The Update Desk: Chris Collins, One Last Time

How many times have we talked about former Rep. Chris Collins, the disgraced former Buffalo-area congressman who denied and then pled guilty to insider trading and other charges? There have been more than a few updates, for sure - take a look. 

First, there was this:

Collins, you have likely heard, has been charged with insider trading; the charges stem from him being on the board of an Australian pharma company, and him allegedly using information he learned about the failure of one of the company's drugs, which he then allegedly shared with his son (perhaps as he attended a White House gathering, if the timeline is correct), and his son allegedly shared the information with his soon-to-be father-in-law. 

And, there was this announcement: 

After extensive discussions with my family and my friends over the last few days, I have decided that it's in the best interests of the constituents of NY-27, the Republican Party, and president Trump's agenda for me to suspend my campaign for re-election to Congress.

I will fill out the remaining few months of my term to assure that our community maintains its vote in Congress to support president Trump's agenda to create jobs, eliminate regulations, reduce the size of government and lower taxes.

I will also continue to fight the meritless charges brought against me and I look forward to having my good name cleared of any wrongdoing.

 But then, we're in New York, so

Buffalo-area congressman and Trump first responder Chris Collins is going to be on the ballot for his congressional seat in November after all.

Unfortunately, it seems, trying to get off the ballot under some grand scheme being worked on by Erie County Republicans and Collins could jeopardize his defense against the federal criminal charges filed against him mid-summer, and could have led to a lawsuit by NY Democrats fighting against the plan to replace him on the ballot. It might even have jeopardized his bail, attorneys thought.

And, we're in New York so, he won re-election. Which brought us to this.

Collins is in the news again, for a couple of reasons. First, the House is going to reopen its ethics investigation into his case, which was suspended back when he was indicted on federal charges. But not to worry -- the House has promised the Department of Justice that they'll not interfere with the criminal case against him.

And that led to this.

Well, he's back, and now news is breaking from his hometown newspaper, the Buffalo News: 

WASHINGTON – Rep. Chris Collins resigned Monday, a day before he is expected to plead guilty Tuesday to federal charges stemming from an insider trading scheme that prosecutors first detailed in an indictment nearly 14 months ago.

And finally, we are here, with this latest update from his hometown paper. 

Chris Collins cried so hard that many of his words got lost in his anguish.

But that act of contrition meant only so much to US District Court Judge Vernon S. Broderick, who on Friday sentenced Collins to 26 months in prison for launching an insider trading scheme with a call to his son from a White House picnic in June 2017.

Saying that he believes "there is a need to both show respect for the law and to inflict just punishment," Judge Broderick added a $200,000 fine and a year of supervised release to the prison time, ending what the paper called "an unusually long three-hour sentencing hearing" which included a very emotional statement from Collins in which he said, among other things,

I violated my core values...  People feel sorry for me. They shouldn't. I did what I did. 

He spoke of the damage to his son's reputation, the problems caused for his son's in-laws, and for his own family, and said of former colleagues who reached out to him that morning,

I let them down -- and the president of the United States.

Broderick pointed out that, in addition to the damage Collins himself called out, he had also left his district unrepresented for months.  And US Attorney Geoffrey Berman, who prosecuted the case, said this.

Lawmakers bear the profound privilege and responsibility of writing and passing laws, but equally as important the absolute obligation of following them. Collins' hubris is a stark reminder that the people of New York can and should demand more from their elected officials, and that no matter how powerful, no lawmaker is above the law.

And sadly, that's a message that New Yorkers have had a hard time mastering, as we've seen so many times before.

We need to do better, we really do.

The Update Desk: Rep. Chris Collins

It's been a while since we've heard much about Rep. Chris Collins (R- Ethically Challenged Erie County). You remember him, right? Insider trading allegations, making a call to his son (but not his daughter!) from the Rose Garden advising him to sell some stock, trying to not run for re-election but not being able to find a way off the ballot, and he ends up winning? Yeah, that guy.

Collins is in the news again, for a couple of reasons. First, the House is going to reopen their ethics investigation into his case, which was suspended back when he was indicted on federal charges. But not to worry -- the House has promised the Department of Justice that they'll not interfere with the criminal case against him.

But the more interesting news about Collins has to do with infrastructure, and taxes. That's right, two things Republicans like to talk about, for different reasons. Infrastructure is good, particularly if it's public/private partnership, which helps their donors, or if it's block grants to states, which the Rs love. And taxes? That's another good topic to talk about too, of course, particularly when they're going down, not up - or not being introduced at all. You know what happens to Rs who get that part wrong. I mean, who can forget "Read my lips - no new taxes!"

Collins, though -- who was the first Congressman to publicly throw his support to Trump, you remember - has different ideas on taxes than most folks in his party. This article, published on HotAir.com, explains his idea on how to fund our much-needed infrastructure updates.

Rep. Chris Collins is urging Congress to double the 18.4-cents-per-gallon gasoline tax, which has not been raised in more than a quarter century. He also wants to double the existing fee that the airline passengers pay per flight. 

Is your head spinning yet?  Doubling the gas tax and the per-flight fee?  A Republican? Here's what Collins said in an interview with The Hill, according to the article.

I not only support increasing the gas tax; I support doubling it. I support doubling the airline passenger fee from $4.50 to $8 or $9. Those are user fees. I won't even call it a tax.

I love when these folks call taxes user fees, don't you? The Democrats do it really well, and the Republicans aren't immune to the name change, either.  They're all so cute.

The Update Desk: Don't Let The Door Hit You...

It's been a while since we've heard any news about Erie County's embattled Congressman, Republican Chris Collins.

In fact, it was back in May that we checked in on Collins, the insider-trading, call-your-son-from-the-Rose-Garden (but don't call your daughter) wheeler-dealer.  Here's what was going on back then:

Collins is in the news again, for a couple of reasons. First, the House is going to reopen their ethics investigation into his case, which was suspended back when he was indicted on federal charges. But not to worry -- the House has promised the Department of Justice that they'll not interfere with the criminal case against him.

But the more interesting news about Collins has to do with infrastructure, and taxes. That's right, two things Republicans like to talk about, for different reasons. Infrastructure is good, particularly if it's public/private partnership, which helps their donors, or if it's block grants to states, which the Rs love. And taxes? That's another good topic to talk about too, of course, particularly when they're going down, not up - or not being introduced at all. You know what happens to Rs who get that part wrong. I mean, who can forget "Read my lips - no new taxes!"

Well, he's back, and now news is breaking from his hometown newspaper, the Buffalo News:

WASHINGTON – Rep. Chris Collins resigned Monday, a day before he is expected to plead guilty Tuesday to federal charges stemming from an insider trading scheme that prosecutors first detailed in an indictment nearly 14 months ago.

A spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said her office received Collins' resignation letter Monday. The aide said Collins' resignation will become effective Tuesday.

