It's the Walking Talking Open Impeachment Inquiry Shuffle Part One...or George and Bill's Tesimony Adventure

Today marks the second week of open impeachment inquiries into the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago and whether, through his minions, he asked the Ukranian government to investigate a perceived poilitical rival (in this case, former Vice President Joe Biden, who is one of the nearly 20 candidates running for President on the Democratic Party primary for the 2020 election).  Originally launched from a "transcript" (more like a memo or loosely transcribed yet edited note) from electoral vote winner Donny and his minions regarding a July 2019 call with Ukranian President Zelensky, the supposedly "perfect call" (in the Mad Fuhrer's words) actually gave a visible proof of "quid pro call" by asking for favors that allude to investigating the appointment of Biden's son Hunter to the board of a Ukranian gas company as well as into Crowdstrike, a tech company that, according to right wing conspiracy theories, helped Hillary Clinton rig the election[which, given the Mad Fuhrer won the electoral college, seems extremely far fetched at best].  While the later is brought up, it's the former that convinced establishment Democrats such as Rep. Chuck Schumer and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that an inquiry had to happen.

The move to make it public came about as Repubs in Congress whined and moaned about lack of "due process" as well as attempts to barge into a SCIF (secure facility) where confidential testimony was given came a vote to make it public and televised.  Of course, the Repubs then whined and moved the goal posts (complaining about keeping the whistle blower's identity private, even though Federal law requires it)..  Which leads us to the testimony we have so far.

Last week (on Wednesday November 13) we had televised testimony from State Department official George Kent and Ambassador Bill Taylor.  In this time we learned some of the background behind the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's behind the scenes tinkerings in regards to withholding military aid to Ukraine either directly or from his lawyer, former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani. unless there were invatigations from the Ukmranian government into both Crowdstrike and the Bidens.  While Repub congressmen on the committees tried to claim this wasn't p[roof of quid pro quo it sure as hell looks like it to anyone not hell-bent on trying to claim electoral vote winner Donny is either completely innocent or that he did it but they aren't crimes.

The left turn in the case came when Taylor testified that one of his aides was present the day after the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's second call to the Ukranian president  have Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland (a Donny fundraiser who many felt bought his post) took a loud phone call with electoral vote winner Donny where Sondland told the electoral vote winner that Zelensky will go ahead with the investigation and that he loves the Mad Fuhrer before telling the aide that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago doesn't care that much about the Ukraine and corruption but really cares only about the Bidens and what he perceives as corruption from them. 

This was something that people didn't know about beforehand.  It caused Sondland to amend his original testimony done behind closed doors and caused Congress to call him as a witness the next week.  What it also did was give some rock solid proof that there was bribery, if not extortion, when Ukrainian military aid was withheld unless they played ball and called for an investigation and  possible prosecution of the Bidens.  They may have gotten away with it except Congress got wind of it and forced the White House to release the aid, which meant Zelensky didn't have to go on CNN (as the Mad Fuhrer and company requested as a condition for aid) to call for the investigation. 

That alone should bring people a lot closer to understanding why the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago should be impeached.  Then as news unfolded from that  with Repubs trying to spin that there was no quid pro quo and he Mad Fuhrer claiming he was too busy but tweeted over 30 times about it beforehand, news broke of a second person who corroborated what Taylor said about the restaurant call. 

All this in the first day or so.  But there's more up ahead.  While we don't know if the Mad Fuhrer was be impeached, much less removed from office yet what we're learning is that his corruption may be deeper and more intense than many people thought.

The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago in the fall fun movie...BEACH BLANKET IMPEACHMENT!!!

Wow!  The last two weeks have been a ride.

