Republicans May Be Sorry For Rigging The Way Congress Works

In Sunday's Spokesman-Review, the most read newspaper in Washington's 5th district, Lisa Brown published an important OpEd, Divided We Fall. "The situation in America today," she began, "with pipe bombs mailed to political figures, the shootings of Representatives Gabby Giffords and Steve Scalise, and the killing of journalists, here and abroad, should be a wake-up call for us to protect our democracy. Leaders of all political parties must denounce violence and threats of violence as ways to address political differences, without qualification, without attempting to justify or rationalize, and without pointing fingers at our political opponents."

We should teach our children and remind each other that free speech, free assembly, and voting are how we resolve political differences in America. Doing that can help rebuild trust and bridge the toxic divides that plague our politics today.

All political leaders should reaffirm our support for the free press. President Trump was wrong to call the media the “enemy of the people,” and wrong to speak approvingly of physical violence against a journalist. A “body slam” could be metaphorical, but in this case, it was real, and nothing to joke about or condone.

...I call on leaders in both political parties to take action to set a different tone. This means not only not succumbing to the rhetoric and obvious attempts to divide us, but resolving important issues like health care, immigration, and budgets, in a bipartisan way. The failure of this Congress and of my opponent to make meaningful progress on these issues that are important to Eastern Washington’s families and economy, is the main reason I left my position as WSU chancellor to run for Congress.

...I believe the root of the toxicity in the current political environment is connected to growing income inequality, and associated economic and social insecurity experienced by many Americans. And these trends are unfortunately exacerbated by policies of this Congress... Above all, to improve trust, and bridge these divides, we need to tell the people the truth-- the truth matters and trust is impossible without it.

Lisa is talking about bi-partisan, even non-partisan, norms of our society, norms that are unrecognized by a profoundly ignorant, self-centered illegitimate "president," who has trampled on them and dragged the rest of his party along for the ride. That ride is likely to get very bumpy very soon. And I don't just mean, bad election results a week from tomorrow. "A GOP rule change," wrote Anthony Adragna for Politico Sunday, "handed unilateral subpoena authority to many House committee chairmen. Democrats cried foul, but now they hope to use it against Trump." Another clear example of the GOP stomping all over the norms. So what happens now? Democrats who are looking forward to investigating the kleptocratic and fascistic Trump Regime will have the Republicans to thank "for one of their most potent tools-- a sweeping subpoena authority that Democratic lawmakers denounced as an abusive power grab three years ago." The shoe is about to change feet-- on 14 of the 21 standing committees where the GOP rules allow chairmen to issue subpoenas without any bipartisan cooperation. When the Republicans were passing the new rules, some of them worried that giving committee chairmen subpoena power would eventually come back to haunt them. It's about to.

House Republicans changed the rules in 2015 to allow many of their committee chairmen to issue subpoenas without consulting the minority party, overriding Democrats objections that likened the tactic to something out of the McCarthy era.

Now the weapon that the GOP wielded dozens of times against Barack Obama’s agencies could allow Democrats to bombard President Donald Trump’s most controversial appointees with demands for information. And many Democrats are itching to use it.

“The Republicans have set the standard and, by God, we’re going to emulate that standard,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) told Politico.

Oversight would be one of the few concrete goals that Democrats could accomplish with control of only one chamber of Congress and Trump still in the White House. They have a long list of potential targets, including likely demands for Trump's tax returns and probes into Cabinet members such as Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke.

Before the 2015 rule change, most House subpoenas needed at least some bipartisan cover, requiring a majority vote of committee members and consultation with a panel’s ranking member. The change erased those requirements and allowed the chairmen to proceed unilaterally, although the exact rules vary by committee.

Many Democrats argue that Republicans only have themselves to blame for weaponizing the subpoena process, and that their own party should not unilaterally disarm now that the power has been unleashed.

“What goes around comes around,” said former Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI). “Would I expect them to give up the unilateral subpoena power by chairman? No. And I don’t think they should.”

That’s not the uniform viewpoint of everyone in the party. Rep. Bill Foster (New Dem-IL) led a group of 38 Democrats in an October 2016 letter urging GOP leaders to abandon the power during the next Congress. He told Politico he still thinks chairmen should not have it.

“I would continue to oppose unilateral subpoena power,” Foster said in a statement. “During my time in Congress, I have seen the majority party use this power to compel individuals to testify who differ from the committee chairs on policy matters. Committees should be expected to hold a vote on a subpoena to determine if the committee issues a subpoena.”

Most House Democrats think Foster is a pompous, self-serving, spoiled asshole and don't pay any attention to his constant whining. Two of the biggest abusers of the subpoena power were House Financial Services chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) and House Science chair Lamar Smith, bother of whom saw what was coming and announced their retirements. Devin Nunes, the poster child for the abuses, will-- if he gets reelected-- be the poster boy for the retribution.

Will Their Opposition To Healthcare Kill The GOP November 6th?

