I Cheat All The Time At Golf, Taxes, Wives, Elections And Bathroom Scales-- I'm Not 239 Pounds; I'm 475 Pounds... I Cut The Funding To The CDC, So This Wang Chung Virus Is Really Going To Be Bad

The SNL fantasy trial was good for a laugh, but there is genuine and deep concern among many who have seen the damage Putin-- and Moscow Mitch-- have been able to do to American democracy on the cheap. Philip Rucker attempted to give the true nature of the disaster voice in a report on how Trump's acquittal-- as illegitimate as his presidency-- will change the institution of the presidency, perhaps forever. Republicans might quibble, at least in public, with how Rucker began his report. "The evidence of President Trump’s actions to pressure Ukraine was never in serious dispute. After a systematic presentation of the facts of the case, even some Senate Republicans concluded that what he did was wrong. But neither was the verdict of Trump’s impeachment trial ever in doubt. The Senate’s jurors are scheduled to etch an almost-certain acquittal into the historical record on Wednesday. The impending judgment that the president’s actions do not warrant his removal from office serves as a testament to Washington’s extraordinary partisan divide and to Trump’s uncontested hold on the Republican base. The expected acquittal also has profound and long-term ramifications for America’s institutions and the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches, according to numerous historians and legal experts. In effect, they say, the Senate is lowering the bar for permissible conduct for future presidents." Or at least for presidents of the same same party that controls a Senate that Moscow Mitch has shamelessly turned into a shrivelled appendage of the Executive Branch.

Keep the results from the national polling NBC and the Wall Street Journal released yesterday, namely that majorities of voters believe that Trump abused his power (52-41%) and obstructed Congress (53-37%) and that Trump is trailing the major Democratic presidential candidates in hypothetical matchups for the general election. According to this poll, Biden leads Trump by 6%, Bernie leads him by 4%, Warren by 3% and even Mayo Pete is ahead of him by 1%. And in the generic battle for Congress, Democrats lead Republicans by 6 points (49-43%).

“It’s a dispiriting moment for an American system that in many ways was founded on the insight that, because humankind is frail and fallen and fallible, no one branch of government can have too much power,” said Jon Meacham, an American historian and author. “The president’s party, instead of being a check on an individual’s impulses and ambitions, has become an instrument of them.”

Since the moment House Democrats opened their impeachment inquiry last September, Trump has projected a sense of persecution and self-pity. He called the effort a coup to overthrow him and defraud the results of the 2016 election.

Again and again, Trump proclaimed on Twitter, “READ THE TRANSCRIPT!”-- though the notes from his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky did not seem to exonerate him. Rather, the notes made plain Trump’s scheme to get Ukraine to open an investigation into former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.

With Trump commanding such exceptionally high approval ratings among Republican voters, however, even senators who acknowledged his actions were wrong voted Friday to block new evidence in the trial and pave the way for acquittal.

One of Democrats’ great hopes to permit fresh testimony from firsthand witnesses, including former national security adviser John Bolton, had been Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), a self-described institutionalist who is retiring and would not have to face the wrath of the GOP’s pro-Trump base.

Yes, one of the Democrats' great hopes... but hopes for what? There were never going to be 20 Republican flips to actually convict Trump. He could hand the deed to Alaska over to Putin in the middle of Fifth Avenue and Dan Sullivan would vote to commend him while Lisa Murkowski just looks on... confused. The Democrats' approach was never really to perform the impossible miracle of persuading the Senate to convict Trump. It was always to persuade the American people Trump shouldn't be reelected in November-- and that neither should the members of his party who backed him. We'll know if they succeeded not on Wednesday, but on election day, 2020. Remember, when Lamar Alexander admitted that Trump’s actions were "inappropriate" and had "already been proven" by House impeachment managers, and that there was "no need for more evidence," he really was helping the Democrats do the job they had set out to do. "Let the people decide," he said.

“This impeachment was a fait accompli at all times,” said Bill Whalen, a fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford University. “You talk to congressional Republicans and there’s a feeling that the president is being persecuted, that impeachment was a conviction in search of a crime.”

William A. Galston, chair of the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies Program, said acquittal “was not only perfectly predictable, but in my judgment, completely inevitable.”

“The United States political scene is as deeply polarized along partisan lines as it has been for at least a century,” Galston added. Noting Trump’s high ratings among Republican voters, he said, “It would take a very brave Republican indeed to break ranks with the president under these circumstances.”

This is not the first instance in which Trump has skirted penalties for wielding the powers of his office for personal or political gain. Former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III found that the president repeatedly worked to block or thwart the Russia investigation, acts to obstruct justice that would have prompted charges were he not a sitting president. But Trump sidestepped any punishment then, just as he appears to now with Ukraine.

One of the president’s lawyers, Alan Dershowitz, proffered a sweeping argument on the floor of the Senate last week that Trump using the powers of his office to pressure Ukraine to open a corruption investigation into the Bidens was not impeachable or illegal because it was done in pursuit of his reelection.

“If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment,” Dershowitz said during the trial.

In the face of stinging criticism from constitutional scholars and legal experts, Dershowitz said later on Twitter that his comments were being mischaracterized. “A president seeking re-election cannot do anything he wants,” Dershowitz wrote. “He is not above the law.”

Still, Dershowitz’s argument was persuasive for some Republican senators looking for arguments with which to defend Trump irrespective of what the evidence showed.

“Let’s say it’s true, okay? Dershowitz last night explained that if you’re looking at it from a constitutional point of view, that that is not something that is impeachable,” Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN) told reporters.

Timothy Naftali, a historian at New York University and former director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, said the arguments advanced on Trump’s behalf in the Senate trial could have lasting consequences for the future of presidential power.

“The Republicans have embraced a theory that permits future abuses of power,” Naftali said. “The outcome of acquittal was predictable... but I’m afraid that this process in the Senate is more enabling of an abusive president than expected.”

The nation’s founders gave Congress oversight responsibilities and powers of impeachment as a check on the executive. Yet, with this week’s likely acquittal of Trump, Meacham argues, the Senate instead has become a tool in the president’s perpetuation of his own power.

