Sunday School 5/5/24: Noem's VP Interview

Here's the last of the three vice presidential interviews - whew! 

This time, we've got South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, who talked with Margaret Brennan in the Face the Nation classroom. Will we see any questions about the dog? I'm willing to bet the answer is yes. 

Brennan had a copy of Noem's book, No Going Back: The Truth on What's Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward (and can I tell you how much I hate overly long and self-serving book titles?) with her for the interview, and started out by asking if Trump mentioned  "any of the response to"  the book when Noem was at Mar-a-Lago over the weekend.

Oh, he certainly knows about the book, and I appreciate his endorsement of it. You know, this is really a book that talks about how we're not going back. It's – we're not going back to the days before Donald Trump. Donald Trump broke politics. And I think that's a good thing. We're not going back to the days of Mitt Romney or the Bushes, that now there's a new way to do and talk to the American people, and they appreciate it. It's an honest, genuine conversation about what these citizens can do to take back their government and to have more input. So, this book is really a how-to guide for how to make your voice heard and how – for people in this country, what they can do to really make sure that they are getting genuine elected officials that really want to give them more freedom and liberty.

So, was that a yes? A no? A 'buy my book' entreaty?  I can't really tell, can you?

Brennan turned to Noem's crazy statement about meeting a particular world leader. Here's what the book says: 

I remember when I met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. I'm sure he underestimated me, having no clue about my experience staring down little tyrants. I have been a children's pastor after all." 

Brennan asked if she had met Kim. 

Well, you know, as soon as this was brought to my attention, I certainly made some changes and looked at this – this passage. And I have met with many, many world leaders. I have traveled around the world. As soon as it was brought to my attention, we went forward and have made some edits. So, I'm glad that this book is being released in a couple of days, and that those edits will be in place, and that people will – will have the updated version.

So, was that a yes? A no? A 'I had no idea anyone was actually going to read the book' line? I can't tell.

Brennan said, "So, you did not meet with Kim Jong-un? That's what you're saying." Noem's answer was pretty funny.

No, I have met with many, many world leaders, many world leaders. I have traveled around the world, I think I have talked extensively in this book about my time serving in Congress, my time as governor, before governor, some of the travels that I have had. I'm not going to talk about my specific meetings with world leaders, I'm just not going to do that. This anecdote shouldn't have been in the book. And as soon as it was brought to my attention, I made sure that that was adjusted.

So, "as soon as it was brought to my attention that I lied in my book, I said, 'oh crap!' and called the publisher," or something like that?

And so, we're doing all that we can to make sure that those changes are made. And I'm going to continue to focus on what this book is, and the blueprint that it lays out for the American citizen on all of the things in the background and stories of my life, but also what I think that needs to be identified in politics and was broken today. I talk about how broken the money game is, how broken it is that – that we've got consultants that are getting rich off of elected officials, and then how fake some elected politicians are. 

Every single person in this country wants someone in elected office that's – that's a human being, that doesn't say they're perfect. I take responsibility for that being in the book. And as soon as it was brought to my attention, I asked for it to be changed. So, I'm glad that the release date is in a couple of days. And we're excited to talk to America about my new book, "No Going Back."

Brennan then asked who Noem might have confused with Kim Jung Un, and wondered if it was the previous, female leader of South Korea.

Well, I think you need to remember, Margaret, and everybody needs to remember that I have worked on ag policy and federal policy for over 30 years. My time in serving and making policies in this country has been extensive and covered decades.

No. No one is required to remember how Noem spent the last three decades, given that most people never heard of her until she hitched her wagon to Trump. 

And when Brennan asked if she ever went to North Korea, Noem said, "yes, I have. I have been there." Brennan was shocked but then said she went to the DMZ (not the same thing, by the way) and said the book includes the info she's "willing to share" about that visit. 

I have traveled the world, and I visited with world leaders. And some of that is referenced in the book. And this anecdote is something that, when it was brought to my attention… … we made some changes. And when the book is released, we'll do all that we can to see that – that that is reflected.

Brennan then noted Kim was mentioned not once but twice, at which point Noem asked "Do you have a question for me, Margaret?"

Yes, I do. South Korea is a treaty ally. North Korea is a nuclear-armed adversary, so that's a… pretty big thing to confuse. I know you read this book before it was published because you released video of your recording of the audiobook. You didn't catch these errors when you were recording it?

And then, Noem did what they all do: point the finger at the other guy.

Well, Margaret, as soon as it was brought to my attention, I took action to make sure that it was reflected. And, listen, this is what is so discouraging about politics and the media today, is that we have the White House that just recently came out and confirmed that President Joe Biden has misspoken, has made mistakes, has even outright lied over close to 150 times just this year.

And you've done nothing to question him on any of that. And you're – you're talking about a book that hasn't been released yet, that's been corrected before it's been released. And you haven't said one thing about Joe Biden saying that he was in prison with Nelson Mandela, that he started the civil rights movement, that he drove an 18-wheeler, that his uncle was eaten by cannibals.

And then it got even more fun.

MB: If I had an interview with Joe Biden, who I have asked for multiple times, I will definitely ask him about his record. But I'm asking you about your book here, which we have. So…

KN: Well, I'm just asking – I'm just asking for why – why am I being treated differently than every other person that you've interviewed? I have looked at your last several weeks of your interviews.

MB: I'm quoting you.

KN: You don't – you don't interrupt other people. You let them talk. Thank you for inviting me to have this conversation about this book. This book is extremely important to the people of this country. It is important, because it's a how-to guide of what they can do to have input into their government, how we need breakers and builders in this world.

OK, that part made me laugh out loud. Brennan doesn't interrupt other people? Good lord, she's the interrupter-in-chief of the Sunday School classrooms! She interrupts everyone! 

KN: And I'm taking responsibility for the change that we've made. And the buck stops with me.

MB: OK, and for the mistake in the book?

KN: And I have told you that, and I'm – no, it's not. What I have said is that I have decided that this anecdote should…

MB: You're not taking responsibility for the mistakes in the book?

KN: I have decided this – I – I am saying that this book is very, very good. And I have met with many world leaders, and that I – there are world leaders that I have met with that are in this book. There are many that I met with that are not in this book.

Now, at this point, if you're Noem, wouldn't you just stop talking about your damn book? Seriously, wouldn't you just stop?

KN: And this is an anecdote that – that I asked to have removed, because I think it's appropriate at this point in time.  

I feel the need to interject here with a definition for Gov. Noem.

Hopefully that might help her going forward. 

KN: But I'm not going to talk to you about those personal meetings that I have had with world leaders. I'm just not going to have that conversation, because I think it's important.

"Help me, Obi Wan Kenobi." I want to be the vice president, but I'm not going to talk about my alleged vast foreign policy experience, "because I think it's important" not to? Is that what she's saying?  