One of the funniest moments in the election debate this cycle-- at least for me-- came when Arizona congresswoman, Martha McSally, a garden variety Trump rubber-stamp who had voted to repeal protections for pre-existing conditions several times, was cornered by a reporter asking her to square her consistent record against healthcare with her promise now-- as she runs for U.S. Senate-- to protect people with pre-existing conditions from the greed of insurance companies. After lying for a few minutes to a reporter who kept pointing out her votes, she finally said something to the effect of "Can't you ask me about something voters are interested in, like the Caravan?" True, Fox News and hate talk radio hosts are interested in the Caravan... but voters? Not so much. They're more interested in Republicans trying to take away their healthcare.

In TX-10, Mike Siegel is campaign for Congress on a platform that includes Medicare for All. His opponent, Michael McCaul is a Trump enabler who has voted to destroy Medicare and to strip away protections for pre-existing conditions. "I have friends and family who would not be alive, and would not have healthcare, but for the Affordable Care Act's protections for pre-existing conditions," Mike told us. "My cousin received a liver transplant that his private insurance refused to pay for, thanks to the ACA. My opponent Michael McCaul voted repeatedly to repeal the ACA without having any replacement in place. The differences between us could not be more stark, and the choice for voters is clear." This is the ad Mike has been running on social media in his district:



In Omaha, progressive Democrat Kara Eastman has had to confront this bullshit head-on, as her opponent, anti-healthcare fanatic and desperate, compulsive liar Don Bacon (R-NE), has tried to pose as a protector of preexisting conditions-- even though he voted against protecting them every single time he could. "My opponent," she told us, "voted 'Hell Yes' for the AHCA. He claims this would have protected people with pre-existing conditions. However, the Washington Post gave this claim 3 PINOCCHIOS as the law would have allowed states the option to seek waivers that would nullify this promise."



The new Ipsos poll released by Reuters yesterday shows that 58% of likely voters want to keep ObamaCare in place and "eight in 10 likely voters from each major party want to protect coverage for people with existing conditions, such as heart disease, diabetes or cancer." I wonder how long before Trump and his sycophants start claiming they support it too. And have always supported it.

With the Nov. 6 elections looming, Democrats are reminding voters of Republicans’ often-repeated promises to repeal the 2010 law. Many Republican candidates are softening their tone or removing website references decrying what they long derided as “Obamacare,” according to candidates, analysts and healthcare experts in both parties.

As Democrats seek to take control of Congress, they see Republicans as having a particularly weak spot on healthcare. Sixty-seven of the 73 most vulnerable Republican incumbents in the House of Representatives voted at least once to eliminate the ACA and its protections for pre-existing conditions, according to the Center for American Progress Action Fund.



Some of those votes date back to the Obama administration, though his successor, Republican President Donald Trump, also campaigned on a promise to undo the law. A repeal attempt after Trump took office last year failed.

Opinion polls show Democrats as having a chance to achieve the net gain of 23 seats they would need to take a majority in the House, but facing a longer shot at picking up the two seats they need to take control of the Senate.

Democratic activists said the repeated Republican attempts to repeal the ACA provide a powerful tool to motivate voters.

“Healthcare has an ability to move people into action,” said Ben Wikler, Washington director of liberal activist group MoveOn. “It is turning people out in town hall meetings ... getting people to make hundreds of thousands of phone calls and getting voters to the polls.”

One sign of Democratic focus: 54.5 percent of Democrats’ federal election ads from Sept. 18 to Oct. 15 mentioned healthcare, far more than the 8.7 percent that did so at the same time in 2010, according to the Wesleyan Media Project.

Some 33.9 percent of Republican federal election ads mentioned healthcare during this period and 31.5 percent in 2010. Republicans took control of the House in the 2010 midterm elections, boosted in part by opposition to the ACA, which had become law earlier that year.

While the aim of the ACA was to expand healthcare insurance to reach millions of Americans who did not have any coverage, Republicans campaigned for years against it as government overreach, especially its requirement that people buy health insurance or pay a financial penalty.

U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill has made healthcare the focus of her campaign in Missouri against Republican challenger Josh Hawley. The state’s attorney general, Hawley has faced criticism from individuals and healthcare groups for saying he supports covering pre-existing conditions even after suing to end the ACA.

“Everyone is feeling anxious and worried about the future of healthcare,” McCaskill said in a telephone interview. “It’s beginning to dawn on people that the Republicans didn’t have a replacement (for the ACA), and that they have no ideas on how they could do it better.”

Hawley ran for state attorney general by emphasizing his role in a lawsuit against the ACA that went to the U.S. Supreme Court, and also worked on a team that successfully challenged the ACA’s requirement to provide contraceptives coverage.

Despite Republican opposition, eight years after its passage many Americans have seen some benefits from the law.

“By the time Republicans last year tried to repeal the law, it had become real, people had benefited,” said Brad Woodhouse, executive director of Protect Our Care. He said at least 20 Republican incumbents have “scrubbed” their websites to appear more supportive of the law.

In Kentucky, Representative Andy Barr has called his vote to repeal the ACA “a great day for freedom in America” but now plays up his support of programs to prevent and treat opioid addiction. In Maine, Representative Bruce Poliquin dropped a promise to “end Obamacare” and now talks about protecting hospitals.