A new court filing in the case, filed in federal court in Manhattan, shows that U.S. District Court Judge Vernon S. Broderick scheduled a court hearing where Collins – who had pleaded not guilty to all the charges against him – will change his plea.

A new entry on the docket in the case read: "As to Christopher Collins: Change of Plea Hearing scheduled for 10/1/2019 at 3 p.m."

Moments after that docket entry was filed, a second appeared, indicating that Collins' co-defendants – his son Cameron Collins and Cameron Collins' prospective father-in-law, Stephen Zarsky – plan to change their not-guilty pleas as well. A hearing in their case is set for Thursday.

No one has any comment on whether the gang will plead to the original changes, which were scheduled to go to trial in February, or if there are lesser, more palatable charges on the table. Either way, it's good that (after the court date on Tuesday), we'll no longer have Rep. Collins to kick around any more.

You can read all of the veritable pastiche coverage of Collins here.

Collins to Run Again After All

Buffalo-area congressman and Trump first responder Chris Collins is going to be on the ballot for his congressional seat in November after all.

Unfortunately, it seems, trying to get off the ballot under some grand scheme being worked on by Erie County Republicans and Collins could jeopardize his defense against the federal criminal charges filed against him mid-summer, and could have led to a lawsuit by NY Democrats fighting against the plan to replace him on the ballot. It might even have jeopardized his bail, attorneys thought, which negated his earlier statement that he would suspend his campaign:

After extensive discussions with my family and my friends over the last few days, I have decided that it's in the best interests of the constituents of NY-27, the Republican Party, and president Trump's agenda for me to suspend my campaign for re-election to Congress it's in the best interests of the constituents of NY-27, the Republican Party, and president Trump's agenda for me to suspend my campaign for re-election to Congress.

Part of this is because of NY's convoluted election law; he'd only get off the ballot if he was no longer a resident of NY, or nominated for another office, or dead. Something we might want to think about changing in the future,  fellow NY voters...

Speaking of attorneys, it probably shouldn't be shocking to learn that Collins had used campaign funds to pay legal fees related to the insider trading. From this report  in August, we learn (emphasis added)

Since July 2017, Federal Election Commission records show Collins' campaign has been paying up to $60,000 per month in legal services to prestigious law firm Baker Hostetler. The firm is representing Collins in the case.

While it is legal to use campaign funds to pay for legal fees, it's not clear whether Collins' constituents and supporters were aware that donations were being used to assist his legal fight.

Those legal fees covered the time period of two separate House probes, including one by the Office of Congressional Ethics and another by the House Ethics Committee. 

A spokesman for the Collins legal team confirmed that the payments from the campaign were for the investigation by the nonpartisan Office of Congressional Ethics and an ongoing inquiry by the House Ethics Committee. Going forward, the congressman will pay for his legal bills out of his own pocket, the spokesman added. 

That's right -- like a lot of other ridiculous expenses, including steak dinners and golf outings, legal fees can be paid out of campaign funds.

I mean, from an ethical perspective, isn't Collins using campaign funds to pay legal fees kind of like the president using donations to his charitable foundation for his own selfish purposes?

Collins recently did an interview with a Buffalo TV station, noting that he welcomed the FBI when they showed up at his house early one morning back in April, and that he thought when he was talking to them that it was related to the ethics investigations (that started in 2016, he noted). In the interview, he was asked whether he thought he had let his constituents down.

No, again, no allegations against me have a thing to do with my role as a member of Congress. Nor did I ever sell any stock, so I'm holding my head high.

He's right on the latter point -- as his stock is in a trust, he couldn't actually sell any specific stock.

But on the former, I can't disagree more: with two separate ethics investigations, the first finding good reason to refer him for the second one, his ethics have everything to do with his role as a Congressman.

 And voters seem to understand that, apparently; for example, residents in Eden, the likely spot to drop Collins so he wouldn't have to run for his Congressional seat, were not at all excited about that idea.

Car horns honked, eliciting cheers as they drove past the group of protesters standing outside the Eden Town Hall. Signs labeled "fraud," "Collins is a swamp monster," and "Eden not bossed, not bought, not Collins," waved in the air as the crowd marched down to the intersection at Route 62 and East Church Street... The protest is the latest in a series of protests revolving around the Republicans' attempts to get Chris Collins off the November congressional ballot after the congressman suspended his campaign following an indictment for federal insider trading and fraud charges. 

Hopefully, voters in the 27th district will do the right thing in November and not give him a single vote.

The Update Desk: Chris Collins, Again, Darn It

I was sure, the last time I wrote about convicted securities fraud conspirer Chris Collins, the former Congressman from Western New York, that I was writing about him for the last time.  I really should have known better.  You can read his sad story here, in my last update. 

I had been ignoring the delays in getting his just over two-year prison term started - concerns about the coronavirus and all - and I even ignored it when he finally did report for duty at the Pensacola Federal Prison Camp back in October. 

Tonight, the impeached, lame duck president issued 20 pardons and commutations, with Collins being among the lucky. 

That the former congressman was the first one to support the president probably was very meaningful to Trump - and I can only imagine that, had he still been in office, Collins would have happily added his name to the list of 126 House Republicans supporting the 'Texas+' lawsuit (sorry, tired of listing the other states that joined that ridiculous case). 

He probably would have been appearing at rallies for the president, or maybe trying to overturn New York's election or something equally silly. At least we didn't have to see that, with him in prison down in Florida. 

I'll leave you with a comment from Geoffrey Berman, the prosecuting US Attorney in the Collins case. (You may remember that Berman was fired by Trump after some questionable personnel decisions by AG Snitty Snitty Bill Barr backfired.)

Anyway, here's what Berman said.

Lawmakers bear the profound privilege and responsibility of writing and passing laws, but equally as important the absolute obligation of following them. Collins' hubris is a stark reminder that the people of New York can and should demand more from their elected officials, and that no matter how powerful, no lawmaker is above the law.

Yes, they do. And no, they aren't. No matter what the pardon memo says - or doesn't.

In Case You Missed it (v5)

Another jam-packed week of news, sports, weather, and veritable pastiche.

In case you missed anything, here's a recap.

Sunday School this week was all about Cory Booker, because he was the only 2020 Dem hitting a classroom. Most of the question he got had nothing to do with his campaign and everything to do with the current president, impeachment, the former vice president.. you know.  Here's an excerpt about ethics, and Trump.

Look, I have a lot of beliefs about ethics rules and the needs for our government of the United States to go far further in the rules than we have. But the fact that the Republicans right now are trying to use this and distract from the president of the United States and his own actions is to me incredible.

Need some Sunday School Extra Credit? Chris Wallace chatted with former Trump Homeland Security Advisor Tom Bossert, who also served as Deputy Homeland Security Advisor under Dubya. Among other things, he offered some insight into the method, or the madness, of Trump:

...I honestly believe this president has not gotten his pound of flesh yet from past grievances on the 2016 investigation. I believe he and his legal team have been looking into this, probably even prior to Joe Biden announcing that he would run for president.