Noting that Benjamin Netanyahu is one of the world leaders the governor' has spoken with, Brennan asked if Noem agrees with Trump that "Bibi Netanyahu has been criticized for what took place on October 7."  Here's the gist of her response: what Hamas did was horrific, America should never stand for anti-Semitism, what's happening at colleges is bad and should be "shut down immediately," and Biden should have acted sooner on that. Brennan interpreted that response to mean Noem doesn't agree with what Trump said.

And then, the interview turned where everyone knew it would: Cricket the dog, and how Noem killed the puppy for being aggressive, too excitable to be a decent hunting dog, and for killing chickens.  The question? "I wonder if you have regrets about sharing this story."

I know, everyone wants to hear Noem defend herself on this mess, but let's be honest: had she not been so proud of what she did, no one would ever know that she did it. And let's be honest about something else, too: animals, including misbehaving dogs, are killed on farms. And I dare say, that fate is likely preferable to leaving a 'bad dog' chained up in the hot sun, pouring rain, and freezing snow, with little or no sustenance.   

In a nutshell, Noem says she included the story about killing the dog because it's indicative of how she has "made very difficult decisions" and "because people need to understand" who she is. And who she is, is a mom with little children and the choice between her kids and the dog, well, the kids win. 

Another reason she talks about it in the book?

...because what I'm tired of in this country is politicians who pretend to be something that they're not, that they aren't willing to have the hard conversations and look at the past and the tough decisions that they've made...what I talk about in the book extensively when people are able to get it on Tuesday is to see the whole story and the truth, not the spin that the media has put on this story. The media has put some or removed – removed most of the facts and – and what – the reason this is in there… 

At this point, Brennan should have stopped talking about the dog, but she didn't. She asked why the dog wasn't taken to a shelter. Noem explained it had been to multiple trainers, she had put lots of time into the dog's training, and nothing had changed.  She took responsibility, she didn't ask anyone else to deal with it. And, then, according to Brennan's interpretation of the book, Noem went out a shot a billy goat that "smelled and would chase kids."  

And I'm asking you this because it seems like you're celebrating the killing of animals. 

Noem turned it into a conversation about extremism and political attacks and she's being treated the same as Donald Trump is treated.

… every day, the constant attacks and coming after me. I – during COVID, I was attacked night after night for months after month for the decisions that I made. In fact, you and many other journalists attacked me every single day on TV for months for the decisions that I made in South Dakota, for my people to protect their freedoms and their liberties.

Does that make her a good candidate to be his VP? I would have asked that, but it wasn't my interview.  

MB: And I thanked you for answering questions on it. But on the – on this point, though... You talk multiple times about it. In fact, at the end of the book, you say the very first thing you would do if you got to the White House that was different from Joe Biden, is you'd make sure Joe Biden's dog was nowhere on the grounds. "Commander, say hello to Cricket." Are you doing this to try to look tough? Do you still think that you have a shot at being a V.P.?

KN: Well, number one, Joe Biden's dog has attacked 24 Secret Service people. So, how many people is enough people to be attacked and dangerously hurt before you make a decision on a dog and what to do with it?

MB: Well, he's not living at the White House anymore.

KN: That's – that's a question that the president should be held accountable to.

MB: You're saying he should be shot?

KN: That what's the president should be accountable to, is, what is – what is the number? And I would say, about Republicans criticizing me, these are the same Republicans have criticized me during COVID. They've criticized me when I have made other decisions in South Dakota to protect my state. And my state today is extremely happy and thriving. We're doing well...

She listed a number of positives for her state, reflecting growth and jobs and no debt, and a AAA credit rating. To which Brennan responded

MB: So, you're not going to retract the book? 

I kid you not - that's what she asked.

KN: I – this book is a powerful book... It's an honest book of a blueprint for America of what citizens can do here to take their country back. And I'm so proud of this book and – and what it will bring to people. I hope that they will buy it. They'll find a lot of truthful stories. And we talk a lot about what we can use as an example from Donald Trump on how he has continued to be a real person, been genuine, and been honest to people, and that what bothers me the most about politicians is when they're fake.

MB: But if you have to retract it or parts of it…

Noem said "I'm not – I'm not retracting anything. I'm not retracting anything."

I'd like to retract this interview, what do you think?

See you around campus.

Sunday School 5/5/24: Scott's VP Interview

I can't believe I'm doing this again - trying to recap a Sen. Tim Scott interview - but here I am. Scott was in the Meet the Press classroom with Kristen Welker.  

Welker started by asking if Scott respects people's right to peacefully protest; the question came in reaction to increased police involvement on campuses. His response, all 279 words of it, started out with

Well, we certainly respect the right to peaceful protest. What we're seeing on college campuses, however, is too often not peaceful protest. 

He went on to talk about the violence that's occurring, and the 2000 arrests that have been made, and continued

What we have to understand is the antisemitism that we're seeing on college campuses today is akin to what we saw in the 1960s. What we should be saying as a nation, the American people, they're saying it loud and clear. They support eliminating antisemitism from college campuses. They're being very clear. There's no space for hate in America.

He then accused President Biden of pandering by not speaking out sooner, and spoke of the 'privilege' that is federal funding for education, a favorite refrain of the Rs. Welker noted that Scott himself has acknowledged the anti-Semitism in his own party, but I guess because it's not happening on campuses as much as it is at 'conservative' gatherings, it's not as urgent. 

Kristen, let me just say this though, Kristen. Once of the things we should make sure we do is continue to focus on the issues that we are seeing faced by those students today... This is the kind of scourge on our nation, the thing that scars the soul of a country as in we don't stand up for the vulnerable. We should make sure we do that today, tomorrow, and every day going forward.

And ignore the stuff 'we' did in the past.  

Her next question was whether or not he talked with Trump over the weekend - they were together at Mar-a-Lago - about being his running mate.

No, ma'am. What we talked about this weekend was how bad the economy is for single parents like the one that raised me. We had a lot of conversations around the room about the importance of eliminating Bidenomics, about the importance of getting inflation back down to 2%. We were just better off under President Trump. Inflation, Kristen, was at 2% and we had the lowest unemployment rates for African Americans, for Hispanics, for Asians, a 70-year low for women. We had the highest funding for historically Black colleges and universities in the history of the country under President Trump. So we were excited to have a conversation. We had no conversations about the VP pick, to be honest with you, to be clear. But we had a lot of conversations about the failures of Joe Biden and the success of Donald Trump.

Again, Welker tried to argue with him, talking economic numbers, and how some were better under Biden than Trump, but are creeping back up, he said (he's right) and then, using her favorite interview tactic, she asked him again (and again) about the VP role, saying "But just to be very clear. It didn't come up at all? Do you think you're on the short list?"

TS:  No – no, ma'am. It did not come up. African American unemployment rate is 6.4% today –

KW: But what about being – what about being VP–

TS: There's no doubt that it would be –

KW: What about being President Trump's VP? Did it come up at all? Do you think you're on the –

TS: Yes –

KW: – short list?