“It is not hyperbolic to say that the Republican Party treats Donald Trump more like a king than a president,” Meacham said. “That was a central and consuming anxiety of the framers. It is a remarkable thing to watch the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower and Reagan and the Bushes become an instrument of Donald Trump’s. That’s a massive historical story.”

Late Saturday night, also writing for The Post, Seung Min Kim and Rachael Bade reported how the impeachment trial has solidified Mitt Romney's outlier status among Senate Republicans and how Moscow Mitch was able to manipulate the Republican caucus on behalf of tactics set in the White House for goals set in Moscow. "In the end," the two reporters wrote, "McConnell held his conference together, arguing that witnesses would drag the trial out for weeks and delay other Senate work. Several Republicans acknowledged that the president did use nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine as leverage to benefit himself politically, calling it inappropriate, but argued it wasn’t grounds to oust him from office." In the end it was 100% about electoral politics.

Unlike other issues in the Senate, there were no substantive attempts to broker a bipartisan agreement that would cool tensions, ensuring that the impeachment proceedings began-- and ended-- as a near-partisan exercise.

“It has just been a lot harder over the last two weeks to have conversations with Republican friends,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT). “The mood in that room is super tense and super heavy.”

Democrats heavily pressured vulnerable Senate Republicans up for reelection this fall, driving a message declaring any trial without witnesses would be a “coverup.” But GOP senators and aides were confident that voters were paying little attention based on a survey conducted by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the official campaign arm of Senate Republicans.

“You know, Iowans right now-- honest to God-- they want us to get this thing over with,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA). “They’re like, ‘Why aren’t you doing the business of the American public?’”

In a closed-door party meeting in McConnell’s suite of offices-- where GOP senators have held some of their most consequential strategy sessions-- it was those precise swing-state Republicans like Sens. Cory Gardner (R-CO) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) who said they were prepared to just move on to a final vote without calling additional witnesses.

That was after Bolton’s blockbuster allegation, laid out in an unpublished manuscript of his book as reported by the New York Times, that Trump directly tied the holdup of aid to Ukraine to the political investigations.

The Times report rocked the GOP conference and made Romney believe it increased the likelihood that more Republicans would join in his effort to call Bolton. At a Jan. 27 lunch, Sens. Patrick J. Toomey (R-PA) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) spoke up about a witness trade, appearing to briefly consider the notion. Romney joined them, making a forceful argument that they had a duty as senators to hear all the relevant evidence.

Moscow Mitch prevailed and today Republican senators are trying to defend their votes to not call witnesses. On Meet the Press yesterday, Lamar Alexander, who-- remember-- is retiring, said Trump's behavior may have been bad but was still not impeachable. Alexander: "I think he shouldn’t have done it. I think it was wrong. Inappropriate was the way I’d say-- improper, crossing the line."

Iowa imbecilic senator, Joni Ernst, who is, rightfully, one of the most vulnerable incumbents in the Senate and who yesterday called for Congress to start impeachment proceedings against Biden immediately if he's elected, was a guest on State of the Union, said that while the call to pressure the president of Ukraine was "Maybe not the perfect call" and that Trump should have used the Department of Justice to talk with him about corruption, she was still planning to vote for acquittal. As if she ever considered voting otherwise! The Senate will be a far better place without Jimi Ernst.

Lamar Alexander (R-TN) Could Pass The Resolution Of Disapprove-- Unless Kyrsten Sinema Moves To Save Trump

Kyrsten Sinema (AZ), the furthest right Democrat in the Senate, has, according to ProgressivePunch, been voting far less progressively than any other Democrat in the Senate and less progressively than Kentucky and Louisiana Republicans Rand Paul and John Kennedy! He crucial vote score is exactly the same as Susan Collins' (R-ME), Mike Lee's (R-UT) and Ted Cruz's (R-TX). She tends to never disappoint Trump. But say for a moment that when McTurtle brings up the Resolution of Disapproval, she can somehow be forced to vote for it with the Democrats. In that case, only 4 Republicans will be needed to pass it. At this point, that looks like it's in the bag. Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) have all said they are yes votes.

Any number of Republicans may provide that 4th vote but by the end of the week Politico was reporting that Lamar Alexander, the Tennessee Republican who is retiring next year, i willing o cast the deciding vote if he can't get Trump to back down and withdraw the phony state of emergency. Burgess Everett reported on Thursday that he's one of the senior Republicans offering Trump a choice: Withdraw your national emergency declaration at the border or face a potential rebellion from the GOP.

In a much-anticipated floor speech, the retiring senator declined to state whether he will become the deciding vote to block the president’s maneuver. But he signaled broad opposition to the emergency declaration and sought to convince Trump that he has other ways to collect $5.7 billion for the border wall-- the precise amount of money he demanded during the government shutdown fight.

“He’s got sufficient funding without a national emergency, he can build a wall and avoid a dangerous precedent,” Alexander told reporters afterward, referring to billions from a drug forfeiture fund and anti-drug smuggling money at the Defense Department. “That would change the voting situation if he we were to agree to do that.”

...[Trump] told Sean Hannity that Republicans who oppose him “put themselves at great jeopardy” and said it’s “very dangerous” to vote against border security. Some GOP senators shrugged off that sentiment.

“I always do what I think is the right thing to do,” said Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA), who is undecided. “As long as I’m satisfied with myself, that’s the person I’m going to satisfy.”

Republicans spent all week debating how to deal with the political headache of seeing a president from their party use some of the same unilateral tactics they panned under President Barack Obama.

After introducing her own resolution of disapproval directly on the Senate floor Thursday, Collins said her “Republican colleagues are very uneasy about the precedent.”

“I don’t think emergencies are a good way to run the government. And the president needs permission from Congress to get money,” said Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on Thursday. Despite those words, he hasn’t made a “final decision” on his vote.

...Despite his clear opposition to Trump’s national emergency declaration, Alexander deemed the looming vote on disapproval a hypothetical, since Trump could withdraw it or the House-passed resolution could be amended. Under current law, the House measure will come up by mid-March, and Alexander left little doubt that he’s just one of a large bloc of Republicans who could defy the president.

