Sunday School 1/14/18

Today, I listened in on the conversation on NBC's Meet The Press, where Kentucky's Senator Rand Paul was one of Chuck Todd's guests; from the other side of the aisle, Colorado's Senator Michael Bennett joined. Immigration and racism and salty language were on tap for the conversations - no surprise there. Similar conversations were held on the other shows as well.

Rand Paul was up first, and he told a story of when he went to Haiti and Central America to perform eye surgeries, using that to frame Trump's most recent incredible comments in a different context for us.

You know, I don't think the comments were constructive at all. But I also think that to be fair, we shouldn't draw conclusions that he didn't intend. I know personally about his feelings towards Haiti and towards Central America... I did about 200 cataract surgeries with a group of surgeons in Haiti and the same in Central America. And when we asked Donald J. Trump as a private citizen to support those trips, he was a large financial backer of both medical mission trips. So I think it's a unfair to sort of draw conclusions from a remark that I think wasn't constructive, is the least we can say. 

And I think it's unfair then to sort of all the sudden paint him, "Oh well, he's a racist," when I know for a fact that he cares very deeply about the people in Haiti because he helped finance a trip where we were able to get vision back for 200 people in Haiti. 

Um -- "sort of all the sudden" talk about Trump being a racist? Where has Rand Paul been hiding? There have been more than ample opportunities, some of which were mentioned on the show.

For some reason, the comments that get skipped are the ones about Judge Gonzalo Curiel, the American judge with the funny sounding name and who, according to Trump

happens to be, we believe, Mexican... I have a Mexican judge. He is of Mexican heritage and should have recused himself...

So, no, Senator Paul -- there's NOTHING sudden about calling Trump a racist.

And, if you change the word 'shithole' to 'economically-deprived' and actually used the term in a nuanced sentence such as the two you suggest, we would be having a completely different conversation than the one Trump decided to have.

Let's take the whole scenario and put different words in there and let's say, "We'd rather have people from economically-prosperous countries than economically-deprived countries." Or, "We realize there are more problems in economically-deprived countries, therefore there's a bigger impetus for them to want to come." Then it wouldn't have been so controversial. 

We do need a "valid, legitimate debate over immigration" and we need it to be bipartisan and we need it to address a number of issues, not the least of which is the DACA issue, and also not the least of it is the crush of illegal immigration.

And you can't have an immigration compromise if everybody's out there calling the president a racist. They're actually destroying the setting. And he's a little bit of it, but both sides now are destroying the setting in which anything meaningful can happen on immigration.

Sounds sort of like the president talking about Charlottesville, doesn't it? "Good people on both sides"? I also think I'd say that the president is more than "a little bit of it."

Senator Bennett, when Todd asked him about whether concluding that Trump is a racist was fair, did his best to provide context as well.

I was raised not to call people racist on the theory that it was hard for them to be rehabilitated once you said that. But there's no question what he said was racist. There's no question  what he said was un-American and completely unmoored from the facts.

He seems to have this impression that immigrants to the United States, like my mom and her parents who were Polish Jews who came here after the Holocaust, somehow, you know, come to the United States and are just lazy and, and the truth is exactly the opposite. You spend any time in neighborhoods across Colorado, what you find is immigrants here striving to make this country better and provide for their families and for the next generation. So I think he has no idea what he's talking about.

And - and on the question of what's in his heart, do you have any idea - thought, Chuck, that he would've called into question Barack Obama's birth certificate if Barack Obama were white?

That's a pretty basic question that no one -- Trump nor any of his minions, have answered. And, as far as I'm concerned, don't need to actually speak to - we know the answer is no.

See you around campus.

The Update Desk: Casino Gambling

Last November, I shared the news ( in this Meanwhile Back in Albany post) that New York's gamble on allowing private, non-Native American casino gambling was not doing as well as expected.

The majority of voting New Yorkers who remembered to turn over their ballots back in 2013 decided we would amend our constitution back in 2013 to allow for up to seven new casinos "for the legislated purposes of promoting job growth, increasing aid to schools, and permitting local governments to lower property taxes through revenues generated."

As I noted in that post in November, the first three casinos - del Lago Resort and Casino (Waterloo) Tioga Downs in the Southern tier (which has its own crazy story) and Rivers Resort and Casino (Schenectady) are all under performing, by some $200 million or so, according to projections.

Competition is increasing - the fourth of the 'up to seven' casinos will open in the Catskills later this spring. The new place, Resorts World Catskills, will have a 100,000 square foot casino, 2150 slot machines, and 134 table games, along with a hotel, spa, golf course, and multiple dining options.

Also opening soon is Point Place, the latest offering from the Oneida Nation, which owns Turning Stone Resort Casino in Verona (east of Syracuse) and another mini-casino in Chittenango. Point Place, in Bridgeport, is supposed to cater to folks in Onondaga County, where the Legislature doesn't want to be in the gambling business and repeatedly turns down even putting up an OTB parlor, as well as from the communities around Oneida Lake and points north.

As noted in this recent article on Casino.org,

When Point Place Casino near Syracuse opens on March 1, the boutique $40M, 65,000 square foot casino will feature 500 slot machines and 20 table games. And while that might be great news for area gamblers, it's not quite as welcomed by the competition.

New York gambling venues have been sprouting up across the state since legislators opted to legalize four commercial casinos in 2013. The result has been a increasingly crowded upstate market, with private and Native American gaming operators fighting for the same customer base. 