TS: I hope that the president will choose a person who helps the country unite and heal. I certainly expect to have a decision from President Trump in the next 60 days or so. But he did not bring it up. I certainly didn't bring it up. I'm excited that in this nation a poor kid from South Carolina can rise to the level of being a United States senator. It just tells me that all things are possible for kids growing up in poverty today. Listen to this show and know that all things are possible for your future.

Instead of talking about policy stuff, Welker decided to talk about "some of the headlines this week," and I groaned. At least she didn't mention the criminal election interference trial in New York. Instead, it was Trump's failure to commit to accepting the results of the 2024 election if he weren't the winner. 

Her question for Scott, who voted to certify the 2020 results? "Why would you join a ticket with someone who believes the exact opposite on this critical point? 

Well, I think we have to listen to what President Trump said and not what the reporters said that he actually said. Here's one of the things that he's been very clear, and even talking about the situation in Wisconsin, what he said was he expects there to be an honest election. He expects the results will be clear and for him to be successful. I expect him to be successful as well. There's no doubt that when you look at the polls across our country the one thing that is crystal clear, that the American people now having a contrast between four years of Joe Biden versus four years of Donald Trump. They're really excited to get back to the Trump years. And so I expect the election to be fair, and I expect Donald Trump to be our next president.

She pushed back, quoting Trump's own words, and also mentioned Wisconsin, noting that Trump again this week said he won the state, which he lost. And after that, she asked her question again. 

So again, to the point, you voted to certify the election results of 2020. It's the exact opposite of what you said and did after 2020. Why would you want to be on a ticket with someone where there's such a fundamental difference?

Because he's all about today, tomorrow and the future, he blew off the entire concern. Basically, no worries, we don't have to fret about losing and having to make any kind of decision. Why is that not a problem? 

There is clear facts here. President Trump himself said he expects this election to be fair, he expects it to be honest, and he expects to win. That's what the presidential candidate should expect, and I expect the exact same thing. And frankly the American people agree with him. This is an issue that is not an issue, so I'm not going to make it an issue.

And then it became the Sunday School classroom equivalent of a pissing match, and I can't stand either one of them, I really can't.  

KW: Well, senator, will you commit to accepting the election results of 2024, bottom line?

TS: At the end of the day, the 47th president of the United States will be President Donald Trump, and I'm excited to get back to low inflation, low unemployment –

KS: Wait – wait, senator, yes or no? Yes or no? Will you accept the election results of 2024 no matter who wins?

TS: That is my statement.

KS: But is it – just yes or no? Will you accept the election results of 2024?

TS: I look forward to President Trump being the 47th president and Kristen, you can ask them multiple times –

KS: – Senator, just a yes or no answer.

TS: – but at the end of the day – so the American people, the American people will make the decision. And the decision will be –

KW: But I don't hear you committing – 

TS: – for President Trump. That's clear.

KW: I don't hear you coming to the election results. S

TS: – Here's the deal. This is why so many –

KW: Will you commit to accepting the election results?

TS: This is why so many – this is why so many Americans believe that NBC is an extension of the Democrat party. At the end of the day, I said what I said. I know that the American people, their voices will be heard. And I believe that President Trump will be our next president. It's that simple.

KW: But senator, as you know, the hallmark of our democracy is that both candidates agree to a peaceful transfer of power. So I'm asking you as a potential VP nominee, will you accept to commit to the election results in this election cycle, no matter who wins? Just simply yes or no.

TS: I expect President Trump to win the next election and listen I'm not going to answer your hypothetical question when in fact I believe the American people are speaking today on the results of the election and if it continues – if it continues for the next six months, we find ourselves in a great position where we get back to another degree of American prosperity. I'm looking forward to that.

I'm not going to bore you with the part of the interview about abortion, because again, she asked a question, he gave a non-answer, she pushed back, she asked again, he non-answered again, declared his non-answer to be his answer, and so on. 

Scott has walked away from what he has said believes in, and supports whatever Trump believes in. I believe everyone in the universe knows this, and there really is no reason to interview folks like Scott unless it's to get information on what Trump plans on doing if he's elected.

There is no other reason to invite him to a classroom - any classroom, unless maybe there's an open seat in a kindergarten classroom somewhere. And Welker? With her repetitive badgering of guests, and her asking only the obvious questions, she belongs there most of the time, too. 

See you around campus - Noem's up next. 

Sunday School 5/5/24: Burgum's VP Interview

Jake Tapper chatted with Gov. Doug Burgum (R-ND) in the State of the Union classroom. Burgum's one of the folks on the long 'short list' of potential vice presidential candidates for Donald Trump. 

Here's some of the interview, including questions I wish had been asked.

Tapper started by asking if Burgum was "comfortable with" Trump comparing the Biden administration to the Gestapo, referring to a comment Trump made talking to donors. Burgum said Trump talked for a long time, teleprompter-free, on lots of stuff, and it was "largely very upbeat."  More to the point, he said

...I mean, this was a short comment deep into the thing that wasn't really central to what he was talking about. But I understand when -- and I think Americans understand, a majority of Americans feel like the trial that he's in right now is politically motivated. And if it was anybody else, this trial wouldn't even be happening. So I understand that he feels like that he's being unfairly treated. And I think that it's reasonable that someone who's being kept off the campaign trail as the presumptive nominee has got some frustration about that.

Tapper followed up with "So, a public trial with witnesses, a jury, a defense counsel, that's like the Gestapo, the Nazi secret police?"  Oh, that's not what he said, Burgum countered.  Not only that, but

And he wasn't referring to this trial when he made that -- made that comment.

Oh - which trial was he referring to, then? 

But I do think that people understand. I mean, I'm a business guy. This is a business filing case. If it was anybody other than a presidential candidate, this would be a misdemeanor. How it got turned into 34 felonies, when there isn't even a -- the alleged crime, which is -- they haven't even convinced anybody there was a crime. But if it were, it would be a Federal Election Commission crime. And that would be pursued by the federal courts, not by a county DA in New York.

Tapper noted some unspecified polling showing "a plurality of the American people think that President Trump did commit a crime when it comes to this case. And if you add in those who think it was unethical, but not illegal, it's a vast majority." And he asked, "...if Donald Trump becomes a convicted felon because of this case, will that affect your support for him for president?"

