in the world. These are exact quotes from the CIA reporting. The name of the person doing the quote is now under review, but it gets even worse.

Raw intelligence obtained by the FBI in 2020, yet buried by rogue bureaucrats, stated that China's activities even included an attempt to manufacture illegal ballots for Joe Biden. Documents show that during this period, dozens of significant CIA and NSA reports about China's election targeting were kept out of the presidential briefing. Raw intelligence, experts will tell you, is notoriously unreliable and often isn't shared until it can be validated.

These were briefings I would get almost every day; everything was kept out that was of importance. One email among intelligence analysts admitted that they had, quote, deliberately massaged the presidential daily briefing to withhold information regarding Chinese activities related to the election. Another official inside the FBI wrote that she was running, quote, a shadow government, unquote, to keep intelligence about China's election meddling from becoming known and to keep it away from the honorable press. This is explained by Fox News, including that "The documents, however, do not establish Trump's broader allegation of a politically motivated conspiracy." Rather, it was a difference of opinion on intelligence matters.

Other officials who witnessed such efforts perceived the motivations to be blatantly political. Recently, we found significant numbers of burn bags information, and this is a group of bags that were used to destroy information, given by President Barack Hussein Obama to be burned, it was supposed to be burned. I have no idea what this even means, other than that three-name guy continues to live rent-free in the FOTUS' head.

These bags were supposed to be at a different level by different people, incinerated and checked, but it never happened. Maybe we got lucky. We believe this was not done on purpose, but rather through gross incompetence of the people that were supposed to burn the bags. But the findings are stunning.

Today, I'm asking the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Justice, the FBI and the CIA to investigate how and why such crucial information was hidden. To fire those involved in the cover up and to file criminal charges, if appropriate, against these people. It would be appropriate to investigate whether any crimes were committed; can we expect that the people in charge of those areas during Trump's first term will be among those investigated? And, of course, we don't have a DNI, and the guy who's been nominated has no intelligence experience. The qualifications of the FBI director are highly suspect as well, but yes, let's give it our best shot.

Yet concealing China's meddling was only the beginning. The third set of documents we are releasing proves that for many years, Americans were blatantly lied to about the security of our election infrastructure, including electronic voting machines and ballot counting systems, dishonest, almost all. Hold please, while I put on my seatbelt for this part: our election infrastructure itself is 'dishonest'?

They're vulnerable and they're easily compromised and people within our government knew that. Tonight, we're publishing a series of previously classified US intelligence community assessments and other reports proving that our government has long known these machines are extremely exposed to attack. As one assessment states, we judge that the United States' adversaries, including at a minimum Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, as well as non-state groups have the capability to compromise US election infrastructure. If that's true, we should certainly try everything we can to limit that ability.

That's unquote but that's some statement, isn't it, made by supposedly great patriots of our country? LOL! The people who support his allegations are "supposedly great patriots of our country?" The document goes on to further state that, quote, we assess that centralized election-related data repositories, such as voter registration databases, poll books, and other official election websites are most vulnerable to exploitation, and adversaries could use this access to these systems to disrupt election processes within the United States of America. Centralized election-related data repositories are bad? Aren't the FOTUS and his minions demanding that states turn over all their voter information to the federal government, which would actually put it in a 'centralized election-related data repository' rather than allowing the states to control their own data? Aren't they threatening to withhold Congressionally apportioned funds from states that don't comply?

Tonight, we're releasing all of those findings and spanning from January 2020 to June 2026. This is a cyber threat aimed at the very heart of our democracy. Many people have questioned whether it could actually be possible to electronically manipulate vote totals or change election results on these terrible machines.

Today, we are releasing documents that show the CIA obtained reporting of a specific plot to do a big number in favor of the corrupt Maduro regime in Venezuela, and that's exactly what happened, conspiring to digitally rig their own country's elections in 2020. And that's what they did. This reporting included precise details about methods to regime develop, to digitally alter vote totals in ways that could not be detected, even with an audit, no matter how deep they went. Reporting suggests Maduro simply ignored what the machines showed and announced totals that differed from those recorded. This is more about a person acting badly than an 'election infrastructure' failure. And we have our own example of this happening right here in the US, right? "I just need to find 11,780 votes," the most memorable line from Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State, in which he sought to overturn the state's results.

This intelligence underscores why we must take urgent action to ensure that our own system can never, ever be hacked or compromised like it was in the past. Was it? Where's the evidence? Venezuela is not America (yet, anyway). The fourth set of documents reveals that even when significant evidence of fraud has been detected, it has been buried and covered up. Among the disclosures tonight are FBI files detailing evidence of alleged fraud by a large-scale voter registration operation in Michigan.

In 2020, Michigan State Police raided a Democrat Get Out the Vote Organization, corrupt group in Muskegon, and were so concerned by what they found. They were just so concerned, they couldn't believe it, actually, that they contacted the FBI in Detroit. The documents state that some canvassers admitted to FBI agents that they signed voter registration forms in other people's names, submitted fraudulent registration for people who did not exist, and received gift cards tied to the number of applications that they produced. Fraudulent voter registration is illegal in every state in America. Multiple investigations found no evidence that any fraudulent voter registrations were submitted or that any fraudulent votes were cast.

In other words, it was pay, play and cheat. The FBI agents working on the case believe that crimes were committed, yet the Biden Department of Justice slow-walked the investigation and killed it. Actually, the Trump DOJ killed the investigation in September 2025, finding "no criminal violation or a priority threat to national security." Tonight, I'm asking the FBI director to ensure that the matter is fully investigated and to work with the Department of Justice to prosecute those responsible for any crimes.

