TGIF 1/3/25

Here's my attempt at a good week/bad week list, the first of the new year. As was often the case with this theme, it seems a week can meander around a bit. 

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-Trump), was re-elected House Speaker on a long-held-open first vote. A few Freedom Caucus folks skipped their votes the first time through the roll call, and three voted for others, but in the end, Johnson prevailed without having to undergo a second vote. 

It may take a while before we know what concessions were made to secure the votes, or if it was simply the unqualified support (and pressure?) of the Once and Future President (OAFP) who offered Johnson his full endorsement ahead of today's vote. 

It might also take a while before we fully understand how this vote impacts the Artful DOGEr, Elon Musk, who both echoed and questioned Trump's endorsement of Johnson, within less than an hour. Will the OAFP stand by his First Buddy, or will he start to pull back?

It feels like Border Czar Tom Homan struck out with his comments after the terrorist attack in New Orleans, which was committed by an American-born, GI Bill-educated Army veteran, who ended his service as a Staff Sergeant in the Reserves a few years ago, and the exploding Cybertruck outside a Trump property in Las Vegas, committed by an active-duty, highly decorated Green Beret. Homan, like others in the MAGA Camp, has pointed to the current administration's border policies as contributors. 

We're not out of the woods. This country is in grave danger. We need to secure that border, and despite what's happened in the last two days in Las Vegas and in New Orleans, this administration is not stopping. They're still releasing thousands of people every week... without proper vetting.

He also talked about the need to ramp up 'insider threat analysis', saying the Biden administration had put that "on the back burner," and warning

We've got two people who served in the military that (allegedly) committed these terrorist acts. We really need to dig down into insider threats in our military and our federal service. 

I don't want to be the bearer of bad news for the incoming administration, but I would be remiss if I didn't remind them that Pete Hegseth, the OAFP's pick to run the Defense Department, was once identified as a potential  "insider threat" because of his apparent affinity for white supremacist groups.

Hegseth, who has downplayed the role of military members and veterans in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack and railed against the Pentagon’s subsequent efforts to address extremism in the ranks, has said he was pulled by his District of Columbia National Guard unit from guarding Joe Biden’s January 2021 inauguration. He’s said he was unfairly identified as an extremist due to a cross tattoo on his chest.

It wasn't that tattoo that got him in trouble - it was another one, reported by a fellow Guard member.  

Sticking with New Orleans for a moment, media reports  say that the New Orleans terrorist left coolers containing IEDs on Bourbon Street, and that "security cameras showed multiple people stopping and looking at the coolers before walking away." I have to say that we all, collectively, deserve a bad week mention for that. 

Have we forgotten all the reporting on the importance of speaking up, of "if you see something, say something?" All the signage at airports and other transportation hubs about reporting unattended bags? Have we forgotten the Boston Marathon bombing? What to do when we see a suspicious package? 

It's a miracle the terrorist didn't have time to detonate the devices - the carnage, the death toll, the societal toll could have been so much worse if that had happened. We have to do better, for ourselves and others.

TGIF, everyone.

Wondering on Wednesday (9/21/22)

Ready... Set... Wonder!

What's flowing from the wondering tap tonight? Random stuff, like an article in the Daily Star that Google traffic in Russia shows a spike in searches for "how to break your own arm," as folks scramble to avoid conscription into the fight against Ukraine. Those who aren't trying to hurt themselves are "leaving the country in droves," causing massive traffic jams at the Russia/Finland border. 

This comes on the heels of reports from several months ago that Russian were shooting themselves in the leg to get evacuated from the front lines. I'm not wondering a whole lot about why they are (or were) doing this kind of thing; rather, I'm wondering what will happen to them when the Putineers find out how hard they're working to avoid the war.

Let's see, what else? Oh - Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is in the news again, but not for migrants this time. Rather, he's signed an executive order declaring Mexican drug cartels 'terrorists' in the Lone Star State.

Texans are victimized by Mexican cartels that produce and import (fentanyl). So, cartels are terrorists. And it's time that we started treating them that way.

His order directs law enforcement to "identify gangs that are supporting Mexican cartels and work to seize assets as well as disrupt cartel networks." And, he's

also directed Texas agencies to alert the public about the fentanyl crisis, including schools and workplaces through mediums like social media and public service announcements to make clear, that truly one pill can kill."

I don't have a problem with anything he did, including asking the White House to make a similar federal declaration; it's reasonable, and certainly defensible, which some of his recent antics aren't. But here's where the wondering comes in: fentanyl's been killing Americans, including Texans, for years, in rapidly increasing numbers. Abbott said that in Texas last year, nearly 1700 fentanyl-related deaths were reported. So, why did it take him so long to order his government to get the word out?

We can finally stop wondering if the January 6th Committee will have a chat with G-G-G-Ginni-and-the-texts Thomas, wife of SCOTUS scoundrel Clarence. Reuters reported that a deal has been struck that'll allow them to chat "in the coming weeks." In fact, her lawyer says, Thomas is 

eager to answer the Committee's questions to clear up any misconceptions about her work relating to the 2020 election.

 I like that - "her work" relating to the election - how cute!

Speaking of "cute," I think that about sums up the Trump team's court filing in response to the DOJ's appeal of the stay ordered by Judge Aileen Cannon. Here's how the NY Times reported on today's decision in the case.

In a strongly worded 29-page decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit blocked part of an order by a federal judge that had temporarily barred the department from using the classified materials in its inquiry into whether Mr. Trump illegally retained national defense documents and obstructed the government’s repeated efforts to recover them. 

The decision has many tasty comments, if you're interested. Yay for us, yay for justice, and yay for not having to wonder if anyone was going to fall for Judge Cannon's overly generous treatment of Trump.