Well, if he becomes a convicted felon in this case, that's a -- just a travesty of justice, because, as I just said, when you have got a business filing error that is for something that was -- again, it's not illegal to pay people for nondisclosure agreements.  That happens all the time. I'm sure this network and others have done that. So that's not illegal. And then you have got a -- again, they're trying do this. And the only reason this trial is happening right now, it's the only one that could actually be brought forward. The other four couldn't be brought -- the other three of the four couldn't be brought forward before the election. So,, this one is largely intended to try to achieve a result before the election. And then you can be assured, as Americans would know, that any kind of appeal would be pushed until after the election. So that's why everybody sees this as politically motivated. And, like I said, a filing error is not something that would affect any American people that are trying to put food on the table and gas in the car. It doesn't affect them. And so this is why the outcome of this trial is not going to change a lot of people's minds. It might actually in some ways help President Trump because it reinforces the idea that the Biden administration is willing to use lawfare to try to attack a political opponent.

Um, Governor - the question was, if Donald Trump becomes a convicted felon because of this case, will that affect your support for him for president. Can I get a simple yes or no answer?

There was some pushback by Tapper that Biden has nothing to do with DA Alvin Bragg, and that it's more than a 'business filing error', and the evidence Tapper's seen so far "suggests there at least was some political motivation to this, and they hid it so as to hide that from the public. That's a little bit more than just checking the wrong box on a form. But let's move on..." to the comment Trump made about the Dems basically having a 40% head start because of civil service workers, unions, and "the welfare. And don't underestimate the welfare. They get the welfare to vote."

Tapper asked if the 100,000 folks getting Medicaid in Burgum's state are being paid to vote for Dems.  

No, and I don't think that's the intention that he meant when he said that...

Well, what do you think he did mean when he said that? 

Burgum talked about open borders, and "national security and public safety" and "inflation touches every single American, the wars that are breaking out around the world." And then he talked about student loan debt, which has nothing to do with "the welfare" as anyone describes it.

But then you throw on top of things like the student loan debt, and you start trying to give away hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money, and it's not even -- it's like we're borrowing to give it away. It's not tax and spend. It's borrow, borrow from the Chinese, and give it away. When you see those, those citizens understand those are like preelection payoffs. Those are like, hey, folks, please vote for us because we're -- we're relieving your debt. So, at what point does it cross over, programs like student debt, to just vote-buying? And I think, again, the people that are working hard and are paying off their debts and aren't getting don't loan relief are saying, hey, this is just isn't fair. And, in America, people want things to be fair, not unfair. And I think it's clear that there's vote-buying going on at a scale like we have never seen before.

Governor, do you believe citizens in your state who have met the requirements of various student loan debt-relief programs should continue to be saddled with debt that was supposed to have been discharged years ago?  

Tapper's comeback was actually quite good, I think - take a look.

 Does that offend you more than Donald Trump telling a room full of donors, wealthy people, millionaires, billionaires, that he's going to cut their taxes? Is that -- is that buying votes any different?

Here's how it went after that. 

DB: Well, first of all, I just reject the whole premise of this idea of wealthy donors. I mean, the room of people that were there yesterday are all people that were job creators. These are -- these are Americans that were -- took risks, that...

 JT: So, they're not wealthy?

DB: ... sometimes risk everything they had to start -- to start a business. Well, they're wealthy now because the American system of capitalism worked for them to create jobs, to help them build their communities. These are among the most generous people in the country. They're the ones that are giving back to their -- to philanthropic efforts and building strong communities. They care about their kids and their grandkids. Because they have been successful and because they have worked hard is not somehow that they should be disparaged. This is what we should be celebrating. These people represent the American dream. And part of the way the American dream works is when we have low taxes and low regulation. And Joe Biden wants to -- he's proposing the largest tax increase in the history of America, and proud of it. 

Here's another easy one that Burgum should have been able to answer, but struggled with. Tapper asked about Trump's comments about what happens if he loses, and whether he'd accept the results or if there'd be violence. In a nutshell, Trump's not promising we'll be spared a repeat of January 6th, and of course, there are his comments that he'd 'spare' (pardon) the J6 rioters.  He wondered if Burgum, who has spoken against the J6 mob, was concerned by Trump's rhetoric.

He started talking about the 1960 election when Nixon conceded to Kennedy. And he talked about 2000 when we had the hanging chads. And then he talked about 2016, and suggested that CNN "challenged" those results. 

And when Tapper tried to get him focused on what might happen next January, not about 60-some-odd years ago or 20-odd-years ago or eight years ago, what happened?

Yes, well, I'm -- I'm looking forward to next January, when Vice President Harris certifies the election for Donald Trump. I mean, the American people are the ones that get to decide these elections. But for both parties and for all Americans, we have got to make sure that every county, every precinct is beyond reproach, and that everybody can be confident in our country... It can be done. It's done all over the nation, except, in some cases, we have got -- we could have a handful of counties that this election could turn on again, and we have just got to make sure that, when it's done, both sides feel good about how it was counted.

And what does that have to do with Trump pardoning J6 rioters, not committing to accepting the results of the '24 election, or promising to not provoke violence like he did in 2020? That would be absolutely nothing. 

Simple question for the governor: Do you disagree or agree with Snitty Snitty Bill Barr that "there was no significant fraud that would have changed the results" of the last election?

DB: Well, again, we're talking about - what are you talking about, what happened before the ballots came in or after they came out? 

JT: I'm talking about the results of the 2020 election.

DB: blah, ditty blah, ditty blah blah blah. We're talking about making sure that the 2024 election is secure. And there's no need to keep relitigating 2020. We got to talk about the policies that are going to help people understand. And again, how do we make America safe? How do we get our economy strong again? How do we secure our borders? President Trump is going to is going to do all those things. And this is a unique point in history, because we haven't -- since Grover Cleveland, we haven't had a former president running against a current president. So, Americans have got a better chance than ever to say, was I better off under President Trump than I am under Biden? And the answer for the majority of people is that they were better off under President Trump.

Governor, is there a reason why you won't just answer the question you're asked? Did someone tell you to do that, or are you doing that on your own?

One last chance for him to do that, with this:  "So, just quickly, if you could, if President Trump asks you to serve as his vice president, will you say yes?" For Burgum, that means dropping 300 words without ever

 Well, I think any of that right now is all speculation. I mean, as you opened the show, talking about the veepstakes and the group of people on stage, you couldn't get it -- if you had had any more on there, they'd have been falling off the stage. And prior to that, he said there was 50. So, I think the short list needs to be modified. Maybe there's a list of 50. If I'm on it, who would know? 

And then, for good measure, he threw in another 2oo-some-odd words, none of which was 'yes'. For all I know, he's still talking. 

Gov. Kristi 'The Hunter' Noem's and Sen. Tim Scott's veep interviews are on the way. 

See you around campus.  

Wondering on Wednesday 5/1/24

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

During last month's discussion on foreign aid bills, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R- Burning Down the House) offered an amendment to the Ukraine bill requiring any Republican who voted for the aid package to conscript into the Ukrainian military. No similar requirements for aid to Israel and Taiwan were put forward. I can't help wondering why the bills weren't treated the same. 