Western New York was in the spotlight in a couple of posts; unfortunately, not in the best light. We had news from the Update Desk on the sad tale of Rep. Chris Collins, the first member of Congress to support the president.

A spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said her office received Collins' resignation letter Monday. The aide said Collins' resignation will become effective Tuesday.

Why did  he resign, you ask? So he could plead guilty to charges in his insider trading case, of course.

The second post was a Quick Take on multiple investigations looking into how things are being done at the WNY Off Track Betting (OTB) office. Not on the gambling end, but on how the Board does business, and who benefits.

New York has a history of good intentions gone bad, and sadly we seem to excel when it comes to situations where public corporations, boards, and authorities are given freedom to do their own thing - because that almost always ends up with politically connected companies and people receiving benefits they are probably not entitled to, or that are way beyond what's reasonable for the work done, and that regular folks have no way to access

In this Poll Watch entry, we learned that, no matter what he tells us, the president is underwater not only on his personal likeability, but also on his policies. He must be reading different polls?

The other takeaway from this question?  Approval of his policies is underwater by 10 points (54% don't approve, 44% do). And, this will pain Trump I'm sure, but his predecessors - Obama (64%), Bush II (57%), Clinton (55%) Bush I (78%), and Reagan (66%) were all better liked than he is. Data on Abraham Lincoln is not immediately available.

And in a Sidebar on the same poll, the news wasn't all that great for the Democrats' policies, either.  None of their big ideas have strong support from a majority of voters, and they're struggling with Democratic voters, too.

Only a handful of the issues - DREAMers, the Medicare opt-in, student loan forgiveness tied to a repayment plan, and tuition-free college - have strong support from a majority of Dems; all the rest of the issues fall below 50% on the strength of support.

In the blink of an eye,  it was Hump Day, and time for some Wondering about Joe Biden's campaign acting badly, and Mike Pompeo's chest-thumping to protect his employees, even as the president maligns them, and about Hillary Clinton, too, and whether she understands her role these days.

 I get it - she couldn't have known that there was going to be an impeachment inquiry starting just days before she and Chelsea hit the road, but she has to know that we're in the middle of a Democratic Primary, and that we don't need her to be on the stage talking about why she lost, or policy, or Trump, or impeachment, or about anything other than Gutsy Women.

The Update Desk was busy this week; in addition to the Collins post, we got caught up with the Democratic candidates via my ongoing social experiment. In addition to counting the emails and the requests for money, I've added a new feature to this: the email of the week, which this time around was sent by Be to O'Rourke's team. Here's a snippet.

Maybe I could do a Facebook live stream with a kitten in hand and say, “You know, we wouldn’t want anything to happen to this kitten now would we… Send your $5 now and Miss Whiskers will be fine.”

To be clear, we’re not planning on harming any kittens. But we do need your help...

Someone should get Miss Whiskers a Twitter account, don't you think?

And finally, blissfully, TGIF. Among other things, we heard from the candidates on their fundraising efforts for the 3rd quarter.

Third-quarter fundraising totals are out for the Democratic candidates. Here's how it look, according to the campaigns: Sanders ($25.3M), Warren ($24.6M), Buttigieg ($19.1M), Biden ($15.2M), Harris ($11.6M), Yang ($10M) and Booker ($6M). Big losers? Biden, down $6.8M and Buttigieg, down $5.8M compared to last quarter's official FEC filings. Time to thin the herd, I think?

That's it -- a busy week for sure. I still owe you some poetry, an Albany update, and more. Let's see if I can fit everything in next week!

TGIF 8/10/18

How was your week, pretty calm?

I think some folks might have wished that were the case.  Take Omarosa. You remember her, right? The thrice-fired Apprentice, who was also fired by the Trump Administration and was booted from Big Brother, another pseudo-reality TV show, is making the media rounds in advance of her latest book, Unhinged: An Insider Account of the Trump White House.

Why is she having a bad week? Well, for starters, her interviews appear to contradict her book - which is a no-no in the business - and do so on her big bombshell, that there are tapes of then Celebrity Blowhard Donald Trump using the n-word.  And she may have heard the tapes, even though she was only told that he used the n-word, she never heard him actually say it. Or, maybe she did or didn't hear anything at all, who knows.

Actually, what might be more damaging than her missteps on the book tour are the authors she's lumped with in the "people who bought this book also bought" list. Omarosa is in fine company (um, yeah, that's what it is) - see for yourself:

• Jeanine Pirro: Liars, Leakers and Liberals, The Case Against the Anti-Trump Conspiracy
• Gregg Jarrett: The Russia Hoax, The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump
• Newt Gingrich: Trump's America, The Truth about Our Nation's Greatest Comeback
• Jerome B. Corsi: Killing the Deep State, The Fight to Save president Trump

Whether she's telling the truth either in the interviews or in the book, and even if she's bunched in with an "interesting" group of authors, she still probably had a better week than this guy, Buffalo-area Republican Congressman Chris Collins. 

Collins, you have likely heard, has been charged with insider trading; the charges stem from him being on the board of an Australian pharma company, and him allegedly using information he learned about the failure of one of the company's drugs, which he then allegedly shared with his son (perhaps as he attended a White House gathering, if the timeline is correct), and his son allegedly shared the information with his soon-to-be father-in-law. Collins son and his FIL sold shares of stock in advance of the public announcement of the bad news, and that is bad news for the Congressman. 

Everyone's pleaded not guilty, and Collins plans on staying on the ballot, at least he does for now. This whole thing would be much less interesting, and we'd be hearing much less about it, if Collins hadn't been the first member of Congress to jump on the Trump bandwagon. And it would be much less interesting if, around the time he allegedly called his son to warn him, there was some way he could have protected his daughter, too - because, according to this report, she allegedly lost over a million bucks on her shares in the pharma company.

And speaking of alleged things, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) went to Russia; he had a letter with him that he passed to Putin's people. According to Paul, the letter was from the Trump Administration and contained stuff about important things; in fact, Paul suggested that Trump send the letter. Except that the White House is saying the letter was meant to introduce Paul to Putin, and that's why the Senator wanted the letter. And the contents? Those were Rand Paul's topics of interest, not the presidents. After all, he's allegedly been talking to Putin regularly since the #HELLinHELSINKI2018 summit last month.

Finally, an update on this week's Wondering on Wednesday post, which included a reference to Kris Kobach, the Trump-loving election fraud conspiracy theorist and Kansas Secretary of State who's locked in a tight gubernatorial primary race with the state's current Governor. Kobach had said that he would not recuse himself, should a recount be requested. Kobach has changed his mind since Wednesday, as his already thin lead was cut in half and concerns about discrepancies and about Kobach's guidance to county election officials has been called into question. He has transferred his oversight activities to his top aide. 