NY legislators and Governor Cuomo don't seem to be too worried. For example, here's a fabulously irresponsible comment from Senator John Bonacic, the Mount Hope Republican who happens to be chair of the Racing, Gaming and Wagering Committee in the state senate, who noted in effect that developers always lie to get approval for their projects.

It was a very competitive process for four casino licenses, and of course their consultants were going to put rosy projections in order to get the Gaming Commission to hopefully give them a license. 

Gee, thanks for the oversight, Senator -- you do know that means oversee, not overlook, right?

For his part, our ever optimistic Sonofa Gov noted about the new casinos

They've all been wildly successful in creating jobs and building beautiful complexes.

Which, as we know, counts for everything with him. The state is littered with beautiful buildings created as part of these economic development, money-for-schools or tax revenue generators (but that's a whole nother post.)

So as we look to March, and hundreds of thousands of square feet of new gaming space, we have this dreary outlook on Wilmorite's del Lago from Moody's, which landed on January 10th.

Moody's Investor Services downgraded Lago Resort and Casino, LLC's Corporate Family Rating today to Caa2 from B3 even while the company's Probability of Default Rating was lowered to Caa2-PD from B3-PD. At the same time, Lago's 1st lien revolver and term loan were downgraded to Caa1 from B2 and its 2nd lien term loan was downgraded to Caa3 from Caa2. The rating outlook is negative. 

In English, what does that mean (emphasis added)?

Key credit challenges include Lago's slower than expected ramp up, single asset profile, and the highly competitive nature of the market which it operates that may impede the company's ability to support its capital structure. There are five gambling facilities, including four racinos and one Native American full scale casino within 100 miles of del Lago's location...

The negative rating outlook considers Moody's expectation that, despite the likelihood that Lago will cover its cash interest obligations and remain in compliance with its financial covenants during the next 12 months, albeit marginally, without a substantial improvement in the rate and degree of ramp-up or an additional equity investment by the owners, Lago will not be able to achieve a level of performance that can support its existing debt capital structure. 

 Lago's rating could be lowered if it appears there will be debt restructuring that involves impairment to existing lenders..

Now, it would be unfair if I failed to mention spin-off economic benefits stemming from del Lago and the other new casinos. For example, the State of New York might be making some extra money.

Data obtained from the State Thruway Authority shows Exit 41 (del Lago is just across the Thruway from the toll booths) had a monthly average of 266,306 vehicles the year before del Lago opened, the casino says. Since the casino opened, average monthly traffic at Exit 41 has increased to 381,477 vehicles...

Another real success story is the Magee Diner, just down the road from del Lago. It's one of several local businesses where gamblers can use their rewards points. The diner's owner, Gary Schlegel, has seen sales increase 15% since the casino opened.

We see more and more new faces in our restaurant every day, and 80 percent of the time my customers tell me they are on the way to or from del Lago.

Schlegel plans on adding outdoor dining and said he's going to see about getting a liquor license, too. This is great news, but as with any other downstream economic effect, this will last only as long as del Lago lasts. Like those shiny under-leased or empty new buildings I mentioned above, hopes and dreams of small business owners are also scattered across the landscape.

I don't want the casinos to fail -- we're already over-invested in them. And I certainly don't want the small business owners who are seeing a bump in business go back to where they were, or worse - fail completely - should the casino 'trickle-down' revenue streams dry up. 

What I do want, though, is responsible stewardship and leadership from our elected officials. That, my friends, shouldn't have to depend on a roll of the dice or the luck of the draw. 

Poll Watch: It's Not the Economy, Stupid

If it hadn't have been for that Sarah Sanders comment on Twitter, I would likely have missed the Quinnipiac poll for a couple of days. Here's the tweet that caught my eye:

Sounds pretty good for the Trump administration, right? 66% of voters having a positive opinion of anything that's related to the president would be worth tweeting, I agree. But the problem is, this seems to be a cherry-picked outcome from the poll that is otherwise mostly unfavorable in a variety of ways about Sanders' boss. Let's take a look at the headline of the press release for the poll.

TRUMP IS INTELLIGENT, BUT NOT FIT OR LEVEL-HEADED, U.S. VOTERS TELL QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY NATIONAL POLL; FIRST YEAR WAS 'DISASTER,' 'CHAOTIC,' SUCCESSFUL'

Wow - genius, maybe - but it sure doesn't sound like stable genius, does it?

Before we dive in, let's do the fine print: the survey was taken the 5th - 9th, with 1,106 voters surveyed via land lines and cell phone. The margin of error is +/- 3.6 percentage points. Good?

Some highlights:

• Trump's approval rating is only 36%, down a point from the last poll; across all demographics except Republicans - political affiliation, age, gender, race - more disapprove than approve.
• The same is true with the level of disapproval; 'strongly disapprove' leads in every demographic except Republicans, where strongly approve, naturally, is the winner.
• Again across all demographics except the Republicans, people say Trump did about as was expected in his first year. And, with the exception of white men, "worse than expected" had a higher percentage than "better than expected." Republicans think he did better than and white men think he did better than expected.
• And, when it comes to optimism or the lack thereof for the next few years of  Trump presidency, Republicans (87%), whites without college degrees (58%) and white men (51%) were the only optimistic groups. Folks 65 and older, and whites each were 49% optimistic and 49% pessimistic. All other groups? Pessimistic.