If you asked me before then what the chances would be that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago (also known as electoral vote winner Donny) would face anything near an impeachment inquiry much less any chance of impeachment,I would've been skeptical.  Because while he's committed more than his share3 of what could be considered high crimes an misdemeanors the Democratic Party leadership always seemed gun shy, almost dismissive of calls for impeachment from Rep. Maxine Waters and later the four freshman Congresswomen known as the Squad (Rashida Talib, Ayanna Pressely, Ilhan Oman, and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez).  When asked why the party leadership usually spouted a variation of a theme that mixed some truth (no President was ever removed from office by impeachment) with speculation (the public wouldn't approve.voters might go further to Donny) and a mix of the two (the Repub controlled Senate would never let it happen).  However, as news of the Mad Fuhrer's phone call with the Ukranian prime minister got leaked the sort of scandal that normally went away whenever Donny and company did something beyond the pale seemed to not take hold this time.  This was even further made clear when a summary of the phone found the electoral vote winner apparently ask for the new leader of the Ukraine to dig up dirt on former vice presdient (and perceived political rival) Joe Biden.  Still, even as the Mueller Report (or what the DOJ under Atty General Billy Barr allowed to not be redacted slowly got some interest in impeachment, the Democratic leadership in the House was reluctant. 

However, as more became known it became increasingly clear that something was up that needed to be addressed.  Still, when Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry would happen I was honestly surprised.  As more details come out it makes one wonder why it took this long. 

As for the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago himself, he's issuing his usual mix of smears and denials while the Repub politicians keep their distance, preferirng their hold on power to the interests of truth, much less interest of the country they're supposed to serve.  As he ramps up claims of treason towards his opponents who are doing what they're allowed to do under the Constitution, Donny's fans and minions are still rallying around him publicly, even as news reports filter out claiming they're scared in private. 

For now this journey can take any number of directions.  What is apparent at this time though is that the impeachment beach party isn't going away any time in the near future.  Time will tell what happens but things are getting scary and humorous at the same time.

Mueller at the House Judiciary Committee Hearing Today - Three Points and an Observation

As I type this former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Mueller had just completed his first of two hearing today in front of Committees in the House of Representatives by testifying under subpoena in front of the House Judiciary Committee (he later testifies in from to the Intelligence Committee).  Having the day off from the paying job (ironically not because of this) and a long night last night I overslept but did catch the last couple of hours off and on.  From what I've witnessed from both watching the hearing and commentary regarding it here are three points that came out that should be taken into account.

First - Mueller has now said that a President can be indicted once he leaves office.  
   The main reason from the Mueller Report why they didn't bring charges against electoral vote winner Donny was that DOJ had a rule that stated that a sitting President couldn't be indicted.  This left open whether or not a President can be charged if he leaves office.  Rep. Jerry Nadler got Mueller to state, for the record, that he was unable to indict the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago for obstruction because of Office of Legal Counsel decision that a sitting president couldn't be indicted.  This was said by Mueller at his press conference a while back but then Nadler asked if [electoral vote winner Donny] could be indicted once he leaves office.  Mueller replied with one word: "True."

This alone would be something that should be notable.  However, it was later in the hearing that Repub Sen. Ken Buck of Colorado asked if you could charge the President with a crime after he left office.  Mueller said yes.  By stating this again, Mueller basically reaffirms the possibility that the decision of the DOJ not to charge electoral vote winner Donny did not mean he was exonerated and that other investigations can still (and will still) occur.  It also leaves open a chance that leaving office doesn't mean that Donny can get away with it and he could still be charged if the Dept of Justice in the next administration after he leaves office would choose to do so.

While there can be some debate over whether this means the OLC decision was the only reason Donny wasn't charged, this and the fact that Mueller reaffirmed similar things means that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago wasn't completely exonerated by the Report.

Second - Mueller Didn't Interview with Electoral Vote Winner Donny to Return to work as FBI Director
      One of the things the Mad Fuhrer, his minions, and Repubs in general have tried to throw against the wall in trying to dismiss the Mueller Report is that Donny didn't hire him as FBI Director and that Mueller was probing him in a case of sour grapes.  Donny even tweeted something to that effect this morning as the hearing was getting underway.  Early in the hearing he was asked by Repub Rep Louie Gohmert of Texas if when they met the day before if they discussed FBI Director James Comey's firing.  Mueller interjected immediately that he was not a candidate,  The fact that Mueller preemptively shot that line down is important in that it derails somewhat this theory that Donny has thrown out on twitter.  While the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago will likely continue to throw out that red meat  Mueller saying that without actually being asked while under oath is important.

