Sunday, November 25, 2018

I Pledge to Vote for the Democrat in 2020

Hopefully all visitors to this site will consider this as obvious as 'water is wet', or 'breathing is better than the alternative'.  The blog title is Things Everyone Knows, after all.

Then again, we're still more than 23 months out from election day, and already I'm seeing crap like this:


Since we're apparently going to start doing this now, I guess it's time to remind everyone of the simple formula for winning elections:
  1. Find your favorite candidate.  If s/he is a Democrat, great.  If s/he is not a Democrat, and refuses to run as a Democrat, find someone else.
  2. Do everything you can to help that candidate win the nomination.
  3. Once the nomination has been decided, do everything you can to get the nominee elected --- even if that person is not the person you identified in step 1.
Easy, right?  And obvious, too.  But since it seems some people still don't get it, let's break it down a bit.

The rationale for step (3) is that any Democrat will be a better president than Trump.  And if this isn't self-evidently obvious to you, then clearly you aren't enduring first-hand the consequences of Trump's attacks on health care, his sympathizing with white supremacists, his ethnic cleansing policies, his assault on the environment, his unconcern for victims of natural disasters, his unnecessary tariffs, etc.  And apparently you aren't sufficiently concerned about the dangers of a Supreme Court with Neill Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

The rationale for step (1) should be even more obvious.  The only candidate capable of beating Trump in 2020 is the Democratic nominee.  So if there's some Johnny Unbeatable candidate who you think will make the best president ever, but he refuses to run as a Democrat, then to hell with him.  We really don't have time for third-party purity tests.

I'll provide one brief example, just because it happens to come from my own congressional district, MN-02.  First, I'll show you the result for our congressional race in 2016:


As you can see, a left-leaning independent candidate, who had no hope of winning the election, took 7% of the vote in an open-seat race in a historically red district, where the Republican candidate ended up winning with just under 47% of the vote.

Would the Democrat have won in a 2-way race?  Well, we can't re-run the 2016 election, but as it turns out, the independent candidate chose not to run in 2018 (she ran against Amy Klobuchar in her Senate race instead), so the 2018 race ended up as a 2-way race between the same Republican and Democratic candidates --- and guess what?


Yes, the dynamics of the race were different in 2018.  This was a Democratic wave election, and the Republican Lewis was now an incumbent who branded himself as an 'independent' Republican (while still very much a trumpian).  So it's not an exact comparison, but --- it appears that practically all of the independent candidate's vote went to the Democratic challenger, leading to the first election of a Democrat in this district in nearly 20 years.

There is really no argument in favor of a third-party lefty candidate which outweighs this result.

So I'm asking nicely, please, if you oppose Trump and support good things like the Constitution and the rule of law and human rights and affordable health care --- follow this simple formula.  There is far more at stake than any one person's opinion about the 'right' kind of Democrat/liberal/progressive.

Tuesday, November 13, 2018

The 2018 Election Isn't Over Yet

There are still two races where extra dollars might make a difference.

  1. The race for Georgia Secretary of State is headed for a runoff, to be held on December 4.  Do you remember the (now former) Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, and his heavy-handed voter suppression?  Well, here's a chance to put someone in that office who will actually encourage and facilitate voting in the state of Georgia, which can only be good news for any Democrats running in the future (like for the U.S. Senate in 2020).  So please give what you can to the Democratic candidate, John Barrow.
  2. This one is more aspirational than anything --- we're trying to elect a Democrat to the Senate in Mississippi.  In a 4-way race, Mike Espy and his main Republican opponent each totaled about 41% of the vote, and so a runoff election will be held there in about 2 weeks.  There's really no good reason to think that Espy has a chance at this, except that with the country's attention on Georgia and Florida, it doesn't seem like the national parties are focusing much on Mississippi.  Perhaps if we can really turn out the Democrats on November 27, we can pull of the upset!  It's worth a few bucks, anyway.  (Note: Espy's opponent recently made a lynching joke, which can't possibly help her).

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

Trump is Playing Xenophobic Political Games With America's Troops

For perspective, here's a table showing the number of people Customs and Border Patrol arrested illegally crossing the border each year since the turn of the century:

Fiscal YearIllegal Crossings
20001,676,438
20011,266,214
2002955,310
2003931,557
20041,160,395
20051,189,075
20061,089,092
2007876,704
2008723,825
2009556,041
2010463,382
2011340,252
2012364,768
2013420,789
2014486,651
2015337,117
2016415,816
2017310,531

Trump recently announced that he is sending 5,200 military troops to respond to a caravan of refugees heading our way from Central America --- a caravan with a current estimated size of about 4,000.

Note that by law, the American military is prohibited from engaging in immigration enforcement, or indeed, ANY kind of law enforcement, without the explicit authorization of Congress.  So it's not clear what Trump expects the troops to do.

Also note that 4,000 refugees --- assuming they all make it here --- is just about 1% of the total number of people CBP routinely deal with on a yearly basis.

Also note that Trump is sending more troops than the estimated number of refugees.  Does he think that every single refugee needs their own personal military escort (and that some of them need two)?

Finally, and most damningly, note that in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the number of illegal border crossings was more than three times what it is today --- yet George W. Bush never saw a need to send our military to the Mexican border.

So is Trump just a coward, afraid of a moderate-sized group of unarmed, tired and hungry refugees?  Is he completely unqualified for his job, and doesn't know the difference between typical immigration and an actual threat to the country?  Or is he just using our troops like toy soldiers to stir up fear and xenophobia in an attempt to scare people into electing Republicans?

There's no reason it can't be all three.  And all of them are reasons to vote out Trump's Republican enablers and replace them with Democrats who aren't scared, clueless and craven.

So vote for all the Democrats on the ballot.  And contribute what you can in the campaign's closing days.

Monday, October 29, 2018

Final Donation Roundup for 2018

With 8 days to go until the election, it's time to sit down, figure out how much you can afford to give campaigns for their final stretch, and decide where you think your dollars can do the most good.

And I'm here to help.  I believe that the most important thing we can do in these final days is to work to reclaim the Senate.  I'm under no delusion that it will be easy --- consensus opinion is that it won't happen.  But it's also not impossible, and we don't want to spend the next 2 years wondering what if.  So I'm going to strongly encourage folks to give to any and all Senate races where there's even an outside chance of a Democrat victory.

For House and Gubernatorial races, however, I'm only going to include races where FiveThirtyEight estimates that the two parties are separated by less than 3 percentage points (using the 'Deluxe' model).  With just 8 days left, we're really not likely to see much more movement than that.

Choose wisely.  Give what you can.  Then sign up to help Get Out the Vote!!!