Some people pretend Greene is Putin's representative to the House, so we shouldn't be surprised that she'd stick it to Ukraine. Others think we're not responsible for defending Europe, but we are responsible for Israel's defense, no matter the cost. These arguments are symptomatic of the degradation of our policy debates over the past few years, leaving me to wonder what it'll take to get us back to realistic discussions.

Greene also said that, instead of giving aid to Ukraine, we should focus on our 'America First economy.' Hearing that, I had to wonder if she even knew what was in the bill, or if she'd read any articles on how our aid to Ukraine works. She must know that as much as $68B of the $113B that Congress has approved for Ukraine  "is destined to be invested here at home."

U.S. support for Ukraine thus offers a once-in-a-generation opportunity to sustain a demand signal to address long-standing weaknesses in U.S. DIB systems generally and ordnance and missile production specifically.

Yep - we send our stockpiled, outdated stuff to Ukraine, and we replenish our stockpiles with newer American-made stuff. If that's not an America First policy, I wonder what would be. I also wonder if Marge ever has a clue, if she's this clueless on our Ukraine aid.

Sticking with Marge for a minute longer, she's announced she'll move to oust Speaker Mike Johnson next week, even as the Dem leadership announced they'll vote table any such motion. Most House Republicans don't want her to move ahead; the RNC doesn't want her to; and even Donald Trump doesn't want her to, and yet, she's going to do it anyway. Is anyone wondering with me what the heck she's trying to accomplish?

Speaking of accomplishments, we know one thing the House GOP would rather be doing than sitting through Greene's antics: "going on the offense by attacking Democrats for insufficiently condemning pro-Palestinian protests on campuses" around the country. 

We've all seen the antisemitic signs and heard the chants at the protests; we'll continue seeing and hearing them, even if they're not the focus of the protests. I condemn anti-Semitism and the October attack on Israel; at the same time, I would love to see a ceasefire, to see Gaza flooded with humanitarian aid, to see an end to the indiscriminate killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians, and to see a way forward. To me, those are pro-human positions, not pro-Palestine or antisemitic ones. 

But I wonder why we have to see and hear more about the antisemitic actions of a few protesters than we do about the many; members of Jewish Voices for Peace arrested for holding a Passover Seder/protest outside Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's house, for example. Or about Jews and Palestinians standing shoulder-to-shoulder, protesting inhumanity together, or about negotiations over divestment issues, especially successful ones. 

And I can't help wondering why two NY Representatives feel anti-Semitism monitors are needed on college campuses. Republican Mike Lawler, one of the two, said, "If colleges will not step up to protect their students, Congress must act."

I'll tip my hat to whoever named the bill - it's a gem: the College Oversight and Legal Updates Mandating Bias Investigations and Accountability, or the COLUMBIA Act.  The bill would give the Department of Education authority to appoint monitors, paid for by the schools, who would "be required to release quarterly, publicly available reports that show what the school is doing to combat anti-Semitism." 

The legislators cite Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as the basis for their bill; I have to wonder how giving one type of discrimination special status fits in with the intent of our civil rights legislation? If we're going to withhold federal funding from colleges and universities, shouldn't it be done in the name of protecting everyone from discrimination? 

As I was preparing to publish tonight's post, news broke that the House passed the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Sponsored by Rep. Lawler, with over 60 co-sponsors, the bill 

would require the Department of Education to use definitions of antisemitism proposed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) when enforcing anti-discrimination laws.

Other bills dealing with antisemitism are also in the works, according to news reports; we'll see if any of them come to fruition. 

In the meantime, I wonder how people feel about the statements below. Feel free to chime in, if you like.

• "We already have enough laws against discrimination. We need to enforce those laws; we don't need to create new ones."
• "All Lives Matter - why are they demanding we pay attention only to them?"

What's on your wondering minds tonight?

Wondering on Wednesday 4/17/24

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

So far, seven jurors have been seated in former president Donald Trump's election interference trial. 

Trump loves that the media keeps referring to it as a 'hush money' trial instead of an election interference trial, because we all know he's against election interference. And if people thought that's what he was on trial for, they might not want to buy his Bible or something. 

I wonder, though - and not for the first time - why the media constantly plays right into his hands by dumbing everything down and going for clicks. There must be some unwritten rule they follow - and it's all of them, all the time. It does a massive disservice to us, and to their profession. 

Trump loves to attack everyone who opposes him, on everything, and his MAGA Campers fall in line with him on that. Everyone's fair game on the interwebs, especially Stormy Daniels, who was paid to keep quiet about her relationship with Trump. 

I don't think they expected her to fight back, but she does. One of his supporters posted, "Stormy Daniels is a parasite that would sell anything for a dollar," to which she replied, "Not true. I wouldn't sell Bibles."  I'm not really wondering much about this; rather, I'm enjoying picturing a 400-pound guy, wearing golden Trump sneakers and full MAGA regalia, sitting on his bed sulking because a stripper got the best of him.

*****     *****     ***** 

Speaking of trials, the House GOP finally figured out how to get to the Senate chambers, and the eleven managers strolled across the hall with the Articles of Impeachment against DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, kicking off the impeachment process in the Senate. 

So far, they've voted on having a floor debate on why a trial is needed (defeated); a motion to debate the articles in closed session (defeated); amendments to move to closed session (defeated), and to adjourn (defeated); a motion to block a motion to kill the first article (defeated); a vote to kill the first Article (passed); another motion to go to closed session (defeated); and a motion to adjourn (defeated). 

One of the motions to adjourn, made by Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), requested adjournment until "May 1, 2004," which brought a bit of levity to the floor. Kennedy corrected the year to 2024 while allowing that the earlier date was "probably preferable."

After that motion was defeated, another one was put up that would have the Senate adjourn until November 6th - the day after election day. I wonder if anyone will be able to top the stupidity of that.

I think it's safe to say the GOP's effort to 'get Biden' by impeaching one of his Cabinet secretaries is not going to succeed, not that I wondered for a moment that it would. 

*****     *****     *****

Remember when Republicans were all up in arms about states potentially keeping Trump off the ballot? Here's a reminder, featuring New Hampshire Republican Party chairman Chris Ager:

Whatever happened to letting the people decide? Let’s let the people decide, and let’s have a free, fair, open donnybrook of an election, and whoever wins, let’s rally behind them and move the country forward. 

Well, the Ohio GOP seems pretty comfortable with ballot-blocking now. Candidates need to be certified by August 7th. Because the Democratic National Convention isn't until August 19th, the Democrats offered to provisionally certify the Biden/Harris ticket, noting that it had already secured the votes to win the nomination. They used the same argument as the GOP did.

If President Biden and Vice President Harris are not listed on the ballot as the Democratic Party candidates, their supporters in Ohio will be stripped of the opportunity to associate with their preferred candidate.