And finally, let's talk about NY AG Tish James and her $250 million civil suit against Donald, Donny, Ivanka, and Eric. Fraud, she says, when the Trumps overvalued their properties by the tens and hundreds of millions, making themselves look more loan-worthy, avoiding taxes, and so on. Two examples? His gold-plated Trump Tower penthouse was allegedly worth over $300 million (and he declared it three times bigger than it is); and he claimed Mar-a-Lago, his Florida document storage facility, was allegedly worth over $700 million, if you built houses on it, which you cannot. 

She got in a dig or two during her announcement, which is to be expected, even if she appeared much less gleeful taking him down than she did in campaign videos when she ran for election in 2018. The deplorable Donald Trump, Jr. posted a montage on Twitter; it's full of her plans and her rage and her threats against his then-president father. 

So, I'm left wondering why I'm sitting here appreciating a tweet from Donny, something I thought I'd never do, and wondering how Tish James is going to defend herself from the onslaught of clearly-documented 'witch hunt' charges, and wondering why it is that prominent Dems always seem to shoot themselves in the foot.

What're you wondering about tonight?

Sunday School 8/29/21

For this week's Sunday School, I'm only visiting the classroom with the day of the week in its name: Fox News Sunday, where Chris Wallace chatted with the Grim Reaper, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Floundering for Relevance), and with National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, which is where we'll start. 

Sullivan said that President Biden "will stop at nothing" to make the ISIS-K terrorists pay for killing 13 Americans (and killing and wounding hundreds more Afghans); he also pointed to our successful 'over-the-horizon' capability that the president mentioned the other day. 

Wallace wondered if our intelligence was so good after the fact, why we didn't prevent the attack from happening in the first place. Here's part of Sullivan's response.

With respect to the attack at Kabul airport, we, of course, had been warning for days that such an attack could take place. We took action to try to prevent and disrupt such attacks. But, of course, all we can do is mitigate risk. We cannot eliminate risk. And this is a fundamentally dangerous and high-risk condition. The president has said that from the beginning. Those of us working on it have reiterated that from the beginning. And it continues, Chris, to be very dangerous. 

They talked a bit about what the next couple of days, and our final hours in Kabul, will look like. Sullivan was careful, particularly when Wallace asked how many people would be left. He said there were 300 or fewer Americans still there, some of whom have chosen not to leave. And we have some commitments from the Taliban about getting our folks out, even after the end of the month. 

Finally, Wallace wondered why President Biden wasn't "taking full responsibility" on abandoning Bagram Airport, instead of "laying this off on the generals." Sullivan reminded Wallace that he's heard Biden "take ultimate responsibility for every decision" he's made And, he explained the difference between a tactical decision, which is the purview of the generals, and a strategic decision, which belongs to the president. 

Moving on to the Grim Reaper, here's his assessment of the war in Afghanistan.

I think what's been lost in all of this, Chris, is why we went there in the first place. We went there to prevent the Taliban from having a regime that would allow terrorists to reconstitute themselves and hit us again here at home. It's been a total success. If you -- this term "endless war," let's take a look at it. The last seven months, the Afghans have lost more people fighting than we have over 20 years. They've taken 65,000 casualties. We've taken roughly 2,000 in 20 years. The last year and a half we've lost no one. With our continued deployment of 2,500 people, we were, in effect, keeping the lid on, keeping terrorists from reconstituting, and having a light footprint in the country. The policy was working. Therefore, I think calling it and endless war or claiming that we're somehow trying to get involved in a civil war is - a domestic civil war is simply not accurate. We went over there to protect us here at home. We've not had a mass casualty attack from over there in these 20 years. I'd call that a successful policy.

Now we're looking at the exit and over the next two days our heroic military is doing the best they can with a horrible policy decision. This is one of the worst foreign policy decisions in American history. Much worse than Saigon because after we left Saigon, there weren't Vietnamese terrorists who were planning on attacking us here at home. That we leave behind exactly what we went in to solve 20 years ago. And I fear for the future in continuing the war on terror. You know, just because we decide to quit fighting doesn't mean the terrorists go away. So they're still out there. They're invigorated. They're emboldened and excited about the success they see in bringing America to its knees in Afghanistan.

Next, Wallace turned to the decision to leave Afghanistan, something he said McConnell opposed when Trump started the process, and he opposed Biden continuing down the path to our full withdrawal.  He asked McConnell

Senator, does President Biden have a point there? If in April he had said, hey, the Trump deal is off, we're staying in and, in fact, we're going to beef up the number of troops, he contends we'd have been back in a full-scale war with the Taliban, and, unfortunately taking a lot of casualties.

McConnell said that's not correct. 

Once again, the president's off the mark. We hadn't lost as many as 13 people, which we lost Thursday, in any of the last four years. In fact, our casualties since 2014 have been quite modest, quite modest. We lost more - I repeat - more of our military personnel last Thursday then we lost in any one of the last four years. So the balance has been dramatically reduced for American personnel. Remember, in the whole war, Chris, we have regretfully lost a couple of thousand of our people. We -- that's very regretful. But the Afghans have lost 65,000. They have been fighting and we've been in the background helping them with counterterrorism and the ongoing training of the military. The policy was working if you remember why we went there, which was to keep the Taliban out and the terrorists from being able to operate with impunity so they could attack us again here at home.

Questions Wallace didn't ask? 

• You say we lost more military personnel in last Thursday's attack than we lost in any of the last four years. But this data from the Defense Casualty Analysis System shows we had 13 'hostile' deaths in 2018, and 17 in 2019. What's the basis for your numbers?

• We did have four hostile deaths in 2020, but they were outside your 18-month window. Isn't the treaty that President Trump signed with the Taliban, which required our full withdrawal, the reason for that?

• Wouldn't breaking the treaty that was negotiated with the Taliban have escalated the terrorism threat in and of itself? 