Senate
  • Beto O'Rourke (TX).  Trailing incumbent Ted Cruz by 5.2%.
  • Phil Bredesen (TN).  Trailing Marsha Blackburn by 4.4% in the race to fill the seat vacated by Bob Corker.  MoveOn has pulled its funding from Bredesen for saying he supports Brett Kavanaugh, but that was a mistake.
  • Heidi Heitkamp (ND).  Trailing challenger Kevin Cramer by 4.4%.  Cramer who recently said that even if Brett Kavanaugh DID attempt to rape Christine Blasey Ford, it's 'nothing' because it 'never went anywhere'.
  • Jacky Rosen (NV).  Trailing incumbent Dean Heller by 0.8%.
  • Claire McCaskill (MO).  Leading her challenger by 0.7%.
  • Kyrsten Sinema (AZ).  Leading her opponent by 1.7%.
  • Joe Donnelly (IN).  Leading his opponent by 2.3%.
  • Bill Nelson (FL).  Leading Florida governor Rick Scott by 2.6%.
Two points to call out here.  First, if these numbers match the final results at the polls, then Republicans will retain their 51-49 Senate majority.  So somehow, the Democrats need to beat the odds in two of the four races in Texas, Tennessee, North Dakota and Nevada.

So if you live in or near any of those states, please help GOTV!

Second --- sadly, the Republicans have been steadily gaining ground in all of these races.  It appears that their xenophobic fearmongering about the refugee caravan is having the desired effect.


House
UPDATE: SwingLeft has a site set up where you can make a single donation that will be split evenly among Porter, Mucarsel-Powell, Finkenauer, Golden, Brindisi, Scott, Allred, McAdams and Spanberger, if you want to save yourself some clicks.

Governor

Saturday, October 20, 2018

17 Reasons to Vote for Every Democrat on the Ballot

The election is 17 days away, so I thought I would write up 17 reasons why you need to vote for every Democrat on the ballot, wherever you are (kind of like my closing argument back in 2016).  Since no one has an attention span these days, I've tried to make them all short enough to fit in a tweet.  I thought about posting one per day to help boost site traffic, but I think it's more important to get all the information out there well before the election.  If you only want to see one reason per day, bookmark this page and keep coming back!

  1. Democrats want to help students with college loan debt, which would stimulate the economy.  Republicans want to help for-profit colleges and debt collectors.
  2. The $1.5 trillion tax cut blew a hole in the budget, which Republicans now want to close by cutting Medicare and other programs.  The tax cut mainly gave even more money to corporations, which passed it along to their wealthy investors.
  3. Citing the deficit their tax cut created, the GOP House has already voted to cut nearly $1 trillion from income security programs, with an additional $500 billion from Medicare.
  4. The GOP Congress refuses to check Trump's abuses of power, for example, his consistent attacks on U.S. law enforcement.
  5. Republicans have tried 3 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which has given affordable health care to an estimated 20 million Americans.  If they retain control of Congress, they will succeed in taking health care away from those Americans.
  6. The Trump administration initiated a horrific and unnecessary family separation policy, which took more than 2,500 immigrant children from their parents with no plan for reuniting them.  Months after a court deadline, nearly 200 children are still separated.
  7. The family separation policy was a true travesty of justice, demanding that parents agree to deportation before reuniting them with their children, and making children as young as 2 defend themselves in court.
  8. The GOP Congress refuses to investigate Trump's flagrant corruption, like the $500 million loan he accepted from China in exchange for dropping sanctions on Chinese telecom ZTE.
  9. If Republicans hold the House of Representatives, they will probably name Jim Jordan as Speaker, a man who turned a blind eye to widespread sexual abuse of athletes when he was a coach at Ohio State.
  10. From Trump to Kavanaugh to Bill Shine to Rob Porter to Jim Jordan, Republicans have demonstrated that they just don't care about sexual assault.
  11. The GOP Congress refuses to investigate Trump's past criminal behavior, like his years-long tax fraud.
  12. Trump's election emboldened white supremacists, many of whom are now running for office as Republicans.  A Republican victory in 2018 will embolden them further.
  13. If Republicans hold the Senate, they will confirm even more of Trump's conservative judges, even if they're liars and accused sexual predators.
  14. America is averaging ONE MASS SHOOTING PER DAY, and Republicans refuse to pass ANY gun safety legislation to change that.
  15. Widespread Republican campaigns of voter suppression must not be allowed to succeed.  If you don't use your vote to eject Republicans from office, you may one day lose the chance to vote at all.
  16. The GOP Congress refuses to check Trump's assault on a free press.  Days after a Washington Post reporter was brutally murdered in Saudi Arabia, Trump told the crowd at his rally how great it is to physically assault reporters.
  17. Republicans know that the Trump White House is corrupt as hell --- they've even made a list of more than 100 investigations of Trump they are currently BLOCKING.  Only a Democratic Congress will provide adequate oversight of Trump.
So that's it.  If you want fiscal policy that helps students and ordinary Americans instead of more tax cuts for Trump's Wall Street buddies, vote for the Democrats.  If you want every American to have affordable health care, vote for the Democrats.  If you want humane immigration policy and common-sense gun safety, vote for the Democrats.  And if you want meaningful oversight of a historically corrupt president, it will only happen if we make sure Democrats control the levers of power in Washington.

Now go vote.

Sunday, October 7, 2018

We Need Manchin and Bredesen

This was a mistake:
MoveOn, a progressive outside group, said on Friday that it is cutting support for Democrats in two key Senate races because they are supporting Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. 
"We're cancelling a planned six-figure digital video ad expenditure for Phil Bredesen in Tennessee due to his Kavanaugh position," the group said in a tweet. 
They added that "similarly [we] will be pulling all planned campaigning on behalf of Joe Manchin in West Virginia if he votes yes. Kavanaugh is unfit for the Court."
This makes sense politically --- why reward two guys who would a support serial liar and likely sexual predator for the Supreme Court?  But it exactly wrong strategically.

There are two reasons why we need Joe Manchin and Phil Bredesen in the U.S. Senate.  The first is: No matter how far they may be from our 'ideal' Democrat, they're still going to be one hell of a lot better than their Republican alternatives.  Manchin, for example, has voted with Trump 61.5% percent of the time, which makes him a terrible Democrat.

But if his Republican challenger wins his seat, that person will be voting for Trump nearly 100% of the time.  It's important to remember that we're talking about West Virginia, a state trump carried by 42 points.  The story is similar with Bredesen.

The second, and most important reason to continue supporting these guys is that the Senate is at stake.  The Republicans seated Kavanaugh with a 51-49 margin.  Just think who they'll seat next if Justice Ginsburg or Justice Breyer die in the next two years.

The ONLY way to prevent the situation from deteriorating is to hope that the Democrats manage to win at least 51 seats next month.  If that happens, Chuck Schumer likely replaces Mitch McConnell as Majority Leader, and it's almost certain that freezes out any more Trump SCOTUS appointments for the next 2 years.

The Kavanugh fight is over, and we lost.  Don't allow that to set ourselves up to lose the next fight.