Finally, to reveal just how vulnerable our elections continue to be, we are releasing the results of a stunning investigation by the Department of Homeland Security. According to the DHS review, state voter rolls and public records, they identified approximately 278,000 alleged non-citizens who are registered to vote in federal elections. 

Since Democrat states refuse to share their voter files the real number is actually much higher than that. Right - because there are allegations of non-citizens being registered to vote, there must be many more of them, because math... You know, like drug prices being 600%, 800%, or even 1500% lower under the current administration. Yet even this limited analysis found more than a quarter of a million foreigners illegally registered to vote. Put together, these disclosures reveal an election system so broken and so vulnerable that no one can possibly defend it. It is not defensible. Where is the data showing how many of them voted? Where is the proof that these people are all non-citizens?  Those are both important questions, the latter particularly so, because the Department of Homeland Security's SAVE database is inaccurate,

Hundreds of millions of US voter files are in the hands of foreign governments. Our machines and ballot counting systems are exposed to hacking and manipulation and corruption. China and other countries have been trying to meddle in our elections. Evidence of fraud has been buried. Hundreds of thousands of non-citizens and dead people are listed and active on the voter rolls. Repeating these statements doesn't make them true, and the risk of tampering or other vulnerabilities does not mean that those vulnerabilities have been or will be exploited.

And yet we still have elections with no voter ID (this is false; even if voter ID is not required at the polling place, it is required to register, and signature verification is a valid form of ID - and frankly, harder to fake than an ID - just ask an under-age drinker), no proof of citizenship, and tens of millions of ballots floating aimlessly through the mail (Yes, aimlessly being potmarked hours away from the local post office where they're mailed, for example.) As one example of the insanity, California's recent election for mayor of LA and governor, was held on June 2nd, long time ago, but it was just completed a few days ago, on July 10th. Think of that, much more than one month.

Took a month to count the votes. I wonder what they were doing. They counted in-person votes; they recieved over 8,423,000 ballots that were postmarked by Election Day and recieved timely per state law; they validated the signatures on the outside of the ballot with the signature on file BEFORE the ballots were opened; they mailed notices to anyone with a signature mismatch that there was an issue and provided details on how to 'cure' their ballot within ten days; they reviewed everytihng related to the cured ballots, then opened the ones that were attested to as being correct, and counted them. In short, they followed the law, and made sure that every legitimate vote was counted, which is what is supposed to happen. This is worse than any third-world country. There's no third-world country that has elections like we have. Right - they just make stuff up, or demand that people lie for them.

In a rare move, NBC and ABC fake news have both said that they would not cover this speech. They knew what it was about, because of the fact that they don't like the topic, because they know how corrupt our system is and they don't want to reveal it. They and others in the media are part of a plot. Yep - all the third-world leaders claim the press is against them, is an enemy of the people, and is fake news. Which is why the networks you're upset with all streamed the broadcast for anyone who wanted to watch. 

They want to continue this fraud for whatever reason. What? They want to keep it going. They want to protect the radical left. Huh? They can't have a great country um..? and that's true; you can't have a great country without free and fair elections. We have those here in America, and we have laws to prosecute people who try to get around the laws. Fraud like this should mean a revocation of their licenses. "Fraud like this" meaning the fake news you hate but love to criticize, denigrate, lie about, and sue, deciding to stream you rather than broadcast you? How is that fraud?  They use our public multibillion dollar in value airways for absolutely no money. Other than license fees, application fees, purchasing a station fees, and/or the FCC public auction fees... plus the cost of selling their souls to keep on the good side of whichever bully is in charge in DC.

They pay nothing. All we want is honesty in our elections and honesty in reporting. Does that include fact-checking? They pay nothing for multi-billion dollar assets. Great damage has been done to our country. Our elections were left vulnerable to being rigged and stolen, and the trust of the American people was lost. Actually, the American people's trust was stolen... This cannot be allowed to continue. The person who has single-handedly done more damage to American trust in our elections? Donald J. Trump, who has convinced people that the Democrats are so smart they could rig a presidential election but didn't bother to rig any races on the ballot. Donald J. Trump, who, knowingly on a recorded line, asked someone to find him just enough votes to win, and didn't care that he was being recorded. Donald J. Trump, he of the January 6th insurrection, who loved the people that were there, chanting to hang his vice president.

Every American, whether you're a Republican, Democrat, independent or otherwise, should be able to agree that we deserve the most secure, honest, and fair election system anywhere in the world. Secure elections should be a partisan — really, should just, we should be together Democrats, Republicans, independents, everybody, and it should not be a partisan issue. It's not a partisan issue - we all want free and fair elections, and as far as any investigations have shown, for the most part we have them. Every state has laws to deal with various types of election fraud, and people are caught and prosecuted for violations - Democrats and Republicans alike. That is as it should be. And as far as anyone has determined, there is NO evidence of fraud sufficient to influence an election. 

It should cause to unite us, not to divide us. This should be a cause, we should be united, not divided. In light of the brand new and irrefutable information, I have revealed tonight my administration is in the process of notifying the states whose election data was compromised by the People's Republic of China and many others. Again, nothing has shown that the information was compromised, or even that enough information was obtained to allow it to be compromised.