Ted Cruz, a U.S. senator from Texas, said during a debate this month against Democratic challenger Beto O’Rourke that he would protect pre-existing illnesses, despite having once forced a shutdown of the federal government over ACA repeal efforts.

In a hotly contested upstate New York congressional race, Democratic challenger Antonio Delgado has hammered his opponent, first-term Republican John Faso, over his vote to repeal the ACA.

“John Faso, despite voting to take away protections, is running TV ads saying the exact opposite,” he said during a recent town hall meeting. “How can you look someone in the face and say, ‘No, I didn’t do that.’ After a while, you’re just lying to our faces blatantly. This is too real to lie about.”

Faso defended his vote in an interview, saying New York state law already ensures patients with pre-existing conditions are protected, regardless of federal legislation.

Despite support for specific elements of the law, 52 percent of likely voters told Reuters/Ipsos they view the U.S. healthcare system as “poor” or “terrible.”

Voters Want Revenge-- This Is What An Anti-Red Wave Looks Like

Very few voters give a damn about the shitload of crap candidates the DCCC has recruited from coast to coast. The only thing worse than the garbage candidates the DCCC has manufactured-- from ex-CIA spy Abigail Spanberger, who uses Trump talking points in her vomit-inducing anti-immigrant ad, to "ex"-Republican multimillionaires on the West Coast-- are their dreadful Republican opponents. But that difference makes all the difference in the world right now. Voters are angry-- angry at Trump and angry at the congressional Republicans who have enabled him and who have advanced a toxic agenda that is hurting people and threatening their families. See that picture up top? That's what this election is all about. That's why the Republicans are going to lose dozens of seats, not just to GREAT candidates like these, but to worthless, anti-progressive candidates the DCCC took great pains to get into place. No one is excited to vote for these candidates aside from they being the weapons to use against Trump and his rubber-stamps. It's not a blue wave; it's an anti-red wave.

As Ally Mutnick reported yesterday for the National Journal, more than 90 Republican incumbents were outraised by their Democratic opponents. Democratic candidates, she wrote, "aren’t just beating Republicans at the fundraising game-- they’re annihilating them." Luckily for the GOP, they have corrupt, self-serving billionaires like Sheldon Adelson, the Kochs, etc, to make up the gap, at least in part. But it's not enough... at least so far.

Ninety-two Republican incumbents were outraised by a challenger in the third quarter of 2018, a sharp increase from the 56 outraised in the second quarter. And that topline doesn’t even fully capture the scope of Democrats’ cash advantage. More than 50 of those members [I think she meant "candidates," not "members"] were outraised at least 2-to-1 and 31 were outraised 3-to-1 or more.

It’s been clear for weeks that Democrats would notch a record-breaking fundraising period, buoyed by small-dollar online donations from a grassroots base eager to defy President Trump. But Republicans revealed a staggering disparity as they filed their third-quarter reports at the Monday deadline... And these statistics have no recent precedent.

...This cycle, Democrats’ advantage is evident in nearly every top House battleground. In the 69 districts, including open-seats, deemed most competitive by the Cook Political Report, just two Republicans posted a higher third-quarter fundraising than their Democratic opponent: Reps. Mia Love of Utah and George Holding of North Carolina.

...In a Los Angeles-area district, Katie Hill raised $3.8 million, eight times more than Republican Rep. Steve Knight. And in Orange County, Harley Rouda raised $3.1 million, more than seven times as much as Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher. In suburban Chicago, Lauren Underwood hauled nearly five times more than Republican Rep. Randy Hultgren. And in northern New Jersey, Tom Malinowski quadrupled the fundraising of Republican Rep. Leonard Lance.

But, as history has shown us, in a wave election, challengers can beat incumbents without even outraising them at all. That's what 2006 and 2010 showed us, in the later when Democrats clobbered Republicans who had 2 and 3 times cash then they did and in 2010 when GOP candidates came along with virtually no money and took out cash-rich Democrats. This year, as long as a Democratic candidate has enough money to get out a message they can beat a much better financed Republican.



There are districts all around the country where the DCCC saw "no chance" and ignored the primaries there-- and are still ignoring them. In many cases-- like in CA-50 (Ammar Campa-Najjar) and TX-10 (Mike Siegel)-- progressives were able to win because of no DCCC interference and now, with a wave, they have a shot in prohibitively red districts. Last week Mike Siegel, the progressive running against entrenched Republican Michael McCaul in a super-gerrymandered red district, was on Maddow's show twice, saw a huge uptick in contributions and, shockingly was endorsed yesterday by the Houston Chronicle.

The DCCC wrote their districts off, so now progressives Dayna Steele and Mike Siegel may ride the wave to wins  in red Texas districts

It’s a challenge for any candidate to run in Texas’ 10th Congressional District, which stretches from Houston’s suburbs all the way to Austin. It’s even harder when one of your staffers gets locked up for trying to ensure that young people in the district can vote.