Thursday, October 4, 2018

Report from Planet Xorgax

For those who have had enough with the battle over Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court, I thought I would update you about what's happening on Planet Gorgax where, by coincidence, a similar debate is going on.

The politics on Planet Gorgax is similar to our own, with power more or less evenly divided between two political parties, the Thoogs and the Gurphs.  Thoog Emporer Biggott has nominated a new judge to serve on the Imperial High Court.  Judge Klorphan requires confirmation by the Imperial Senate before he can be seated.

The process was problematic from the beginning.  Even when Judge Klorphan was nominated three months ago, Emporer Biggott was under investigation for crimes against the Empire.  It didn't help matters any when, a month later, the Emporer's former lawyer implicated him him in a criminal act.  The following month, the Emporer's former campaign manager, who himself had been convicted on 8 felony charges earlier, agreed to cooperate with the team investigating the Emporer.

Given that the Emporer had been implicated in a crime, and was under active investigation for crimes against the Empire, it would be fair to assume that the Senate wouldn't consider any nomination made by the Emporer.  Instead, the Thoog-controlled Imperial Senate proceeded with the confirmation process in what can only be described as an act of sheer partisanship.

The next major development occurred about a month ago, when it was discovered that Judge Klorphan had lied under oath during his previous confirmation hearings, lies that he repeated again to the Imperial Senate.  The Imperial High Court has a long tradition of its members upholding the highest ethical standards, and it's hard to imagine that these lies themselves didn't end Judge Klorphan's ambitions then and there.  But again, this discovery went largely ignored by the highly-partisan Thoogs in the Imperial Senate.

Then, just about a week later, a bombshell news release detailed a female Xorgaxian's claims that when Judge Klorphan was an adolescent, he consumed too much kluuk and attacked her, climbed on top of her, and tried to take her clothes off --- presumably in an attempt to rape her.  A week later, a different female alleged that Judge Klorphan had sexually assaulted her as well, this time when he was a young man.  Three days later, a third woman came forward with a sworn oath that, while not accusing Judge Klorphan of sexually assaulting her personally, stated that as a young Xorgaxian he had regularly engaged in sexually aggressive behavior, likely but not definitely including gang rape.

These allegations understandably threw the confirmation process into chaos.

Judge Klorphan naturally denied the allegations, but they weren't easy to sweep aside.  Independent analysts have declared all three women's stories credible for a number of reasons.  What's puzzling is the way Judge Klorphan and his Thoog supporters are reacting.

One might choose to avoid a discussion of Klorphan's guilt or innocence by ending the nomination process entirely, and requesting that Emporer Biggott simply choose another judge with less baggage.  But failing that, one would expect that all parties would welcome a full investigation into the allegations by law enforcement --- either to verify the allegations of the women (and thus avoid seating a sexual predator and possible rapist on the Imperial High Court), or to clear the judge's name.  This is what all Xorgaxians should want.

But strangely, although the Gurph Senators requested exactly such an investigation, the Thoog Senators refused to ask for one, and Emporer Biggott refused to order one.  Even more strangely, Judge Klorphan repeatedly refused to demand an investigation --- preferring, it seems, to live the rest of his life under a cloud rather than demand the one thing that could prove him innocent.

This stonewalling seemed for all the world like a partisan power-play on the part of Emporer Biggott and the Thoogs, and it made Judge Klorphan look like a Xorgaxian with something to hide.

The stench of partisanship became more pungent when the Thoogs who control the Imperial Senate chose to hear additional testimony from only one of Klorphan's three accusers, as well as from Klorphan himself.  They refused to hear testimony from the only other person in the room when the alleged attack occurred, who also happened to be Klorphan's best friend at the time.  Nor did they make any attempt to seek out any of the other Xorgaxians alleged to be at the party where the attack occurred.

And the testimony of Klorphan was simply bizarre.  In the only public forum he had to prove his innocence, he continued to lie repeatedly under oath.  Again, this is completely inappropriate for a sitting judge, much less someone who aspires to the highest court in the land.  But beyond that, it completely destroys his credibility when he denies the allegations against him.

But rather than end the nomination process then and there --- or even slow it down for further investigation, the Thoog leaders in the Senate actually planned to ram through Klorphan's nomination immediately!  Such a thing is 100% incompatible with Xorgaxian principles of justice or ethics, and can only be attributed to Thoog hyper-partisanship.  It looked like Xorgax was on the brink of a true travesty of justice, until two Xorgaxian survivors of sexual assault confronted a Thoog Senator, and got him to hold up the vote until law enforcement actually conducted an investigation into the allegations against Klorphan.

The investigation just concluded, although it was clearly not a thorough investigation, and it seems quite likely that Emporer Biggott and/or Klorphan's Thoog supporters deliberately impeded the investigation.  In short, the investigation was a sham, designed to give cover to wavering Thoog Senators so they can justify their vote for the lying (and likely sexual predator) Klorphan.

If Emporer Biggott and the Thoogs were interested in the integrity of the Imperial High Court, wouldn't they want a thorough investigation, to find the truth, whatever it may be?  And if Judge Klorphan is truly innocent, wouldn't he want such an investigation?  There is no good explanation for the Thoog party interference, and it is clearly a politically-motivated abuse of power.

Yet in spite of all this, the Thoogs have convinced a substantial portion of the Xorgaxian population that these allegations, and the desire to investigate them fully, is a partisan smear on the part of the Gurphs!

Think about the mental gymnastics required to believe such a thing.  One would need to:
  1. Believe that all three women had decided independently to make fabricated claims against Klorphan --- two of them making sworn statements under penalty of perjury and criminal prosecution.
  2. Believe that all of the corroborating witnesses (people who had heard these stories either directly from the women or second-hand months or years before Klorphan was ever nominated) are also lying.
  3. That the independent experts who have examined the women's claims and found them credible are somehow wrong --- or are also part of the 'smear'.
  4. That Thoog politicians believe that all of this is a hyper-partisan and criminal smear on the part of the Gurphs --- but for some reason they don't want the 'smear' to be investigated.
  5. Ignore Klorphan's repeated, obvious lies on a range of topics.
  6. Ignore the repeated, obvious partisanship of Emporer Biggott and the Thoogs --- and accept their obviously nonsensical claims that the Gurphs are the ones acting with partisan bias.
  7. Believe that the Gurphs would orchestrate --- and successfully conceal --- this vast conspiracy to defeat Klorphan's nomination, only so that Emporer Biggott could nominate (and likely get seated) a different judge who will rule in a way that pleases the Thoogs.
They're not the sharpest bunch, the Xorgaxians who support the Thoogs.

Anyway, Judge Klorphan's ultimate fate is still anyone's guess.  It seems likely the Thoogs are still going to put him on the court, in spite of everything.