While Sanders grabbed hold of the positive vote for the economy, there's not a lot in the poll that credits Trump for what's going on.

• Most voters (except Republicans), think Trump's policies aren't making a difference in their personal finances; this is consistent regardless of race, age, income level, and class (working, middle, upper middle+).
• Results are fairly mixed on whether Trump's policies are helping the economy. In total, 37% say helping, 29% say hurting, and 30% say no difference. Women (34%) 18-34 year olds (35%), blacks (44%) and Hispanics (43%) and folks with household income of $30K -$50K (35%) say his policies are hurting the economy.
• Most demographic populations credit President Obama not president Trump for the economy; Republicans (70%), those 65 and older (47%), and whites without college degrees (46%) credit Trump. 

Moving on to the questions touching on what people think about Trump.

• Only Republicans think Trump shares their values (76% yes, 22% no). The only demographic that's even close? You guessed it - whites without college degrees (46% yes, 51% no). Overall, 65% say no.
• Everyone, other than Democrats, (32%)  think Trump is a strong person; 59%  of all respondents say he is. On the flip side, 69% of votes say he's not level headed, with only the Republicans (a remarkable 65%) say he is.
• More folks say he's intelligent than not (53% - 44%). Non college educated whites (67%),  men generally (56%) and white men specifically (61%) agree by the largest percentage.
• Most think he doesn't care about average Americans (59% no, 38% yes), with Dems and blacks disagreeing the most (93% and 88%, respectively); that he doesn't have good leadership skills (59% yes, 39% no); and that he's not honest (63% no, 34% yes).

What grade did he earn for his first year?

• A - 16%
• B - 16%
• C - 11%
• D - 17%
• F - 39%

Across all demographics, he earned an F more frequently than any other grade, other than GOP voters, 91% of whom gave him a C or better. I want what they're smoking.

And, on "what one word would you use to describe the president's first year in office?" - a question where people could say whatever they wanted, over 40 terms were mentioned at least five times.

• Positive terms and the number of times mentioned included: successful (42); great (27); good (26); awesome (21), excellent (20), and outstanding (15). 
• Neutral terms? Interesting (23 mentions), different (10) and surprising (10). 
• Negative words included disaster (69), chaotic (62), horrible (28), embarrassing (24), terrible (24), and disappointing (19).

Finally, speaking of embarrassing, by a difference of 40 percentage points (66% to 26%), voters think Trump has damaged our reputation around the world, rather than helped repair it. Only -- yes, Republicans - think that he's helping (64%) more than he's hurting (25%).

So -- while Trump, House Republicans in particular but Senate Republicans, too seem to think that the stock market doing well is what "America" means, the rest of the population thinks there's more to it than that. 

Yay, us!

Wondering on Wednesday (v117)

Oh wow -- Wednesday again, already?

Tonight I'm wondering about words, lots of words, different words...

I'm wondering, for example,  if anyone I know has gotten a copy of  Fire and Fury, the Michael Wolff book yet. I'm hoping someone has, so I can get a first-hand report from a trusted source. How full of errors is it, really? Can any of it be relied upon as true? 

What else did Sloppy Steve say, other than the one quote we've heard a couple hundred times so far, about Little Donny Trump Manafort having a traitorous meeting in Trump Tower? And I wonder, was what he said worth what he lost?

Speaking of books, my husband got the Alec-Baldwin-as-Donald-Trump book, You Can't Spell America Without Me, which I might read before he does. I mean, how bad can this one be, when it gives us stuff like this?

I have the best words, beautiful words, as everybody has been talking about and talking about for a long time. Also? The best sentences and, what do you call them, paragraphs? My previous books were great and sold extremely, unbelievably well - even he ones by dishonest, disgusting so-called journalists. But those writers don't understand Trump, because quite frankly they were major losers.

Baldwin Trump might have beautiful words, but I think the ones that might be more worth reading that his, and certainly than Wolff's, are the ones that Glenn Simpson, the Fusion GPS guy, gave in his testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The transcript was leaked by Senator Dianne Feinstein, who said in a statement

After speaking with majority and minority committee staff for 10 hours, Glenn Simpson requested the transcript of his interview be released publicly. The American people deserve the opportunity to see what he said and judge for themselves. The innuendo and misinformation circulating about the transcript are part of a deeply troubling effort to undermine the investigation into potential collusion and obstruction of justice. The only way to set the record straight is to make the transcript public. 

Fusion GPS was the group that hired former British Intelligence Officer Christopher Steele, who assembled the Trump Dossier, which is at the heart of at least some aspect of some investigation of what Russia may or may not have done to interfere with the election.

Steele was referred for criminal investigation to the Justice Department by two Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee, who are now in a snit that the transcript was leaked. Where the hell,  I wonder, is all of this leading? And who, I wonder, is going to end up winning?

Winning is always a great segue to Trump, isn't it? Today, the president threatened (again) to do something about people who say and publish things that are not true.

We are going to take a strong look at our country's libel laws, so that when somebody says something that is false and defamatory about someone, that person will have meaningful recourse in our courts.

Our current libel laws are a sham and a disgrace and do not represent American values or American fairness.

 We want fairness. Can't say things that are false, knowingly false, and be able to smile as money pours into your bank account. We are going to take a very, very strong look at that, and I think what the American people want to see is fairness.