Third - It Looks Like The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago and his minions had asked his staff to falsify records.
     In one exchange with Rep.Cedric Richmond (D, LA) it was revealed that Donny and company tried to protect himself by asking staff to falsify information and that there was an attempt to get White House Counsel Don McGahan to provide a false written record of information,  In other words, lie to those investigating your side.   

Now anyone with eyes and ears who pays attention knows Donnya nd company seems to obstruct justice in regards to their BS on an almost daily basis (way too many instances to claim).  What makes thids differnet is the fact that,if it were anyone else, there'd be charges and court dates involved but since OLC rules don't allow the Justice Dept to indict a sitting president, he still gets to stay where he is.  It also reiterates Mueller's replay that the Report DID NOT EXONERATE the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago regardless of what the latter tweets. 

With those three points (which likely have been made by others in a batter way) in tow let's tackle an observation I have regarding the Repubs on these committees.

The Repub Congresspeople Seem to Channel Someone who confuses talking too fast with making a good debate point
     Granted I walked in on the middle of Matt Gaets' attempt to show boat to gain the Mad Fuhrer's approval as my starting point but I noticed that  they all seem to channel their inner Ben Shapiro at some point.  Usually they start slow but somewhere get to a point where they try to say a lot of words really fast regarding things that have little to do with what was supposed ot be talked about.  Several of them even seemed to use Ben's phrasing.  It would be funny if it wasn't for the fact these people were elected to guide this country yet seem to want a pat on the hand from Donny more than serving the people they supposedly represent. 

In time I'm sure there will be a lot of things that people find in here that may sway thigs one way or the other.  For now though I think the good of the hearings is more adding some context to what was in the Mueller Report since at over 400 pages many people don't have to time to check it out. 

Woder how the Intelligence hearing will stand out.
    

So Mueller’s Gonna testify Today

Update:  Edited and corrected to include both hearings.

 It's July 24, 2019 and former special counsel Robert Mueller will be testifying in front of the House Judiciary Committee followed by a hearing in front of the House Intelligence committee sometime today answering questions related to the Mueller Report regarding possible collusion and obstruction of justice by electoral vote winner Donny and his minions.  While Mueller has said that any testimony will mainly apply to what he’s already said in a previous press conference and what's in the report itself this is still a big deal.

lt is a big deal because while this will mainly cover a lot of ground many already know if they pay attention, the fact that most people haven't read the Mueller  Report (at over 400 pages that’s understandable since it is a commitment to get through it) means this will provide some context and some information that people don't already know, flesh it out so to speak. Regardless of whether or not there are any bombshells revealed in his testimony  this means that we're going to lease get some new context on what was in the report and why he came up with the conclusions he did as well as possibly understand what limits were placed on the investigation itself. 

 Either way this is going to be a bumpy ride. Though electoral vote winner Donny (a/k/a: the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago)  has already said that he has no plans to watch it then said he might watch a little in the same gaggle. What that means is he totally plans to watch the testimony and will likely be tweeting about it all damn day instead of doing his job.

Time will tell what happens as result of Mueller's testimony, It might push the buttons to get people on board to impeach the Mad Fuhrer, it might avoid that but open up new paths for Congress to investigate (Mueller said in his pres conference a while back that while the DOJ couldn't charge a sitting president, congress could).  The abut one thing is for certain this is going to add another twist and turn to the ride that's already bumpy and leading to a long scary year before the 2020 election.

Electoral Vote Winner Donny 's Sunday Tweets at Four Congresswomen

When it comes to the tweets of electoral vote winner Donny (a/k/a: the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago) I try to be careful about commenting on them too deeply. In some instances he shoots off on something whenever the mainstream media isn't focused on him in an attempt to either divert from something bad or make things all about him.  Sadly, more often than not the media starts talking about him and his latest social media cherry bomb (sometimes in regards to something he knows nothings about) rather than the issue at hand.  However, once in a while he comes up with something so beyond the pale that we have to take a look at it.  Here is his latest case in point.