Jacob Aronowitz, a field director for Democratic candidate Mike Siegel’s campaign, was arrested at the Waller County Courthouse last week. He was there to deliver a letter disputing a decision that would have prevented students at the historically black Prairie View A&M University from voting on campus in the 2018 election. The Waller County Sheriff’s Office said Aronowitz was arrested for failure to identify, a Class C misdemeanor. He was released after two hours.

This is the same county where Sandra Bland died in jail after being pulled over for failure to signal a lane change.

Aronowitz’s brief arrest received national attention, and a day later Texas’ secretary of state announced that students will be allowed to vote on campus without having to fill out change of address forms and observers will be on site.

Consider us impressed with a campaign that fought for and succeeded in protecting voting rights even before winning an election.

This is a tough call because we’re fans of incumbent U.S. Rep. Mike McCaul, but in this race Siegel has our endorsement.

An assistant city attorney in Austin, Siegel, 40, wants to strengthen the Affordable Care Act, though he told us ideally he’d prefer single-payer health care.

He thinks the federal government has failed to make the proper investments in flood control infrastructure. That includes a coastal storm surge protection at the Port of Houston, which is outside his district but, as he recognizes, is key to the national economy. He’s also pushing for a pragmatic immigration plan similar to the 2013 bipartisan Senate bill.

Siegel has a specific focus on helping the rural parts of this district. He pointed to preventing rural hospitals from closing and expanding high-speed Internet access outside cities. Overall he’s running on a New Deal-style policy and wants to see the return of national public works projects.

Even if he doesn’t win. Siegel’s robust campaign may help turn out voters in areas that Democrats often don’t reach, such as Austin, Bastrop, Burleson, Lee, Waller and Washington Counties, and that statewide candidates.

...We’ve routinely endorsed [McCaul] for office, but he didn’t meet with the editorial board this cycle.

Despite his impressive record, McCaul has spoken all too softly over the past two years when it came time to put his foreign policy toughness to the test... he’s failed to step up and call out the president with the same honest voice we’ve heard from Republicans like U.S. Sens. Ben Sasse (R-NE), and Jeff Flake (R-AZ).

The nation could use McCaul’s voice right about now. In a 60 Minutes interview aired over the weekend Trump yet again gave Russia a pass for interfering in the 2016 election.

McCaul is acting like supporting the White House is worth a massive foreign policy surrender, contrary to everything we’ve seen him advocate for over the years. He wouldn’t put up with what he’s tolerating from Trump if Barack Obama were still president.

Early voting as been beyond what anyone inside the Beltway could have possibly predicted. Normal Americans are matching to the polls to defeat the fascist threat. It would seem impossible, but in some states turnout is on track to be higher than it was in the 2016 presidential election, which would be a first in American history. But, of course, Trump is a first in American history too. For example, in the last midterm (2014), 2,080,071 Coloradans voted with advance ballots. So far this year Coloradans have requested 3,297,951 advance ballots. And... this is what disdain for Trump and his rubber-stamps in Congress-- and love for our country-- looked like in California for the last 3 months. Amazing!

Do Some Voters Favor Cutting Medicare And Slashing Social Security?

Ostensibly this ad is about the Florida gubernatorial race. But even if you've never set foot on Floridians soil, please watch it, because it's about where you live and where everyone in your family lives. Andrew Gillum is the progressive mayor of Tallahassee I've personally known for over 20 years-- which was why Blue America was able to endorse him on the day he declared he was running-- and Ron DeSantis is a far right Trumpist with a record in Congress for voting to cut Social Security and Medicare, just like virtually every Republican in the House.

Andrew's campaign, on releasing the ad Tuesday morning noted that "It’s no surprise Ron DeSantis has refused to release a healthcare plan-- because his record is clear: slashing Medicare and Social Security and even to raising the retirement age. Ron DeSantis’ record speaks for itself and as governor, he’d continue these attacks on hardworking Floridians. Ron DeSantis does not have Floridians’ best interest at heart, and he has shown it over and over again. Andrew Gillum has a vision for our state where Florida seniors can retire with dignity and Ron DeSantis is more worried about protecting billionaires; Ron DeSantis is wrong for Florida."

Like Andrew Gillum in Florida, Randy Bryce is seeing a flood of sewer money being used to smear him and destroy him as a person. No one has ever seen such a filthy campaign in Wisconsin. But, like Andrew, he's staying strong and keeping the issues that matter to people front ands center [Please help us respond to the filth Ryan's sleazy SuperPAC has been unleashing by contributing to the IronStache Fund.] This morning, Randy told us that "This ad-- like the approach we are taking in Southeastern Wisconsin-- demonstrates that voters aren't looking for soundbites. Social Security and Medicare are way too important to be danced around with poll tested lingo like "putting seniors first." Folks don't want to hear that crap. They want to know what you will do and what the other person will do, period. We are taking that message right to the voters, and it is paying off."

In the Texas 10th, Mike Siegel is picking up steam after appearing on Rachel Maddow, winning a victory for voting rights, and receiving the Houston Chronicle endorsement this morning. Siegel is running on a Medicare for All platform, while his opponent Michael McCaul celebrated his vote to repeal Obamacare. In a district that rates health care as its top priority-- regardless of party affiliation-- Siegel is poised to shock the country if voter turnout breaks the right way. "McCaul, he told us this morning, essentially voted to kill his own constituents. McCaul’s only chance to win re-election is the ‘straight ticket’ option here in Texas. Very few voters recognize him as a true representative of their interests."