• How much longer should we have stayed in Afghanistan, training their military to do what they are apparently still unable to do, after all these years? At what point should they be able to defend themselves?

• How much responsibility do the Afghans bear themselves for what's happening in their country? 

• Many people are pointing to the extreme religious beliefs of the Taliban, and how those will impact Afghan women. There's been a lot of publicity about an Afghan folksinger who was killed by the Taliban. How much should these, or do these, play in any decision we make regarding involving our military in other countries? 

Keep an eye out for anyone asking that kind of question, and let me know if you find anyone. 

See you around campus, assuming you haven't been disenrolled for not getting a vaccine.

Wondering on Wednesday 1/27/21

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Where to start the wondering tonight? 

Well, there's that happy little domestic terrorism bulletin today, from the Department of Homeland Security. 

The Acting Secretary of Homeland Security has issued a National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) Bulletin due to a heightened threat environment across the United States, which DHS believes will persist in the weeks following the successful Presidential Inauguration. Information suggests that some ideologically-motivated violent extremists with objections to the exercise of governmental authority and the presidential transition, as well as other perceived grievances fueled by false narratives, could continue to mobilize to incite or commit violence.

Now, DHS goes on to say that a 'bulletin' only "describes current developments or general trends," so there's no new credible threat - but if anyone doesn't believe there is a general trend here,  I wonder where they've been for the past several months, or if they were paying attention today when one of the guys charged in the plot against Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer turned on his co-conspirators and will testify against them.

Ty Garbin, 25, pleaded guilty on Wednesday to the kidnapping conspiracy, marking the first conviction in the bizarre case that made national headlines in October. Fourteen men were accused of plotting to kidnap Whitmer and discussing plans to attack the state Capitol building and a police facility, and possibly take out Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, too. Prosecutors allege the group, which included several militia group members, were frustrated over strict COVID-19 lockdown orders in Democrat-run states

I wonder how many more of these we'll learn about, through the investigations into the insurrection in DC?

And speaking of the insurrection, yesterday members of the Senate were sworn in to do "impartial justice" as jurors in the second impeachment trial of Donald Trump. One of them, Kentucky's Sen. Rand Paul, led a failed procedural vote, which is alternately described as a vote to immediately debate the constitutionality of impeaching a president that's already out of office, or declaring that the impeachment is unconstitutional. Either way, 45 Republicans voted with Paul, who declared victory even though his vote failed.  

Also wonder-full was that Mitch McConnell voted with the other Rs on Paul's motion. And, of course, that McConnell was the one who set the schedule for the Senate that precluded them from doing anything with the impeachment until after President Biden's inauguration. I wonder how seriously he wants us to take him for his comments the day before the inauguration. Let's reminisce, shall we? 

The mob was fed lies. They were provoked by the president and other powerful people. And they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like. But we pressed on.

"We pressed on." So, let's move on? I guess that what his vote means?

I wonder what House Minority leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy and the #IMPOTUS are going to chat about tomorrow at Mar-a-Lago? Trump is not a Bakersfield, CA resident and so is not one of McCarthy's constituents. And, of course, the former president is just a regular private citizen now, according to Republicans, so what's the need to go and hang with him? 

McCarthy made the news for something else, let's see.  Oh - I remember - an appearance on Fox News - shocking, I know - in which he said that Biden's first week in office (that would be three days, but who's counting) he had done more to benefit Russia and China than the United States. And that 'unity' is what the Rs are working on. Now, there's really nothing there to wonder about - he's being true to form, and Judge Jeannine is also being true to form. 

But the next day, also on Fox, we learn that Biden might be 'upsetting China.'

"Now by putting these more restrictive 'Buy American' policies in place, we are further exacerbating some of the trade problems that we've had," (Brandon Arnold) opined. "It's annoying people to the north, it's annoying other countries."

"We have to tread lightly here," ((host Ainsley) Earhardt agreed. "Because we want companies in America to do well but, also, we need [personal protective equipment] from other countries. Then we don't want to do anything to upset that relationship, maybe with China or someone else -- even though China is such a big threat."

I wonder which one of the shows I should believe? I'm so confused.

Quick Takes (v53): Liberate Michigan!

Quick Takes

Well, well, well....

It would seem that when the president called for the liberation of Michigan, some folks may have taken him seriously.

Now, I'll say it right up front that there may be no connection at all between the men arrested today and the president's LIBERATE MICHIGAN! tweet, which was sent on April 17, 2020.  

As we learned back then, 

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has faced opposition from Republicans and business groups that argue she went too far in her April 9th extended and expanded stay-at-home 0rder. A Wednesday protest about the order in Michigan brought thousands to Lansing.

When she was asked then whether the president's tweet might encourage more protests, Whitmer hoped it wouldn't, and "she also noted that people are feeling anxious about the pandemic and its economic fallout. And, she said.

The most important thing that anyone with a platform can do is to try and use that platform to tell people, 'We're going to get through this."

Well, we all have seen lots of examples of the president using his platforms - Twitter, Instagram, the White House briefing room, and the hosts of his favorite shows on the Fox network - in a way that's completely inconsistent with what his own Coronavirus Task Force says people should be doing, and in some cases completely inconsistent with common sense, so it's probably not surprising that he would tweet something as inflammatory as he did. 

And while it wasn't just Michigan he wanted to see liberated - Minnesota and North Carolina were similarly blessed with tweets - Whitmer's been a particular thorn in his side.  

According to today's announcement,

The court filing alleges the conspirators twice conducted surveillance at Whitmer's personal vacation home in northern Michigan and discussed kidnapping her to a "secure location" in Wisconsin to stand "trial" for treason prior to the Nov. 3 election.