We will be working closely to mitigate any harm and we're taking swift action to ensure that sensitive voter data is better protected so we can never be bought, we can never be hacked, and we can never watch a stolen election again. That does NOT mean that all voter data should be provided to the Federal Government. One person who should know, at least as well as anyone, is the FOTUS, whose tax information was stolen and shared, along with the data of over 405,000 other individual and corporate taxpayers. Also, the voter information of everyone receiving a mail-in ballot certainly should NOT be shared with the US Postal Service, either.

Tomorrow, the Secretary of Homeland Security will hold a briefing to outline his department's recent work confirming cyber vulnerabilities in our electronic voting systems.

They are bad. We're in the process of informing governors, Senators and members of Congress of potential issues in their states. If you look at voting today, it's in such bad shape in so many states, and we are committing to fix it and we're also committing to be working with those states and local jurisdictions to help them fix and patch known technical vulnerabilities before the midterm elections. Oh, the irony! This is the guy who just fired the Election Assistance Commission folks, the leaders of the very federal agency charged with assisting states with election security, after previously getting rid of the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. You can't make this stuff up.

We have very important elections coming up. We want those elections to be honest. I've also ordered DHS to notify every state about noncitizens on their voter rolls and direct them to remove all ineligible voters from the lists immediately. But most importantly, addressing this alleged crisis of election security demands that Congress must pass the SAVE America Act. How easy is that to do, unless you want to cheat. This is an absurd comment.

The only reason you wouldn't do it is you want to cheat because your policies are so bad, and your candidates are so pathetic that you can't get away or can't get elected any other way. Actually, those are the very reasons why a president would demand Texas redraw its Congressional districts off-cycle to gain him five more seats. And it's why other red states jumped on the redistricting bandwagon to curry favor with him. And why blue states foolishly fell for it, too. This landmark bill requires that all voters must show photo voter ID. How simple is that? Could I have your photo, please? Photo voter ID. He knows that is not what the bill asks for, and pretending that's all it is? It's a bald-faced lie. All voters must provide proof of citizenship. 

Are you a citizen of our country, please? And hopefully there will be no corrupt mail-in ballots, which, if you watched California and so many other places, mail-in ballots are inherently corrupt. Again, California ensured that the mailed-in ballots were NOT corrupt. So, you would have no mail-in ballots except for illness, disability, military deployment, or travel if you're going away on business or vacation. And what about you? Which of those reasons applied to your mailed-in vote in Florida's primary?

These reforms are urgently needed to stop the vulnerabilities that I've mentioned. He knows, everyone in DC knows, and anyone that has read the SAVE America Act knows that the bill does NOTHING to address voting machine vulnerabilities, foreign attempts to influence how Americans vote or who our candidates are, attempts to influece the press to report in a specific way about a candidate, individuals who make bad choices to earn bonuses or get gift cards, people who ignore actual vote tallies and use their own made-up numbers, people who try to get others to change vote totals, people who don't include things when they brief their bosses, selling or sharing voter data, or networks that don't put evyerthing the president wants on the air. To all Americans, I ask you to pick up your phone tomorrow, call your Representatives in the House and Senate and demand that they pass the SAVE America Act without delay. Together, we will restore faith and confidence in our country, and we will be bigger, better and stronger than ever before. The bill will NOT restore faith and confidence in our country, or in our elections, 

Thank you. God bless you. God bless our great military. And God bless America. Thank you very much. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO MY COMMENTS.

Breaking Fake News Update (v1)

Fake News broke on August 7, 2025!

This news came shortly after Comer subpoenaed Bill and Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Eric Holder, Merrick Garland, Robert Mueller, William Barr, Jeff Sessions, and Alberto Gonzales in his "investigation" of the Epstein files. 

We will continue to share fake news as it breaks. 

Wondering on Wednesday 2/22/23

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

A pregnant woman, jailed while awaiting trial in Florida, is suing to be released because her unborn child is being illegally detained. When you think of it, she's right, isn't she? If her fetus has personhood under Florida law, how can it be imprisoned when it committed no crime? I have to wonder - did any legislators consider this type of consequence when they rushed to assign personhood to a fetus? 

GOP Congressional leader Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-You Kidding Me?) has suggested we need a national divorce, in which we'd "separate by red states and blue states and shrink the federal government." She's also suggested that folks from blue states who move to red states should wait five years before being allowed to vote in their new state. Greene sits on the House Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on Oversight and Accountability. I'll let you do your own wondering on this.

2024 presidential candidate Donald Trump, never one to shy away from the cameras, traveled to East Palestine, OH today. The town, the site of this month's chemical-carrying train derailment, was the perfect place for Trump to stand behind a podium with his fundraising banner pasted on the front and tell people he's having plenty of Trump-branded water delivered to them, along with water of "much lesser quality." I couldn't help wondering if he brought any bottles of his swamp water to throw into the crowd; it seems he forgot to do that.

Comically, on the national news tonight, an anchor said that the train derailment in East Palestine "had become political" with Trump's arrival. Why is that comical, you might be wondering? Maybe because the coverage on all the networks and cables has been about the politics of it: what FEMA is doing (or not); what the EPA is doing (or not); what the Transportation Department is doing (or not); what the mayor, governor, senators, and congresspeople asked for (or didn't); what Norfolk Southern, the owner of the train, offered (or didn't) and so on. Throw in the names of Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, and Trump, all once and possibly future presidential candidates, and the politics almost overshadow the derailment and the related health and safety issues it may have caused.