In the early morning hours of Sunday July 14, 2019 the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago decided, for reasons unknown to us, to send out a vile tweet regarding four "Progressive Democratic Congresswomen," which many believe is aimed at Rep. Ilhan Omar (D, MN), Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D, MI), Rep, Ayanna Pressley (D, MA) and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D, NY and a/k/a: AOC).  In this tweet he claimed the four came "from countries  whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world" and that they were "loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run" before telling them to go back to "the crime infested places from where they came."

All of this before most people even woke up to have breakfast, get ready for whatever was planned for the day and the like.  Almost immediately after the anger in the Mad Fuhrer's tweet kicked in came the reaction where the silence of most of his fellow Repubs was almost as telling as those who pointed out that it was racist, with the exception of Repubs who tried to bend themselves into near pretzel like conditions to claim what electoral vote winner Donny tweeted wasn't racist.  With that in mind, a brief look at the tweet is in order.  This will likely cover ground that's already been covered but it has to be done.

First up is the question of racism- was the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's tweet at four U.S. Congresswomen of color racist?  In a sane and just world one wouldn't even have to ask this question because it should be obvious that the tweet was hella fucking racist.  The racism here is obvious for several reasons.  One, all of the women are U.S. citizens (which you have to be, either by birth or being naturalized at least seven years previous) with Ocasio Cortez, Tlaib, and Pressley all being born in the United States.  Since that makes them from here for all intents and purposes, telling them to go back where they came from is really nothing more than racist code speech intended to rile up the white supremacists and their closet fans that make up a good chunk of his base.  

So, why is he tweeting this?  Some people have suggested it may be a diversion from several things in the news whether it be the Jeffrey Esptein case (remember that Donny at one time claimed to be a friend of his) or to keep people from talking about conditions at the border Trumpcentration camps.  There may be some truth to this in that such a tweet does take some of the oxygen out of the room and force people to take on the tweet itself.  At the same time one has to remember that Donny has long used racism to gain power whether it was using birther rhetoric during the era of President Obama and claiming the country's first black President wasn't born in the U.S. and isn't really president to his frequent retweeting of white nationalist memes, refusal to disavow David Duke, and having his grown sons go on a white nationalist radio show twice before the 2016 election.  During that campaign the question of whether or not Donny was a racist became irrelevant as his willingness to play in that sandbox was just as dangerous as if he were the reincarnation of a segregationist sheriff from the 1950s south. 

However, when placed in context with actions such as getting sued by the Federal Government in the 1970s (along with his father) for refusing to rent to minorities or his continuing to not acknowledge that the five people who became known as the Central Park 5 (and which example he used for an op ed supporting bringing back the death penalty in the early 90s) were innocent of the crimes they were accused of committing despite eventually being exonerated by DNA evidence and the confession of the actual culprit years after they were convicted to the birtherism reveals a lot more about whether the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago may be racist than his so easy to dispute denials (like his claims that he's the least racist person ever). 

Is this merely riling up the base?  Is it an election campaign tactic to get the white supremacist part of his base to come along?  Both?  It's hard to say but it's easy to figure out that all of this may be true and that things are going to get a hell of a lot uglier before the 2020 election. 

In the upcoming print issue I'll dive into a couple of things that weren't really discussed here - including one thing the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago doesn't even get he's right about.    As for comments, I still refuse to right to delete comments that are totally ignorant, hateful (racist/Misogynist/homophobic/anti trans etc) or arguments I believe are in bad faith.  

A Couple of Points Where Joe Biden Seems Really Naive

I've been meaning to type this for about a week or so but a mix of current events and my paying job schedule got in the way.  Thus, the post is being put on here now and while in another time this would come off as dated Biden's response to one of these points keeps it vital and should be remembered as we near the caucuses and primaries over the next months.

Is it just me or does anyone else think former Vice President Joe Biden is awfully naive on a couple of points as he runs for President?