I have to wonder, if the American people wanted 'fairness' would they have elected Trump? And similarly, if American values are misrepresented by false and defamatory statements, would the American people have elected Trump?

Finally, to end on a happy note, I wonder if the people at Trader Joe's knew all along that so many of their product names could be sung to the tune of Eleanor Rigby?  Here are a few examples that  a keen-eyed (keen-eared?) Twitter user, @DanSpenser noticed last fall.

• Harvest whole wheat bread
• Mini beef tacos
• Super burrito
• Pita bite crackers
• Three seed beet crackers

There are more - Spenser has added to the collection this week -- and, like everyone else who's read the tweets, I can't stop singing.

And, I can't stop wondering, who is the face that she keeps in a jar by the door for?

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.

OrangeVerse XXVII: Mar-a-Lago Musings (pt 3)

When we last left the president musing away with NY Times reporter Michael Schmidt, he had was just getting warmed up talking about Obamacare. You can read part 1 and part 2 if you want to get up to speed before diving in to this last part. Let's pick the verse up again.

Good News!

Now here's the good news.

We've created associations,

millions of people are 

joining associations.

Millions.

That were formerly

in Obamacare or 

didn't have insurance.

That's gonna be a big bill, 

you watch. 

It could be as

high as

50 percent

of the people.

Then they talked about him working with Democrats in Congress.

Sailing the Bipartisanship

But the Democrats

should come to a

bipartisan bill.

And we can fix it.

We can fix it...

We can make a 

great health care plan

through bipartisanship. 

We can do a

great infrastructure plan

through bipartisanship.

And we can do on

immigration, and

DACA in particular,

we can do something

that's terrific

through bipartisanship.

Schmidt wondered if Trump was moving towards the center, something he hadn't done before. And immigration - there's always room for immigration.

Centered, Schmentered

No. I'm not being centered. 

I'm just being practical.

No. I don't think I'm changing.

Look, I wouldn't do a DACA

plan without a wall. 

Because we need it.

We see the drugs

pouring into the country.

Chain, Chain, Chain

I'm always moving

I'm moving in both directions.

We have to get rid

of chainlike immigration

we have to get rid of the chain.

The chain

is the last guy that killed...

the last guy that killed

the eight people.

So badly wounded people.

Twenty two people

came in through

chain migration.

Chain migration

and the lottery system.

They have a lottery

in these countries

They take the worst people

in the country, 

they put them into the lottery

then they have a handful

of bad, worse ones, 

and they put them out.

"Put them out" indeed. So, wanna talk about China and North Korea?

China. China. China

Yeah, China...

China's been...

I like very much

President Xi.

He treated me better

than anybody's ever been treated

in the history of China. 

You know that.

The presentations...

One of the great two days

of anybody's life and memory 

having to do with China.

China's hurting us very badly

on trade, but I have been soft  on China

because the only thing

more important to me than trade

is war. OK?

Fox News

I'm disappointed. 

You know that they

found oil going into... 

It was very recently. 

In fact, I hate to say

it was reported

this morning,

and it was reported

on Fox News.

Oil is going into North Korea.

Oil is going into North Korea.

So I'm not happy about it.

And speaking of news...

It's Social Media, Stupid

And, by the way, it's not a tweet.

It's social media

and it gets out in the world

and the reason I do well

is that I can be treated

unfairly and very dishonestly

by CNN, and you know, I have

what do I have now, John

158 million

including Facebook

including Twitter,

including Instagram

including every form

I have 158 million people. 

Reporting just this morning

they said 158 million.

So if they do a story

that's false, I can do something

otherwise, Andy, otherwise you 

just sort of walk around saying

what can I do?

What, am I going to 

have a press conference

every time somebody,

every time Michael

writes something wrong?

And finally, we'll end with #winning, which is the only way to go out, right?

Please, Please...

We're going to

win another four years

for a lot of reasons,

most importantly

because our country

is starting to do well

again and we're

being respected

again. But 

another reason that

I'm going to 

win another four years

is because newspapers, television, 

all forms of media will tank

if I'm not there

because without me

their ratings are going

down the tubes.

Without me

the failing New York Times

will indeed be not

the failing New York Times 

but the failed New York Times.

So they basically have to let me win.

And eventually

probably six months

before the election,

they'll be loving me

because they're saying

 Please, please don't lose

Donald Trump.

OK.?

Sunday School, 1/7/18

Ready for this one? I mean, are you really ready for this one?  OK, here goes.

Michael Wolff was a guest on NBC's Meet the Press, with Chuck Todd behind the microphone. Here are few of the author's comments.

On how the whole thing came to be:

You know, I literally kind of knocked on the door and said, "Can I come in?" and they said "Okay." And I came in. I sat on the couch and that's the point of view that I've written this book from... 

On how Wolff's book seems to take the one-sided, anti-Trump approach he accused the media as a whole of taking:

...You know, I went into this, a decent part of the country went into this, his entire staff went into this thinking that maybe this can work. It's different, even peculiar, but who knows what can happen here? And that was exactly my, my frame of reference. I would have been delighted to have written a contrarian account here, Donald Trump this unexpected president, is actually going to succeed. OK, that's not the story. He is not. 

And finally, when will this hit the wall? 2020, or before?

Um, I think -- I don't know when the train is going to finally hit the wall... And the thing that keeps everybody's attention absolutely riveted - this global attention - is that the train keeps going, but the wall is still there. I mean one of the things, I think, about this book and why it's hit such a chord and become this cultural moment is it's given everybody this focused opportunity to say, "Holy crap."