But maybe not!  If you've read this far and agree that putting Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court would be a hideous mistake, you need to call your Senator immediately (especially if that Senator is a Thoog Republican), and tell them to vote NO on Kavanaugh!  Call:

(202) 224-3121


Sunday, September 23, 2018

The Inverted Morality of Republicans

With two new allegations of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh --- one public, one private so far --- it's even more obvious today that he is unfit for a Supreme Court appointment than it was yesterday.

But at this point, discussing Kavanugh's problems is redundant.  Instead, I want to focus on one point of the New Yorker story by Jayne Mayer and Ronan Farrow:
Senior Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week and, in conversations with The New Yorker, expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote.
Kavanaugh has already disqualified himself by lying to Congress, and one very brave woman has come forward to tell her story of Kavanaugh attempting to rape her in high school.  Under such circumstances, a person with ANY sense of propriety, ethics or common sense would, upon seeing a second woman come forward, realize that the Kavanaugh nomination must come to an immediate end.

But the Senate Republicans saw this, and immediately sought to 'accelerate the timing of a committee vote' --- as if confirming him would somehow change the fact that he's clearly a serial sexual predator.

It's not just Trump; it's the whole Republican party.  They are, without exception, rotten to the core.

Saturday, September 22, 2018

Kavanaugh

Brett Kavanaugh is, quite simply, unfit to serve on the Supreme Court.  The fact that Trump hasn't pulled his nomination demonstrates Trump's utter lack of integrity (try to contain your surprise).  The fact that McConnell and other Senate Republicans haven't publicly expressed their intention to reject his nomination demonstrates theirs.

Again, try to contain your surprise.

What MAY surprise you is that I'm not (yet) talking about the allegations made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford against Kavanaugh.  No, I'm talking about the multiple instances where Kavanaugh committed perjury --- something it seems that no one is discussing.  In particular, when the Bush administration was working to confirm judicial nominees early this century, a Republican aide named Manuel Miranda stole some strategy memos from Democrats, and
. . . [Kavanaugh] was repeatedly asked under oath as part of his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings for his position on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit about whether he had received such information from Miranda, and each time he falsely denied it.
He repeated these lies during his recent Supreme Court confirmation hearings.  Perjury is a felony, and while it seems that legal experts agree Kavanaugh's lies don't meet the high bar for actual prosecution, it's a slam dunk that no one who brazenly commits perjury multiple times has any business serving as a judge, much less sitting on the Supreme Court.

Note: But the Republicans don't care.  Not even one out of 51, apparently.

Now the allegations of attempted rape made by Dr. Ford are an entirely separate matter, but Kavanaugh's checkered history with the truth puts him at a disadvantage in terms of credibility.  While Dr. Ford has passed a polygraph, and experts in sexual assault deem her story credible, there is no reason to give much weight to Kavanaugh's denials.

Note: But the Republicans don't care.  Not even one out of 51, apparently.

Kavanaugh's Republican supporters aren't doing themselves any favors, either.  While they correctly point out that the concept that one is 'innocent until proven guilty' is the bedrock of our legal system, they are also blocking an FBI investigation that might exonerate Kavanaugh.  This is a neat trick to make sure Kavanaugh is never proven guilty, even if he is.

Or maybe they're blocking such an investigation precisely because they're concerned it might incriminate him instead.  Or quite possibly, they don't want anyone looking too closely at Kavanaugh's formative years because he might have still other skeletons in his closet.

In the end, it's clear that Kavanaugh doesn't belong on the Supreme Court, and it looks like even the Senate Republicans recognize that fact.

Note: But they seem determined to put him there anyway.

Tuesday, September 11, 2018

Donate

I've donated to some of these candidates --- I wish I could donate to all of them.

In an effort to support a 'blue wave', I've identified a number of close races where a few extra dollars might help push the Democrat over the top.  ALL RACES BASED ON UPDATED FIVETHIRTYEIGHT ANALYSIS AS OF 10/22/2018!

I'll make an effort to keep this page up to date, but as always with stuff you read on the internet, caveat emptor.

Senate
Like most people (with a conscience, anyway), I'm both angry and upset about Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court.  The good news is, we have a real chance in the next month to re-take the Senate.  If we manage to get 51 Democrats elected, it will guarantee that Trump can't seat any more Supreme Court justices until at least 2021.  So we need to do everything we can to elect Democrats to the Senate, even Democrats with views we strongly disagree with.

Here are the Senate races which are still in play, listed from most GOP-leaning to most Democrat-leaning, according to FiveThirtyEight as of October 22:
  • Beto O'Rourke (TX).  Trailing incumbent Ted Cruz by 5.0%.
  • Phil Bredesen (TN).  Trailing Marsha Blackburn by 4.1% in the race to fill the seat vacated by Bob Corker.  MoveOn has pulled its funding from Bredesen for saying he supports Brett Kavanaugh, but that was a mistake.
  • Heidi Heitkamp (ND).  Trailing challenger Kevin Cramer by 4.2%.  Cramer who recently said that even if Brett Kavanaugh DID attempt to rape Christine Blasey Ford, it's 'nothing' because it 'never went anywhere'.
  • Jacky Rosen (NV).  Trailing incumbent Dean Heller by 0.1%.
  • Claire McCaskill (MO).  Leading her challenger by 1.7%.
  • Kyrsten Sinema (AZ).  Has a 1.9% lead in the race to replace retiring Senator Jeff Flake.
  • Bill Nelson (FL).  Leading Florida governor Rick Scott by 2.6%.
  • Joe Donnelly (IN).  Has a 3.7% lead in his race for re-election.
I've taken Joe Manchin (WV) off this list, because FiveThirtyEight currently favors him by nearly 10 points.  Since my last update, the Republicans have gained ground in Texas, North Dakota, Nevada and Indiana.  Sinema's lead remains constant, and Democrats have gained ground everywhere else.  If the current polling holds, Democrats will lose one seat (Heitkamp) and pick up one other (Sinema), leaving Republicans with the same 51-49 advantage they currently hold.

So we need to get Jacky Rosen back ahead in Nevada, and hope that O'Rourke, Bredesen or Heitkamp pull off an upset.  Those four races are probably the best ones to put money into.