J.D. Scholten's extremist opponent, Steve King didn't just passively vote against healthcare at every opportunity he got. King famously thundered about the Affordable Care Act, "Rip it out by the roots!" I asked J.D. if healthcare is still resonating in rural Iowa as a big issue. He told me that "On the trail, health care is the number one issue voters ask us about. I regularly drive across this district in our campaign RV and as you can imagine, we have to stop a lot to fuel up. I constantly see donation boxes at gas stations, to help with a loved one’s medical bills. We’re the richest nation in the world. We shouldn’t have to crowdsource our health care costs."

Primary Turn-out Surged. But Far More For Democrats Than For Republicans

Trumpty Dumpty by Nancy Ohanian

On Wednesday Axios posted a fascinating chart about the blue vs red primary surge in swing districts this cycle. You can probably read it if you click on the image:

They compared 19 battleground House districts to see how much of a primary vote surge there was for each party in each district. And there was a surge for each party in each district-- but the surges were disproportionately stronger for the Democrats in every single one of the 19 districts, all of which have Republican congressmen now

Now let me make a few things clear that Axios didn't look at. First off, even in districts where there were non-competitive primaries-- take WA-08-- for example, there were much bigger Democratic voter surges than Republican. The incumbent, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, saw a modest 1.6x jump from the 2014 midterms, the second biggest of any of the 19 districts for a Republican. But that was dwarfed by the 2.8x jump for Democrats who came out in droves to vote for Lisa Brown. And that isn't an outlier... that was the story in every one of these districts.



Look at CA-45, the Orange County district where Trump rubber-stamp Mimi Walters is desperately clinging to life. There were no other Republicans in the primary. However there were 4 Democrats participating, from a right-of-center New Dem, Dave Min, to Katie Porter, who won. But all that activity drive up Democratic participation from 2014 3.3 times among Democrats but just 1.4 times among Republicans.

How about where was no incumbent and there was a real Republican contest? Let's look at the CA-49 race (southern Orange County and northern San Diego County). Darrell Issa had announced he was retiring and the primary was wild-- 9 Republicans and 4 Democrats. You'd think all those Republicans would drive up turnout, right? But no. Democratic turnout zoomed up 2.7 times while GOP turnout lagged at 1.5 times.

It was even worse for Republicans in WI-01, where Paul Ryan withdrew from the race. There were 6 Republicans in the hunt but just 2 Democrats. 61,087 Democrats participated and just 59,870 Republicans. Democrats were so charged up to vote for Randy Bryce-- 36,397 did-- that Democratic voter participation surged two and a half times, while barely ticking up among Republicans at all-- 0.9 times. Ryan's handpicked candidate, corporate lawyer Brian Steil, was endorsed by Trump but he only managed to get 30,883 votes.

There was no circumstance or combination of circumstances that created a greater-- or even equal-- surge among Republicans than there was for Democrats.

Axios says this matters because 'poor turnout has been the scourge of Democrats' efforts to win congressional elections in the last decade. But this data suggests that a surge of anti-Trump enthusiasm could boost their turnout in November-- and not just in already-blue areas, but in parts of the country that could deliver control of the House to the Democrats."

OK, they have that right, but you know who's all wet? The DCCC. Notice that what's driving this is "anti-Trump enthusiasm," not enthusiasm for the shit candidates the DCCC recruited or for the so-called message the Democrats are supposedly pushing. The ridiculously unpopular "big tent" party is incapable to coming top with a popular message-- say Medicare-For-All or Job Guarantee or free state colleges-- because the DCCC recruits so many conservative Blue Dogs and New Dems from the Republican wing of the party. The only thing the DCCC is good at is digging a grave for the Democratic Party and setting in motion another anti-blue wave for the 2022 midterms. When Pelosi listed her 3 inane priorities, the most memorable one was also the most horrible: PayGo. There is no blue wave-- just an anti-red wave.

So how many of these 19 seats will the Democrats take? Probably 17. Possibly 18. And 19 wouldn't be a shock.

Going Into The Final Month Before The Midterms, 65% Of Americans See Trump As Dishonest

Joseph Goebbels, Master of Propaganda by Nancy Ohanian

Trump has an astonishingly bad job approval rating. In the latest SSRS poll for CNN his overall approval was just 36% and disapproval had risen to 58%. Worse yet, just 32% of Americans perceive him as honest and trustworthy. 65% of Americans see him as dishonest and untrustworthy. The only people who still say they find him honest have been brain-washed by Hate Talk Radio and Fox News. Normal Americans see right through the bullshit and gas-lighting.