"Several members talked about murdering 'tyrants' or 'taking' a sitting governor," an FBI agent wrote in the affidavit. "The group decided they needed to increase their numbers and encouraged each other to talk to their neighbors and spread their message."

The collected federal and state law enforcement officers spoke of "elaborate plans" to kidnap Whitmer and overthrow the government, and referred to the "rather unprecedented" nature of the case - and, I'd suggest, the rather unprecedented state of affairs in the country today. 

...it does send a very vivid reminder that while we may be in a period of discourse, possibly even divisiveness and fighting across the nation, law enforcement stands united.

That's how it look from the perspective of Col. Joe Gasper of the Michigan State Police - and that united front "is the result of months of work" leading to both search warrants and arrest warrants in Michigan and in other states. If convicted of the charges, the men face the potential of life in prison.

Again, at least at this point, I haven't see anything concrete tying these folks to the president's ridiculous rhetoric, and it would be silly to make such a connection without evidence. But it would be foolish to ignore the potential for such a connection, especially since, according to this Reuters report (and many others over the past weeks and months) 

Internal U.S. security memos in recent months have warned that violent domestic extremists could pose a threat to election-related targets, a concern exacerbated by the coronavirus pandemic, political tensions, civil unrest and foreign disinformation campaigns. 

FBI Director Christopher Wray said during congressional hearings in September that his agency was conducting investigations into violent domestic extremists, including white supremacists and anti-fascist groups. Wray said the largest “chunk” of investigations were into white supremacist groups.

Which, as we've seen, have been generally ignored by the president, his AG and others in his administration, in favor of promoting antifa and Black Lives Matter as the greatest threats to our domestic tranquility.

It's a sorry state of affairs, indeed. And it will probably get worse before the election, and after, regardless of who wins.  

TGIF 1/10/20

Just like that, it's Friday again...  Ready for this week's picks for the good week/bad week picks?

Let's give the president a bit of a pat on the back - he took out a terrorist, after all. It may have been for less than honorable purposes, if this Wall Street Journal reporting is true - but he did take out a terrorist.

Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said.

The administration's team that went to talk to Congress to give the details about the mission that took Soleimani out had a mixed week. Secretaries Mike Pompeo (State) and Mark Esper (Defense) were joined by Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Mark Milley and CIA Director Gina Haspel were well received by most Republicans, but less so by Democrats. Here's what Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer had to say.

As the questions began to get tough, they walked out. There were so many important questions that they did not answer. 

At least two Rs, though, were unhappy. Rand Paul was one of them. The other, Utah Senator Mike Lee, had a good week I think, given how forcefully he responded to the briefing. Calling it "probably the worst briefing I have seen, at least on a military issue, in the nine years I've served in the United States Senate," he specifically cited the administration's contention that debating or discussing the possibility of any additional military action against Iran would "be emboldening" the regime. 

One last thing on the whole terrorism issue: just today, we're learning that at the same time we successfully killed Soleimani, we unsuccessfully tried to take out another Iranian military leader in Yemen. According to this WaPo article,

On the day the US military killed a top Iranian commander in Baghdad, US forces carried out another top secret mission against a senior Iranian military official in Yemen, according to US officials. 

The strike targeting Abdul Reza Shahlai, a financier and key commander of Iran's elite Quds Force who has been active in Yemen, did not result in his death, according to four US officials familiar with the matter. 

I guess that means Shahlai had a good week? 

Who else is having a week?  Well, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, for one. She's moving, finally - to the relief of many in the House, as well as many of us out here in citizen land - to choose the House Managers for the Senate trial, and to get the Articles of Impeachment that were approved in mid-December sent over for the next phase. In my opinion, Pelosi's had a bad week.

• Some of her own flock were suggesting publicly it was time to get this moving;
• having no say, really, in what happens in the Senate, she was merely sitting on the sidelines as Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer fought about what the trial would look like; 
• Several senators threatened to change the Senate rules to declare this all a nothingburger if the Articles weren't sent over timely; and
• McConnell voted his support for just such a proposal.

I can only guess that Pelosi was hoping the trial would still be going on come February when Trump is set to deliver his State of the Union address (need to get my drinking game board ready for that!) but instead, we're likely to have an even more emboldened and unhinged message from him. Honestly, much as I hate to say it, that bastage McConnell had another 'better than his opponent' week - and that makes two in a row.

And, from the Democrats on the campaign trail:

• Marianne Williamson, who back in December let her campaign staff go, today announced she was ending her campaign for President. It was hard to know she was still in the race, since she's not been on the debate stage and apparently hasn't been saying anything overly noteworthy out on the hustings. It's probably a good week for her, I think.
• That guy from Vermont is now leading likely caucus-goers in first place votes, coming in at 20%, with Elizabeth Warren (17%), Mayor Pete Buttigieg (16%) and Papa Joe Biden (15%) in results from the Des Moines Register poll released this evening. 
• Mayor Pete also picked up an endorsement this week, from Rep. Anthony Brown of Maryland; Brown is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. 

There's always more, but we'll leave it here for this week.

Sunday School Extra Credit 1/5/20

This week's Extra Credit is the all-Pompeo edition, as the Secretary of  State made appearances in all of the five main classrooms. Because similar questions were asked in all classrooms, I'm just providing some of the many comment Pompeo made.

Each of the quotes is a standalone item, ostensibly in response to a question but many just to get the message out regardless of what was asked. I've italicized a few things for you, the reason for which will be clear by the end of the post.

Let's start with This Week.

We took him off the playing field... president Trump made the right decision to stop Qassem Soleimani from the terror campaign that he's been engaged in Against America, not only five years ago and 10 years ago, but on December 27th when an America was killed...the world is a safer place. We are taking the actions that we need to take to protect American interests, not only in Baghdad and in Iraq but throughout the region.