U.S. House
  • Of course I need to mention the Democratic challenger Angie Craig right here in my home district of MN-02.  This district has been red for a very long time, but Angie has a real chance of bringing home the win for team D.  Leading by 6.8%.
  • Dan Feehan is gaining on Republican Jim Hagedorn in the open DEMOCRATIC seat in MN-01 which Tim Walz vacated to run for governor.  Trailing by 0.2%.
  • Joe Radinovich is the Democrat running to replace retiring Democrat Rick Nolan in MN-08. The GOP is running attack ads against him because, it seems --- he has a lot of parking tickets, speeding tickets, and so forthTrailing by 5.2%.
  • Amy McGrath has a real shot to flip a seat in ruby-red Kentucky (KY-06).  She also has some amazing campaign ads.  Leading by 0.7%.
  • Katie Porter is on track to flip a seat in CA-45.  Leading by 3.6%.
  • NEW!  Josh Harder is likely to flip CA-10.  Leading by 4.0%.
  • NEW!  Katie Hill is likely to flip CA-25.  Leading by 3.2%.
  • HOLY SMOKE!!!  Harley Rouda is currently ahead of the repugnant Dana Rohrabacher, considered the member of Congress most compromised by Russia.  We need to win this one, folks!  Leading by 3.0%!
  • Xochitl Torres Small is in a dead heat to fill another open Republican seat in NM-02.  Leading by 0.2%.
  • FiveThirtyEight still has this race as 'Lean Republican', but Cook Political Report has just moved UT-04 to a tossup between Democratic challenger Ben McAdams and incumbent Republican Mia Love.  Trailing by 1.8%.
  • Lizzie Fletcher is positioned to defeat incumbent Republican John Culberson in TX-07.  Trailing by 0.2%.
  • Gina Ortiz Jones is falling behind incumbent Republican Will Hurd in TX-23.  Trailing by 5.8%.
  • NEW!  Colin Allred is within striking distance of current House Rules Committee chair Pete Sessions in TX-32.  Trailing by 1.6%.
  • Paul Davis is in a tossup race for an open GOP seat in KS-02.  Leading by 0.9%.
  • Sharice Davids has pulled into the lead over incumbent Republican Kevin Yoder in KS-03.  Leading by 5.9%.
  • Sean Casten is close behind incumbent Republican Peter Roskam in IL-06.  Leading by 2.0%.
  • Brendan Kelly is close on the heels of incumbent Mike Bost in IL-12.  Trailing by 2.2%.
  • Elissa Slotkin is tied with incumbent Mike Bishop in MI-8 (Cook Political Report just changed the race to 'Lean Democrat').  Leading by 0.7%.
  • Kara Eastman is neck-and-neck with incumbent Republican Don Bacon in NE-02.  Trailing by 3.0%.
  • Cindy Axne is statistically tied with Republican incumbent David Young in IA-03.  Leading by 1.9%.
  • Aftab Pureval has slipped behind incumbent Republican Steve Chabot in OH-01.  Trailing by 4.0%.
  • NEW!  Danny O'Connor is closing on an incumbent Republican in OH-12.  Trailing by 2.0%.
  • Debbie Mucarsel-Powell has a shot at unseating incumbent Republican Carlos Curbelo in FL-26.  Trailing by 0.4%.
  • NEW!  Kristen Carlson has a chance to flip FL-15.  Trailing by 3.0%.
  • Kathy Manning is in a tossup race against incumbent Republican Ted Budd in NC-13.  Trailing by 1.4%.
  • Dan McCready has moved NC-09 to a tossup.  Leading by 0.9%.
  • NEW!  Linda Coleman is within striking distance in NC-02.  Trailing by 2.4%.
  • Leslie Cockburn is poised to pick up an open GOP seat in VA-05.  Trailing by 2.0%.
  • Abigail Spanberger is a bit more than one point behind the odious Dave Brat in VA-07.  Trailing by 0.2%.
  • NEW!  Elaine Luria is within striking distance in VA-02.  Trailing by 2.0%.
  • Andy Kim is neck-and-neck with incumbent Republican Tom McArthur in NJ-03.  Leading by 2.5%.
  • Tom Malinowski is a slight favorite over incumbent Republican Leonard Lance in NJ-07.  Leading by 1.8%.
  • Antonio Delgado is slightly favored over incumbent Republican John Faso in NY-19.  Leading by 1.7%.
  • NEW!  Anthony Brindisi is favored to flip NY-22.  Leading by 2.2%.
  • NEW!  Nate McMurray is within striking distance of incumbent Republican Chris Collins, who has been indicted for insider tradingTrailing by 4.3%.
  • Scott Wallace is in a dead heat with incumbent Republican Brian Fitzpatrick in PA-01.  Leading by 0.6%.
  • NEW!  George Scott has a chance to flip PA-10.  Trailing by 3.2%.
  • Jared Golden is within striking distance of flipping ME-02.  Leading by 2.0%.
  • Kim Schrier has a narrow lead in the race to fill an open (Republican) seat in WA-08.  Leading by 1.4%.
Governor
  • Laura Kelly has a good shot to claim the governor's mansion in Kansas, and it's vital that she does.  Her opponent is Trump's voter-suppression guru Kris Kobach, who is such a clown a judge recently ordered him to take classes to gain a better understanding of the law (no, really).  Kelly would likely have a decent lead over Kobach if it weren't for the fact that some third-party wanker has decided to try to screw things up for her.  I just made a donation to Kelly myself.  Trailing by 2.3%.
  • Stacey Abrams has a good chance to claim the governor's mansion in Georgia.  If she manages to win, it will happen in spite of massive voter suppression on the part of her opponent.  Trailing by 0.4%.
  • Andrew Gillum is consistently polling ahead of Trump's hand-picked candidate for governor of Florida, a position which has been held by the odious Rick Scott for the past 8 years.  Leading by 4.1%.
  • Recent polls actually show Democrat Tony Evers pulling away from odious Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, but it might be a good idea to throw Evers a few bucks to make sure he keeps his lead.  Leading by 2.0%.
  • NEW!  Richard Cordray is keeping it close in Ohio.  Trailing by 0.8%.
  • NEW!  Steve Sisolak is neck-and-neck with his Republican opponent in Nevada.  Leading by 0.4%.
  • NEW!  In Alaska's crazy governor's race, Mark Begich is trailing by 3.8%.
That's all for now.  I'm sure I'll come up with others before election day, so bookmark this post and keep checking in for updates!

Monday, September 10, 2018

A Kaepernick v Trump election

I want to make it clear up front: This is NOT a post suggesting that Colin Kaepernick should run for president in 2020.  Rather, it's to call out the utter moral decay of the Republican party based on a recent article in the National Review.

As one should expect from the National Review, the article is both one-sided and dishonest, and I've dissected it in some detail here.  But the upshot is that the author, Kyle Smith, has decided that the Democratic party is the 'party of Kaepernick', and he seems to believe this will be simply devastating for Democrats' electoral chances.

Well, since the Republicans are unquestionably the party of Trump, let's spend a bit of time thinking about who comes out looking better in this comparison.

To start with, let's try doing something that very few people have done since Kaepernick first knelt during the national anthem.  Let's read what he has to say about his reasons for doing it:
"I'm going to continue to stand with the people that are being oppressed. To me, this is something that has to change. When there's significant change and I feel that flag represents what it's supposed to represent, and this country is representing people the way that it's supposed to, I'll stand."

"This stand wasn’t for me. This is because I’m seeing things happen to people that don’t have a voice, people that don’t have a platform to talk and have their voices heard, and effect change. So I’m in the position where I can do that and I’m going to do that for people that can’t."