TGIF, everyone. 

In Case You Missed It (v66)

Got your cuppa? Here's your recap of last week's posts.

I devoted my Sunday School classroom time to folks who have been tapped to serve in the incoming administration, including Jen Psaki, who'll be the new White House press secretary. She talked with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday about a number of things, including the day's hot topic. Take a look.

And, finally, the Hunter Biden questions: does Biden promise to let US attorney David Weiss (he's currently conducting the investigation) finish the job?  And second, what does Biden think about a special counsel possibly being appointed to investigate his son?

 Well, let me be crystal clear, Chris, and I appreciate you asking this question. He will not be discussing an investigation of his son with any attorney general candidates. He will not be discussing it with anyone he is considering for the role, and he will not be discussing it with the future attorney general. It will be up to the purview of a future attorney general and his administration to determine how to handle any investigation.

That's pretty clear, and boy, I  hope she's not kidding. 

A lot of classroom time was spent talking about the likely-committed-by-the-Russians computer breach, although some of the people interviewed pointed out that we do need to make sure we do the hard work on attribution before we go off all halfcocked and hog wild down the retribution path. I included those interviews in your Extra Credit. 

One of the folks making the rounds was Kevin Mandia, CEO of FireEye, the cyber security company that initially discovered the breach. He talked with Margaret Brennan on Face the Nation. Here's part of their discussion on how we keep this kind of thing from happening again.

He said we need to "have doctrine," like we do for the use of chemical weapons, so people know the rules of the game, and if we don't, he thinks it will just get worse.

We're going to see the borders continue to be pushed outward in cyber attacks-- to the point where, when do we finally do the work--when it's already intolerable, when it already got so bad that we have no choice but to respond. But like you said, it starts with doctrine. With doctrine, you have to get attribution right. And with attribution, then you have to do a proportional response to whoever the actors were. 

I dropped a Trump in Transition post, the 48th in that series, on Tuesday. There'll be one on January 20th, I think. We'll see if he earns one before then. Here's a bit of that brain dump.

The millions who showed our displeasure, our distaste, our dislike, he cannot or will not comprehend. Our exhaustion, he cannot comprehend. How annoyed we are, how sick we are of his constant self-promoting, the embarrassing tweets, the grifting, the cast of characters by whom he is surrounded, that he foists upon us, that he honors and celebrates, he cannot comprehend.

Equally incomprehensible is that, as he pretends all of this isn't happening, didn't happen, isn't true, he continues to roil the waters in which his devout supporters swim, working them into a frenzy of martial-law supporting, havoc-wreaking, our-country-has-been-stolen fanatics. They are insisting he will be president, he will have his second-term inauguration come January 20th, and they don't care what it takes to make that happen.

Sometimes, trying to get my arms around this stuff between him and his followers, I beg for the chance to have my own 'Bobby Ewing in the shower' moment, I really do. 

Disgraced former Buffalo-area Congressman Chris Collins was in the news again; he was the subject of a note from The Update Desk.

Tonight, the impeached, lame duck president issued 20 pardons and commutations, with Collins being among the lucky. 

That the former congressman was the first one to support the president probably was very meaningful to Trump - and I can only imagine that, had he still been in office, Collins would have happily added his name to the list of 126 House Republicans supporting the 'Texas+' lawsuit (sorry, tired of listing the other states that joined that ridiculous case). 

My Wondering on Wednesday included a bunch of random questions (including a couple related to Christmas) - and the ones below.

Why is the United States considering offering immunity to Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi royal who's such a good What's App friend of Jared Kushner, for his role in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi?

Who will be the next target that the president will attack, now that he's gone after the #2 Republican in the Senate? Any guesses?

Why are people all of the sudden worried about foreign policy? Why haven't they been complaining all along? And why are reporters and politicians lying about it?

I took the rest of last week off, for a little holiday R&R, but we're back at it. See you later for Sunday School.

The Update Desk: TGIF 8/11/08

In last week's TGIF post, I mentioned Buffalo-area Rep. Chris Collins, who was the first member of Congress to climb aboard the Trump train all those months ago.  And, he was just indicted for insider trading.

When the indictment came out, Collins was adamant that these were false allegations - meritless was the word he used in this press conference in which he outlined his general business acumen, his history of saving jobs for western NY, his political career, and his plans to vigorously fight the allegations while continuing to serve in Congress.

He even brought his wife to the press conference; she waved clumsily, then stood by his side, a fixed expression on her face, looking as if for the life of her she couldn't figure out why she was there. It was strangely reminiscent of the Eliot Spitzer presser after the whole Client #9 stuff broke ten years ago, except that in that case, it was a 'stand by me while I admit to being a cheating cad who doesn't take off his socks' thing, vs. a 'I saved our son a few million bucks' thing. 

Yesterday, however, Collins had a change of heart. He is suspending his campaign for re-election, throwing the race to hold the most Republican district in NY into turmoil. Here's his official statement, done in the usual fashion - toss around a few trigger words, and focusing attention on himself as a savior of the world. They must go to school to learn how to do this.

Democrats are laser focused on taking back the House, electing Nancy Pelosi Speaker and then launching impeachment proceedings against President Trump. They would like nothing more than to elect an 'Impeach Trump' Democrat in this District, which is something that neither our country or my party can afford.

After extensive discussions with my family and my friends over the last few days, I have decided that it's in the best interests of the constituents of NY-27, the Republican Party, and president Trump's agenda for me to suspend my campaign for re-election to Congress.

I will fill out the remaining few months of my term to assure that our community maintains its vote in Congress to support president Trump's agenda to create jobs, eliminate regulations, reduce the size of government and lower taxes.

I will also continue to fight the meritless charges brought against me and I look forward to having my good name cleared of any wrongdoing.

We'll have to see whether there's time to get his name off the ballot before November.

And maybe we'll hear from the president on this when he makes his trip to New York on Monday.

Wondering on Wednesday (v118)

Here we go again, everyone - it's Wednesday!

Buffalo Congressman Chris Collins was one of the earliest supporters of Donald Trump's presidential candidacy, and he has continued to be a staunch defender of Trump as president. On Tuesday, Collins was on CNN's 'Cuomo Prime Time' broadcast, talking about the warm fuzzy president that we're supposed to recognize when we see him (full disclosure: I'm really bad at picking him out of a crowd even a crowd of one).

Here's the Congressman's take on what happened at the meeting where Trump's um, colorful comment drew so much attention:

It's disappointing that anyone would leave a private meeting and politicize that, and certainly a lot of that language was denied. All I know is this is a president who is not a racist, who cares about the young people who are here now, who have lived here most of their lives. He will be generous and compassionate with them, but he needs what he needs on the border wall, on border security. That's a reasonable compromise.