Trump’s national emergency declaration for border wall funding is “unnecessary, unwise and inconsistent with the Constitution,” Alexander told reporters. “And many Republican senators who can speak for themselves share that view.”

“We’ve never had a case where the president has asked for money, been refused the money by Congress, then used the national emergency powers to spend it anyway,” he added. “To me that’s a dangerous precedent.”

Collusion by Nancy Ohanian

How Dangerous Are Trump's Severe Mental Illnesses To America? Why Not Give Him The $25 Billion Hew Wants To Steal If He Promises To Resign?

They also have a problem with him overseas

Yeah, yeah, we all know Trump is a lying sack of shit. The idea that this man is president is more disgusting and unpalatable by the day. The idea that the latest job approval poll shows that 39% of Americans actually approve of the way he's doing his job-- and only a mere 54% disapprove-- makes me worry if my country can actually survive as a beacon of hope and a decent place to live. The Washington Post ran another Trump's the Biggest Liar in History piece yesterday. The compulsive liar-in-chief and the I-was-just-doing-what-I-was- told-Nazis who populate his ghastly regime "say U.S. laws or court rulings are forcing them to separate families that are caught trying to cross the southern border. These claims are false... It’s strange to behold Trump distancing himself from the zero-tolerance policy ('the Democrats gave us that law') while Nielsen claims it doesn’t exist ('it’s not a policy') and Sessions defends it in speech after speech."

For Trump, the family-separation policy is leverage as he seeks congressional funding for his promised border wall and other immigration priorities, according to reporting by the Washington Post. Top DHS officials have said that threatening adults with criminal charges and prison time would be the “most effective” way to reverse the rising number of illegal crossings.

The doublespeak coming from Trump and top administration officials on this issue is breathtaking, not only because of the sheer audacity of these claims but also because they keep being repeated without evidence. Immigrant families are being separated at the border not because of Democrats and not because some law forces this result, as Trump insists. They’re being separated because the Trump administration, under its zero-tolerance policy, is choosing to prosecute border-crossing adults for any offenses.

Meanwhile Eliana Johnson and Annie Karni have written a shocking report for Politico on how frustrating Trump's family separation agenda has become inside his own Regime. Towards the end of a long piece on how hapless Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is caught up in Trump's horrifying actions towards children, they mention that her sponsor, Chief of Staff John Kelly-- himself the former Homeland Security Secretary-- is flipping out entirely.

"Kelly’s status in the White House," they wrote, "has changed in recent months, and he and the president are now seen as barely tolerating one another. According to four people close to Kelly, the former Marine general has largely yielded his role as the enforcer in the West Wing as his relationship with Trump has soured. While Kelly himself once believed he stood between Trump and chaos, he has told at least one person close to him that he may as well let the president do what he wants, even if it leads to impeachment-- at least this chapter of American history would come to a close." (Trump's deputy chief of staff, Joe Hagin bailed yesterday afternoon. He had wanted to quit long ago but Kelly had persuaded him to stay on.)

Standing between Trump and chaos is not something Trump approves of or finds supportive of his ultimate ambitions. Trump is certifiably insane on several levels-- from Narcissistic Personality Disorder to traits that are far more dangerous to the country. On Tuesday he exploded during a private meeting with Senate Republicans over the one thing he's trying to accomplish that will outlast his miserable time in office: the Great Wall of Trump. He threatened to shut down the government in September-- so right before the midterms-- if they don't give him the $25 billion he wants to build the wall, much of which, no doubt, will line the pockets of his friends and family. This defines a kleptocracy. The senators fear that shutting down the government will shut down their careers.

In a private meeting regarding the wall Monday, Trump fumed to senators and his own staff about the $1.6 billion the Senate is planning to send him this fall, according to two people familiar with the meeting. Trump wants the full $25 billion upfront and doesn’t understand why Congress is going to supply him funds in a piecemeal fashion-- even though that’s how the spending process typically works.

...GOP lawmakers are loath to see a government shutdown on their watch just weeks before the midterm elections.

“It’s probably an overwhelming belief in the House and the Senate, especially the Senate, that government shutdowns aren’t good for anybody,"[Alabama Senator Richard] Shelby said.

The Appropriations Committee, which is led by Shelby, began working to pass its Homeland Security bill on Tuesday. Democrats seem unlikely to change course and agree to add more border security money for the president.

"We've got the bill and we're moving forward and I think we're going to get good bipartisan support for it. I think it's a good bill that will keep our borders safe," said Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT), the ranking member of the Homeland Security appropriations committee.

On Monday, GOP Sens. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia and Shelby both tried to explain to Trump that the Senate is merely meeting Mulvaney’s request and has to cut a bipartisan deal with Democrats. The Senate needs 60 votes to pass a spending bill, so Republicans would have to find at least nine Democratic votes.

"We're going to do make a down payment on that working together," said Capito, chairwoman of Homeland Security spending panel.

But Trump has not been mollified. He raised his voice several times in Monday's meeting with Mulvaney, White House staffers and the senators, insisting he needs the full $25 billion-- an unlikely outcome in the narrowly divided Senate.

Shelby said he views $1.6 billion as a floor in negotiations, which could increase if Democrats want to do some horse-trading.

Horse-trading-- like in rescuing the children Trump has put in concentration camps?

This is a letter the American Psychological Association sent to Trump last week:

On behalf of the American Psychological Association (APA), we are writing to express our deep concern and strong opposition to the Administration’s new policy of separating immigrant parents and children who are detained while crossing the border. We previously wrote to then Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly on April 5, 2017, about this matter. Based on empirical evidence of the psychological harm that children and parents experience when separated, we implore you to reconsider this policy and commit to the more humane practice of housing families together pending immigration proceedings to protect them from further trauma.

APA is the leading scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. Our membership includes researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants, and students. APA works to advance the creation, communication, and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people’s lives. We have 115,700 members and affiliates across the United States and in many other countries, many of whom serve immigrant youth and adults in a wide range of settings, including schools, community centers, hospitals and refugee resettlement centers.