"It's something that can unify this team. It's something that can unify this country. If we have these real conversations that are uncomfortable for a lot of people. If we have these conversations, there's a better understanding of where both sides are coming from."

"I have great respect for the men and women that have fought for this country. I have family, I have friends that have gone and fought for this country. And they fight for freedom, they fight for the people, they fight for liberty and justice, for everyone. That’s not happening. People are dying in vain because this country isn’t holding their end of the bargain up, as far as giving freedom and justice, liberty to everybody. That’s something that’s not happening. I’ve seen videos, I’ve seen circumstances where men and women that have been in the military have come back and been treated unjustly by the country they fought have for, and have been murdered by the country they fought for, on our land. That’s not right."
Whether one agrees with his methods, his purpose is honorable: using his platform as an NFL player to give voice to the oppressed whose voices cannot be heard.  And this one small action was so threatening to people in power (the NFL owners, the Republican party, and Trump) that they took away his platform, and with it, his career.

There is no question that Kaepernick would still be playing in the NFL if he had never taken this stand.  One could argue about whether he'd be a starter, but it's probably fair to assume that he would be earning as much as Teddy Bridgewater, the backup to Drew Brees.  That's $5 million both for the 2017 season he missed, and the current 2018 season.

So at a minimum, he's sacrificed his NFL playing career and $10 milliion in career earnings to take this stand.  And since leaving the NFL, he has helped to raise more than $1 million for charity.

How does this compare to Donald Trump?  How much time do you have?

Well, like Kaepernick, Trump also set up a charity to collect money.  But unlike Kaepernick, Trump's charity was actually a self-dealing sham.  Trump really only cares about giving to Trump.  During the 2016 campaign, he pledged $1 million to veterans organizations, but didn't actually come through with the money until he was shamed into it.  And of course, that's really the least of his sins.

He lies with shameless abandon.  He's racist.  He obviously conspired with Russia to rig the election in his favor.  He's still acting as Putin's lapdog, probably because Putin has compromising information on him.

He jeopardizes our national security on a daily basis, both actively and passively.  He uses the office of the president as his own personal ATM machine (in violation of the Constitution's emoluments clause).  He's shredding our global alliances, and he's putting children in cages.

It's late, and I have to get up for work in the morning.  Suffice to say that the pit of Trump's evil and corruption is practically bottomless.

But the big brains over at the National Review, they think the real problem is that Democrats are failing to criticize a guy who gave up a career millions of young men dream about in order to speak out for the oppressed.

That tells you everything you need to know about the complete and utter moral bankruptcy of the American conservative movement.


Kaepernick

So, Kyle Smith of the National Review (a right-wing publication, but one which occasionally tut-tuts Donald Trump) has decided that the Democrats are the party of Kaepernick:
Last week, left-wing Democrat Ayanna Pressley ousted long-term incumbent Michael Capuano from the John F. Kennedy/Tip O’Neill House seat in the Democratic primary while praising the NFL anti-flag protests, which her opponent called “wrong.” Democratic Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke says — in Texas! — that there is “nothing more American” than kneeling for the national anthem. The judicious center-left New York Times columnist David Leonhardt notes in his daily newsletter that “the anthem is a trap for Democrats.”
Of course, I doubt that anyone is actually holding 'anti-flag protests', especially not anyone running for Congress as a Democrat.  Ayanna Pressley has said she supports "both the cause and the tactics" of NFL players taking a knee to "elevate the issue of police brutality", while Beto O'Rourke gave an articulate and powerful explanation of his support for peaceful protests, one which his opponent Ted Cruz is similarly distorting.

From this laughably biased start, Smith keeps rolling to the right, claiming that "The Left and its base of activists, pundits, and (increasingly) woke capitalists simply can’t let this issue go".  But of course, if the right had allowed the country to come together and try to address police brutality, then Kaepernick would still be playing football and the protests and this article wouldn't exist.  Instead, the right and outlets like NR have followed the lead of the whiner-in-chief, using alleged 'anti-flag protests' for more than a year to distract from the fact that Trump is destroying the country.

Smith goes on to note that "Demonizing a huge population based on stereotypes derived from the actions of a few of its members is exactly the kind of anti-American impulse that liberals once stood so valiantly against."  Indeed, liberals still do stand against such demonization based on stereotypes --- such as when a right-wing publication demonizes the entire Democratic party based on some made-up allegations of 'anti-flag protests'.

After further distorting the motivation for the protests, Smith veers briefly back into rationality --- "Do the anthem protests matter when it comes to deciding which political party to vote for? It’s hard to see how they do" --- before divesting himself of all self-awareness: "Thanks to the Trumpification of national discourse --- voters appear to be growing less rational by the hour."

At least, that seems to be what Smith and the National Review are hoping.

Friday, August 24, 2018

Blinding Insight

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Game Over for Mueller

Well, this is bad news:
The Senate confirmed President Trump's nominee to lead the Justice Department's Criminal Division despite concerns about his ties to a bank that has come under scrutiny by the FBI.
. . .
"I cannot believe the Republican Party just rubber-stamped a nominee to head the Justice Department’s Criminal Division who has no prosecutorial experience, who chose to represent a Russian bank with deep ties to [Russian President] Vladimir Putin, and who would not commit to recuse himself from Russia-related matters if confirmed.This could prove to be a historic mistake," said Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), the No. 2 Senate Democrat. 
 Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, also questioned if Benczkowski would give Attorney General Jeff Sessions insight into the investigation, from which he recused himself from last year. 
Actually, there's a bigger problem than the possibility that Benczkowski might share information with Attorney General Sessions, a man who, despite his many faults, at least seems to have sufficient integrity to really recuse himself from an investigation when he says he will.

No, the bigger problem is this.  If Trump decides to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, then Benczkowski would take his place.  And considering Benczkowski's ties to the Russians, I have no doubt he will end Robert Mueller's investigation if Trump tells him to.

For months now, pundits have been chattering about what the 'red line' is that Trump must not cross, lest the Republican Congress decides to retaliate.  I think this move makes it crystal clear that no such line exists.

After all, if Republicans in the Senate had any desire to protect Mueller, don't you think that at least one or two of them might have voted against a nominee like Benczkowski, who is obviously underqualified and having his own ties with the Russians?

The question now is pretty clearly not whether Trump will fire Mueller, but when.  Senate Republicans have just shown him that he will pay no price for doing so.

Working Class Watch - Day 533

Conventional wisdom has it that the working class (okay --- working class whites, specifically) were the key demographic supporting Trump in 2016.  How's that working out for them?
Tariffs levied by America's trading partners, such as China, kick in on Friday as retaliation for Trump's heavy taxation of their imports. Farmers in the heartland say that a drawn-out trade war could lead to more farms going bankrupt or selling out.
"The banks are not going to keep writing checks to save your farm," Matt Thiede, chief operating officer of Heeren brothers, a produce packing company in Comstock Park, Michigan, told NBC News. "For some family farms, one season could be the death of them."
Yes, those 'farmers in the heartland' are getting what they voted for.  I might feel sorry for them if their votes weren't flushing the rest of the country down the toilet with them.