Oh - one more name we need to throw into the politically derailed derailment? Mike Pence. He can't stop talking about it including saying that the Biden economy "derailed the economy of East Palestine long before that train came through...", He also said that he would have gone to East Palestine before he would go to Kyiv. If you're wondering, like I am, if Pence is running in 2024, the answer is yes. If you're wondering, like I was, whether Pence has visited Kyiv or East Palestine, the answer is no.

This last item?  I'm wondering how long it would take for the echo of right-wing screams to die down if Maddow had gotten the entire cache of the January 6th video. And I'm wondering, too, if the American people deserve to see what really happened, as the Congressional MAGAists have said, why the footage was exclusively given to a pundit, not a newsman. To a single network, not to every network. To Tucker Carlson, of all people.

What's on your wondering mind these days?

Sunday School 1/15/23: Extra Credit

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sunday School 11/27/22: Extra Credit

This week's Sunday School was all about the classroom panel discussions. For your Extra Credit, I'll nose around a few of the 'usual suspect' interviews, starting with Dana Bash and Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R-AR) on CNN's SOTU.

"A former president, an antisemite, and a white supremacist walk into Mar-a-Lago. There is no punchline." That was Bash's intro to her discussion with Hutchinson - and I love it. Now - on to the recap.

• Hutchinson said he hopes "someday, we won't have to be responding" to stuff Trump has said or done. About the dinner, it "empowers people when you meet with them... you want to diminish their strength, not empower them." He also said "You have got to be absolutely clear in your communication that this is not acceptable dogma, it's not acceptable conversation, it's not acceptable history, and you have to disavow it. it's as simple as that."

• In his upcoming speech at the Reagan Institute, he's going to talk about things that Republicans "historically" don't do: "attack America's democracy...denigrate our political system...undermine confidence in America...attack those institutions that are fundamental to the rule of law." He said the party "is in a good position coming out of the midterms," but his remarks are for "the individual candidates that strayed from" Republican principles.

• He signed a bill banning biological males from competing in women's sports, so he's "comfortable" with Herschel Walker's attack ad about trans athletes just days after the shooting at a LGBTQ+ bar in Colorado Spring. He also passed anti-hate legislation and said "we shouldn't be targeting anyone because of their race or their gender." He closed with, "What happened at that nightclub is a human tragedy... These are challenging issues. And what happened is just simply wrong."

On MTP, What's-his-name (WHN) talked with Gov. Jared Polis (D-CO). Colorado's been the site of several mass shootings over the years. 

• Polis said everyone's voices need to be heard to fix this. "I think what you really need to do if you're serious about reducing these kinds of gun violence events and mass violence events is try to take the best ideas from all sides that work." That means mental health, and gun policy, and dealing with anti-LGBTQ stuff. "We need to, as a society, as political leaders, walk and chew gum at the same time. We need to look at all the evidence and the facts and try to make decisions that lead to a safer country."

• He said it looks like "this would have been a good instance" for the use of Colorado's 'red flag' law. It's been used "several hundred times, but could have been used even more" to prevent mass shootings, self-harm, or suicide." He also said "it's never comfortable" to get involved in someone else's business, particularly when it's a mental health issue, but "it's certainly better than the alternative," which is doing nothing.

• We need a national solution on guns. One example? Colorado has universal background checks, but neighboring states don't. He also was "generally supportive of national efforts towards closing the gun show loophole, towards having a conversation about. having a "process where you need an additional license or background check for some of the most high-powered weapons, I did support that as a member of Congress."

Finally, Jon Karl talked with Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) in ABC's This Week classroom. 

• Unbanning Trump from Twitter is "a terrible mistake" and that Elon Musk did it via a user poll "further contradicts Musk and his claimed concern about bots on his own platform."

• Appointing a special counsel for Trump investigations is the right move, and "if the same prosecutors that have been investigating the former president and others can be moved on to the special prosecutor's team, then there is every reason to do it, no reason not to do it..." 

• Yes, we could have a trial of a candidate during a presidential campaign. He thinks the position that you can't indict a sitting president "is flawed as a constitutional matter," and he said DOJ can't now say "you also can't indict a former president who wants to run again."

• He doesn't want to "get ahead of" the decision the January 6th Committee issuing any criminal referrals. "I think the evidence is there to make a referral and we just have to decide whether that's the course we are going to take."

• Similarly, the potential for holding Trump in contempt for ignoring the Committee's subpoenas "is being discussed." He expressed frustration with the DOJ, saying "...even where we have held people in contempt, we're only batting 50 percent with the Justice Department in their willingness to enforce it."

• Kevin McCarthy probably will strip Schiff of his Intelligence Committee seat. "I suspect he will do whatever Marjorie Taylor Greene wants him to do. He is a very weak leader of his conference, meaning that he will adhere to the wishes of the lowest common denominator."

• He said the Ds "continually face a variation of the same question, which is should the Democrats do the right -- do the appropriate thing when Republicans have consistently refused to. I think we maintain the high ground. We follow the law. We follow our responsibilities under the separation of powers," and so yes, they should comply with "appropriate oversight."

• And finally, should now 80-year-old Joe Biden run for re-election? "I think he should. I think he's extremely capable. What he's been able to do in the last two years is an unprecedented level of accomplishment. If he wants to continue, I'm for him."

See you around campus. Chime in if you want - my office door's always open.

Quick Takes (v67): He Wants to Be The Gov?

Today was a day of celebration in my neck of the woods.

President Biden came to town, along with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, and Governor Kathy Hochul.