The current policy calls for children to be removed from their parents and placed for an often indeterminate period of time in the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement. Decades of psychological research have determined that it is in the best interest of the child and the family to keep families together. Families fleeing their homes to seek sanctuary in the United States are already under a tremendous amount of stress. Sudden and unexpected family separation, such as separating families at the border, can add to that stress, leading to emotional trauma in children. Research also suggests that the longer that parents and children are separated, the greater the reported symptoms of anxiety and depression are for children. Adverse childhood experiences, such as parent-child separation, are important social determinants of mental disorders. For children, traumatic events can lead to the development of post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health disorders that can cause long lasting effects. Furthermore, immigration policies, such as separating families at the border, can also adversely impact those immigrants who are already in the United States. They can suffer from feelings of stigmatization, social exclusion, anger, and hopelessness, as well as fear for the future.

As a tragic example of the current policy’s serious potential for harm, a Honduran man who was separated from his wife and 3-year-old son after he crossed the border into Texas recently took his own life while detained in a holding cell, according to the Customs and Border Protection officials, public records, and media reports. There are also reports of detained immigrants foregoing legitimate claims for asylum by pleading guilty to expedite the return of their separated children and reports of parents being deported while their children, including infants, remain in custody. These incidents serve to highlight the mental health crisis for many families caused by the Administration’s policy.

Given these considerations, a change in immigration policy regarding the detention of immigrant families at the border is desperately needed-- from separating parents and children to housing them together and providing needed physical and mental health services. As psychologists, we have documented multiple harmful effects of parent-child separation on children’s emotional and psychological development and well-being and urge that the current policy of family separation be reversed. Should you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Serena Dávila, J.D., with our Public Interest Directorate.

Paul Ryan And Señor Trumpanzee In League To Destroy Senate Bipartisan Efforts

Lamar Alexander (R-TN) voted to repeal Obamacare but when the repeal failed he decided he doesn't really want to hold folks in Tennessee who get healthcare coverage through Obamacare hostage. A former governor of his state and the chairman of the Senate Health Committee, he started working on a bipartisan fix that would at least stabilize the insurance markets while Congress figures out how to proceed. I've been hearing reports that his efforts have been going well. But then someone ratted him out to Trump and yesterday Trump-- with Paul Ryan in tow-- tried to put the kibosh on the whole endeavor. Ryan and White House extremists went to McConnell and Cornyn and told them to make Alexander stop, claiming that if a catastrophe is looming, there will be more pressure on senators to pass this new version of TrumpCare-- the one 10 governors, including Republican governors of Ohio, Massachusetts, Alaska, Nevada and Vermont, came out against yesterday and the one, also yesterday, the AMA said "would result in millions of Americans losing their health insurance coverage, destabilize health insurance markets, and decrease access to affordable coverage and care," and the one Vet Votes told their members "would be the single largest cut to veterans' health care in the history of our nation. If this bill passes, tens of thousands veterans will lose their health care, and countless military family members as well." That one.

Republicans say that while the bipartisan talks between Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) initially seemed promising, many in the GOP fear providing money for Obamacare but offering little for conservatives-- especially after Republican lawmakers have been throttled by President Donald Trump and the GOP base for failing to repeal the health law.

Vice President Mike Pence said Tuesday that the Trump administration is all-in on the latest repeal effort, flying to Washington with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) to deliver a message to the Senate GOP on repeal: "This is the moment. Now is the time," according to a pool report. Ryan and Trump called them during the plane ride as well.

Trump has threatened to withhold billions in Obamacare subsidies, which would upend private insurance markets. Alexander and Murray are working on legislation to have Congress provide those subsidies while allowing states more flexibility.

But Republicans claim Democrats are not willing to bend enough. Democrats reject that claim and say it is intended to sink bipartisan negotiations.

The “speaker is drawing a red line” and said the House “would not be able to pass a bailout of insurers,” said one congressional source familiar with the dynamics. “The White House also told GOP leaders that [Obamacare subsidies] without repeal would not work.”

A House source familiar with the conversation confirmed that a call between Ryan and Senate GOP leadership occurred in which the stabilization approach was sidelined. A second House Republican source said a stabilization bill "would definitely make some in our conference pretty upset if we took it up."

"Our focus is on repealing and replacing this failing law, and we are encouraged the Senate is making progress," said AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Ryan.

Señor Trumpanzee by Nancy Ohanian

Instead, Ryan and the White House are backing the repeal bill written by Graham and Bill Cassidy (R-La.) that would turn federal health care programs into state block grants, repeal Obamacare’s coverage mandates and wind down the law’s Medicaid expansion while capping the entitlement program’s spending for the first time.

Graham said his friend Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) may support the bill, according to the pool report, a potentially significant development considering McCain's opposition to the last repeal attempt.

Asked about Graham's suggestion in an interview Tuesday, McCain responded: "I have nothing to say."

Pence called Graham Monday night to get him ready for the goal line push, and also called Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a moderate Democrat, to test his support. A Manchin spoksesman said Tuesday he opposed the bill.

Pence also spoke to Alaska Gov. Bill Walker about how the bill might affect Alaska, in a bid to reel in Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), another senator who helped tank the last effort.

However, a bipartisan group of governors-- including Walker and GOP Govs. John Kasich of Ohio and Brian Sandoval of Nevada-- sent a letter to McConnell on Tuesday saying they oppose the Graham-Cassidy plan and want the Senate to concentrate on the bipartisan Murray-Alexander approach.

The Congressional Budget Office said Monday it would not be able to provide full estimates on how the Graham-Cassidy bill would affect insurance premiums or coverage for several more weeks. The bill would make deep spending cuts to Medicaid in the coming years; CBO has estimated that similar proposals would mean millions more would be uninsured.

...A senior White House official said there was never much interest in the Murray-Alexander talks and chalked it up to "the media talking about it,” though McConnell openly acknowledged the possibility that the two deal-making senators could strike a bargain. Trump listened to arguments for it and seemed intrigued, but it wasn't seriously considered as a possibility, this person said.

The bipartisan proposal would continue subsidy payments and would not be seen as repealing Obamacare, this person said. Other White House officials said Graham-Cassidy isn't their ideal bill, but it's a "final chance to actually get something done," according to a second administration official.