The intelligence assessment made clear that no action, allowing Soleimani to continue his plotting, his planning, his terror campaign, created more risks than taking the action that we took last week. We reduced risks.

This - this is a regime that has been acting against American for an awfully long time. And we are suffering from eight years of neglect and we're trying to push it back. We're trying to contain them.... We're trying to correct for what was the Obama administration's appeasement of Iran. And we have to - we have to do that. We have to continue to do that, or Americans will be less safe. 

...we're working diligently to execute our strategy to convince the Iranian regime to act like a normal nation. The Iranian people are demanding it. We are supporting it and we will be successful. 

And from Meet the Press:

We could see that he was continuing down this path, that there were in fact plots that he was working on that were aimed directly at significant harm to American interests throughout the region, not just in Iraq. 

We suffered from eight years of Iranian support from America. We gave them billions of dollars. We gave them resources. We allowed countries to trade with them, to build up there economies. What we are now having to correct for is the enormous economic activity that took place during this Iranian nuclear deal that President Trump rightly got out of in May 2018. It's taken a little bit of time, and it will continue to take time, but we are going to restore deterrence. We just had a big hill to climb up, Chuck. We've seen hundreds of thousands of people killed in Syria. Millions have to depart the region. We've seen...all of these terrorist organizations, the Shi'a militias, the Shi'a militias that we are now challenged to push back against today, all underwritten by American policy during the Obama administration....

We want the regime to change its behavior. And ultimately, the leadership in Iran will be determined by the Iranian people. We saw the protest. I am confident we will continue to see protests. They weren't protesting against America. They weren't protesting saying, "Death to America." They were demanding that the Iranian leadership behave in a way that takes care of the Iranian people. 

Now, from State of the Union:

...we're trying to restore deterrence that, frankly, is a need that results directly from the fact that the previous administration left us in a terrible place with respect to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Team Obama appeased Iran, and it led to Shia militias with money, Hams, the PIJ, hundreds of thousands of Syrians killed by Soleimani himself. 

We - we have provided them clear guidance about what it is we have as an expectation. We have worked with them. We tried to have conversations with them. It is important that they understand that American will no longer behave the way it did during the Obama-Biden administration. We will no longer appease. We will no longer tolerate. 

There are clearly actors that go beyond Soleimani. We're still doing the work we're doing. And that's why we're still preparing. That's why we're still flowing forces to the region. That's why we're doing all the things we're doing, building our our coalition, making sure our partners are defending our embassies and diplomatic facilities and military installations all throughout the region. 

We are setting the conditions for a successful and safe America, prosperous American at home, secure America abroad.  

And from Face The Nation:

We've been under threat from the Islamic Republic of Iran since at least 2015 when the previous administration made the mistake of entering that horrific nuclear deal and gave money and resources to this regime.

To take a terrorist off the battlefield does not increase the risk of terror. The risk of terror is increased by appeasement. That's what the Obama - Obama-Biden administration did. It's what president Trump will never do, Margaret. 

The instability they have created for our ally Israel, for our partners, the Saudis, our friends, the Emiratis, all of these countries, Soleimani and his band of Merry Brothers have been a negative influence in the region for an awfully long time.

We understand the obligation to share with the American people why it is we're taking the actions we can and we will do so. (p)resident Trump has done so in tweets. I've done so in messages. I'm sitting here with you today articulating why it is in America's best interest, the action we took. 

There - there remains enormous sets of risks in the region and America's preparing for each and every one of them. That includes not only the threats from the proxy militias in Iraq, but in the region more broadly along every victor, including cyber.

And finally from Fox News Sunday:

We are confident that the Iraqi people want the United States to continue to be there to fight the counter-terror campaign. And we'll continue to do all the things we need to do to keep America safe. 

So, we'll have to take a look at what we do when the Iraqi leadership and government makes a decision, but the American people should know we'll make the right decision. We will take actions that, frankly, the previous administration refused to take to do just that. 

Well, Chris, the American people know that there's a strategy. There's a strategy that has been several years in the making now, that we've been working on. It's been a diplomatic strategy. It's been an economic strategy. You're now seeing elements of the military strategy...We made clear that this cost would be brought home to them, to the leadership regime in Iran, and that we would raise costs. We wouldn't just attack their asymmetric efforts, we would response in a way that imposes costs on the decision-makers who are putting American lives at risk. 

Remember where we came in. In 2015, the Obama-Biden administration essentially handed power to the Iranian leadership and acted as a quasi-ally of theirs, by underwriting them -- underwriting the very malicious - that killed Americans.

Endless wars are the direct result of weakness, and president Trump will never let that happen. We're going to get it right. We're going to get the force posture right. We're going to get our facilities as hardened as we can possibly get them, to defend against what Iran may potentially do. 

The Obama administration created enormous risks to the American people in Iran. This administration is working to reduce that risk. 

Here's my take on all of this:

• The question on whether there was, or still is, any imminent threat to America or Americans beyond the risk that exists on any given day was asked, in some way or another (even multiple times in multiple ways), and it was never answered.
• The number of times Pompeo managed to work in references to the Obama administration was breathtaking. It seemed he was trying to make the point that us attacking another country's leader was the fault of Barack Obama and Joe Biden, not a conscientious decision on the part of the current administration.
• That point is noteworthy because, at the same time they're having us believe that every action taken is a direct result of 'appeasement' on the part of the previous Administration, they are telling us that Soleimani has been a threat to America, Americans, and our interests for decades - plural. After all, Soleimani had been in charge of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's Quds force since the late 1990's. But, of course, nothing bad happened before November 2008, as we know.

I'm trying to be less cynical in 2020 - and this classroom experience seems designed to be an early test of my intention.

See you around campus.