They were all here, along with Onondaga County Executive Ryan McMahon, business and labor organizations, education folks, and other community leaders and invited guests, who joined Micron President and CEO Sanjay Mehrotra to celebrate the chip company's long-term, $100B investment in Onondaga County that will bring some 40,000 jobs to the area over the next two decades. 

Rep. Lee Zeldin (R- Crime Stoppers Fan Club) the guy who wants to be governor of our state, was in Syracuse to talk about crime (what else?) and was asked about the Micron project. Here's what he had to say about it.

I think the Micron deal tells you a story of where the business climate is right now in this state. See in other states, they have businesses coming to the state because of low taxes, the regulatory environment, state agencies are run with a very pro-business approach. The business climates in other states are so much better, businesses just move to the state. There’s no way to get Micron to come to New York for low taxes. There’s no way to get Micron to come to New York because of the great regulatory environment. They’re not coming here because the state agencies are run by this great pro-business culture. They’re not coming here because we have one of the best business climates in the country. 

You have to look at why they’re coming here, how we got here, what it took to get them here, because the fact that we’ve reached the point where we essentially have to bribe businesses to come to New York with billions of dollars of tax breaks, who won’t come here otherwise, I think highlights this state is heading in the wrong direction. Because we want other businesses to come to New York. 

And on what will happen if he's elected, he added

We’ll work with Micron. We’ll do whatever we can to improve the business climate in this state, but as far as bringing other businesses to this state, we really have to get much smarter with our mindset.

Perhaps Rep. Zeldin should get his head out of the daily NYC crime reports (he tweets them regularly), and pay attention to what's required to secure deals like this. The truth is, they don't just fall from the sky and land in someone's lap. It's not like the opening of a hot dog stand, for Pete's sake. 

If you don't believe me, listen to the people in central Texas, who fought long and hard for the Micron deal. 

LOCKHART, Texas — On Tuesday, Micron Technology announced a new investment worth up to $100 billion in Central New York. The company had forced a bargaining battle between Clay, New York, and Lockhart, Texas.

"It was billions in tax savings, both ad valorem and sales tax. It was billions in our rates for electric and water, so all of those combined made the billions of dollars," Caldwell County Judge Hoppy Haden said. "The art of dealmaking is knowing when to, you know, say, 'That's my best offer. It's my best and final.'" 

Haden led the team offering the multibillion-dollar incentive package for the Lockhart area. 

I guess we should be happy Zeldin will "work with Micron" if he's elected, but I can't help wondering what would have happened had he been the governor already. Would we be welcoming the company to New York, or would we be waving goodbye to the Micron opportunity as it passed us by on the way to Texas? (Speaking of waving goodbye to opportunity, here's what Rep. Zeldin had to say when NYC lost the Amazon HQ2 project to Virginia.)

As governor, would he have collaborated with everyone - folks from both sides of the aisle - to ensure passage of the legislation that helped bring this deal to NY? Who knows - but there is one thing we do know. 

He didn't vote for it. 

TGIF 9/30/22

Another week is winding down, and it's time for the good week/bad week accounting. Here are just a few of the folks who earned a mention.

The state of Florida had a mixes week. On the latter, the cat-4 Hurricane Ian made a mess of things, tossing boats and houses and piers around, causing massive flooding, and cutting power to millions of customers as it crossed the state. On the other hand, many people evacuated on time, and many of those who didn't rode out the storm and lived to talk about it. We'll learn more in the coming days on how deadly it was, but the initial reports were not as bad we expected. On a personal note, I'm grateful that all my friends and family in Florida are safe.

Staying in the Sunshine State, Gov. Ron DeSantis is doing his darnedest to act statesmanly, given his presidential aspirations, but his past - and votes against disaster funding for another hurricane in a far-off place (the blue states of New Jersey and New York) - are cropping up on social media. His staff said the Gov has no time for pettiness, which is a first, I think; he's a master of the petty, in fact. But when push comes to shove, or when storm surge comes to the Gulf Coast, he's willing to set that aside and work with President Biden, at least until there's talk about making fiscally responsible disaster aid demands. 

Speaking of the gaffe master, he might have exceeded our wildest imaginations at a White House hunger conference this week, when he called out for the late Rep. Jackie Walorski, who was killed in a car accident in August. Walorski was a co-chair of the Hunger Caucus, and was one of the folks who introduced the bill that led to the conference. And, of course, the pack of reporters, hungry as always for a sound-bite and air time, undertook "a series of tense exchanges" trying to get an answer as to why Biden, well, pulled a Biden. Is an answer necessary?

Supreme Court Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was formally sworn in this week, and will take her seat on the bench on Monday, at a time when 60% of us believe the Court is "out of touch" and 66% believe there should be term limits for Justices.  Those sentiments aren't indicative of KBJ, of course, but she's coming on the Court at a difficult time, with some tough cases on affirmative action and college admissions, LGBTQ rights, and election issues, among others.

Beto O'Rourke, who's running for governor of Texas, received support from family members of Uvalde school shooting victims. They traveled nearly five hours by bus to hold a press conference an hour before the only debate between O'Rourke and Gov. Greg Abbott who, in these folks minds, "had not taken enough action on gun control measures" since the shooting four months ago.

I hope you had a good week.

TGIF, everyone.

Sunday School 9/11/22: Extra Credit

Let's continue with What's-his-Name and Vice President Kamala Harris in the Meet the Press classroom. 

I recapped the first part of the interview in yesterday's Sunday School post; this segment begins with questions about the Supreme Court, and her confidence in it.