So, now that it's officially the day of Wondering, I can't help wondering why it is that every Republican who has commented on this whole debacle, Collins included, has managed to completely conflate DACA with shitholian nations such as Haiti and the African continent? And I wonder how on earth can we rely on our elected officials if they don't even know that our southern border separates us from Mexico, not Africa? And, staying with the Republicans, shouldn't they be worried about the potential for a Bernie Sanders victory in 2020 if we let in all these Norwegians we should be coveting? What are they thinking, I wonder?

We've learned, with this president, that the most important thing on his mind, or the position that's the most important one he has is whatever was said by the last person he talked to, Hence, Norway was the anti-shitholian comparison.  Given how many world leaders Trump has talked to - you know, all those ones he 'respects' -  in his first year in office, it's hard not to wonder how much worse this could have been.

The president tweeted on the stroke of 8 PM the winners of the Fake News Awards. Here's the celebratory tweet, in case you missed it. 

Note that to get to the list of winners, you don't get them from the White House website, you get them from the GOP website. I wonder about that right off the bat. Are these the president's awards, or the Republican party's awards?  Whose fake news is this, anyway?

I should tell you I certainly tried to see if there were any red carpet pictures -- what's an award show without those, right? -- and I certainly tried to see who the winners were, but that's all on hold until the website gets up and running,it seems (cue the ketchup commercial), although I did see an unconfirmed tweet about CNN winning some...

One more wondering before I go.  Facebook is in hot water these days, as some tech folks called them out for not doing enough to keep us safe from those pesky Russians pushing their fake news false narratives pro-Trump and/or anti-Clinton news stories. Seems these folks thought that more could have been done, especially since the 'screeners' who reviewed reported accounts and posts were not instructed to look for stuff that was fake and pull it down.

Speaking from experience, I know that it can be hard to convince the reviewers to take stuff down (in my case, it was a porn thing not a political thing), so I get there could be some frustration. 

But here's the thing that has me wondering: what difference does it make, at this point, if the fake stuff that was posted to try and influence our election came from a Russian bot or from an American in the Russian River Valley wine region in California, or having dinner in the Russian Tea Room, or from an American sitting in a corner dive having a white Russian?

Is a Russian bot more of a threat to us than we are to ourselves?  Just wondering...

In Case You Missed It (v20)

Another busy week for news watchers (and news avoiders), so here's a recap in case you missed any of this week's posts.  

The week started with news from the Update Desk - we had another update on the long, sad saga of Rep. Chris Collins, who last Friday was given a 26-month sentence stemming from his guilty plea on insider trading and other charges.

Saying that he believes "there is a need to both show respect for the law and to inflict just punishment," Judge Broderick added a $200,000 fine and a year of supervised release to the prison time, ending what the paper called "an unusually long three-hour sentencing hearing" which included a very emotional statement from Collins in which he said, among other things,

I violated my core values...  People feel sorry for me. They shouldn't. I did what I did. 

For this week's Sunday School, I sat in on an economics lesson, given by former Trump director of the National Economic Council. In addition to telling us he's not worried about a recession and he doesn't like tariffs, he also talked about some Democrats and their gimmicky policy proposals on raising revenue. And, for a while there, he sounded a lot like me.

You know, we look at spending and we look at revenue and we don't talk about them in the same sentence. We collect taxes and we spend. And Congress never thinks about how much money they have to spend. They just go spend... you wouldn't run your household like that. I wouldn't run my household like that. 

In the Extra Credit post, I looked at what some of the House Managers had to say; and there was Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-Trump), who came in from the golf course to chat with Chris Wallace. Graham actually agreed with managers Hakeem Jeffries and Jerry Nadler, the letter who said about Hunter Biden testifying, that Biden

"has no knowledge of the accusations against the president," which is true. Anyone on the Senate side suggesting he be called would be absurd. Jeffries echoed that thinking, saying that the standard for calling witnesses is "relevance to the central allegation in this case," that being Trump pressuring Ukraine. 

Graham himself said

Hunter Biden and Joe Biden and the whistleblower, we can look at those allegations of misconduct outside of impeachment." 

I hope he remembers that exchange, since later in the week he seemed to be changing his tune on that.

Following an op-ed by Greta Van Susteren, I went back and looked at my posts related to Making Political Debates Better, and compared them with that Van Susteren said. She and I have very similar positions on this, aiming to put educating voters front and center in the debates. We focus on driving one-liners, sound bites, and pitting the candidates against each other, instead of allowing for a nuanced discussion on key issues, some of which have been around, unsolved or unaddressed, for years.  As Van Susteren said,

... If we don’t want the Oval Office to operate like Twitter, why do we test our candidates as if it does? 

Turning to my weekly Wondering on Wednesday, I spend some time wondering about things Rand Paul was saying about John Bolton, and what he might say if he were called to testify in the impeachment trial.

Which one is the guiding light for John Bolton at this point? Axe to grind and books to sell? Or, be a player and say, 'even if I'm gone, he's doing what I want on Iran and other things?'

To which I responded, 

Hey, Rand Paul, here's an idea: maybe Bolton is going to be a patriot, and say, 'even if I'm gone, and even if Trump's doing what I want on Iran and other things, I don't care - and I'm going to do the right thing and tell the truth?'  

On Thursday, in addition to the Email of the Week from one of the Dem presidential candidates - this week's winner was That Guy From Vermont - I re-opened the Trump in Transition theme to consider what would happen in a post-Trump administration if a Democratic president had the full and unfettered power of the presidency, unlimited either by criminal statute or Constitutional power.

... picture a President Sanders asking a foreign country to investigate an opponent of 'Democratic Socialism' or a President Biden having a friendly foreign government dig up dirt on all of the nepotism hires in the government, or a President Buttigieg having an equality-centric foreign country go after anti-gay politicians and their families, or a President Warren asking another country for help in digging around in DNA databases for dirt on political opponents... 

I'm pretty sure we all can picture the look on the Republicans' faces under those circumstances, can't we?

For this week's TGIF, in addition to some thoughts on impeachment, we had fun with the new Space Force logo (and the old ones, which were even more fun when introduced to help raise money for the Trump/Pence gang).  Here's how I closed the post.

To which George Takei - Sulu on Star Trek - said, "Ahem. We are expecting some royalties from this..."

So, there you go - you're up to date on the veritable pastiche for the week. If you'd rather stay up to date on posts when they happen, drop your email in the Instant Gratification box on the right sidebar on the blog.

See you tomorrow for Sunday School.

Sunday School 1/28/18

Just an observation, before we head off down the hall to the classrooms: I thought there were 535 members of Congress - you know, 435 in the House and 100 more in the Senate?

For some reason, it seems like the booking people for our Sunday lectures only know of about 25 or so of them. Maybe we can convince them we'd like to see a little more diversity of opinion on on Sunday mornings?