Biden, currently the front runner in the Democratic primary race for the 2020 election, is being pitched by the mainstream media as the electable choice who can cross the aisle and get things done in this tense and divided climate.  Running on a mix of name recognition and his past Biden's place in these early polls are read as a rebuke to what's perceived as "the far left" of the Democratic Party whose alleged cries of "socialism" will turn away "white working class voters" long lamented by corporate media pundits as those who deserted the party to support the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago in 2016.  However, while it's true that Biden has a lot of knowledge of how Washington has traditionally worked from nearly 50 years in Federal government (his first election to the Senate was in 1972 and had never had to run a competitive election race outside of his failed Presidential runs in the 1988 and 2008 race {the latter of which led to his becoming the VP running mate for Barack Obama and then two terms as Vice President), his continuing to work in that mindset has lead to a couple of things he seems really naive about.

First, let's talk about his claim that nobody running has a more progressive record than him over the years.  On the surface it seems like typically campaign braggadocio (every person running might say something similar on the Democratic Party side and/or thinks they're the person who can beat electoral vote winner Donny [why would they run if they didn't]), it shows the former VP still in what campaigning used to be, making claims and expecting people to be too busy to research and challenge them.  The problem with this is that we live in the age of the Internet and, while the stupid things private individuals do might not be totally accessible, a public officials record can be tracked down and debunked not just via "oppo research" from either political opponents or in preparation by one's own team but by those in the general public willing to do the research.  As a result we have learned about Biden's past support of the Hyde Amendment (which bans Federal funds from being used for abortion care - and a stance he continued to support until public outcry forced him to change it) as well as his support on various laws related ot the War on Crime in the 1990s including some that even former President Bill Clinton has said were wrong in retrospect).  The fact that he continues to be proud of that part of his voting record in effects undermines his claims of being the most progressive candidate in the 2020 Presidential race.  In fact, Biden's continuing to try to use his record as a selling point while  claiming he's the most progressive candidate is a prime example of him continuing to run as if nothing has changed - when two plus years of the Mad Fuhrer has proven otherwise.

The other place where Biden seems really naive is related to the issue of civility in this political climate.  Biden has gone on record as reportedly believing that once electoral vote winner Donny was out of office the Repubs in Congress and the Senate would then suddenly have an epiphany and realize that they shouldn't be acting the way they're currently acting and thus a spirit of bipartisanship will re-emerge.   It's one thing for a private citizen unaware of how Washington works or the machinations of current politicians to state something like this.  However, Biden spent eight years one heartbeat away from the Oval Office as VP to Barack Obama, the first black president of the U.S. and a man who administration was constantly hindered by Repubs in the legislative branch who, from day one were trying to make him a one term President and, when that didn't work, tried their hardest to make sure gridlock was the best case scenario.  For Joe Biden to actually say this with a straight face  it makes one wonder if he learned anything from the eight years he spent as VP under Obama.  Add to this current Senate Majority Leader Addison the Turtle (some of y'all call him Mitch McConnell) stating that if a Democrat wins the 2020 election he will make sure no Democratic legislation gets passed in his time in office, and it's clear that civility won't just reappear if the Oval Office changes parties next year. 

In fairness, the latter is not just Biden's naivete on this issue.  There tends to be a desire for merely pre Donny in much of the Democratic Party establishment, thinking that once he's gone that all will be well again.  The problem though is that the Repub party only agrees to anything bipartisan if they get what they want and the Democrats cave, thus moving things further to the right.  With the current Repub leadership emboldened by the Mad Fuhrer and his fan club of white conservative christians and white supremacists, there's no reason for anyone to think that if their side loses next year on the Presidency but keeps the Senate that the GOP will suddenly start playing fair and not constantly block everything until they get almost all of what they want.  Still, someone running for President should know better - especially if he knows how the other side actually works and should know by now that the civility they speak of exists just slightly this side of a unicorn in today's legislative body. 

Now does that mean Joe Biden would be just as horrible as the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago has been since taking office in January 2017?  I think it's fair to say that he would be less terrible but the way things are going, it would be only by a matter of degrees; and thinking small moves will solve things these days is a prime example of how the politicians in Washington are being totally naive.

Wasn't yesterday a Ride?

Does anybody else think that yesterday was really really bizarre?

 In the course of one day, the Mad Führer of Mar-A-Lago went from threatening Iran to claiming that said nation's attack on a U.S. military drone was an accident to calling for an airstrike to calling off that airstrike. It was definitely a bizarre thing to read about when I got home from the paying job last night.