Sunday, July 8, 2018

Disgrace

It all began when Vice President Mike Pence used the word 'disgrace' in a tweet:
This got me to thinking that Pence doesn't really understand the meaning of the word 'disgrace', and so I decided to spell it out for him.  And since I've wanted to do an immigration post for a while, I decided to expound on my reply here, where space is not so limited.

Disgrace 1: On May 7, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a new 'zero tolerance' policy on immigration.  This is a transparent attempt to create a crisis at the border, with the well-known side effect of forcibly separating children from their parents.  This includes not only children of parents who cross the U.S. border illegally, but also those who come seeking asylum, which is legal.  The long-term effects of family separation on children are serious and often permanent, which is only part of what makes this policy a disgrace.  The other part is that the Trump administration is visiting these horrors on approximately 3,000 children for the sole purpose of trying to get Democrats to agree to Trump's pointless and stupid wall.

Disrgrace 2: It's bad enough that the administration separated these families in the first place.  It takes the disgrace to another level that they obviously took these children away without any plan to reunite them, ever.  They permanently destroyed these families in service to their political agenda.

Disgrace 3: In addition to having no plan to reunite these children with their families, they also clearly had no plan to adequately care for the children in their custody.  And since they have roughly 3,000 children in their charge, that should really count as 3,000 separate disgraces.  Some lowlights include forcibly giving the kids psychotropic drugs, a 1-year-old returned to his mother after 12 weeks covered in lice, after apparently not having been bathed the whole time, and this:
An investigative report by the Associated Press reveals widespread abuse at Shenandoah Valley Juvenile Center in Virginia, where children as young as 14 claim they were tied to chairs with bags over their heads, “beaten while handcuffed and locked up for long periods in solitary confinement, left nude and shivering in concrete cells.”
Disgrace 4: Literally holding the children hostage, demanding that their parents agree to 'voluntary' deportation before reuniting them with their children --- despite the fact that they are under court order to reunite the families unconditionally.

Disgrace 5: Making a mockery of law and order by literally having the immigrant children represent themselves in deportation hearings, including children as young as 1 year old.

Disgrace 6: Attacking all immigrants as members of MS-13, 'infesting' U.S. cities, when fewer than 0.1% of immigrants crossing the border in fiscal year 2017 had gang ties, according to Border Patrol:
Since the Trump administration took office, the Border Patrol has detected fewer gang members crossing irregularly than during the Obama administration. In FY2017, these detections amounted to 0.075 percent of the total number of migrants (228 MS-13 members out of 303,916 total migrants). When combined with MS-13’s rival, the Barrio 18 gang, the number rises only slightly to 0.095 percent. This is far from the “infestation” of violent gang members described by the president.
Disgrace 7: As noted above, almost none of the immigrants being rounded up and separated from their families have gang ties.  But the threat of MS-13 and others IS real --- and is the reason why many of these people seek asylum in America.

Trump and his minions are rounding these people up to return them to their home countries, in some cases, to certain death.  In one particularly egregious example, an MS-13 gang member who decided to cooperate with the FBI was nevertheless imprisoned and slated for deportation and certain death.  Despite the fact that he tried to turn his life around in an effort to limit the spread of the MS-13 in America.

If defeating MS-13 is the real purpose of 'zero tolerance' (and not, you know, racist ethnic cleansing), shouldn't we encourage MS-13 gang members to reform themselves and help the feds, rather than effectively punishing them with a death sentence?

Disgrace 8: Forming a 'denaturalization task force' to strip citizenship from people who came to the U.S. legally and have already become naturalized citizens.

Disgrace 9: Deporting honorably-discharged veterans who also happen to be immigrants.  These men put their lives on the line for America, and the Trump administration has chosen to thank them by forcing them out of the country.

Disgrace 10: Discharging non-citizens who are currently serving in the military.  There can only be two reasons for this policy: 1) Pre-emptively avoiding the embarrassment of deporting these service members at some point in the future after they have been honorably discharged, 2) Naked racism.  Neither reason reflects well on the U.S.

Disgrace 11: Trying sweep disgraces 1-10 under the rug by pointing to the successes ICE has had, and denouncing anyone who points out these disgraces as favoring 'open borders', terrorism, or human trafficking.

There is literally no reason ICE --- or some equivalent agency --- can't effectively fight human trafficking without committing some of the same sins as the traffickers.

For all of the fearmongering coming from the administration, the fact is that ICE didn't even exist until 2003.  Yet somehow, the U.S. did a reasonable job of fighting terrorism and human trafficking before that.

And it's worth noting that even the ICE agents of HSI --- the ICE division responsible for combating terrorism and human trafficking --- want nothing to do with Trump's anti-immigrant policies, because "anger at ERO immigration practices is harming the entire agency’s reputation and undermining other law enforcement agencies’ willingness to cooperate".


Saturday, June 16, 2018

Hostages

Trump is holding immigrant children and families hostage.  He's admitted as much.

This abomination of a presidency needs to end.


Legislation to #EndFamilySeparation

If you haven't heard by now about the Trump administration's new policy to (effectively) kidnap the children of undocumented families crossing the border, you should:
In recent weeks, the personal cruelty of Donald Trump has been translated into official United States policy — and the human toll is staggering. The Intercept, which has done some strong reporting on the growing moral crisis at the border, did the math and calculated that at least 1,358 children — and possibly closer to 1,500 to 2,000 — have already been separated from their parents in only the first month or so of the administration’s “zero-tolerance” scheme. In addition, the flood of asylum-seekers suddenly facing criminal prosecution has led to mass trials that present a dystopian nightmare view of modern America.
. . .
We all know now what’s happened to America these last 506 days. The question is, What are you and I going to do about this? As some have noted since the early days of the Trump administration, whatever you would have done during the other great moral crises that have afflicted our modern world — the Holocaust, or the fight to end segregation in the American South — is what you are doing, or not doing, right now.
I've put together a list of possible actions we can take to fight back.  But for now, I want to discuss legislative solutions that are being considered.

Even though Trump initiated this policy on his own, with the enthusiastic support of Jeff Sessions, he now wants the public to believe that somehow the Democrats created this problem, and he demands that the Democrats solve it.

In trying to pin the blame on the Democrats, Trump is, as always, a despicable liar.  He could reverse his policy in an instant if he wanted to.  But nevertheless, Democrats ARE working toward a legislative solution.

In the Senate, Dianne Feinstein has introduced the Keep Families Together Act, would do exactly what the name suggests: prevent federal authorities from separating families at the border.  As of this writing, it currently has the support of 43 Democrats and NO Republicans.

In the House, there are (at least) two bills under consideration; one drafted by Republicans and one by Democrats.  And here, the GOP is playing games with these childrens' lives (which was the choice Trump made by starting to separate families in the first place).