NBC's Meet the Press had House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin III, and intelligence guru Robert Gates. Topics included the report that Trump wanted to fire Robert Mueller; the Nunes memo; immigration, DACA and the wall; and sexual harassment.

On ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Martha Raddatz hosted Senator Lindsey Graham, Ken Starr and ABC correspondent Dan Abrams, talking about immigration, Trump/Mueller, and Steve Wynn. The more interesting part of the show today was the trip from California to Texas along the border.

Here's a woman who, as a DACA qualifier, went to college and law school:

My mom had heard of the American dream, and she wanted us to experience that. And she knew my dreams wouldn't be fulfilled in the - the place where we were because her dreams weren't fulfilled... My family has been here 30 years paying taxes, contributing with our labor. We have created businesses. We are job creators. I understand that we --we broke the law by being here. And I feel there should be a way for us to become lawful immigrants, to become citizens some day.

Or this one, a Trump supporter who lives a few miles from the border and who thinks Dreamers should be allowed to stay, but also supports the wall:

I think it would stop a lot of them from coming over. I mean, I'm sorry, they need to come over here to take care of their families, I understand that. But most of them come over, and a lot of them earn their money and they're sending it back down there, they're not spending it here. Aren't we supposed to be boosting, or taking care of us first?

And there's this gentleman, a visa overstayer, now married to an American woman.

I think there should be more control of who gets into the country and how they get into the country, because -- we do need low-skill workers to do the jobs that most Americans don't want to do.

Finally, two people who were brought here illegally as kids, one of whom is DACA qualified and studying to be a nurse, talking about the potential for citizenship dangled by the president.

I would love to be able to be a citizen, but I think for me, and for what we see in our own community is that it would be a lot more important to be able to keep our families together.

Raddatz also talked to several border area politicians, too.  All in all, some good stuff in there.

The two best parts of Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace had to be South Carolina's Trey Benghazi Gowdy - and yes, I actually said best part and Trey Gowdy in the same sentence - talking about the Mueller investigation, the Nunes memo, and the damage the Republicans are doing to themselves, and Juan Williams reminding everyone that lovers talk to each other.

First, Gowdy. On Mueller's investigation, he had this to say.

And by the way, he's got two -- there are two components to his jurisdiction. There is a criminal component. But there's also a counterintelligence component that no one ever talks about because it's not sexy and interesting. But he's also going to tell us definitively what Russia tried to do in 2016. So the last time you and I were together, I told my Republican colleagues, leave him the hell alone and that's still my advice. 

And while he's not convinced there's 'no there there' with the Nunes memo (also a topic of conversation), on Republicans hurting their own credibility with their "secret societies and palace coups," Gowdy was clear.

Yes, Republicans are the best I've ever seen at taking good facts and overstating them and therefore changing the narrative... I don't know what they meant by secret society...  Republicans are better served by letting the texts speak for themselves... Republicans would be well served, let the texts speak for themselves...quit engaging in hyperbole, which we seem to do a lot.

Williams was fun during the discussion about the text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, the lovebirds who worked on the Clinton and Trump investigations. Strzok was the one removed from the Trump investigation and demoted to Human Resources immediately upon the text messages coming to Mueller's attention, months ago.

Wallace was trying to get things riled up with the group, but Williams wasn't having it.

JW: Come on Chris, they -- people have personal opinions. You and I have personal opinions. I think we come out here and try to do an honest job. 

CW: Wait, wait, you're not at all troubled by those texts?

JW: Well, first of all - no, be -- remember, they're lovers. So this is like pillow talk between two people who  have personal opinions. I don't know that it has impacted their capacity to lead at investigation. What I see here is a repeated effort coming from the right. They throw spitballs at the wall trying to somehow disparage the FBI, discredit Robert Mueller....

 CW: How about then Peter Strzok and Lisa Page are saying, well, let's not go into that Clinton investigation loaded for bear.

JW: Well, wait a second, they're talking. It's like and and me joking and saying, hey Chris, president Trump, we wish, would come on this show and then --

CW: I'm not joking, I'm serious.

JW:  I know. I know. but I'm saying we wish. But I'm saying -- and I say, Chris, well you know what, if you want him to come back, maybe we shouldn't ravage him this time. That's a joke between Juan and Chris. That's not an indication of how you're actually going to conduct the interview.  But this is, again, discredit the FBI because they're worried that Mueller, in fact, is going to find something. That's what going on...

Hear, hear.

Finally, one quick update from the interview with Maine's Susan Collins on CNN's State of the Union. Asked for her reaction to the story about porn star Stormy Daniels and her $130,000 payout from the Trump camp, Collins had this to say.

Well, I don't know the circumstances of it. In some ways, this sounds like an issue that's between president and Mrs. Trump, because it doesn't seem to be a workplace issue, as far as I know.

On that note, see you around campus.

Quick Takes (v7): Paladino Threatens NY Republicans

Quick Takes

Failed NY gubernatorial candidate and Western New York businessman Carl Paladino has gone off the rails, and on the record, with his plans to harass New York's Congressional Republicans unless and until they throw their support behind Donald Trump.

According to an article on Syracuse.com,

The Buffalo businessman said in an interview that he will use email to rally his supporters against New York's Republican members of Congress who have remained neutral in the presidential race. Paladino, who ran an insurgent campaign to capture the GOP nomination for NY governor in 2010, said the emails will become increasingly personal in the coming weeks, targeting individual members of Congress.

Paladino, advised the GOP representatives in part that

None of you is a profile in courage... You cannot stay neutral any longer; it conflicts with your job description. You're supposed to make decisions in the best interests of your constituents. They're angry. It's a festering anger, built up over the years by a smoke and mirrors government working to keep the political class comfortably feeding at the public trough. 

I guess Paladino believes our Representatives are supposed to make decisions in the best interest of Carl Paladino, who has some festering something-or-other built up over the years by a desire to stay relevant. However, nothing in the job description of the people we send to Washington says they have to listen to their party bosses, or to marginal party members sitting on the sidelines.

Heck, if that were the case you might as well require them to listen to armchair pundits like me.

Paladino's threat to ramp up the personal attacks was supported by one of his WNY minions, Chris Collins, who texted other members of the NY delegation to help bring them to heel.

I know Carl Paladino has been aggressively pushing all of you to endorse Trump. And I know he has indicated he will start 'attacking' NYers who don't endorse Trump. You may or may not care, but he does have a formidable email list. 

Collins noted that he was only relaying a conversation he had with Paladino, and that he asked that the attacks not start until after primary petitions had been passed.  How generous of him.

One person who did not fall for the bluster is my representative, John Katko of Camillus. Katko has been a solid representative for the district, in my opinion. I'm a Democrat, but I voted for him, and I'm glad I did. I don't always agree with him,but neither do Republicans -  which in my book means he's doing his job pretty well.

And, I can confidently say, none of the explanations he's given for his votes have included anything close to "because Carl Paladino told me to do it."