...Democrats portrayed the rejection of the bipartisan push as intended to create pressure on Senate Republicans to hold their nose and support the Graham-Cassidy bill, and as the only way out of the party's political quagmire. If that bill fails, Republicans may have to return to bipartisan talks, particularly if Trump again threatens to halt subsidy payments.

On Monday, Democrats said Murray was willing to make significant concessions to Alexander on more flexibility for states to run their health care systems if Obamacare subsidies were funded by Congress.

“Murray has agreed to basically everything that Alexander has been asking for,” a Democratic aide said.

If Democrats are able to perusade just three Republicans to endorse the stabilization effort, it could mark a death blow for the Graham-Cassidy bill, since it would suggest there are not 50 Senate Republicans willing to completely repeal Obamacare. Democrats say GOP leaders and the White House are trying to create a false sense of urgency with a deadline looming.

“It’s crystal clear that Republicans are trying to shut down those negotiations in order to close off the better, more bipartisan path that moderate Republicans could take,” said a second Democratic aide. “They know that if they have a choice between a good bipartisan bill and Graham-Cassidy, some of them are likely to choose to former.”

Establishment Republicans May Be Winning The Primaries But The Tea Party Wing Controls The Argument

Louisiana teabagger Steve Scalise isn't the biggest win for the Ted Cruz wing of the GOP

The reaction from ugly Republican racists to the embarrassing Tea Party losses in Oklahoma and Mississippi Tuesday-- two of the most brainwashed and extreme right-wing states in the U.S.-- was, to put it mildly, ungracious. McDaniel, of course, is refusing to concede. Limbaugh was screaming about Uncles Toms on the radio the next day and, as the National Memo pointed out, Palin declared that the Mississippi election had been tampered with, the results were illegitimate and that it is pointless for people like her to support the Republican Party.

"Ruh roh! In order to save an entrenched 42-year member of the good old boys club what kind of 'Scooby snacks' has 'DC' promised to Mississippi Democrats to intervene in the GOP runoff for U.S. Senate?" she asked. When the enticing treat of not having Chris McDaniel as their senator proved too much for Democrats to pass up, Palin was predictably displeased.

"If Republicans are going to act like Democrats, what’s the use in getting all gung ho about getting other Republicans in there?" she pouted to Sean Hannity on Tuesday night.
The next day, she took to her Facebook again to voice her displeasure.

"When an election is questionable, with potential legal violations, politics MUST be put aside and the irregularities MUST be fully investigated. Regardless of party, we owe it to voters and to democracy within our Republic," Palin wrote.

This morning Sheryl Gay Stolberg was reporting from Tennessee that the Ted Cruz wing of that state's GOP is undaunted and ready to triumph over Lamar Alexander and install a lunatic fringe neo-fascist, Joe Carr, as the state's next U.S. senator, despite polling that shows 64% of Tennessee Republicans happy with Alexander. Alexander has the poll numbers, Newt Gingrich and the state Republican Party but Carr has… Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum, Jim DeMint and a motley crew of delusional, drug-addicted Hate Talk Radio hosts.

Given that Chris McDaniel, Mr. Cochran’s Tea Party challenger, lost Tuesday, such optimism might seem out of place. But Tea Party conservatives here and in Washington say that, if anything, the close call in Mississippi-- and what appeared to be Mr. Cochran’s reliance on Democrats to win his runoff race-- has only emboldened them.

...In many ways, Mr. Alexander’s approach, Republican strategists say, is a model for how incumbents should prepare to rebuff a challenger. With his penchant for deal-making with Democrats, a voting record that infuriates Republican purists and a long history in Washington, Mr. Alexander knew he would be vulnerable.

So, unlike Mr. Cochran, Mr. Alexander started laying the groundwork for his re-election early. In January 2012, he quit his Republican leadership post, saying it would “liberate” him to work on issues he cared about. But it also freed him to spend more time at home in Tennessee. Aides hope this will help him avoid the impression, which plagued Mr. Cantor, that he is too entrenched in Washington.

Of course, the real story of the Tea Party defeats this year is that it cost the Republican Establishment an immense amount of money-- for which the Chamber of Commerce, which footed the bill, is getting precious little in return in terms of their agenda-- and, worse yet, has moved the party's center of gravity far to the right, making it harder to go into general elections outside of the Old Confederacy and appeal to normal voters. Tea Party candidates aren't winning-- although they did managed to insert Steve Scalise (R-LA) into the House leadership-- but the Tea Party agenda is now the Republican Party agenda.

The scope of the effort to suppress activist-backed candidates has been broader and costlier than is widely understood, covering at least 20 House and Senate primaries from North Carolina to California, and from coastal Mississippi to the outer tip of Long Island. The loose coalition of establishment forces encompasses two dozen advocacy groups, industry associations and super PACs that have raised and spent millions on behalf of Washington’s chosen candidates. Former Republican National Committee Chairman Mike Duncan said the “quote ‘establishment’” had successfully divided up the primary map this year to avoid duplicating one another’s efforts. Eventually, Duncan said, outside groups on the right may realize that they’re better off working with the national party than raging against it. Indeed, in many cases this year, national party favorites have tacked well to the right to win their primaries.

“I think we have to keep on winning. I think we have to show up and make sure that our candidates are not going to be complacent and that they start early,” Duncan said. “That wake-up call certainly seems to have gotten through.”

Nearly a third of the establishment money has come from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The business lobby’s spending in this year’s toughest primaries has about equaled the $7 million that the conservative Club for Growth and the Senate Conservatives Fund have spent together on the most fractious elections-- excluding races, like the Senate campaigns in Arkansas and Alaska, where there’s been no meaningful clash between establishment-sanctioned outside groups and the activist right.

And the $23 million figure isn’t even close to a full accounting of what D.C.-backed candidates spent to win their nomination fights. Candidates themselves, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John Cornyn of Texas, have collectively spent tens of millions more from their campaign accounts.

Top Republican strategists and party officials say they have no regrets about going all-in against flawed primary candidates. In a perfect world, they say, the whole expensive ordeal would be unnecessary. With conservative outside groups routinely bumping off incumbent lawmakers and prized recruits, it’s simply the cost of doing business-- now and perhaps for the foreseeable future.