Moving on to Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace had CIA chief (and possible Secretary of State if  Rex Tillerson gets the boot) Mike Pompeo defending the president's fitness.

When we talk about some of the most serious matters facing America and the world, complex issues, the president is engaged, he understands the complexity, he asks really difficult questions of our team at the CIA so that we can provide him the information he needs to make good informed policy decisions. 

And I watched him do that. I watched him take the information that the intelligence community delivers and translate that into policies that are of enormous benefit to America. Statements like the one Mr. Wolff made about how we all think about the president are just ridiculous on their face. They are frankly beneath the conversation this morning, Chris. 

When Wallace pointed out that it's in part a conversation today because Trump can't help himself and responds to what Wolff says, Pompeo did answer the fitness question.

Completely fit. I mean, I paused only because it's just a ludicrous question, right? These are from people who just have not yet accepted the fact that President Trump is the United States President. And I'm sorry for them in that.

Before turning to other more boring stuff, like the protests in Iran, Wallace asked one last question.

By raising questions about the president's fitness, in a sense -- and the president became part of it, making this the big topic this week - has this book weakened our country? Weakened our standing around the world?

Pompeo's answer was swift, and sure.

No. 

On ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, the roundtable gang talked about fire and fury of The Fire and Fury, too. The group was batting around that the president made it worse for himself by getting involved, kind of like Richard Nixon's "I am not a crook" comment messed things up for him. One panelist, Roland Martin, offered some insight.

This book changes nothing. I read 250 of the 350 pages last night. Bottom line is simple. Everything that he laid out we already knew, in terms of the kind of people (Trump) chose, the fact that you don't have principles, you don't have morals, you don't have ethics.And what you have here thought is a Republican party where you have different pieces. They get exactly what they want from Donald Trump.

You have white evangelicals. They don't care about  how he has treated women because all they want are federal judges who will get rid of same-sex marriage and abortion. You have folks on the business side, you get the tax reform. You have the folks who are all about the social issues, they get what they -- everybody gets exactly what they want.

This comes down to power. The Republican Party, they want -- all those folks, they want power. Donald Trump provides that. And so as long as he's there, and they can get what they want, it doesn't matter. This book will not change a thing. 

Stephanopoulos moved on from there.

It raised a question of power but...it does also raise these questions of the president's fitness. I mean, a lot of the anecdotes in there, let's say 50% of them are true... it raises serious questions about his mental capacity, his ability to process information, his impulse control.

Sara Fagen, an ABC News contributor, offered that the agreed the 50% figure George mentioned was about right (although Martin thought it might be 90%), and then talked about Trump.

It does. But it doesn't really matter. And it's not going to matter until and unless something very catastrophic happens as a result of a tweet or a provocation to another national - international leader. 

That, I think, is probably a true statement. 

See you around campus. 

Meanwhile Back in Albany (v14)

Nathaniel Brooks/NY Times

New York's Sonofa Governor Andrew Cuomo gave his eighth State of the State (SOTS) address last Wednesday.

He chose a much more traditional route this year - no dog and pony shows across the state, just a "Castro-esque" speech about all of the things he wants to do as president in 2020 governor in 2018. The Castro comment, which I love, came from Colgate University professor Tim Byrnes; it comes near the 20-minute mark in this video.

So what's on the gov's wish list this year? He starts with sexual harassment, and a laundry list of proposals:

• no taxpayer funds should be used to pay for any public official's sexual harassment or misconduct;
• no state or local government enter into a secret nondisclosure agreement; 
• companies doing business with the state disclose the number of sexual harassment; adjudications they have, and the number of nondisclosure agreements they've executed;
• state pension funds only be invested in companies the Comptroller determines have adequate female and minority representation in management or on the board of directors.

And, he asked for enactment of the contraceptive care act and state legislature approval of Roe v. Wade. And a new independent, government-wide whistleblower process. And a strict, uniform code of sexual harassment policies that would be binding on all employees, all branches and agencies, all authorities, and all local governments.

Then came criminal justice reform, starting with the bail process. We need to be color-blind and wealth-blind, he said, and so unless the person poses a significant flight risk or threat to public safety, bail is out of the picture and everyone is released on their own recognizance. And a full work week for trial parts of our courts, judge performance used as a consideration for advancement, more timely filling of judicial vacancies, and speedier trials.  Legally binding corrective action plans for out-of-compliance jails is also on the table.

Then, after some talk about youth unemployment and non-specific requirements that local governments meet the same MWBE goals as the state does, Cuomo tackled homelessness.

What does it say about us as a society? That we now pass men and women lying on the streets with the same ease that we pass light poles and mailboxes. It has become part of our new normal, but it is abnormal and it is wrong...

New York state will ensure that every local government is effectively reaching out to homeless people, or they will not receive state funding. Period. I'm also directing the MTA and Port Authority, Centro, CDTA, the RGRTA, the NFTA and all our cities to do the same.  

And, for those who would say that they're unable to help the mentally ill homeless because the law doesn't let them, Cuomo vowed to change the law.

And speaking of changing the law, Cuomo dropped a little ethics reform into the mix here, vowing to ban all outside income for legislators. This may be a non-starter, since his commission to give legislators a pay raise (on the theory that they're full time, not part time) failed in 2016. You can read about that process here, here, here, and here.