Sunday School 3/17/19

Let's dive right in to this morning's lectures, starting with CNN's State of the Union, where Jake Tapper had as his guest today US Ambassador to New Zealand Scott Brown.

Brown noted that he hadn't spoken directly with the president since the terrorist attack, but was aware of contacts between the two countries on multiple levels, and we know of course already about president Trump's conversation with Prime Minister Ardern. Tapper noted that Trump so far hasn't offered "sympathy and love" to Muslims. He asked (twice) if Brown would like to see him do that; here's part of his response:

...there's been no time in my political or diplomatic life that I have ever questioned our government, whether it's this government or any other prior government's commitment to end racism, to stop bigotry, to really deal with the Islamophobic attitudes... What's happening around the world really seems a little bit irrelevant, to be honest with you, because we're dealing with taking care of those Muslim brothers and sisters and family members and community members and friends that are hurting right now. 

When pressed on a possible rise in white nationalist activity in the US or around the world,  Brown said he wasn't focused on that, but said he hadn't seen anything in New Zealand to indicate that. And he said he doesn't give "any credibility" to the terrorist's manifesto that specifically mentioned Trump.

Let's see what the other folks were talking about.

Sidebar: TGIF 3/15/19

Yesterday's post was about hate, particularly white supremacist hate, which we tend to ignore much more than any other kind.

I wanted to point out a couple of things that are directly related both to yesterday's post, and to why this particular type of hate tends to be ignored.

First: I saw a couple of accounts (and you can watch here for yourself) about a request made by New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to president Trump. Her recounting was that Trump asked what offer of support the US could provide, and she asked him for "sympathy and love for all Muslim communities."

Below are three tweets the president sent about the white supremacist terrorist attack in Christchurch:

In between the first and second tweets about the attack, he tweeted about the "Jexodus" - a new term for me. According to Trump that's what you call it when Jews leave the Democratic Party and join the Republican Party. I'm sure he learned that on Fox News.

Other tweets and retweets yesterday, if my count is correct, included one about Google helping China but not the US; one about the Paris Accord; one about the economy; one about the weather in the Midwest: eight about the Mueller probe; and ten about immigration and his veto of the bill opposing the national emergency declaration to re-appropriate money for the border wall.

At no point did he do what Prime Minister Ardern requested. 

But wait - there's more. Or, less, really.

TGIF 3/15/19

It's hard to even contemplate a TGIF post today, so I'm going to take a different approach entirely. 

There are so many things about this that turn my stomach, not the least of which is that, if you replaced occurrences of New Zealand with America, it could have been written by any number of people right here in the US.

Any number of national known politicians, their extremist supporters, their minions and surrogates who speak as if for them, if not actually for them, the ones who believe there are good people on both sides, or who lament that white nationalist has become a negative term and who espouse that no matter what, the Judeo-Christian society is the best society ever, all others pale in comparison and only ours is blessed by God, or that anyone who is not white must be biased against them, or that people of color or Muslims or Jews are filthy dogs... 

Others, maybe people known to us, including perhaps even family members, who share horridly offensive comments directed at Muslims, or Jews, or immigrants, who fear an invasion or a takeover by Muslims, by Jews, by Hispanics, by immigrants, by people who are not like us, don't look like us, don't dress like us, don't pray like us, don't 'American' like us... 

The police officer, the fireman, the head of your favorite local charity, who post racist information on social media and then complain that it was meant to be private, not public - while at the same time saying that what they posted doesn't represent what they think...

Because when a person shares something like this, it does represent what they think, unless it is expressly stated that it doesn't, at the time it's posted - not later, when it's discovered by someone outside the original intended audience. 

Unequivocally, the statement by the Australian politician does not represent what I think or believe, and I'm deeply offended by it. 

I'm sharing it because I want to remind people who think that this is all harmless, or all in good fun, or just a joke, or not really what they mean to understand that it is really harmful, is not at all meant in good fun, is not a joke, and, honestly, it is what people who say this really mean.

Don't let them fool you again, And again. And again. And again. And again. And again. And don't elect them, whether it's to local or state or national office, or to any other position of leadership or authority. 

Just don't. 

OrangeVerse XXXVIII: We'll Have a Shutdown

The president met this week (with a transfixed, mesmerized or catatonic Vice President Pence at his side) with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and soon-to-be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a free-wheeling, free-speaking, free-versing, free-range conversation.

I think the whole thing bordered on craziness, until it finally hit the wall and the fighting was over. Or maybe that was just my head hitting the desk, not sure.

The Easy One

And then we have the easy one, 

the wall.

That will be the one

that will be the easiest of all.

What do you think, Chuck?

Maybe not?

So we're going to see

but I will tell you

the wall

will get built.

We'll see what happens.

It's not an easy situation.

How Big Is It?

So.

A lot of wall

has been built.

We don't talk about that.

But we might as well start.

Because it's building - 

it's being built right now

big sections

of wall. 

And we will continue

that and one way

or the other it's going to be built. 

Don't Make Me Do it, Chuck

So I'd like not

to see a government closing,

a shutdown.

We will see what happens

over the next short period of time

We're going to keep it open

if we have border

security. If we don't

have border security

Chuck

we're not going

to keep it open.

Border! Border! Border!

We need border security

And I think we all agree that

we need border security

The wall is part of

border security

Yeah.

We need border security

the wall is part of

border security

you can't have very good

border security

without the wall no.

you know what

we need border security

that's what we're going to be 

talking about

border security.

If we don't have

border security

this country needs

border security

the wall is part of

border security

it's a big part of it.

we need to have

effective border security

we have to have

border security

we have to have the wall

as part of 

border security

but we have to have

border security

#shutdown firster and damn proud of it

I - no no no no no

the last time, Chuck

you shut it down

and then you opened it up

very quickly.

You want to know something?

Okay, you want to put that on my --

I'll take it.