In an interview, Katko noted that he would back whoever the party's nominee is, but noted

whoever it is, I will point out my differences. I've acted independent in Congress. I'm going to continue to be an independent voice in Congress. And if I agree or disagree with my party leaders, I'm going to let that be known.

To me, that's what he should be doing, not running around strong-arming his fellow representatives, and not kowtowing to the whims of unelected party members who live outside the district.

I Want an Ignoramus for Christmas

Lori Van Buren/Times Union photo

Buffalo NY has the Buffalo Billion, and they have the Buffalo Bills, and they have the Buffalo Buffoon, Carl Paladino.

Paladino ran for governor of NY and lost; he led the state Republicans for a while; he's currently on the Buffalo School Board; and he led the charge for Donald Trump here in the Empire state, having his picture taken with the POTUS-elect as seen here, and even going so far as to threaten New York Republicans who did not agree with him.

The Buffalo businessman said in an interview that he will use email to rally his supporters against New York's Republican members of Congress who have remained neutral in the presidential race.  Paladino...said the emails will become increasingly personal in the coming weeks, targeting individual members of Congress.

How very Trumpian of him -- personally attacking people, even people in your own party, who were elected by people, and who are supposed to serve, their actual constituents - not Carl Paladino. And Chris Collins, the former Erie County Executive and current representative for parts of Western NY and the Finger Lakes in Congress - and member of the Apprentice transition team - chimed in back in back then, too.

I know Carl Paladino has been aggressively pushing all of you to endorse Trump. And I know he has indicated he will start 'attacking' NYers who don't endorse Trump. You may or may not care, but he does have a formidable email list.

Yeah, Collins is a stand-up guy, helping threaten fellow elected officials, and yeah, that Paladino, he's a heckuva guy. 

Paladino was selected by ArtVoice, "Western New York's smartest news, arts, and entertainment," along with several others, to answer a few questions about what they wanted for 2017. Here are two of the questions, and Paladino's answers.

1. What would you most like to happen in 2017?  Obama catches mad cow disease after being caught having relations with a Herford (sic). He dies before his trial and is burned in a cow pasture next to Valerie Jarret, who died weeks prior, after being convicted of sedition and treason, when a Jihady (sic) cellmate mistook her for being a nice person and decapitated her. 
2. What would you like to see go away in 2017? Michelle Obama. I'd like her to return to being a male and let loose in the outback of Zimbabwe where she lives comfortably in a cave with Maxie, the gorilla.

The other two questions asked who should run for mayor in Buffalo, to which Paladino appeared to answer Donald Trump, and about a proposed $50M Amtrak station, which Paladino believes is unnecessary, and he also said that we are the laughingstock of America because of the intelligence of our elected leaders. And, remember, he is one, as a member of the School Board...

Not surprisingly, there's been a lot of backlash on his responses to the first two questions -- they were so out in right field that the Trump team had to distance themselves, if you can believe that. And you can believe that, because I read it on Breitbart.

Carl's comments are reprehensible and they serve no place in our public discourse.

Wow -- is that kind of like being sent to bed without any supper by your billionaire father?

Equally unsurprising is Paladino's doubling down in response to the response to his ignoramusness, which included calls for his removal from the school board, accusations of racism, and even a beat-down from St. Bonaventure University, his alma mater.

It is true that a university is a place that encourages political discourse, but a civil discourse that, as Lincoln said, speaks "to the better angels of our nature." Such racist and demeaning comments have no place in civil society. As in the America we all love, so too at St. Bonaventure - we're better than that. 

Paladino took 14 paragraphs, not counting the opening "This is in response to my comments published in Artvoice" and the closing, shown here, to make his case.

And yes, it's about a little deprecating humor which America lost for a long time. Merry Christmas and tough luck if you don't like my comments.

In between those two statements? Well, let's see: he attacked the press; he attacked the Obamas as two America-hating progressive elitist ingrates; he mentioned hundreds of fired soldier generals and admirals; he talked about Michelle's hatred of America; Barack's yellow-bellied cowardice; unvetted immigration of Muslims; drug pusher commuted sentences; the silent-majority middle class rising up against Democrats and Republicans alike; the end of an era of mainstream media; a fraudulent shadow government and a lazy-ass president; the end of the progressive movement; Trump being called unfit for office; and a president doing nothing for black children.

Now, I have to say, if you didn't get all of that out of Barack Obama having relations with a cow and Michelle Obama going back to being a man and living in a cave with a gorilla, you're not alone. I didn't get all of that either - not even close.

I appreciate and hold dear our God-given right to speak freely. Oh wait - the God-given right is the one to freely hold guns, sorry. Anyway -- I truly believe we have the right to say what we want to say, even when what we say makes us look like an ignoramus. And so I'm personally OK with Paladino's choice to firmly cement his ignoramus credentials, in case anyone doubted that he was a card-carrying ignoramus already.

And, in the spirit of the holiday, I'm happy to be able to check one more thing off my Christmas list.

Wondering on Wednesday (v153)

I wondering, right off the bat, how anyone could have been unmoved by the president's press conference today, in which he mocked Republicans who didn't win their races, took credit for 'resigning' Jeff Flake, attacked the press, refused to answer questions he was asked, answered questions he wasn't asked, pretended that he was concerned about the environment, suggested that he would work in a bipartisan fashion with Nancy Pelosi, threatened to retaliate against any investigations initiated by the House, lied about why he still is not releasing his tax returns, and more. Transcript is here; video is here.

And I'm wondering how many people watched Nancy Pelosi's presser? For her part, she suggested they'd not investigate the president unless there was a reason, offered to work with the Rs, and so on - - what you would expect her to say. She also said she was the best person to be House Speaker.  And it seems she'll keep her leadership role. In addition to Pelosi, who's 78, Steny Hoyer, who's 79, and Jim Clyburn, also 78, want to remain in the top leadership roles. To which I can only sigh.

Pelosi can probably only sigh as well, as there's no question she was kicked out of the news cycle by the forced resignation of Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III. That saddens me, the Sessions ouster. He managed to hold on for so long. At least he wasn't dragged out of town to be fired, a la Reince Priebus. I wonder if the first thing he's going to do is go to Disneyland?

I'm also wondering about Chris Collins out in Western NY (or, as Brian Williams allegedly said, the northern tier of upstate NY).  You remember Collins, right? Multiple ethics investigations: a federal indictment for insider trading: tried to get off the ballot, couldn't, and yes - he won.  Well, I should say, he's projected to be the winner. He's up by around 2800 votes, so we'll have to see if there'll be a fight from his opponent. If he wins, does he show up to work with his former colleagues? Or does he fake a pulled muscle or something, I wonder?

And then there's the dead brothel owner who was elected to the State Assembly in Nevada. Dennis Hof, who was a Trump-ish candidate, won with around 68% of the vote. You can wonder away on this one all you want.