While Speaker Paul Ryan and others claim that their bill will end family separation, those who have studied it insist that --- surprise! --- it won't:
The draft bill, crafted as a compromise between conservative and moderate Republicans, includes longstanding White House demands that would make it easier to detain children for longer periods, deport them more quickly, and make it harder for their families to claim asylum under the law. It also contains a list of other White House priorities, including cuts to legal immigration and funding for a border wall, as well as a path to legal status for recipients of DACA, called Dreamers.
But immigration lawyers, policy analysts and activists say that there's no language in the bill that overrules the Trump administration's decision to criminally prosecute parents, which places them in federal custody away from their children and is the direct cause of the current wave of family separation — nearly 2,000 kids have been taken from their parents in recent months, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
So the Republicans are using this bill as a Trojan Horse, telling people it will end family separation, while instead it's simply a laundry list of GOP priorities to further curtail legal immigration.

Please don't vote for Republicans.

Although there is no bill currently under consideration in the House to end family separation, House and Senate Democrats have each introduced the HELP Separated Children Act, which aims to protect the safety and welfare of children separated from their families.

Please contact your representatives and ask that they support the two Democratic bills, and don't be taken in by Republican lies that their bill will solve the problem.

Sunday, June 10, 2018

Family Separation is Still Happening

Just a reminder: It is still official U.S. government policy to separate immigrant children from their families.  The number of children now separated in this manner is north of 1,300, and will continue growing until the Trump administration stops --- or someone stops them:
We all know now what’s happened to America these last 506 days. The question is, What are you and I going to do about this? As some have noted since the early days of the Trump administration, whatever you would have done during the other great moral crises that have afflicted our modern world — the Holocaust, or the fight to end segregation in the American South — is what you are doing, or not doing, right now.
A reminder that you may have the chance to speak out about this horror on June 14 --- although sadly, it seems that there aren't events in every city (including mine).

And here are suggestions for other things you can do.

Monday, June 4, 2018

Thing Everyone Knows: No One is Above the Law

No matter what your politics are, you should want to crush this ASAP:
"If he shot James Comey, he'd be impeached the next day," Giuliani was quoted as saying. "Impeach him, and then you can do whatever you want to do to him."
Giuliani, who is representing Trump amid special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, also appeared on a pair of talk shows Sunday.
On both, Giuliani argued that the president probably has the sweeping constitutional authority to pardon even himself of federal crimes.
Under normal circumstances, Congress would immediately convene hearings on the matter, with an eye toward impeachment.  Under normal circumstances, the media would scramble to get every member of Congress --- but especially members of the president's party --- on record either supporting this authoritarian view or condemning it.

But in case you haven't noticed, these aren't normal times.  So it's up to us, the citizens, to badger our representatives into taking a stand either for or against the rule of law.


Saturday, June 2, 2018

Legal Aid for Those Migrant Children

Just when you think Trump can't get any lower, he finds a shovel.  After separating immigrant children from their parents, another recent policy change insures that those children will have no legal representation in court:
“The government is creating unaccompanied kids, then releasing them to someone other than parents, and then further restricting their ability to access counsel,” said Manoj Govindaiah, director of family detention services for Texas’s Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES), which has represented kids through the ORR funds. “So they’re almost ensuring people cannot successfully navigate the immigration court process.”
RAICES, which typically represents about 300 unaccompanied minors a year in the Dallas-Fort Worth area thanks to ORR funding, had just screened a new round of applicants when they received the announcement earlier this month to accept no further cases, staff attorney Jennifer de Haro told me.
“We had to call all the families back and tell them we couldn’t provide them free services anymore,” she said.
Here's a list of things you can do to fight this tyranny NOW while we wait for November to get here.

Monday, May 28, 2018

Time for Action: #EndFamilySeparation

Recently, we've discussed the Trump administration's new policy of separating families entering the U.S., either illegally or in search of asylum, and given a brief explanation of the rank barbarism of the policy for the ethically challenged.

Here, we make an effort to present solutions.

One obvious solution is to pledge to campaign and vote for Democrats in November. And while that is a necessary course of action, it is hardly sufficient. For one thing, the Democrats' record on immigration issues isn't all that great, so simply marking the line marked 'D' won't guarantee results. We need to push Democrats, both incumbents and challengers, to adopt pro-immigrant policies. For another, the election is still more than 5 months away, which means that a Democratic Congress is at least 7 months away, and even then they'll only be able to check Trump's abuses (hopefully) rather than enacting their own legislation.

Families are being torn apart NOW. We can't wait that long to act.

I'm certainly not the best resource for this kind of information, but here's my best shot:
  1. Contact your legislators, whether they are Republicans, Democrats, or Zoroastrians. As noted above, not all Democrats are good on immigration policy; they need to be pushed. As for Republicans, their death-grip embrace of Trump is all poll-driven. If they receive enough constituent calls (especially from Republican constituents), they'll turn around. Plus given the current push to force a DACA vote in the House, we shouldn't assume that all Republicans are as bad on immigration as Trump.
  2. Donate time, money, or both to groups fighting the administration's policy, or fighting for immigrants' rights. There are many such organizations, so choosing just one can be a bit overwhelming. The ACLU has a long and distinguished history of winning victories for civil rights of all kinds, and they're on the case here. The same is true of the Southern Poverty Law Center. For organizations specifically focused on immigration, I believe that the Informed Immigrant is a solid site, which hosts a search engine you can use to find local organizations where you can donate. (UPDATE: The following organizations have been recommended since this post originally went up: Innovation Law Lab, the CARA Pro Bono Project, the Florence Immigration and Refugee Rights Project, and the Texas Civil Rights Project.  My donation went to this last organization, because it is highly rated by Charity Navigator, and because a wonderful woman named Kendyl Hanks (@HanksKendyl) has promised to match donations made to TCRP if you DM her your confirmation.  Her offer may have expired by the time you read this).
  3. Two other organizations which seem good --- but caveat emptor, I've spent literally minutes researching them --- are The Young Center for Immigrant Children's Rights and The National Immigrant Justice Center.
  4. Democrats in my local congressional district have some other suggestions, as does politicalcharge.org.
  5. MoveOn is organizing a national day of action on June 30.  Check for an event in your area.  If there isn't one, come back later to see if someone organized one --- or organize one yourself!
Finally --- this is a horrific situation, and there's no question Trump, Sessions, ICE and CBP all bear responsibility for it. But this isn't and shouldn't become a political cudgel. For one thing, Obama's hands are far from clean when it comes to immoral immigration policy. For another, this is a national disgrace which requires a unified, national response. And we can't work together to end the injustices of the immigration system --- all of them, whether it's Obama or Trump who's responsible --- if we insist on pointing fingers at each other.

This atrocity is the defining issue of our time. The way we respond as a nation will define America for the next generation.