Lisa Brown, former chancellor of Washington State University, seems to get offended by the way so many Republicans have suddenly embraced Trump's penchant for creating his own "facts" out of thin air. "Ironically, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers has made 'civility' a theme of her campaign," she told me yesterday. "Yet, she was silent when the President mocked Dr. Ford and when he called Senator Elizabeth Warren 'Pocahontas,' and she doesn’t object when he makes statements that are demonstrably false. Her well-publicized distortions of my record and hers speak to a capitulation to a Trump-style loose relationship with the facts that feeds voter distrust of her and desire for change after 14 years of party-line representation."



Monday Matt Gertz of Media Matters, penned an essay on how all the lying is being dealt with by the mass media, The press helped build Donald Trump's lie; now it has to reckon with that.

Donald Trump rose to prominence and the presidency on the strength of his self-proclaimed mastery of The Art of the Deal. It was that business acumen, Trump claimed, that allowed him to turn a paltry loan from his father into a vast empire. But last week, the New York Times revealed that Trump was not the self-made billionaire he had claimed to be but rather the recipient of at least $413 million from his father, in part through tax schemes the paper described as “outright fraud.”

The painstaking investigation by Times reporters David Barstow, Susanne Craig, and Russ Buettner is not just a skillful demolition of the origin story Trump told. It’s also a rebuke to generations of journalists who bolstered Trump’s tale. Trump provided the myth, but he needed the press to trumpet it out to the public. The result was a lie so durable that no single story, however brilliant, can unravel it.

As president, Trump has waged war on the “fake news” press. But long before he reached the Oval Office, he depended on overly trusting journalists to burnish his reputation. To their credit, The Times reporters are up front about the role their own paper played, noting early in the piece that his self-proclaimed narrative “was long amplified by often-credulous coverage from news organizations, including The Times.” In one particularly devastating example, they highlight a 1976 Times profile-- “a cornerstone of decades of mythmaking about his wealth”-- in which the then-30-year-old Trump simply passed off his father’s businesses as his own, claims the paper’s reporters obviously didn’t scrutinize at the time.

In the years that followed, media coverage would crystallize that image of Trump as a self-made success and deal-maker extraordinaire. Some pushed back on that story-- The Times article names four journalists and biographers whose work was particularly vital: Gwenda Blair, David Cay Johnston, Timothy L. O’Brien, and the late Wayne Barrett. But on balance, reporters were taken in by Trump’s skillful manipulation, vulnerable to his understanding that they were “always hungry for a good story, and the more sensational the better.” The early profiles of the 1970s would generate the magazine covers, tabloid frenzy, and talk show interviews of the 1980s. By the 1990s, Trump was a pop culture icon, a symbol of wealth and power. And in 2004, NBC launched the blockbuster reality show The Apprentice, bringing Trump’s preferred persona as a respected and ever-successful mogul into the homes of millions.

“Money is at the core of the brand Mr. Trump has so successfully sold to the world,” The Times’ reporters conclude. “Yet essential to that mythmaking has been keeping the truth of his money-- how much of it he actually has, where and whom it came from-- hidden or obscured. Across the decades, aided and abetted by less-than-aggressive journalism, Mr. Trump has made sure his financial history would be sensationalized far more than seen.”

Now Barstow, Craig, and Buettner have provided the aggressive journalism that had been lacking. But it remains to be seen whether the facts they have mustered can convince the public that the story so many of their colleagues helped Trump tell was a lie.

Trump has a built-in insurance policy against such reporting. No longer relying on the press to burnish his image, Trump has convinced his supporters that critical news outlets can’t be trusted. As the media critic and journalism professor Jay Rosen puts it, “Before journalists log on in the morning, one third of their potential public is gone.” Trump’s supporters instead tune in to sycophantic right-wing outlets like Fox News, where The Times story has been alternately ignored and spun as a good thing for the president. The network’s audience isn’t going to believe a story from what Trump terms the "failing New York Times" over the president himself.

And even audiences that might be open to learning new facts about Trump could simply miss them. The Times report was initially met with a flurry of secondary coverage by other media outlets. But that focus quickly dissipated in the face of the GOP push to confirm Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, and by the end of the week, the story had largely faded from broadcast and cable news. On Saturday, The Times itself published an analysis finding that the previous week had been the best of Trump’s presidency. The piece did not mention the paper’s own bombshell report exposing how the president benefited from tax fraud.

The next day, perhaps in an effort to regain momentum, The Times republished its story in a separate section. But that morning, Meet the Press, This Week, Face the Nation, and Fox News Sunday-- weekly talk shows that focus on politics and historically set the news agenda for the week-- all completely ignored it. (The story was brought up in passing by a panelist on CNN's State of the Union.)

But for all that Trump has been the star and producer of his own long-running soap opera, he’s not its only author. And The Times report has brought new players onto the stage: New York City and state regulators plan to review the foundations of Trump’s fortune, while congressional Democrats are promising to force the release of the president’s tax returns if they regain power. If the Times investigation turns into a long-running storyline rather than a one-off episode, it might finally break through.