 So why did it happen? Some have suggested that there is friction between National Security Advisor John Bolton's camp and electoral vote winner Donny.  Others have suggested that maybe the Mad Fuhrer really doesn't want this war but is being led around by the military.  There are even reports that Valdimir Putin suggested that this attack would be a bad idea.  So what do we know?

First, national security and diplomacy experts are saying this didn't help electoral vote winner Donny or the country's standing in the world.  Also, this might not be over yet as there are still a few ships heading towards the region to be stationaed near Iran (so he might still get this war yet).

Personally, I'm amongst those who think the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-:ago wants a war for several reasons:  One, the mainstream media usually follows along for a while and is less critical when a war goes down (see both wars with Iraq, Afghanistan, etc).  It also is a great motive by which he can quash dissent.  For those reasons alone I think he may still want this.

So why didn't it happen yesterday?  I honestly don't know.  Donny claims a sudden concern over loss of life if a strike happened.  However, given his disregard for human life in his own country whether it be the growing income inequality or locking migrants and asylum seekers in what is safe to call concentration camps at this point this excuse seems hollow.  Maybe it was Putin, maybe it was blowback by his donors.  As I said time will tell on what happens next.

While we don't know what elctoral vote winner Donny is going to do about Iran (hell, in the next 12 hours he could suddenly do the mother of all strikes) on thing is clear: yesterday was a bizarre ride that, if nothing else, shows that maybe there is something to the theory that the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago is a malleable useful idiot for whatever forces in power want, whether it be influence, a theocracy, or war. 

Regardless, it's something that's scary to contemplate.

So The Mad Fuhrer Admits He Might Accept Foreign Help and Thus Break the Law

Boy have the last few days been a ride.  I'd been working on finishing the new print issue (and a double issue at that) so between that and the paying job I'd been slightly out of the loop when it comes to news.  However, since there's been a lot of stuff coming down recently it feels important to at least address what happened Wednesday.

On Wednesday afternoon news broke regarding a one on one interview that George Stephanopolous of ABC News did an Oval Office one on one interview with electoral vote winner Donny when George asked him a somewhat hypothetical question regarding the 2020 election.  The Mad Fuhrer was given a scenario where a foreign power contacted his campaign (offering Russia or China as a couple of examples) and said they had dirt on his opponent, then asked in that case should his campaign listen or should they contact the FBI.  Without missing a bea and just after slightly turning his head,  the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago said he'd "probably do both."

Yes, you read that right.  Even after just being investigated in the Mueller probe for similar things electoral vote winner Donny is again on national TV openly admitting he'd probably accept dirt from foreign governments on election opponents in the upcoming election. While that alone seems to show he doesn't the laws he's supposed to defend and enact, there's something else here that needs to be said.

First up is the question itself.  Stephanopolous is an establishment journalist so it makes sense this shouldn't be a gotcha question - and it wasn't/  Hell, it wasn't even a softball question.  This question was basically tee ball, as in ABC News set up a question on the tee and all electoral vote winner Donny had to do was hit the metaphorical ball by stating either that of course they'd go to the FBI or something about following Federal law on the issue (accepting help from a foreign power on an election campaign is against Federal law) or something like that.  After two and a half years in office this wasn't a question that should've made the news.

However, the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago, being who he is, somehow either wasn't told that or chooses not to say he'd follow the law.  And that is the second concern.  When Robert Mueller finally commented on his investigation a month or so ago he basically said what many already had an idea about: it wasn't an exoneration and while they couldn't bring charges under Justice Department rules Congress can look into it further.  One has to wonder if it will take electoral vote winner Donny actually being impeached to get him to finally get the hint.

Even then, would it work?  Electoral vote winner Donny has a history of disregarding the law when it's in his interest to do so.  This makes the 2020 election take an ominous turn as some wonder if he will leave office willingly if voted out. 