Patrick O'Connor, in this morning's Wall Street Journal was more analytic: Tea Party's Poll Setbacks Don't Limit Its Washington Clout. He asserts that the battle of the Export-Import Bank, in which Tea Party Republicans and House progressives are mounting a challenge to the corporate whores of both party Establishments, is the latest example of the Tea Party being far from dead and buried. "[T]he disconnect between tea-party election losses and the movement's continued power in Washington," he wrote, "underscores deep divisions inside the GOP that show no sign of abating after a busy spring in which so-called establishment candidates won far more intraparty contests than they lost. The GOP leadership, for example, benefited from millions of dollars in campaign spending by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to promote leadership-backed candidates in nearly a dozen primaries, part of a broad effort to stem tea party momentum. And yet three of the Chamber's top legislative priorities-- an overhaul of immigration law, a replenished Highway Trust Fund and reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank-- are in jeopardy because of conservative resistance in Congress."

My guess is that Thad Cochran has no intention-- if he even has an understanding-- of granting the NAACP the reciprocity it is asking for. That just isn't how Republican politics is working at a time when the Tea Party can cost the Establishment millions and millions of dollars just by growling some nonsense with a southern drawl.

Will The Republican Civil War Devastate The Tennessee GOP?

Teabaggers are running wild, encouraged by all the media coverage Ted Cruz's infantile nihilism and extremism is getting. They've rewritten history to read-- at least in their own rarified circles-- that Republicans have lost recent elections not because their agenda is too extreme for normal people, but because the platforms aren't extreme enough to bring out the right-wing base. This week teabaggers announced primary campaigns against more conservatives including NRCC Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR), GOP Senate Whip John Cornyn (R-TX) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). Linda Vega is the 4th teabagger to launch a primary campaign against Cornyn this year. No one is pure enough for the Hate Talk Radio and Fox-created sociopaths on the far right. In Texas alone hard core conservative incumbents Jeb Hensarling, Joe Barton, Kevin Brady, Ralph Hall, Mac Thornberry, Michael Burgess, Pete Sessions,and Lamar Smith are facing teabagger primaries, more Texas Republicans that are facing Democratic primaries! And domestic terrorism suspect Steve Stockman will face off against Michael Cole, the Libertarian candidate from last year who's running as a Democrat next year. In North Carolina mainstream conservative Walter Jones has 3 or 4 teabaggers primarying him and poor old Howard Coble-- the longest-serving Republican congressman in North Carolina's history-- has 3 teabaggers in contend with, two of who are also crackpot fire-and-brimstone Baptist ministers.

There's an ugly pattern developing around the country for Republicans-- who certainly brought this on themselves. Many of them are panic-stricken and bending over backwards to placate the extreme right, which further alienates independents and swing voters. For example, by voting against the deal to reopen the government and take default off the table, over a dozen Republicans who need independents to win general elections-- including Paul Ryan (WI), Sean Duffy (WI), Tom Petri (WI), Jeff Denham (CA), Justin Amash (MI), Tim Walberg (MI), Kerry Bentivolio (MI), John Mica (FL), Steve Southerland (FL), Tom Reed (NY), Joe Pitts (PA), Ed Royce (CA), Jackie Walorski (IN), Steve Pearce (NM), Randy Forbes (VA), and Scott Garrett (NJ)-- have put themselves in grave jeopardy for the 2014 midterm elections. They may have calmed down the extremists for a moment, but now they're open to losing to a Democrat. Tennessee mainstream conservative Senator Lamar Alexander-- who is facing Democrat Terry Adams in the general and far right state Senator Joe Carr, a deranged teabagger, in a primary-- is approaching the challenge differently. As Paul Kane pointed out in the Washington Post yesterday, "Alexander is doing something few other incumbent Republicans have tried recently: Instead of running scared of the tea party, he’s running hard against it."

Alexander hardly mentions tea party icons such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) nor does he call out the hard-right conservative groups such as Heritage Action for America that forced Republicans to pursue the politically disastrous strategy that led to the recent federal government shutdown.

But in speeches across the Volunteer State, Alexander is in the habit of delivering thinly veiled blasts against the “Washington people” and their “voting score cards” who propose to tell Tennesseans what it means to be a Republican. That’s clearly a shot at conservative advocacy groups such as Heritage Action and the Club for Growth, two of the groups that have set new purity criteria for Republicans and have been funding primary challenges against many who do not meet their standards.

…He has mounted a vigorous defense of recent votes in which he joined with Democrats to approve a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws and a farm bill that spends billions on food aid for poor people and some cash payments for farmers and farming conglomerates, including soybean growers here in Trenton.

Behind the scenes, as the Cruz-led strategy to shut down the federal government went on this month, Alexander emerged as the key behind-the-scenes Republican finding a path to reopen the government and increase the federal debt limit to avoid a potential default. Deputized by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Alexander worked with a bipartisan group that paved the way for the final pact, making good on the promise he delivered to the farmers in this tiny west Tennessee town a month earlier.

“If all we do is stand around handing each other score cards, we won’t get anything done,” Alexander said. “That’s why, in the current health-care debate, I’m not in the shut-down- the-government crowd. I’m in the take-charge-of-the-government crowd, and get something done.”

Unlike his state’s other recent senators-- including three presidential candidates and a vice president-- Alexander’s national ambitions were both obvious and unrealized before he got to the Senate, having run twice for president after serving two terms as governor and as education secretary. Elected to the Senate in 2002, he began edging his way up the leadership ladder until two years ago when he abruptly resigned as Republican Conference chairman.

The stated purpose was liberation from toeing the party line, so that he could pursue more bipartisan work.

All that has infuriated people like Ben Cunningham, the founder of the Nashville Tea Party and a leading anti-tax advocate in the state for the past decade.

“I don’t think anybody has any illusion about how difficult it is going to be to beat Lamar,” Cunningham said. “A lot of things have to come together."