Next up? The environment. Finally tackling the threats to our water, including toxic algae and the Grumman Plume. And,

• ending any investment in  fossil fuel-related activities in the state pension fund;
• two new RFPs for offshore wind, enough to power 400,000 households;
• suing the federal government if they release GE from any further obligation to clean up the Hudson River.

Opioids? He hit on that too, promising a "comprehensive solution: more prevention, more education, more enforcement, more treatment"  -- and more lawsuits.

But we also want to advance a new approach this year, the ultimate 'follow the supply chain' strategy. Big corporations may own Washington, but they don't own New York...

The opioid crisis was manufactured, literally and figuratively. Unscrupulous distributors developed a $400B industry selling opioids, and they were conveniently blind to the consequences of their actions. They pumped these pills into society. And they created addictions. Like the tobacco industry, they killed thousands, and they did it without warning.  We will make them pay for their illegal and reprehensible conduct. We will sue them, and we will stop the spread of opioids because too many innocent lives have been lost and the time for action is now before we lose another single life.

I was surprised not to see another call out on pension investments here. Big Pharma companies seem like an easy target, I would think, for a governor who seems particularly litigious this year.

Maybe dropping everything tied to 'fossil fuel-related activities' (which seems to mean no more oil and gas companies, no more chemical companies that are involved in any kind of research or development on petroleum products, or any companies having anything to do with fracking, or staffing and supporting oil rigs, or any of the oil and gas distribution companies and possibly any of the utilities, for starters), coupled with dropping companies that don't have an 'adequate' number of women in leadership roles in the company or the boardroom, is enough pain to suffer on behalf of all the over one million members, retirees and beneficiaries in the nation's third largest pension fund?

I'm going to stop here -- going back to Professor Byrnes' comment on Castro-esque, this has gotten us not quite to the bottom of page eight of the governor's nineteen-page SOTS address. We'll pick up in another post this week.

Grains of Salt (v27): Rise Above

Grains of Salt

Today, inside the Landmark Theater instead of on the steps of City Hall, Syracuse's new mayor had his public inauguration.

Independent Ben Walsh's inauguration marks a change for the city of Syracuse: we have a non-major party mayor for the first time in a century or so. Walsh, the son of a Republican congressman, grandson of a Republican mayor, got elected with a lot of Democratic support.

He also had the support of many local developers, with whom he worked as deputy commissioner of neighborhood and business development and executive director of the Syracuse Industrial Development Agency in the administration of Stephanie Miner, our term-limited former mayor.

Walsh ran as a collaborator, someone who can and will work with his local, state and federal counterparts to advance the interests of city and her residents. We've seen that before, when Miner first got elected and immediately began working with County Executive Joanie Mahoney. That relationship soured, irrevocably, but that did not sour the voters on the prospects of someone new who was willing to do the same thing. 

In his inaugural comments, Walsh highlighted his optimism, because "Syracuse is a strong city that stands on a solid foundation... a diverse community that only weeks ago voted to set its differences aside and work together to create an even better future...(and) because we have strong support for our city across the region and the state."

After challenging everyone to participate in our city and our government, he shared some information about his transition team, which focused on four areas: poverty and economic opportunity, education, safety and neighborhoods, and city finances.

Lifting people out of poverty will be the single biggest challenge we confront together, and it will be central to our agenda over these next four years.  A segregated city that concentrates wealth in some places and poverty in others is not a modern, progressive city. We must rise together...

 Education and the condition of our schools is another critical issue facing our community. Together we will push our graduation rate from just over 60 percent today to 70 percent, then 80 percent and beyond until we can be counted among the best urban school districts in America... 

We must also improve our neighborhoods and make our streets safer for all of our citizens...(my Quality of Life Commission) will be...focused on beautification of our streets, gateways and business districts; addressing nuisance crimes that destabilize our neighborhoods; and enforcement of ordinances using data and metrics to prioritize neighborhood services.

And he specifically talked about policing, which was a hot issue during the campaign.

...we will put more officers on the street. But we must go beyond policing. We need to build relationships between our officers and our neighbors and we need a police force that reflects the rich diversity of our community. 

Walsh admitted during the campaign that, if needed, he would consider a tax increase. He didn't mention that today, but he did talk about a few things we can anticipate.

...I will hold a Fiscal Summit in partnership with the Maxwell School at Syracuse University. We will convene our city's anchor institutions, business leaders, the banking community, as well as county, state and national leaders - and we will tackle our challenges head on..

My administration will partner with business owners and developers...encourage investment and new jobs in the city... be intentional and work together to ensure success is enjoyed in neighborhoods throughout our city.

He closed his remarks on the same theme with which he began - optimism.

The challenges we face are not different than those faced by other cities, big and small, in America... we will follow an inclusive and engaged approach to government. We will think and act independently and in non-partisan ways. We will operate a city government that is humble and aware of its responsibility to serve. And every day, we will work to earn and maintain your trust. 

There is no problem too big to solve as long as we Rise Above. No reason to stop us from fulfilling the promise that Syracuse's best days are still ahead of us.  

Rise above is exactly what our city needs to do. I'm excited by the prospect of this new administration, and hope that Walsh and his team can get us back on track. We'll have a lot to talk about, I'm sure, as his administration gets its legs and starts to really dig in.

This Just In...