There's no option for provisional certification, according to the state's Attorney General; the best hope is for legislative action by May 9th, allowing an exemption to the deadline. There's precedent for this - it just happened in 2020, when both parties had late conventions, and the legislature did the right thing. But this is 2024, and the times are very different.

I think it's a Democratic problem, Senate President Matt Huffman, R-Lima, told reporters last week. There should have to be a Democratic solution. That hasn't been proposed to me.

Is it any wonder so many people think our elected officials are hypocritical jerks? 

*****     *****     *****

Speaking of hypocrites, let's look at Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, who seems to have issues with protestors, or at least, with protestors who block traffic while calling for a cease-fire in Gaza. If they were on a bridge in his state, he suggested that civilians should take matters into their own hands and toss them over the side.

He doesn't seem to have the same feelings about the January 6th protestors, though. Cotton was part of a group of GOP Congressmen that filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to throw out the obstruction charge brought against many of those protestors, suggesting that it was too harsh. The charge can result in a 20-year sentence, rather than a kinder, gentler one that would result in a sentence of a year or so, "that is frequently used against most protesters who disrupt Congress."

I can't help wondering how many of those "most protestors" did the same thing as the J6 gang did? How many others have assaulted police officers on their way to 'disrupt Congress,' other than the J6 gang? And I wonder how many other protestors wore body armor and brought bear spray, zip ties, and other assorted goodies in their protest kits? 

*****     *****     *****

Come with me to Arizona, where Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed the so-called "Ten Commandments" bill, which would have allowed teachers and administrators to display and read the Ten Commandments in school buildings. Hobbs said she had concerns about the constitutionality of, and the need for, the bill.

Enter Sen. Anthony Kern (R-MAGA Hypocrite), who said

I'm appalled the state's top elected official is abandoning God and the very foundation our country was built upon by not allowing teachers to expose their students to the morals and ethics outlined in the Ten Commandments... When children are exposed to good, noble, honest, and righteous ideas, they are more prone to being better human beings with sound character, able to navigate life's problems with grace, and have a greater chance of treating each other with respect and dignity throughout life.

Kern was present at the January 6th riot, and "his own social media posts strongly suggest" he "actively encouraged the mob, both before and after the attack..."  He was a fake Trump elector, and he tried to get the state's official slate of electors overturned.

I have to wonder whether he wasn't exposed to "good, noble, honest, and righteous ideas," or if he just failed to learn from them.

What's on your wondering mind tonight? 

Wondering on Wednesday 4/3/24

Ready... Set... Wonder!

I saw an article in The Week about 'passive investing' - using index funds to do the work for you, or for your 401(k). The Week, if you aren't familiar with it, presents news items with multiple viewpoints from different media outlets. Here's a bit of the piece on index funds, with my emphasis added.

A market doesn’t work if everyone just “sits back and watches their money grow,” said Katie Martin in the Financial Times. It sounds “a little snobbish” to rail against passive investing, “which has unlocked wealth for millions of people who otherwise might not be active in financial markets at all.” But several recent studies have found that indexed stocks have begun to “show lower sensitivity” even to major economic shocks than their non-indexed counterparts. That turns investing from a process of “seeking out, rewarding, and profiting from successful companies” to a “circular bet” on more money flowing into the market.

The article came out before Trump Media and Technology Group (DJT on the Nasdaq)  went public with a value of some $8B, even though the company has ridiculously poor financial performance.

Is this the kind of company you'd 'seek out and reward,' I wonder?

*****     *****

Perhaps as many as half a million folks in California got a raise this week, as the minimum wage for most fast-food workers - and only those workers - increased from $16/hour to $20/hour. The raise stems from a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last fall, and comes a few weeks after workers formed the California Fast Food Workers Union.

Generally, I'm not a fan of politicians singling out a category of workers and changing their minimum wage without adjusting the minimum wages for other low-paid workers, but I don't wonder why politicians do it.

What I do wonder is why so many people think it's OK for the government to make a random distinction between a fast-food worker and a day-care worker, a home health aide, or a janitorial staffer. And I wonder why, when the politicians do this for some but not for all, people are so comfortable telling the other workers to 'just go ask for a raise,' or 'organize and fight for themselves.'

And, of course, I wonder how the pols come up with the convoluted rules they apply. This law applies to "restaurants offering limited or no table service and which are part of a national chain with at least 60 establishments nationwide. Restaurants operating inside a grocery establishment are exempt, as are restaurants producing and selling bread as a stand-alone menu item."  

A shoutout to anyone who can make this make sense. I sure can't.

*****     *****

This one has me scratching my head with wonder. I was not aware that there's a thing out in the Interwebs asking, "Who actually eats at Arby's?" And, until this morning when I saw this article that Arby's is going to give "skeptics" four free sandwiches this month, to try and convince them how good the food is. According to the company's Chief Marketing Officer, the chain is "putting our money where our mouth is," and that April is

the perfect opportunity for any skeptics out there to try any of the sandwiches they've been eyeing.

There's just one catch: the 'skeptics' who have been "eyeing" the sandwiches have to be enrolled in the company's rewards program to get the free sandwiches. Call me skeptical, but I wonder how many of the free sammies are going to go to existing rewards members, not to new customers?

*****     *****

It seems 'the right' found itself in a bit of a snit over Easter Sunday. It seems that 'the left' has attacked Easter with the same zeal as it fights the war on Christmas. First, President Biden dared recognize the annual Transgender Day of Visibility, celebrated annually on March 31st. That's a bad thing, it would appear, when Easter also falls on March 31st - at least according to House Speaker Mike Johnson and the other usual suspects. But that's only half of the problem. 

The other issue? A ban on religious Easter eggs at the Biden White House. I kid you not.

...guidelines for the contest in which kids submit decorated eggs for a White House display specify that the art "must not include any questionable content, religious symbols, overtly religious themes, or partisan political statements. 

There's only one problem: the guidelines don't belong to 'the left' and they don't come from the Bidens. They come from the American Egg Board, which has had the same rules since the 70s. And that means former president Donald Trump attacked Easter using one of the exact same weapons as President Biden used.

So, what am I wondering here? With all the effort 'the right' puts into manufacturing wars by 'the left' against Christian holidays, I wonder why they don't put even one iota of effort into attacking the very un-Christian, unreligious, unpleasant, unpatriotic Easter 'truth' posted by their fearless leader. 

*****     *****

Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R-MAGA) is unhappy that LSU's women's basketball team wasn't on the floor for the playing of our country's National Anthem (not to be confused with "America's most recognized patriotic anthem," Lee Greenwood's God Bless the USA) at their Elite Eight appearance in Albany on Sunday. 

So unhappy, in fact, that he wants the state's Board of Regents to create a policy requiring student-athletes "be present for the National Anthem or lose their scholarships." He even managed to bring his mother into the mix with his tweet on the subject, which said, in part,

My mother coached women's high school basketball during the height of desegregation, no one has a greater respect for the sport and for Coach Mulkey. However, above respect for the game is a deeper respect for those that serve to protect us and unite us under one flag !