Harris said the thinks the SCOTUS is an "activist court," which means 

we had an established right for almost a half a century, which is the right of women to make decisions about their own body as an extension of what we have decided to be the privacy rights to which all people are entitled. And this court took that constitutional right away. And we are suffering as a nation because of it.

She also said she was inspired by Thurgood Marshall, and by the Warren Court, with decisions like Brown vs. Board of Education. Now, though, "it's a very different court" than the one that had justices like Marshall, Warren, and Sandra Day O'Connor.

With no follow-up on that, WHN moved to abortion, asking Harris about a bill being moved forward by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-OH) and Susan Collins (R-ME), which they say would basically codify the protections under Roe for abortion up to 24 weeks. and wondering if she'd "be OK with" that. She said she'd have to read the bill, noting "the details obviously matter."

He noted that this bill is not getting the same support from "some abortion rights groups" as other options, and he asked if it was "more important" to find Republican support for this. She said "Ideally, yes, it would be bipartisan."  

And, should the government "put any limit on abortion?" Harris believes government should not be

telling women what to do with their bodies... telling women how to plan their families... criminalizing health care providers... saying "no exception for rape or incest."

And moving on, "since we're here in Texas," WHN asked if Harris would call the border "secure."  

The border is secure, but we also have a broken immigration system, in particular over the last four years before we came in, and it needs to be fixed.

WHN asked again if she's "confident the border's secure," given we'll see two million crossing this year. 

We have a secure border in that that is a priority for any nation, including ours and our administration. But there are still a lot of problems that we are trying to fix given the deterioration that happened over the last four years. We also have to put into place a law and a plan for a pathway for citizenship for the millions of people who are here and are prepared to do what is legally required to gain citizenship. We don't have that in place because people are playing politics in a state like this and in Congress. By the way, you want to talk about bipartisanship on an issue that at one time was a bipartisan issue both in terms of Republican senators and even presidents.

Next question? Inflation is being made worse by us not having enough low-wage workers, so a "solution on immigration reform that increased particularly lower wage job labor – lower wage labor could actually have an impact on lowering inflation. How is that not the motivating force to get something done here?"

Um, because there is literally zero motivating factor to giving Biden another win? Why do anything before the midterm election, since the Rs have visions of taking over the House and Senate, ensuring nothing gets done for another two years...  But that's my answer. 

Here's what Harris said.

I do believe that, for all reasonable people, all reasonable people are motivated and desirous that we would get something done. I think a big part of the problem though is that there's been political gamesmanship with this issue suggesting that it's a zero-sum game. If you want to deal with the issue, there are practical solutions, which include creating a pathway to citizenship, fixing a broken immigration system, dealing with the root causes of why people are fleeing their home when most people don't want to leave home. And if they do, it's usually because they're fleeing some harm, or they simply can't take care of their basic needs if they stay. There are solutions. And sadly, this has become such a partisan issue, instead of something where we work on it together, agreeing that what we're doing is not working as a nation. It's not working.

That agreement alone will be hard to get, regardless of the outcome of the midterm election. 

WHN then delved into 2024, wondering if there'll be an announcement after the midterms about the Biden/Harris team's plans. Harris said

Listen, the president has been very clear that he intends to run again. And if he does, I will be running with him proudly.

He thought she said 'probably,' which prompted some chuckles. She reiterated that a couple of times, saying "I'm very proud to be his vice president." The talked about Harris now having broken John Adams' record of tie-breaking votes in the Senate, which made her proud.

Who would have thought that this kid born in Oakland, California just broke a record with John Adams... Kind of, you’ve got to appreciate that.

WHN asked her about preparing for "the worst-case scenario that your job may hand you."  She said that she prays it doesn't happen; the rest of her answer seemed designed to show that she's preparing for it by doing the work that a VP does, even if, as WHN noted, there's no job description.

And listen, I think that there is no question that the role and the responsibility of vice president is a very important one. And Joe Biden knows that more than anybody. He and I talk about it. And it is the job of working with the president, doing what I can to be a great partner, to take on and help take on some of the biggest issues that impact our country, both domestically and in terms of foreign policy. And so that's the work that I do. So that has been the work of meeting with over a hundred heads of state around various issues, be it Ukraine or what we need to do around our space program. So that is the work of vice president, and it is important and it is something that I take very seriously.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this interview: were you satisfied with her answers? Do you have a better sense of her now than before? If Biden decides not to run next year, is she the best Dem to replace her? Chime in!

See you around campus. 

Sunday School 9/11/22

For your Sunday School, I'm going to noodle around in the Meet the Press classroom. What's-his-name (WHN) interviewed Vice President Kamala Harris in Houston last week, and played many clips from the interview today. 

WHN started the interview talking about how our focus "has had to shift from foreign terror to the threat from within." Harris spoke of how we were able to "hold our heads up as a defender and an example of a great democracy," and how we held ourselves up as a "role model." 

So, you look at everything from the fact that there are eleven people right now running for secretary of state, the keepers of the integrity of the voting system of their state, who are election deniers...  you couple that with people who hold some of the highest elected office in our country who refuse to condemn an insurrection on January 6th. And I think what it sends is a signal that causes people to question, “Hey, is America still valuing what they talk about?”

She said she's "very concerned" that thing like this "allow people to call into question our commitment to the principles of "what is right, what is good, what should be fought for, what should be human ideals, and certainly, the ideals of democracies... And that's a shame."