From the Breaking News desk at veritable pastiche:

Congressional Republicans have asked the Department of Justice to investigate former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.

Other investigations recently requested, getting geared up, or already underway may include some of the following.

• The Clinton Foundation and 'pay to play' when losing presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State
• The Clinton emails, the swiffer used to wipe the email server, and the server at the State Department cafeteria
• The Whitewater Land Deal
• What exactly was or is in William Jefferson Clinton's cigar humidor
• Exhumation of the 50 some odd people alleged to have been killed by the Clintons or their associates
• Criminal and forensic reviews of all investigations into those 50 some odd deaths that did not lead into an indictment of anyone named Clinton
• All of the Senators, living or dead, who did not offer a 'guilty' vote on either of the two articles of impeachment against Clinton in 1999. Exhumation may be required here as well
• Hillary Clinton's sexual preferences, specifically related to the pizzagate child lesbian sex ring, as well as to any underlying attraction she had, or has, for her husband, which has never been sufficiently explored or explained
• Those striped pants
• George Stephanopoulos and his exorbitant salary at ABC, which is way too high not because he's a lousy journalist but because he's a friend of the Clintons and since she lost, he's not worth the money any more 
• Huma Abedin, for specific stuff or just on principle - I mean, she was married to Anthony Weiner
• Barack Obama's birth certificate
• Allegations that Michelle Obama is a man
• Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass and presidential intimacy

Or, maybe not. Yet.  

Oh Please! Oh Please!

Oh please, let there be a Trump National Golf Course within sight of one of the lease areas the Interior Department wants to open up for drilling, oh please!

Today, we learned from Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke that

Responsibly developing our energy resources on the Outer Continental Shelf in a safe and well-regulated way is important to our economy and energy security, and it provides billions of dollars to fund the conservation of our coastlines, public lands, and parks. 

Today's announcement lays out the options that are on the table and starts a lengthy and robust public comment period. Just like with mining, not all areas are appropriate for offshore drilling, and we will take that into consideration in the coming weeks. 

We all know how much a fan of energy production this president is -- he literally drips energy, 'all of the above' energy, without playing favorites or picking winners and losers, remember? Except when it comes to his own properties, well, all bets are off.

In this post from last April, I noted that when Trump found out there might be wind turbines off the coast of his Aberdeenshire golf course, he sent 16 letters to government officials, noting how damaging it would be for the country of Scotland.

Don't destroy your coastline and your countryside with these monstrous turbines. Your economy will become a third world wasteland that global investors will avoid. 

And, there was this -

Its adverse visual impact on my development and the beautiful Aberdeen coastline will be disastrous and environmentally irresponsible.  

Now, I don't know about you, but if the president got that bent out of shape about a dozen wind turbines in Scotland, can you imagine how he'd feel about oil rigs within sight of one of his American resorts? It doesn't even have to be all that close, just close enough to get a glimpse of off in the horizon...you know, the deep water horizon.

Or, even better, maybe we could put one off the coast of his pride and joy, Mar-a-Lago?

Wouldn't that be too, too perfectly ironic?

Drillbabydrill! Unleash our energy independence, right in front of the president's private club!

On another note, oh please, oh please let there be tape recordings of the interviews that went into Fire and Fury, the explosive new book about the Trump White House!

I don't really care that the GOP is experiencing a collective um, er, a collective 'happy moment' about the downfall of Steve Bannon, or whether he's the bigger believer in the Trump agenda than the GOP  leadership is (because of course, he is) and I don't even care that a really rich Republican donor like Rebekah Mercer has to publicly release a statement disavowing Bannon. That's a real first world problem right there, don't you think?

No, what I care about is wanting to know the truth about the Trump administration.

If it's as unhinged as people have been saying all along, as disjointed as the media has been reporting all along, we deserve to know.

If there are tapes, interview notes, and all of the other tricks of the journalism trade to support what's in the book, then we will know who's lying, finally, and we'll know what kind of shape the country might really be in with Trump in the Oval Office.

It doesn't mean that we'd be any better off, immediately - it will only mean that we would know, and wouldn't have to guess any more. And then, if needed, appropriate steps could be taken.  If, on the other hand, there's proof that what Michael Wolff has in his book is NOT true, then we will know that, too.

Oh please, oh please!

Wondering on Wednesday (v116)

Oh MY, what a Wednesday for wondering! Let's get to it!

Why, I wonder, have we (and by 'we' I mean everyone I know and most of the anchors on TV and radio) never heard of a 'bomb cyclone' before?  What a cool term for a really messed up situation, right? Here's how one writer at Popular Science talked about it:

Bomb cyclone: it sounds really cool, it's actually kind of scary, and it's headed your way. On Wednesday and Thursday, the intimidatingly-named winter storm is set to hit the East Coast with icy precipitation from Florida up into New England. But a name as apocalyptic as bomb cyclone begs explanation. How bad will this storm be, exactly? I mean, "bomb" is generally a qualifier you want attached to something like "frostings," not "cyclone."

Hear, hear. Apparently it has to do with low pressure falling a whole lot in a 24 hour period, and cold air, and circular winds or stuff. To be honest, they had me at "frostings." And, by the way, the storm's name is Grayson.