Here in New York, our Sonofa Gov won re-election handily; polls in the final days of the campaign showed Andrew Cuomo had only a 13% lead over Marc Molinaro, but in the end he won by over 20%. Three other candidates were also in the race, and in total got under 240K votes - but each had enough to keep their party on the ballot for the next four years.  I wonder what it will take for NYers to boldly go towards a different party, the Libertarians or Greens, or even the new one that just popped up on our radar this year, the Serve America Movement?

Not surprisingly, folks have looked at the electoral map for NY, which shows Cuomo won the cities - Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and NYC - plus Tompkins County (home of Ithaca, one of the most liberal cities in the country), Ulster County, and Long Island. Some are calling for  a new system, so that Cuomo wouldn't be the winner because he didn't win a majority of the counties...  For some, the fact that Cuomo has more than 1.3 million votes than Molinaro apparently is not enough - he has to win the geographical victory as well? I have to wonder about that logic.

How to wrap this all up?  Well, let's go with this: it's expected that by the time is all said and done, over 113 million people will have voted in the midterms. That's 49% of all eligibles. The obvious thing we can wonder is, will these folks stay engaged for the duration?  Will we continue to see women including women veterans and women of color, elected, or is this a one-and-done?  Will Dems leverage their victories from Tuesday into something that's sustainable?

We'll be wondering that at least through the 2020 election cycle, which starts now.

Sunday School 1/30/22

I wandered into ABC's This Week classroom yesterday. Here are some highlights. The segment that got the most press, from what I could see, was the George Stephanopoulos interview with Sen. Susan Collins (R-Very Concerned) and what she didn't say. But let's start with what she did say. 

Collins appreciates adding diversity to the Supreme Court, but says the "clumsy at best" process around Biden's promised nomination of a Black woman "adds to the further perception that the court is a political institution like Congress when it is not supposed to be." And, she disagreed with George that this was the same thing President Reagan did during the 1980 campaign.

Actually, this isn't exactly the same. I've looked at what was done in both cases. And what President Biden did was as a candidate, make this pledge. And that helped politicize the entire nomination process. What President Reagan said is, as one of his Supreme Court justices, he would like to appoint a woman.

I'm very concerned with the senator's research skills - because Reagan did not say he "would like to appoint a woman." He went much further than that.

I am announcing today that one of the first Supreme Court vacancies in my administration will be filled by the most qualified woman I can possibly find, one who meets the high standards I will demand for all court vacancies. 

Not only that, but thanks to some great research and documentation, we now know Reagan did it for exactly the same reason Biden did: to secure votes from a specific demographic in order to garner his party's nomination. 

Now, to the attention-grabbing part. George asked Collins about president Trump's hint that he'd pardon January 6th insurrectionists if he gets elected in '24, and whether she could  "imagine any circumstances where (she) could support his election." Collins said Trump shouldn't have said that; she thinks we "should let the judicial process proceed." And when George pushed her on not ruling out supporting Trump, here's what she said.

Well, certainly it's not likely given the many other qualified candidates that we have that have expressed interest in running. So, it's very unlikely.

It's also very unlikely she'll commit to anything, if she can't even commit to this. 

The panel this week included political animals Donna Brazile, Donna Shalala, and Chris Christie, and Reihan Salam, president of the conservative Manhattan Institute.

Here's Brazile on SCOTUS, after noting that 108 of the 115 Supremes have been white males, some of whom "were extraordinary..."

But the fact is, 55 years after Thurgood Marshall was put on the court, 31 years after Clarence Thomas, 13 years after Sonia Sotomayor, this is a moment when the country can finally say equal justice under the law applies to everybody. It's an extraordinary move by the president. I welcome this appointment. And I'm going to fight with everything I have, to make sure that this extraordinary woman gets confirmed.

Here's Christie after noting that "elections have consequences."

...it wouldn't have been the way I would have approached it, by pre-announcing something like that, but Joe Biden won the election. He gets to make the choice. And every one of the 100 senators has a right then to scrutinize this person's background, experience, and decide whether or not they deserve lifetime tenure.

And Shalala, on both the prospect of a Black woman joining the Court and on polling showing most American just want the most qualified person. (I don't believe that for a NY minute, I've gotta tell you, but I digress). 

Well, it brings someone with a different experience, a black woman's experience. It makes the court look like America. It makes it look fairer. And I'm not surprised the majority of Americans think he ought to just pick the -- the qualified candidate. That's, in fact, an advancement, that we ought to pick the qualified candidate. But a black woman on the court, it will make a difference.

And, here's Salam, after noting he thought Biden's promise "was a mistake," because it limited his options 

... I think that one thing to keep in mind is that the Democratic coalition is awfully diverse along many different dimensions. Donna Shalala mentioned that there's such a thing as a black women's experience. When you look at the four leading contenders, as far as news reports go, these are people with dramatically different experiences and actually some subtle differences in ideological sensibilities as well... So I think that recognizing the distinctions among black women and recognizing that there are many other kinds of diversity one could bring to the bench is a good and valuable thing. And Democrats ought to keep it in mind.

Perhaps the most remarkable comment of this discussion was about the politics of the whole thing, and it came not from a panelist, but from the host. Christie set it up.

...But on the politics of this, George, for the midterms, when you have inflation where it is, when you have crime where it is, the things that affect people's everyday lives, they don't see the Supreme Court affecting their everyday lives in the same way that inflation, crime, and foreign policy crises do. So, I think it may have some small effect, but nowhere near a determinative one.

Here's the comment from Stephanopoulos.

It has rarely been a big - a big voting issue in either presidential or midterm elections...

Um, really, George? I'm Susan Collins-level very concerned with your failed memory of the 2016 and 2020 elections. The Supreme Court was one of the keys to Trump's victory in the former, and he also used it in the latter. Sheesh - everyone knows that.

I was going to end the post there, but instead I'll close with thoughts about Rs not wanting to stick a fork in a Trump 2024 run. Here's Salam's take on it.

Well, I think that it makes sense for people to want to preserve freedom of action. You do not know how the environment might change. There are a lot of Republicans, a lot of conservatives who said at the very beginning of the 2015-2016 campaign cycle that they wouldn't support Donald Trump. But then things changed. And we could condemn them. We could praise them for that. But the reality is that, you know, politics, the environment moves very, very quickly.

And, here's Brazile.

I can't imagine President Trump saying he will pardon the very same people who injured 140 policemen. I can't imagine President Trump saying at a rally that he would pardon people who said, kill Mike Pence, assassinate Nancy Pelosi. There's -- there's -- there's no place in our politics for that type of rhetoric and that type of action and leadership. So I hope the Republicans reject Donald Trump so that they can move past this movement and we can try to figure out how to bring the country together. 

From where I sit, 'bringing the country together' remains a Herculean, or even Sisyphean task, but one can always hope. I encourage you to join me in not holding your breath on this one.

See you around campus.