You know what

I'll say?

Yes

if we don't get

what we want 

one way or the other

whether it's through you

through a military

through anything 

you want to call

I will 

shut down

the government

Absolutely.

And I am proud --

and I'll tell you what -- 

I am proud

to shut down

the government...

So I will 

take the mantle.

I will be the one

to shut it down.

I'm not going 

to blame you for it.

The last time

you shut it down

it didn't work.

I will take the..

I'm going to shut it down...

Wondering on Wednesday (v152)

On a day when pipe bombs were stopped from being delivered to President Obama, Hillary & Bill Clinton, Eric Holder, Maxine Waters, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and former CIA director John Brennan, the president didn't make his own statement, initially - he "wholeheartedly agreed" with the statement of his veep on a retweet.

When he did make his statement, here's what he offered:

A major federal investigation is now underway. The full weight of our government is being deployed to conduct this investigation and bring those responsible for these despicable acts to justice... We have to unify. We have to come together. Acts or threats of political violence of any kind have no place in the United States of America. This egregious conduct is abhorrent to everything we hold dear. We're extremely angry, upset, unhappy about what we witnessed this morning and we will get to the bottom of it. 

Tonight at his rally in Wisconsin, he served up a plateful of comments on the issue, including this:

My highest duty, as you know, as president, is to keep America safe. That's what we talk about. That's what we do. The federal government is conducting an aggressive investigation and we will find those responsible and we will bring them to justice. Hopefully very quickly. Any acts or threats of political violence are an attack on our democracy itself. 

And this:

No nation can succeed that tolerates violence or the threat of violence as a method of political intimidation, coercion, or control. We all know that. Such conduct must be fiercely opposed and firmly prosecuted. We want all sides to come together in peace and harmony. We can do it. We can do it. We can do it. It will happen.

And this:

For example, those engaged in the political arena must stop treating political opponents as being morally defective. The language of moral condemnation and destructive, routine -- these are arguments and disagreements that have to stop. No one should carelessly compare political opponents to historical villains, which is done often, it's done all the time. Gotta stop. We should not mob people in public spaces or destroy public property. There is one way to settle our disagreements, it's called peacefully at the ballot box.

And this:

As part of a larger national effort to bridge our divides and bring people together, the media also has a responsibility to set a civil tone and to stop the endless hostility and constant negative and often time false attacks and stories. Have to do it. They've gotta stop. Bring people together. 

At no point did he say that he would stop lying, or that he would stop calling people names, or that he would put a halt to the 'lock her up' chants, or that he would stop celebrating people who body slam a reporter, or that he would stop any of his other vile statements, including violence will ensure if the Democrats win.

As it's clearly not the president, I wonder who will be leading the "larger national effort to bridge our divides and bring people together"?

The Speed of Safety

Beginning in late September 1982, the Chicago area, and in fact the entire country, was on edge as seven people died after taking Tylenol laced with cyanide.  Tens of millions of packages were recalled; people were afraid to take any medicine for a while, fearing they could suffer the same fate.

Less than a full year later, the NY Times published an article about industry-wide efforts to develop truly tamper-proof packaging.

Companies that make over-the-counter drugs and other consumer products are still struggling to cope with the packaging worries that began with the contamination of Tylenol capsules last year, resulting in the death of seven people.

Since then, over-the-counter drug makers have spent $173 million to meet the requirements of the Food and Drug Administration for tamper-resistant packaging, according to the Proprietary Association, a trade group of non-prescription drug makers. 

The article noted some of the challenges in coming up with something that was truly tamper resistant, and also the challenges faced by consumers trying to get into the new packages to use the products. This is still an issue today, I can attest, as I'm currently battling the flu with both prescription and non-prescription medicine, and it takes several minutes of meditation, a pair of scissors, and often a knife to get the meds out of their protective covers. I surely would have a drink to help steady my nerves before attempting to get the pills, if alcohol weren't contraindicated.

We also learned from the Times article that the original deadline for the entire non-prescription drug industry to be 100% compliant with  the tamper-resistant packaging rules was February 6, 1984 - a mere 495 days from the first Tylenol death.

On December 22, 2001, Richard Reid tried - and failed - to light a fuse in his sneaker, hoping to take down a plane flying from Paris to Miami.  On July 10, 2003 - only 565 days later - the TSA issued a press release attempting to clarify what they had been doing with shoe screening for months.

TSA's increased focus on screening shoes in recent months reflects a necessary reaction to information gathered by federal intelligence agencies. But just as TSA, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, achieved consistency last fall by clarifying procedures for the screening of drinks carried through security checkpoints, the agency is moving now to make sure its shoe policy is implemented consistently from coast to coast. 

"Our screeners have always worked hard to make sure a 'shoe bomb' does not get on an aircraft," Admiral Loy said. "Now we must make sure our security process is consistent so air travelers know what to expect at every airport in the country." 

The shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School occurred on December 14, 2012. The shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School occurred 1,888 days later.

Still too soon?

Meanwhile Back in Albany (v15)

Nathaniel Brooks/NY Times

Picking up where we left off on the Sonofa Gov's 2018 State of the State, let's turn again to the litany of things Andrew Cuomo wants to accomplish this session.

Here's a few quick hits, some of which are likely going nowhere, until and even after details get fleshed out:

• protecting union workers
• same day registration, no-fault absentee ballots and early voting
• closing the LLC loophole and implementing a 'true public financing system" 
• social media disclosures on who ("or what") is paying for political advertising
• cashless tolling at bridges, tunnels, and on the Thruway
• expanding investment and acreage for to parks and tourism investments
• airport modernization, investment in the Long Island Railroad, and maybe a tunnel or two
• preserving CHP, Medicaid and our health insurance industry
• expanding pre-K programs and free college tuition programs
• finding creative ways to reduce property taxes (but not the unfunded mandates that drive them)

Some of the harder stuff?  Terrorism, for one.