He and other Tennessee hard-line conservatives met last fall at a tea party gathering in Cincinnati with activists who in 2012 helped defeat incumbent Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) and with strategists who propelled Cruz to an upset victory in the Texas primary. The first counsel was to make sure Alexander got into a one-on-one battle so that the conservative vote wouldn’t splinter, which could let Alexander win with just a plurality (as did Gov. Bill Haslam in 2010 and Sen. Bob Corker in 2006 in GOP primaries).

The collection of tea party groups settled on state Rep. Joe Carr, whose first ad [below] this week accused Alexander of working “behind closed doors trading favors” on the bill to reopen the government.

He opposes the immigration bill that Alexander helped negotiate and the Senate’s version of the farm bill. A state representative from about 40 miles southeast of Nashville, Carr has never spent more than $125,000 in a campaign. After dabbling with running in a House race, Carr instead leapt into the Senate race but raised just $52,000 in the third quarter.

He frankly admitted that his candidacy is reliant on outside conservative groups jumping into the race. Those groups told Carr they would be willing to spend up to $5 million if Carr can convince them he has a chance to win.

“For us to be able to have an opportunity to get that money in play so we can be competitive, we have to raise our own money,” he said. “It’s our intention to raise as much money as we can to prove to the outside groups across the country that this is a race of national interest.”

Democrats Are Unprepared For A Rare Opportunity To Win A Senate Seat In Tennessee

Anti-immigrant Know Nothing Joe Carr (R)

Tennessee's congressional districts are so gerrymandered that Democrats can only win in the state's two districts that are primarily in big cities, Nashville and Memphis. And in Nashville, the Democratic incumbent, Jim Cooper, is a conservative corporate-friendly Blue Dog who votes with the GOP very frequently. Statewide, it's not as clear cut, although the state has trended red in recent years. Democrats lost every presidential race in Tennessee after Bill Clinton's narrow 48-46% win in 1996. And last year, Obama did worst of all, failing to even break 40%-- down 3% since his 2008 drubbing there by McCain.

In 2012 Republican Bob Corker didn't have a legitimate Democratic opponent and trounced right-wing psychopath, Mark Clayton, 64.9- 30.4%, who ran as a Democrat without the party's backing. When Corker first ran, in 2006, in a Democratic year, he beat another conservative Democrat, corrupt Wall Street shill Harold Ford (who scored nearly 48%). The state's senior senator, Lamar Alexander, a former governor and U.S. Secretary of Education, ran for the Senate when Fred Thompson retired in 2002. The far right opposed him in the primary but he narrowly beat lunatic fringe congressman Ed Bryant and then Democratic Congressman Bob Clement 54-44% in the general. In 2008, he trounced Democrat Bob Tuke, 67.3-32.6%.

The far right of his own party is still after his scalp and teabaggers are howling for his blood again. A couple dozen teabagger groups signed a letter to him this month demanding he retire or be put to the sword face a primary.

During your tenure in the Senate we have no doubt that you voted in a way which you felt was appropriate. Unfortunately, our great nation can no longer afford compromise and bipartisanship, two traits for which you have become famous. America faces serious challenges and needs policymakers who will defend conservative values, not work with those who are actively undermining those values. Quite honestly, your voting record shows that you do not represent the conservative values that we hold dear and the votes you have cast as Senator are intolerable to us. Furthermore we have serious doubts about your ability to fix our problems since you have played such a significant role in creating them.

The Little Plaid Book you authored contains very sage advice on politics. Rule #297 is especially important because you advise anyone running for office to “Serve two terms, then get out.” Are you willing to follow your own advice, or will you fall into the mire of hypocrisy?

As you are likely aware, there have been polls conducted that show your vulnerability. While no viable contender has yet emerged, it is becoming more probable with each passing day that one will rise to the challenge. When a serious contender eventually does enter the race, the moment their fundraising capability makes them a viable candidate, your re-election is in serious jeopardy.

Therefore, we urge you to conclude your long and notable career by retiring with dignity instead of fighting against a serious conservative primary challenger who would expose to all Tennessee voters the actual history of your voting record.

Sincerely,

Sevier County Tea Party
Tea Party of Lincoln County
Gibson County Patriots
Benton County Tea Party
Carroll County Tea Party
Jackson Madison County Tea Party
Dickson County Tea Party / 912 Project
Obion County Tea Party
Stewart County Tea Party
Tennesseans for Liberty (Madison County)
Volunteers for Freedom (Henry County)
We the People (Tipton County)
Rutherford County Tea Party
TN 9-12 Project
Caney Branch Tea Party
TN Republican Assembly
Smoky Mountain Tea Party Patriots (Blount Co)
McMinn County TEA Party
North Sumner Tea Party
Tennessee 8th District Tea Party Coalition

And the candidate they had in mind, right-wing extremist Joe Carr, started leaking the word that he's in on Monday and then made the announcement Tuesday on Ralph Bristol's WTN-FM show that he's given up his bid to ouster Scott DesJarlais and that Alexander is his target instead.

Carr was unable to raise much money against DesJarlais but he's hoping that national teabagger groups hate Alexander enough to finance his primary. He's best known in Tennessee for being a vicious anti-Hispanic bigot and a total NRA shill.

Alexander had a competent and appealing response out yesterday in the Tennessean. But if a clownish sociopath like Carr wins the primary anyway, it's not likely that many independents-- and even some mainstream Republicans-- will vote for him. That opens the door for a Democrat. But what Democrat? The DSCC doesn't have anyone yet and local grassroots Democrats know who they want-- Chattanooga Mayor Andy Berke-- but fear he won't do it. Berke was a popular state senator who was just elected to be Chattanooga's mayor a few months ago. He's probably the only plausible Democrat in the state who could take the seat. I wonder if Harry Reid has called him. I bet not.

And so what if he was bad at spelling in school? Tennesseans aren't hiring him to win spelling bees; they want someone to turn back the hands of time and keep progressive and change from ever darkening their doorsteps. But he should at least know how the spell the office he's running for, no?