Landry apparently doesn't know that college athletes in his state, and others, typically aren't on the court or field for the anthem, which is played several minutes before the game starts. And he apparently doesn't know that they haven't been, for many years. And he apparently doesn't know that the Regents have nothing to do with scholarships. 

It kind of makes me wonder whether he gave this whole thing any thought at all, or if he just shoots from the lip like the guy who endorsed him for governor.

*****     *****

Oh - in case you're wondering, here's the current status of the GoFundMe to raise money to help the former president pay his judgments. I'll continue to report on this each week, but for now, it looks like it's gonna take a while.

*****     *****

What's on your wondering mind tonight?

Sunday School 3/31/24: Extra Credit

For your Extra Credit this week, I've opted to highlight a conversation with two religious leaders from Washington, DC: Wilton Cardinal Gregory, the Catholic Archbishop, and the Right Reverand Marianna Budde, the Episcopal Bishop. They spoke with Ed O'Keefe last Thursday, and the interview was shared in the Face the Nation classroom. Here are some excerpts from their conversation.

O'Keefe talked about presidential candidates Donald Trump and Joe Biden, and compared how they 'invoke Christianity."

I know this gets a little tricky. But we have one who is now selling Bibles that also have copies of the Constitution and a Bill of Rights in them. But the other is the second Catholic president, who goes to church every Sunday, who observes the holy days of obligation, and builds his schedule around them, but doesn't talk at all publicly and is uncomfortable speaking about his own faith. Are you comfortable with the role and the level of Christianity in our politics today?

Cardinal Gregory said that faith used to be "the moral voice" that political people would turn to, as the "moral compass." And now?

...I think in some cases it's the political world that's beginning to set or claiming to set the moral voice. We've switched positions. There is a great need, I believe, to place faith in its proper position, which is not necessarily antagonistic to the political arena. But to seize the responsibility of being that guiding principle, that moral light for our people to turn to.

Bishop Budde expressed concern about how the "message of Christianity is being distorted" in the country, calling it a "cause for deep concern," and more.

I feel it's a – it's an abuse of the faith. And I have to be very careful because I'm not perfect in my understanding of what it means, A, to be a perfect Christian, I'm not a perfect Christian and I'm not a perfect American, but I think we are walking on very thin ice now. I would encourage anyone who buys a Bible to read the Bible and in particular to read the teachings of Jesus, and then to set our policies if we're going to call ourselves a Christian nation against the highest aspirations that Jesus calls us to.

The two faith leaders disagreed a bit on what kind of Catholic President Biden is; Cardinal Gregory said "he could say he's very sincere about his faith," but referenced the term "cafeteria Catholic," one who chooses "that which is attractive" while dismissing "that which is challenging." Budde said, "Or, as Thomas Aquinas would say, you allow your conscience to guide you."

O'Keefe wondered if there's "something on the menu he's not ordering," in Cardinal Gregory's view.

Well, I would say there are things, especially in terms of the life issues, there are things that he chooses to ignore or he uses the current situation as a political pawn rather than saying, look, my church believes this.

 Again, Bishop Budde countered with what I think is a more balanced view.

It's also possible to be a practitioner of the faith as a public leader and not require everyone that you lead in your country to be guided by all of the precepts of your faith, right?

O'Keefe said that seems to be what Biden believes, and Budde concurred, saying that's how she interprets it. She also spoke from her experiences worshipping with Biden at Washington's National Cathedral.

I will say the one thing about him that I admire tremendously - there is not a funeral of a state's person or a state person's spouse that he does not attend, stay through the entire service, and speak from the pulpit as in eulogy, and I find that example to be an expression of authentic faith.

When asked, Cardinal Gregory said he "would not put a lot of emphasis" on any sort of "Biden impact on the pews," and he added some not unexpected perspective on the 'cafeteria Catholic' comment.

He does attend church regularly with great, you know, devotion. But he also steps aside some of the hot-button issues or uses the hot-button issues as a political tool, which it's not – it is not the way I think we would want our faith to be used. The issues of life begin at the very beginning and they conclude at natural death. And you can't – you can't pick and choose. You're either one who respects life, and all of its dimensions, or you have to step aside and say, I'm not pro-life, I'm, you know, on one side of the equation I feel that I could support this dimension of life, but in others, I would step aside.

In response, Bishop Budde offered this.

I love the spectrum of life. I think you can be in adherence of the spectrum of life and still respect a woman's right to choose in reproductive health and including when to have an abortion in the early stages of pregnancy. So I'll just say that as a Christian I believe that that's possible and still hold to the full spectrum of life.

I appreciated how the two faith leaders spoke about their positions, but I'm surprised that the bulk of the conversation focused on how President Biden lives his faith, and nothing about president Trump and his faith. I'm not sure whether O'Keefe opted to lead the conversation towards Biden, or if his guests didn't want to talk about it. 

I think it was a disservice not to delve into how the guy who makes money selling Bibles commands so much respect from people who self-identify as 'religious.'  Maybe next time, I guess...

FYI, here's my Easter message from several years ago. Like Bishop Budde, I'm not a perfect American, or a perfect anything else, for that matter, but I appreciate the value in making an effort to be a better person, regardless of whether or not I check a 'religion' box on a form somewhere.

See you around campus.

Sunday School 3/31/24

We begin the Easter edition of Sunday School with Dana Bash and her Good Friday conversation with Senator Rev. Raphael Warnock (D-GA); here are some excerpts from that conversation, which aired in the State of the Union classroom.

Rev. Warnock said the message he'll be sharing with his congregants is "the good news of Easter is that evil and injustice will not have the last word," and that "Truth crushed to earth will rise again."

As he describes himself as a "Matthew 25 Christian," Bash wondered if people, not just in the US but around the world, "have gotten away from" that theme of "caring for strangers and being welcoming towards people of all different backgrounds." Warnock said how we treat our neighbors and how we take care of those "who are most marginalized is a central tenet" of that chapter, and he said there are "some 2,000 verses in the Scripture" talking about how to treat the poor.

Sadly, you wouldn't know that listening to some of the loudest Christian voices in America today that are often mean to poor people in the name of faith. I don't know what Bible they're reading.

Bash turned to Trump's encouraging folks to buy his $60 licensed Bible, and played a clip from his video; I had that clip, and more, in my  OrangeVerse post last week.

All Americans need a Bible in their home. And I have many. It's my favorite book. It's a lot of people's favorite book. I'm proud to endorse and encourage you to get this Bible. We must make America pray again. 

Warnock noted "The Bible doesn't need Donald Trump's endorsement," and said

The sad thing is that none of us are surprised by this. This is what we expect from the former president. If he's not selling us steaks, he's selling us a school whose degree is not worth the paper that is written on. If he's not selling us a school, he's selling us sneakers. And now he's trying to sell the Scriptures. At the end of the day, I think he's trying to sell the American people a bill of goods. And that worked in 2016, although he did not win the popular vote even in 2016. It did not work in 2020. And I don't think it's going to work in 2024.