Or, maybe the storm's name is Bannon, I'm not sure. Seems the former special friend to the president, the guy who helped him win, yadda yadda yadda, was really just a nothingburger after all this time. ICYMI, Bannon has turned on the president, it seems. Or maybe he's trying to save him, I don't know.  In a new book coming out next week, Bannon had this to say about that pivotal meeting in June 2016 with some Russians (just one of many of his contributions to the book):

The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor with no lawyers. Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it's all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately.

But we certainly don't need to wonder how the president feels about him now, do we?

Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me, after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party. 

Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn't as easy as I made it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country... 

It goes on in a similar vein, and it seems pretty clear it wasn't written by the president, but rather by his handlers. Who knows, maybe it was written by Anthony Scaramucci, he says he's still close to the president. And who am I to wonder about that?

There one other thing we will be left to wonder about, maybe for ever - or maybe, not at all. For it seems that the White House has shut down its vaunted Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. You remember what the president told us when the group met for the first time, don't you?

No? That's OK - here's an excerpt:

I'm pleased that more than 30 states have already agreed to share the information with the commission and the other states...If any state does not want to share this information, one has to wonder what they're worried about. And I asked the Vice President, I asked the commission: What are they worried about? There's something There always is.

This issue is very important to me because, throughout the campaign and even after it, people would come up to me and express their concerns about voter inconsistencies and irregularities, which they saw.. In some cases, having to do with very large numbers of people in certain states.... if we want to Make America Great Again, we have to protect the integrity of the vote and our voters.

Alas, Sarah Sanders told us,

Rather than engage in endless legal battles at taxpayer expense, today president Donald J. Trump signed an executive order to dissolve the Commission, and he has asked the Department of Homeland Security to review its initial findings and determine next courses of action.

We are reminded, in the same article linked above that a Loyola Law School study found 31 known cases of impersonation fraud, out of a billion votes cast, in all American elections from 2000 - 2014, so maybe the Commission was just a way for Trump to prove his own tale of 3,000,000 illegals voted against him?  And, I wonder who those 31 folks were, anyway? And who they voted for?

And finally, tonight marked the premiere of season 11 of The X-Files.  As they say on the show, "the truth is out there."

I wonder...

OrangeVerse XXVI: Mar-a-Lago Musings (pt 2)

When we left the president and Michael S. Schmidt, the NY Times reporter, chatting in the Grill Room as Trump's private club, the president had just declared that West Virginia's Joe Manchin was all talk, no do.

As we pick up, the conversation has moved past West Virginia (the president saved coal, he created jobs...) and on to being the head of the Republican party.

President Strangelove

I was for Strange

and I brought Strange

up 20 points. 

Just so you understand.

When I endorsed him

he was in fifth place.

He went way up.

Almost 20 points.

But he fell

a little short. 

But I knew

what I was doing.

Because I thought that

... If you look at my rhetoric

I said the problem with Roy Moore

is that he will lose the election.

I called it.

But as the head of the party

I have a choice: 

Do I endorse him or not?

I don't know.

Um.

(andbythewaywhenIendorsedhimhewentup)

I feel that I have to

endorse Republicans

as the head of the party.

So I endorsed him.

It became a much closer race

because of my

endorsement.

In case it wasn't clear that Roy Moore is a loser and Trump is a winner, he hammered the point home again.

The Problem is You Got it Wrong,... I Said

The problem with Roy Moore

and I said this

is that he's going to lose

the election. I hope

you can straighten that out. 

Luther Strange was brought way up

after my endorsement

and he almost won. But. ...Almost won...

He lost by 7 points, 7 or 8 points

And he was way behind.

Because of two things, 

you know, what happened...

But I never thought Roy

was going to win the election

but I felt...I never thought Roy

was going to win the election

but I felt... And I said that very clearly. 

And I wish you would cover that

because frankly, I said

If Luther doesn't win Roy

is going to lose the election.

And then, he tackled Ronald Reagan - and won.

Ronald Reagan Couldn't

Ronald Reagan

wanted to take deductibility away

from states.

Ronald Reagan

years ago, and

he couldn't do it.

Because New York

had a very powerful group of people.

Which they don't have today.

Today, they don't have

the same representatives.

You know, in those days

they had Lew Rudin and me...

I fought like hell for that.

They had a lot

of very good guys.

And then, there was more winning, can you stand it?

I'm More Bigly than Reagan

But, just so you understand,

Ronald Reagan

wanted to take 

deductibility away

and he was unable

to do it. 

Ronald Reagan

wanted to have 

ANWR approved

40 years ago

and he was unable

to do it. 

There's more winning, I've got to tell you. And more bigly stuff than you can even predict.

Two Things. Barney

Two things.

No. 1 I have 

unbelievably great relationships

with 97 percent of the

Republican congressmen and senators.

I love them

and they love me.

That's No. 1.

And No. 2

I know more

about the big bills...

than any president that's 

ever been in office.

Whether it's health care

and taxes.

Especially taxes.

And if I didn't

I couldn't have

persuaded a hundred

congressmen to go along

with the bill.

The first bill 

you know,

that was ultimately,

shockingly

rejected. 

I'll tell you something...

Put me on the defense

I was a great student

and all this stuff.

"Oh, he doesn't know the details"

these are sick people.

But Michael,

I know the details

of taxes

better than anybody.

Better than 

the greatest CPA. 

I know the details

of health care

better than most, 

better 

than most.

And if I didn't

I couldn't have

talked all these people

into doing

ultimately

only to be 

rejected.

I've got to stop and catch my breath, I really must. I promise, I won't leave you hanging too long for more.