Even Ann Coulter Knows The Teabaggers Demanding The GOP Move Further Right Are, In Her Words, "Moron Showoffs"

Even a crackpot right-wing publicity hound like Ann Coulter can smell a delusional moron on the far right when she's confronted with one. In her column for some lunatic fringe website yesterday, Coulter castigated Jenny Beth Martin of the Tea Party Patriots as a "small mind" for blaming Romney for the big Republican Party electoral defeats across the nation this month. She objected to Martin's statement about Romney's unsuitability as a Republican candidate in statements like this: "What we got was a weak, moderate candidate handpicked by the Beltway elites and country club establishment wing of the Republican Party. The presidential loss is unequivocally on them." Coulter points to Romney's success in 7 months of Republican primaries that included notable far right extremists like Tea Party Queen Michele Bachmann, Texas Know Nothing Rick Perry, and neo-fascist religionist fanatic Rick Santorum.

The idea that Romney failed to present a clear contrast with Obama or was too "nice" is also nonsense. If Republicans continue to tell themselves comforting myths about our candidate being the problem, they better get used to losing a lot more elections.

...To the extent Republicans have a problem with their candidates, it's not that they're not conservative enough. Where are today's Nelson Rockefellers, Arlen Specters or George H.W. Bushes? Happily, they have gone the way of leprosy.

Having vanquished liberal Republicans, the party's problem now runs more along the lines of moron showoffs, trying to impress tea partiers like Jenny Beth Martin by taking insane positions on rape exceptions for abortion-- as 2 million babies are killed every year from pregnancies having nothing to do with rape.

Romney lost because he was running against an incumbent, was beaten up during a long and vicious primary fight, and ran in a year with a very different electorate from 1980. At least one of those won't be true next time. But we're not going to win any elections by telling ourselves fairy tales about a candidate who lost because he wasn't conservative enough, articulate enough or mean enough.

Romney, Coulter claimed, is much further right than Ronald Reagan ever was. And the Tea Party, clearly dragged down Romney and the GOP's chances in the Senate. Key House teabaggers, including Allen West (R-FL), Ann Marie Buerkle (R-NY), Sandy Adams (R-FL), Joe Walsh (R-IL) and Quico Conseco (R-TX) were defeated in their reelection bids and even Bachmann barely made it through-- and only because Steve Israel of the DCCC decided to not target her. In the Senate races, all the key Tea Party candidates-- Todd Akin (MO), Richard Mourdock (IN), Connie Mack (FL), Kurt Bills (MN), George Allen (VA), Josh Mandel (OH), Tom Smith (PA), Charles Summers (ME), Joe Kyrillos (NJ) and Linda McMahon (CT)-- were badly beaten. In fact, in every race where the Tea Party forced the GOP to pick a more extreme right candidate instead of a more mainstream conservative, the Republicans lost. Not that that will stop them from trying the same stunt again. They should look closely at how the extreme right lunatic they forced on Orlando Republicans, Todd Long, gave Alan Grayson the biggest congressional comeback landslide in contemporary electoral history; but they won't.

The tea-party movement is trying to regroup after taking some licks in this month’s elections. Several groups already are setting their sights on 2014 congressional races, in which they plan to promote their preferred candidates and hope to weed out Republicans they consider insufficiently conservative.

...Conservative groups also are considering potential challenges to GOP Sens. Lindsey Graham in South Carolina, Lamar Alexander in Tennessee and Saxby Chambliss in Georgia, whom some activists view as not conservative enough.

Although none of the 3 are known members of the Nazi Party, all are considered extremely right-wing, Chambliss may have angered the lunatic fringe this week by disavowing his Grover Norquist pledge on a Georgia TV station. Chambliss, whose career-long ProgressivePunch score is a shocking 2.04-- even more far right than secessionist freak shows Jim DeMint (R-SC), Roger Wicker (R-MS) or Jeff Sessions (KKK-AL) or Tea Party darlings Marco Rubio (R-FL), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Mike Lee (R-UT)-- says he knows Norquist and the teabaggers will come after him in 2014 with a primary challenge from an outright John Bircher like Paul Broun but is confident he made the right decision.

“I don't worry about that because I care too much about my country. I care a lot more about it than I do Grover Norquist,” said Chambliss.

“I'm willing to do the right thing and let the political consequences take care of themselves,” the Georgia senator added.

This is the perfect scenario for a replication of what happened in Indiana, where a weak reactionary Blue Dog, Joe Donnelly, had virtually no chance to be reelected to his House seat, threw a Hail Mary pass by running for Senate against Richard Lugar, only to bee the teabaggers defeat Lugar and replace him with the unelectable Mourdock. In Georgia an even more reactionary and even weaker Blue Dog, John Barrow, will be facing certain defeat in the House in 2014 and has been making noises about running against Chambliss. He'd have no chance against Chambliss but against someone as over the cliff as Broun or potential primary challenger Karen Handel ... Stranger things have happened.

As for Lamar Alexander, he has an even more right-wing voting record than Chambliss (1.92) and is even more popular in his homestate. And even Lindsey Graham's score (5.17) is hard to describe as anything but "right-wing extreme," falling halfway between Rand Paul (6.25) and David Vitter (4.61). The teabaggers will have a rough time making a case than any of these senators aren't right-wing enough-- not that anything like that would even begin to stop them.

They'll have mighty slim pickings in the House, where almost all the moderate Republicans are long gone. Walter Jones (R-NC) might be vulnerable in a primary but that would hand the district over to a Democrat-- same goes for Mike Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ), Chris Smith (R-NJ), Jim Gerlach (R-PA), Fred Upton (R-MI), Tom Petri (R-WI), Charlie Dent (R-PA), Leonard Lance (R-NJ), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Frank Wolf (R-VA), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) or Peter King (R-NY). But I'd love to see them try. I'll even help them!

Meanwhile, Norquist has already struck back at Chambliss for abandoning The Pledge: "Senator Chambliss promised the people of Georgia he would go to Washington and reform government rather than raise taxes to pay for bigger government. He made that commitment in writing to the people of Georgia. If he plans to vote for higher taxes to pay for Obama-sized government he should address the people of Georgia and let them know that he plans to break his promise to them. Sen. Chambliss mentions his fear of losing a primary if he breaks his word to Georgians and votes to raise their taxes,. History reminds us that when President George H.W. Bush raised taxes in a deal that promised (and did not deliver) spending cuts he was defeated not in the primary, but in the general.”