In yesterday's Washington Post, Jennifer Rubin weeped over the rotting carcass of her Republican Party, whining that the "Trumpization is complete. It’s not a conservative party, or a small government party or an anti-authoritarian party (to the contrary!)... no principle, dismissive of courtesy and reasoned persuasion. Anger, not ideas, is its animating force. We have a nativist party that views America not as a creedal nation, but as a white Christian nation that is diminished by immigrants and is threatened by outsiders. If it possesses any coherent philosophy, it is one of victimhood-- which in turn justifies any and all bad behavior... Any Republicans thinking of challenging President Trump because they recoil from the party of Trump is, I hate to break it to them, out of luck. The party wants the mocking cruelty, the attacks on the press and on women, the protectionism and the white nationalism. These things define it." What's shocking to Ms. Rubin, was apparent to normal people who abhor a huckster long ago. How could anyone possibly feel any affinity for a party that allowed itself-- with barely a gasp-- to be taken over by a lowlife crook like Trump? Michael Bloomberg warned them.

This Week's New Campaign Ads

Paul Ryan's Adelson-funded SuperPAC is running the dirtiest and most personal smear campaign in history. The goal is to disgust independent voters and turn them off from voting. Meanwhile, Democrats are trying to stick to issues but are being distracted defending against Ryan's attempt to smear them. Ryan is pounding Randy Bryce especially hard in his own district (which he's retiring from). He knows the key to election is independent voters, who are leaning strongly away from the GOP. The Ryan PAC has spent $1.5 million on ads attacking Randy for a record of arrests (driving while intoxicated, smoking pot, protesting Scott Walker's anti-union legislation...). Randy responded this week by looking straight into the camera and taking responsibility (above). Ryan's PAC then recruited Bryce's right-wing, hate-filled jealous brother to denounce him as a cop hater, setting off a fire storm that back fired on Ryan's hand-picked candidate, Bryan Steil.

If you'd like to help the candidates on this page keep these ads on TV, please consider clicking on this link and contributing what you can. Every little bit helps.

Yesterday Elizabeth Warren told her supporters exactly what I've been saying all week-- in her words, that "Republicans are scared to face the voters this November. So they’re calling in the cavalry-- asking their biggest donors to sling the filthiest mud against some of our strongest Democratic candidates. Paul Ryan’s pet Super PAC is flooding the airwaves with false attacks-- and in some cases dog-whistle garbage-- in districts that will help decide whether Democrats win back the House." She suggested contributing to some of the candidates being smeared by Ryan's machine, particularly Katie. I would add Randy Bryce, Kara Eastman and Jared Golden to that list as well, all of whose campaigns can be found by clicking on the 2018 congressional Blue America thermometer on the right. How about contributing to the candidate whose video you like the best and would like to see on the air the most?

In Maine, Ryan's PAC seems obsessed with Jared Golden's tattoos-- which his frontline unit members all got after fighting in Afghanistan (while Republican Bruce Poliquin was working on Wall Street to loot workers' pension funds). The DCCC responded in kind on behalf of Jared with a blistering ad that hits Poliquin on his biggest weaknesses:



So far Kara Eastman isn't getting any DCCC help-- so she went after Don Bacon, her Trump-enabling Republican opponent, herself, and totally on the issues Omaha voters are interested in. She's basically ignoring the ads Paul Ryan's PAC is running against her that accuse her of being in a punk rock band when she was in college. This one, at least to me appears to be a lot lmore effective than that:



Same with Jess King-- no DCCC help (and none on the horizon)-- so she went after... the establishment on her own. This is one of the best ads of the cycle. Jess is a progressive grassroots candidate in southern Pennsylvania and she owes nothing to either party and in this brand new ad says what so many Americans feel: "Both the Republican and Democratic Party establishments have failed to stand up to the special interests. While working people are getting left behind, leaders in both parties keep stacking the deck against us... We deserve a Representatibve who shares our values and who's willing to stand up to the political establishment in DC." This is a very appealing ad and will probably be extremely effective in a district like PA-11.



Ammar Campa-Najjar's newest ad was made for Fox viewers and uses Fox anchors to get his message out! It's an effective and ballsy concept. He goes right after Drunken Hunter's defense of his indefensible criminal activities-- and right to his core base of supporters. Since the indictments were made public, Ammar has caught up with Hunter in polling and this ad should help change a dead even 46-46% tie into a lead-- even in this very red R+11 congressional district east of San Diego:



Katie Porter is being inundated with negative ads from Paul Ryan's PAC. They even "accused" her of having gone to Harvard, probably a stupid accusation to make in a well-off, highly educated district where people admire educational achievement. She's sticking to the issues in her new ad-- while letting voters know the difference between where she stands and where her Trump rubber stamp opponent, Mimi Walters, stands. Walters has a voting record and it's completely out of step with the district she doesn't even live in.



Lisa Brown is also getting pounded by Paul Ryan's SuperPAC which is desperately trying to save Trump enabler Cathy McMorris Rodgers in eastern Washington. Her brand new ad is persuasive as it contrasts McMorris Rodgers' actual voting record against healthcare with the top plank in Lisa's campaign. This is one of the top battle-ground races in the country and among the top 5 races when it comes to punishing the GOP for their massive overreach.