Harris said she finds "interesting" polling showing that 70% of Rs don't believe she and Biden "won the 2020 election legitimately." She's not experiencing that when she's out meeting and talking to people, which prompted WHN to ask, "do you think you talk to a lot of Republicans...?" In response, she said, "Well, I think I talk to a lot of Americans," about infrastructure, access to high-speed internet, and about choice - in particular, she mentioned the overwhelming rejection of government interference in Kansas. 

In response to his question, "what is a semi-fascist?" Harris spoke about it not being helpful when people deny elections or obstruct "the outcome of an election with the largest number of voters ever for a presidential candidate.

And when we look at where we are, I think that we have to admit that there are attacks from within, to your first question. And we need to take it seriously. And we need to stand up together, all of us, and think of this not through a partisan lens but as Americans.

WHN wondered if it was "hard to do both," calling out the obstruction and election denying and at the same time try to unite people, Harris pointed to Biden's long record of bipartisanship, and that he's been criticized for that during his career.

But there are moments in time when we have to also agree, all good people who care about our country, that there are those who right now are vividly not defending our democracy. And I think we want that our Commander-in-Chief, that the president of the United States will speak up and raise the alarm about what this means to our strength and our future, much less our integrity.

Another 'all pundits ask it' question was about Dems helping support MAGA Republicans in their primaries, even when Biden is talking about "good Republicans" and how they're not like the MAGA variety. WHN wondered if the Democratic Party was making a mistake. Harris said it wasn't up to her to tell people how to run their campaigns, and like pretty much all the administration Dems, refused to say whether it reflected badly on the party. Her focus is on "a midterm election in which so much is on the line." 

Our president has said he will not let the filibuster get in the way. If the Senate, through a majority vote, votes to pass the Women's Health Protection Act, he will sign it into law. You know what that means in the midterms? We need to hold on to the Senate and get two more. And then we can put into law the protections of Roe v. Wade. Everything is on the line when you think about the millions of women and people in America who care about them, who understand the significance of protecting a woman's right to make decisions about her own body instead of her government telling her what to do.

WHN asked if she was comfortable making changes to the filibuster for voting rights and a woman's right to choose "could end the legislative filibuster for good."  Her response?

No, I’m not. No, I'm not.

She thinks it could be set aside for these issues and still be in place for other issues, saying "that is very likely, yes."

The last section of this part of the interview was about the Former Guy, and about the certification of the next election. WHN asked how much Trump's being both a past president and a potential presidential candidate should "factor into the decision to charge him?" Harris said she "wouldn't dare tell" the DOJ what to do. She also reiterated that the current administration,

unlike the previous administration, have been very, very careful to make sure that there is no question about any kind of interference in terms of the decisions that the Department of Justice makes in that regard.

And, her opinion on "the argument that it would be too divisive for the country to prosecute a former president?"

I think that our country is a country that has gone through different periods of time, where the unthinkable has happened, and where there has been a call for justice, and justice has been served. And I think that's potentially going to always be the case in our country, that people are going to demand justice and they rightly do.

Next, WHN asked if Harris had contemplated any scenarios that might happen on January 6, 2025. She first said, "Not at all," but then said

No. I mean, well, listen, what have I thought about? I have thought about the fact that, right now, we have an election in less than two months. And if we're going to look at timelines, that's one of the most immediate timelines that I'm looking at.

Yeah, but... he asked if she'd thought about how she'd "handle a certification that did not reflect the outcome of the popular vote in the state?" 

I haven't gotten to that point yet. I have to believe that the United States Congress and all the people who have taken an oath to defend our democracy will ensure and will stand up against anyone who tries to destroy or circumvent the rules and the practices and procedures that we've had in place that have allowed a peaceful transfer of power since the inception of our nation and the founding of our nation. And getting back to the ultimate point, that is – that is what we're talking about when we think about January 6th. We have always had a peaceful transfer of power in our nation, no matter our differences, no matter how bloody-knuckled we've been in campaigns. 

And we can't say that now, WHN pointed out.

Well, certainly, we were on the verge of having a very different outcome. And the injury was still an injury for which we still are experiencing the wound. 

I'll have more from the interview for your Extra Credit. 

See you around campus. 

Sunday School 9/4/22

We're back in the This Week classroom for part of your Sunday School. Martha Raddatz hosted Keisha Lance Bottoms, senior advisor to President Biden in an interview that, in my opinion, went off the rails pretty quickly.

She started with Biden's Independence Hall speech and how the White House said it would be "optimistic" and "was about bringing people together," but pointed to Biden saying "President Trump's MAGA supporters are a danger to democracy" and wondered how that was "unifying."

Now, just for clarification, if you search Biden's speech, the word 'danger' appears three times. 

The first time was when Biden quoted someone else, which seems the most likely instance Raddatz was referring to: 

That’s why respected conservatives, like Federal Circuit Court Judge Michael Luttig, has called Trump and the extreme MAGA Republicans, quote, a ‘clear and present danger’ to our democracy.

The second was when he talked about "we, the people" not getting torn apart: 

We, the people, will not let anyone or anything tear us apart. Today, there are dangers around us we cannot allow to prevail. We hear -- you’ve heard it -- more and more talk about violence as an acceptable political tool in this country. It’s not. It can never be an acceptable tool.

And the third was when he spoke more directly about" public figures," MAGA Republicans prominent among them, and political violence: 

On top of that, there are public figures -- today, yesterday, and the day before -- predicting and all but calling for mass violence and rioting in the streets. This is inflammatory. It’s dangerous. It’s against the rule of law. And we, the people, must say: This is not who we are. 