...lone wolves are a new threat. It is getting worse not better. The Internet companies must search their hearts and minds to determine their obligation to public safety when they know who is visiting terrorist sites, and they know who is learning to kill Americans. That is there issue. In the meantime, our issue is to protect ourselves.

That means more police, better training, state of the art surveillance - and, restructuring Penn Station, which is particularly vulnerable - even if it means using eminent domain if private properties near the Station need to be included in the mix. Cuomo calls for Amtrak, the feds, and city officials to come together to make the necessary improvements. This might be tough with Trump in charge, especially since the feds just stepped back from a new NY/NJ tunnel plan.

Rethinking taxes, another hard one. Cuomo mentioned the federal government's "assault on New York" and the three ways we'll address it. First, challenge the new tax bill it in court - it's unconstitutional, it's double taxation, it violates states' rights and equal protection. Then, we'll develop a 'repeal and replace' effort for every state, every taxpayer.  Finally, we're going to look for a different way to fund New York, reducing our reliance on income taxes, such as a payroll tax.  And yeah, carried interest would be a thing of the past, too.

There was a bit more in there, but then the Sonofa Gov tried to find his father.

As the greatest Republican president Abraham Lincoln said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand." But our obligation as leaders is not just to say what we are against, but also what we support. Our obligation as leaders is not just to criticize, but to offer an alternative - and we do. New York follows a different path. New York believes that there is no future through division, but only through unity. The New York Way is to believe diversity is not a liability; it is the exact opposite. Diversity is our greatest asset. We celebrate it. The New York Way is that tolerance is expected from all and inclusion is our operating principle, and forging community is our ultimate goal...

And maybe, just maybe, to fuel the fire for 2020.

Gay and straight, white and black and brown, upstate and downstate - all working together focusing on what unites us rather than divides us and then building on that commonality. Now, this is not a new principle. It's not a democratic or republican idea, nor is it even uniquely New York. It is an idea proven over 240 years. It is the nation's founding premise and enduring promise. Is it our Founding Fathers' essential wisdom summed up in just three words: e pluribus unum. Out of many, one. So fundamental to the American idea that in 1782 they stitched the words on the great seal of the United States, and that seal and those words are on a flag that has hung in the Oval Office everyday since. Right behind president Trump's desk. To find the way forward, the president only needs to turn around. 

And then, back to New York.

That, my friends, is the true formula for what makes America great. That is the simple yet profound idea that made America the greatest country on the globe. And New York - New York was the laboratory for that idea. We proved that it worked in 1782, and we proved that it works today. This year, let us show what New York is, at its best. Let us show this nation the New York lesson: that at times of trouble and anxiety, the premise that made America great still guides us. That we do not seek to raise ourselves by pulling another down, but rather we believe we succeed by raising each other up. 

That is the New York Way.  And the New York Way is true north. And our true north is to follow the credo on the great seal of the State of New York: always reach higher, always hear our better angels, always aspire to unify, and always point up. 

Excelsior!

To infinity - and beyond!

No, seriously - there's a whole lot of stuff in here, and a lot of it is going to cost a ton of money that we simply do not have. Even Cuomo admits we don't have any money.

It's going to be an interesting session, for sure, starting with Cuomo's budget, due in the next ten days or so.

Wondering on Wednesday (v109)

Holy moly, there's so much to wonder about tonight. Let's dive in.

What, exactly, would have been the compromise that would have saved us from the Civil War, I wonder? The president's personal General, John Kelly, went on Laura Ingraham's new show on the Trump News Network and educated us on the War Between the States.

It was always loyalty to state first back in those days. Now, it's different today. 

Why yes, yes it is.

Today, we have people thinking that states like Texas or California should secede from the Union - but they don't leave. And we don't have people fighting for the right to sell human beings in the town square anymore, either. Things are indeed different today.

Back to General Kelly:

But the lack of an ability to compromise led to the Civil War. And men and women of good faith on both sides made their stand where their conscience had to make their stand.

What was Kelly thinking, I wonder? Was there some historical figure who should have sacrificed their conscience, as it appears Kelly has done since becoming Chief of Staff? Is this just Kelly channelling his boss?  I mean, remember these comments from the prez?

People don't realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it,why? People don't ask that question, but why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?

Kelly also has echoed his boss with his attacks on Florida Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, who brought to light the somewhat odd condolence call from Trump to the widow of Sgt. La David Johnson, who was killed in Niger along with three others. He told Ingraham he would never apologize to Wilson, whom he (at least so far falsely) accused of taking credit for getting a new FBI building funded, something that happened before she was in office.

Speaking of things Kelly's boss said, I wonder if anyone can think of any other President, living or dead, who would have responded to a terrorist attack in New York City by blaming one of New York's senators for, in effect, allowing the terrorist into the country? #whattheeverlovingsniff, I wonder, is wrong with this man?

And #whattheeverlovingsniff is wrong with his staff, that they dug up this nugget about Schumer? Why not blame Mitch McConnell, I wonder? He voted for the bill that included the Diversity Visa Lottery, too.

Now obviously, that question about McConnell was facetious - the question, of course, is why the hell is the president blaming anyone at all for this act, other than the person who was apprehended after being shot by law enforcement immediately after committing the act?

Or maybe the question is, what the hell is wrong with Trump?  In addition to bashing Schumer, he took this opportunity to call out the justice system.

We need quick justice and we need strong justice, much quicker and much stronger than we have right now. Because what we have right now is a joke and it's a laughingstock.

Why yes, yes it is. (In case you're wondering, I'm not talking about the justice system anymore...)

And finally, I wonder, who will be the next one exposed as a serial abuser?