While that is conjecture at this point, what is known is the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago seems hell-bent on gaslighting America by telling what he's likely to do and hten telling them he didn't say what we actually saw and heard him say.  This makes Donny's statement telling as, even though there's more than enough evidence that such an action would violate the law, the fact he can't even just say he'd follow Federal law when it comes to foregin powers offering dirt on electoral opponents shows that next year's elections is going to get dirty and ugly indeed, and that the Repubs will do anything to try and keep power - ethics and the law be damned.

This should scare anyone who wants elections to be free and fair in the USA.

SO WHY NO MUELLER REPORT POST YET?

As you all know Special Counsel Robert Mueller wrapped up his investigation into possible Russian interference in the 2016 election about a week and a half ago and handed it over to his bosses in teh Dept of Justice.  While the initial letter from the Mad Fuhrer's new Attorney General Billy Bar claimed he was exonerated, none of us have seen the nearly 400 page report.  In the aftermath (and Donny's calls for probes into those investigating him - encouraged by his fellow Repubs on Capital hill) it still hasn't been made aavailabel to Congress, much less those of us in the public.  Because of this we have decided to wait until the report actually is released to the public (preferably unredacted) before commenting on it.

As for electoral vote winner Donny being completely and totally cleared and exonerated by it I think we all know, given the vindictive and petty nature of the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago, that itf the report really did clear him prime time television would be pree-empted for the next month and a half so Donny's minion's could read pages from the report while Donny gloated (and yes, this would include Saturday and Sunday nights as well) until every word was read, then it would be available at DOnny's properties where he'd autogrph it along with Bibles and women's breasts.  He definitely wouldn't hide it like he is now. 

Thus let's wait and see what the report said before jumping to conclusions.  And, if he really didn't collude with Russia, that unfortunately means electoral vote winner Donny is really stupid (and Russia and other dictators see a perfect useful idiot for their purposes).  That should not comfort any of us regardless of politics.

Catching Up - Briefly Touching on News Items That We Missed

Hey!  I know it's been a while since I've been on the this blog.  I'd been busy between the paying job and some family situations that had to be dealt with.  While I'll try to be on here more often I've learned that sometimes life gets in the way.

Those who read the last print issue may note that I referred to more up to date information on certain topics either at the time it hit the stands or shortly thereafter.  I had every intention of doing that but a combination of exhaustion from the job as well as several family emergencies happening at once made that somewhat impossible at the time.  Because of that and the passage of time things slipped through the cracks.  However, since I try to keep my word to the extent possible given a situation I've decided to give some brief summaries on the items I previously planned full posts on but now would be too late.  I apologize for the brevity of these but it should bring up somewhat up to date.

THE VIRGINIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY SCANDALS

Right around the time the last issue got published a combination of scandals rocking the Demcratic Party controlled governorship in Virginai.  Between revelations of Gov, Northam's blackface photos while in college, the sexual assault allegations towards Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax, and Secretary of State Mark Herring's claim that he may have taken a photo in blackface a strange door has opened that shows how entrenched racism may be even in the less conservative parts of the South ( in regards ot Northam and Herring) and how the second in line to rule if Northam resigned may be tarnished in teh era of Me Too.  Now, discussions over whether they should stay in office oir resign have come and gone tenfold since then and those in office are still there.  With that in mind I have decided to bring up what I originally wanted to bring up.

First, how the hell did this shit not come up when they were being vetted?  Political parties have been known, even on the state level, to do opposition research in prep for scandals like this - and somehow this slipped through the cracks.  Were these guys that entrenched in the VA state Democratic Party establishment?  Did anyone even bother to track these down as the 2018 election neared?  These questions somehow escaped the mainstream media but I think most people who have a passing knowledge of American politics have had these questions in their heads.  In Herring;'s case his revelation may have been trying to get in front of it as the shit went down but the Repubs will use this as ammunition.  And they'll definitely use the allegations against Fairfax as ammo being able to concern troll their racism and hide it in a way to mask the Demcrats as "anti woman" or some shit like that.