Shall we forgive Raddatz her lack of specificity? 

Bottoms said Biden "reminded the American people who we are as a country," a democracy "built on the rule of law," "that values the peaceful transition of power," and "that values the right of people to go and vote safely and in peace."  He reminded us that "democracies are fragile," and

if we are not intentional about preserving who we are as a country, if we are not intentional about reminding ourselves that there is a rule of law in this country, then we will be in danger. So, the president spoke optimistically about who we are as Americans. We are the greatest nation in the world. But also, a reminder that we have to be intentional about being the greatest nation in the world and that we have to call out hatred. We have to call out this balance and that if we don’t, our democracy is in danger.

Here's Raddatz, totally dismissing the response to her first question.

Whatever you said, the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, which tracks hate speech, said after the Biden speech, there was a surge online in conversations that said Biden’s remarks singling out MAGA Republicans were interpreted as a declaration of war against conservatives and all the Trump voters.

Really? "Whatever you said..." That's how Raddatz wants to run the interview? Wow. To her credit, Bottoms gave an answer I support.

Well, what I would say to that is that this is what this MAGA agenda has been all about. It’s been about distorting the truth. It’s been about misleading people. It’s been about putting out information that inflames people. And I just encourage people, go to The White House website, WhiteHouse.gov, and read the speech for yourself. I’ve read it multiple times and what I see in the speech, I see words of encouragement. I see optimism. I see a commander-in-chief who was calling out to all of us, no matter our political affiliation.

That brought this question. 

"All of us?" He wasn’t calling out to the MAGA supporters certainly. He mentioned them more than a dozen times and -- as a threat to democracy. Has the president essentially given up on those MAGA Republicans, some 70 million people?

All I can do is sigh. Really loudly, really annoyedly, really frustratingly, sigh. 

Because everyone knows - everyone who hasn't had their head in the sand, or someplace else, since late 2018 or early 2019, at least - knows that there are millions of people who voted for Trump who are not 'MAGA' supporters, at all. They are the disaffected, 'let's try something different' folks who were tired of the same old, same old, who were willing to take a chance on an allegedly successful businessman, who were willing to look past the bluster, and hope that, in conjunction with a reasonable Congress, things they were unhappy with could change. 

These are the people that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton spoke about. And they're the people Joe Biden talked about, too. Here's just one example, for the folks in a booth in the corner in the dark in the back - and for Raddatz.

Now, I want to be very clear -- very clear up front: Not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans, are MAGA Republicans. Not every Republican embraces their extreme ideology. 

And Bottoms pointed out that Biden has, and will, work with anyone and everyone - Rs, Ds, Is - "to get things done in our country." She didn't say it, but she could have said that the "MAGA Republican agenda doesn't include working with anyone across the aisle," and we have ample proof of that:

• Peaceful transition of power ring a bell? 147 Republicans voted against that. 
• Infrastructure? Only 13 Republicans voted for that; many more have taken credit for it.
• Doing something to ease the baby formula shortage? 192 Republicans voted against that.
• Insulin price controls? 193 voted against that. 
• Build Back Better? All House Rs voted against that. 

Is that Biden's fault? Is it solely the GOP's fault? Is it solely the Dem's fault? 

Raddatz wondered "How has President Biden bridged the divide? What has he done really to unify this country?" She pointed to a Quinnipiac poll showing that 69% of Democrats and Republicans believe democracy is in danger of collapse, but the Republicans blame Joe Biden and the Democrats blame Donald Trump, and said, "Again, how has Joe Biden helped bridge that divide?"

I could be wrong, but I believe we elected a president in 2020, not a miracle worker. Biden can try all he wants, but there's also accountability on the other side to do something other than say that Biden's speech was not unifying (as did many MAGA Republicans on social media), or to vote against everything that Biden puts forth as an agenda item, particularly when a plurality, if not an actual majority of Americans at least theoretically support much of the Dem's agenda; polling has shown this to be the case for several years, the decisions of our elected officials notwithstanding.

 
Bottoms spoke of Biden's bipartisanship in passing gun legislation as one example, but reiterated the point of his remarks. 

But it’s also going to take for all of us to stand up to hatred and what the president again continues to say it’s this MAGA agenda. The president has not called out all Republicans. He’s been very specific about this MAGA agenda. And I’ll just remind you the words from Martin Luther King Jr., when he said that it’s not the words of our enemies that we will remember, it’s the silence of our friends. And what the president has said is that mainstream Republicans, Independents, Democrats can all come together. We’ve seen us come together to do what’s right on behalf of the American people. But if people are silent, then the very core of who we are as a country is in danger.

I don't see that as being difficult to understand, do you? Unity is not forged in one hand, in one party, in one set of policies. It's like a tango - it takes two.

One thing I will give Raddatz credit for was asking about Dems paying for ads in the primaries that work in favor of MAGA Republicans. Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, head of the DCCC, defends it, and the Democratic Governors Association apparently does, too.

In my opinion, it's dumb, and they shouldn't do it. She did say "tens of millions of Democratic groups who have spent money" but I'm pretty sure the meant "Democratic groups which have spent tens of millions of dollars." Bottoms didn't have a good answer for that - maybe because there isn't one. 

Please, read Biden's speech. You don't have to agree with him, but you should at least know what he said, and the context of his remarks. The punditry would prefer you don't educate yourselves, but I respect you more than they do.

See you around campus.