Talking about the other documents you get for your $60 - the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and whatnot - Warnock said getting into the Bible business is "risky business for someone like" Trump.

because the folks who buy those Bibles might actually open them up, where it says things like, thou shalt not lie, thou shalt not bear false witness, where it warns about wolves dressed up in sheep's clothing. I think you ought to be careful. 

Bash brought up House Speaker Mike Johnson saying President Biden acknowledging March 31st as the annual Transgender Day of Visibility was "abhorrent" and that Biden "betrayed the central tenet of Easter," which falls on March 31st this year.

...apparently, the speaker finds trans people abhorrent. And I think he ought to think about that. The fact of the matter is, as you said, March 31 has been a day to lift up transgender people who endure violence and bigotry. Easter, the date changes every single day. But this is just one more instance of folks who have -- who do not know how to lead us trying to divide us. And this is the opposite of the Christian faith.

Next, Bash talked with Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), who's been calling on Speaker Johnson to allow a vote on aid to Ukraine for quite a while now. Lawler thinks they'll finally get one when the House returns from the Easter break., saying "critically important for our allies," and that "we cannot shirk on our responsibility to uphold and defend democracies across the globe."

He's one of the members behind the 'Defending Borders, Defending Democracies Act' which would provide assistance to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, and also bring back the 'remain in Mexico' policy and Title 42. He said he's spoken with Johnson directly, and is "confident that he is going to bring a bill to the floor."

His thinking on Rep. Marjorie Flamethrower Taylor Greene (R- You Kidding Me?) and her threat to boot Johnson, Lawler was direct. 

I can't speak for her... But, as I said the day that she introduced it, it's idiotic. And it's not going to actually help advance the cause that she believes in... Infighting does nothing to help advance any of those issues or policy positions. And, in fact, it undermines our majority.

Bash noted Lawler is one of only four House GOP members supporting a federal law allowing IVF, and asked if the rest of his party is "on the wrong side of this issue." Lawler said that if the Rs want to be "a party that supports life, then we should be fighting to protect the ability of families to become parents," and that the people aren't interested in "extremism."

Bash asked a couple of Trump-behaving-badly questions; in a nutshell, Lawler thinks everyone needs to tone it down and watch what they say. On the specific issue of Trump attacking another judge (and the judge's family), he thinks "families should always be off-limits." And, he added, instead of focusing on things the media likes to pay attention to,

... I think the focus of this campaign and this election should be on the American people and the issues facing the American people. 

Next, I dropped in on the MTP classroom, where Kristen Welker talked with GOP Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska. Welker noted that Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced on social media that he had spoken with Speaker Johnson on the issues his country is facing, saying "Quick passage of U.S. aid to Ukraine by Congress is vital." 

She asked Bacon, a supporter of aid to Ukraine how confident he was that a bill would pass.

Well, Speaker Johnson is an honest man. He truly walks his faith. He doesn't talk his faith, he walks his faith, he shows it. He's committed to making this the first, the top priority, when we return back to Washington, DC.

He said most of his colleagues support military aid, but don't support humanitarian aid that the Senate included in their bill. He and three others, including two Dems, have a $66B bill that would provide aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, plus border security. Their bill would allow for amendments, which might make it more palatable.

...I know the speaker also wants to have, like, the Repo Act, where we repossess some Russian assets to help them pay for this. Also, maybe, some lend lease segments to the bill. So, some of this may become in the form of loans.

They also want to try and force Biden to give Ukraine different weapons, "higher-tech, more capable" arms to "help them prevail on the battlefield," including the ATACMS guided missiles. Welker pointed out that Biden has been asking for funding to pay for those - for seven months - and the House has held things up. 

Bacon wants there to be some kind of 'bicameral, bipartisan solution," and that he doesn't want to pass a bill if it would pass the Senate. Welker noted the Senate had passed a bill, which the House famously voted down, at Donald Orange Jesus Trump's urging.

Yeah. Well, it didn't have a lot of bicameral support, at least on the Republican side. Why is that? You have about almost $30 billion in humanitarian aid and there's not a lot of support for that amount of humanitarian aid going to Ukraine. We think the EU could do a lot more humanitarian than they are. They just did a $50 billion humanitarian aid and Germany has committed more. We think our role should be more military aid because that's what we're good at. 

I had to pause the video at that point, it being Easter Sunday and all; I shouldn't have been surprised, since it was an R saying it, but still.

When asked whether he thought Johnson could lose the speakership over this issue, Bacon said 

It's possible, I'm not going to deny it. We have one or two people that are not team players. They'd rather enjoy the limelight, the social media. And the fact is with the one-seat majority – and we'll end up with a three- or four-seat majority after some special elections – out of 435 people, it's a very narrow majority. And one or two people can make this a minority.

Personally, he prefers to "work with the team," and doesn't think they need 100% agreement on everything. He also thinks the Dems are tired of the dysfunction over the speakership, and would take steps to keep Johnson from losing the vote if it came to the floor. There might be a standoff after the Ukraine bill is handled, but he hopes Johnson will prevail if it comes to that. 

On impeaching the president, folks he's talked to "say there's not a specific crime" and he'd need that or a misdemeanor to be in favor of the move. But is it time to drop the whole thing?

I don't know if it's time, right now. But I do think we're probably nearing the conclusion of this investigation. And I think it was important for the American people to see that, yes, there's $24 million in foreign money that the family raised and all the hidden LLCs that the money was moved around in. But that is, in itself, not a high crime or misdemeanor.

Welker asked about the Biden-in-the-pickup video image that Trump shared (the same question Bash asked Lawler) and got a similar answer: he doesn't support that, he wants both sides to raise the bar of civility, and said we're better than that.

We're the strongest country in the world... we are the best country to live in, but we're not going to remain that way if we treat our opponents in this way...We've got to be a lot better at how we dialogue with the opposition... 

And because she just can't take an answer for an answer, she pushed him for something more by asking if he thought it was OK that Trump was attacking the families of the judges in his many cases. Bacon said he'll lead by example and focus on the issues.

And I think in Nebraska, in the Midwest, we don't like the nastiness, you know? We have a phrase here, "Nebraska nice," and it's real. 

She then asked, "And, on this Easter, what is your message about bipartisanship and the possibility of working together on something like" rebuilding the Francis Scott Key Bridge? 

... I think our faith calls for the golden rule. It calls for, like, you know, the fruits of the spirit in Galatians, that we should treat each other with respect, decency. And I think, as Christians, sometimes we forget that in this political debate... we've got to hold a higher bar here and remember the gold rule, as we work out the issues facing our country. 

See you around campus.