However, while many people have said the more ethical thing that Northam could've done was resign we must also point out that the website that leaked Northam's pics weren't doing it out of public outrage but out of cynical politicking.  It turned out to be released by a neo Confederate leaning website with ties to the man Northam beat in the Governor's race, Corey Stewart.  The common assumption was with Northam out, they could use the sexual assault allegations Fairfax faced to get him out and then possibly go after Herring if he made the confession he did, which would leave the 4th in charge, a Repub delegate  as the Governor.  They didn't count on Northam et al refusing to leave.  Which leads to the other factor - with the Democrats staying in this case the GOP can claim that the liberals only want to win and don't really care about racism or sexual assault as a cynical way to try and pick off votes, especially cynically trying to get the African American vote.

Ironically though polls taken after the scandal show that the majority of African Americans in Virginia want Northam to stay in office.  Some even suggest that the blockface scandal isn't that big of a deal.  That I personally tend to doubt.  However, I do think a lot of people may still want Northam in office there because the devil they know is still preferable to the devil they don't know, so to speak.

It's hard to say what lies ahead but as things slowly fade here this may either be a footnote to the weirdness of this year or it could be weaponized in Virginia for elections in 2020 and beyond.  I wish I knew what lies ahead but election years and the road leading to them are often confusing and unpredictable.

CPAC 2019

The Conservative Political Action Conference was held by the American Conservative Union at the very end of February and first couple days of March 2019.  The annual conference of the hard right base that the Repubs cater to every year had the usual weird mix of speakers, booths et al.  However, there were some distinctly disturbing things that went down.  While I"ll cover one of them in the upcoming issue, something else comes to mind as well that deserves mention in this blog.

The lockstep in rhetoric and attitudes at CPAC is getting scarier then usual.  Even when the Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago's weird over two hour speech is taken out of the equation,  the tendency for the base to embrace one point of view on an issue with next to no disagreement was ratcheted up more this time in prep for 2020.  Whether it's their pro forced childbirth stance using what should be a non issue of late term abortion (a procedure only performed when either the mother's life is in danger or when a medical issue with the fetus is so bad it either won't survive birth or will die very shortly thereafter) and ratchieting it into believing the other side supports infanticide or giving the illusion that socialism will ruin the US if the GOP doesn't win, what seems to be prominent in what little I was able to catch (again I was taking care of family issues) was more aimed at painting people on the left as not merely people they disagree with but creature who hate the country and want to persecute the right wing.  While some of this has always gone down at CPAC, their rallying aorund electoral vote winner Donny seems to give it a darker vibe this time around. 

While its good they reportedly banned white nationalists from appearing there a(t least on the booths to sell stuff side of things) it seems to contradict themselves when some of the speakers (especially Donny) seems to spout a variation of their same rhetoric.   Add that to the spin that those on the other side are evil and beyond reasoning with and there's  the potential of a small number of this lot that could be emboldened to head towards violent confrontation.  I really hope it doesn't happen but, until I see people on the right call in their own and consistently point out that the hateful rhetoric is counterproductive, I'm not holding my breath.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT 

I wasn't going to comment on this case at all given that it could be confusing whether of not the actor from the TV show Empire was attacked by two people late one night in Chicago or whether it was staged or not.  However, the recent dropping of all charges against Smollett means a lot of people are upset, climing that justice was not served.  The Mad Fuhrer of Mar-A-Lago even tweeted that he's having the FBI and DOJ lookk into the case (which, given it's a state case and not Federal would be difficult at best).

So where do I stand?  I have no idea.  I really don't/  At this point it's possible that Smollett was telling the truth. It was also possible that he might not have but that the prosecutions case was so weak (and 16 felony charges was a bit of overkill) that pursuing it further could've blown up in the Cook County prosecutors faces.  Nobody saw this coming so I have to say that I really don't know what to expect here - and you probably don't either. 


Granted this is merely the tip of the iceberg in terms of news issues that may fall through the cracks.  With the debate over the Green New Deal being of utmost importance, healthcare, women's reproductive rights being under attack now more than ever and various other things in the news it can be hard to get to the point.  We'll try to focus on these issues later when time permits.  Now it's time to step back and have some dinner. 

P.S.:  For the time being I am allowing comments.  However, if anyone decides to be a complete asshole or threatens myself or anyone else I have no problems with shutting that down.  Keep that in mind before you decide to comment.