Mike Siegel's ad contrasts a so-called "safe" gerrymandered district, with the safety-- the lack of safety to be more precise-- of the people who live in it. It's an expensive ad to run in two very high-priced media markets (Austin and Houston) and Mike can really use some help putting together two effective ad buys. Give him a hand here. 



Dayna Steele, like Mike Siegel, is also running in Texas. His district starts in the suburbs west of Houston. Hers is on the other side of the sprawling city. TX-36 voters know Dayna because she was the most popular rock dj on K-101 for years. Instead of a new TV ad, take a look at the trailer for a 6-part docu-series in which a film crew follows Dayna on the campaign trail, Dayna Steele: Rock the 36th. From the movie company's press release:

Dayna Steele is sick and tired of being told she can't do something. As Houston's "first lady of rock and roll" during the 70's, 80's and 90's, Dayna introduced a whole generation to the music of legends like Boston, Joan Jett and Melissa Etheridge on Rock 101 KLOL. Her fans, known as “Steeleworkers,” never forgot her influence on their lives. In 2016, Dayna was looking forward to retiring with her husband, a pilot for NASA, and spending the rest of her days on the golf course. But the presidential elections in November of that year changed her mind and put her on a different course.

The wife of a first-generation Cuban-American and the mother of an LGBTQ son, Dayna felt she had to do something to fight the resurgence of homophobia and xenophobia in the country she loves. On May 31, 2017, Dayna Steele announced her candidacy for the 36th Congressional District in the State of Texas. Running as a Democrat in one of the reddest districts in a traditionally red state, Dayna knows this campaign will be a hard fight as she goes up against an incumbent who once notoriously said, “Sometimes a lady needs to be told when she’s being nasty.” With the future of the country on the line, Dayna is one nasty woman who is ready to fight for the people of her district. Her campaign motto says it all… Healthcare + Education = Jobs

I know it looks like a dead screen, but just click on it; it comes to life-- bigly:

Why Are There So Many Zombies Hanging Around Spokane?

The eastern Washington state congressional district (WA-05) is one of the hottest in the country. The highest ranking Republican woman in the House, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a pure Trump enabler and rubber stamp, is under pressure from former majority leader of the Washington state House and former Washington State University University (Spokane), Lisa Brown. The two candidates have raised $6,170,863 so far, far more than any other race in the state. As of the July 18 FEC reporting deadline, McMorris Rodgers had $1,232,499 left in her campaign account and Lisa Brown had $920,575 in her account.

Paul Ryan's Adelson-funded SuperPAC has set up office in the district and is spending a great deal of money to bolster a weak incumbent. McMorris Rodgers has turned to arch-villains like Devin Nunes, one of Putin's favorite comgressmen to help her raise more money. Although WA-05 backed McCain narrowly against Obama-- 51.2% to 46.3%-- Hillary was just the wrong candidate for that district. Bernie was a big winner in the Democratic primary there. Trump beat her 52.2% to 39.1%. Bernie took the 3 biggest counties by big numbers-- Spokane County 78.1-21.7%; Stevens County 80.8% to 18.4% and in Walla Walla County, 70.8-29.2%. If you'd like to contribute to Lisa's campaign, just click on the thermometer on the right.

The PVI is R+8, a point in the wrong direction from 2015. But there are enough independent voters in the district to give Lisa a great overcome the odds. She's running on a strong, forthright campaign embracing, for example, the idea of an economy that is more equitable for American workers. "True economic growth and jobs," she told us, "come from investing in people (through education) and in infrastructure."



One of the things I like most about Lisa is that she understands how to work across the aisle to find shared interests in order to get good, solid legislation passed. That's the advantage of electing experienced, skilled legislators to Congress, people like Ted Lieu, Pramila Jayapal, Karen Bass, Jamie Raskin, Judy Chu, Katherine Clark, Adriano Espaillat...



All that said, the way I first met Lisa was from Krist Novoselic, former bass player with Nirvana. He persuaded me to talk with her based on his own experiences with her. Lisa has always taken the arts seriously. In fact, in the state House, she sponsored the Washington State Motion Picture Competitiveness Program 10 years ago and just renewed last year. The bill helped lay the foundation for the creative economy in eastern Washington resulting in shows like Z Nation, which is filmed in Spokane. In fact, the show likes her so much that they sent a zombie to her campaign announcement event!

The Connection Between Impeachment And The Midterms

Closing In by Nancy Ohanian

NBC News has released polling numbers from 9 key states-- eight of which Trump won-- showing that, among other things, that the anti-red wave is going to sweep away a lot of Republicans in November. National numbers show trends but state numbers are closer to reality-- and the reality doesn't look good for the GOP-- despite the hundreds of millions of corporate dollars they are spending smearing Democrats in every single contested seat in the country.

Yesterday, the imbecilic, senile, illegitimate "president" tweeted more of his bullshit:

What polls? The ones Ivanka and Kushner-in-law make up and read him to calm him down before bedtime? These are the congressional preference numbers in states the GOP absolute must hold onto to keep the midterms from being a rout. Every one of them other than Texas now has a Democratic preference (and Texas is trending away from the GOP in all the key districts around Houston, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio:

• Texas- R+7
• Florida- D+3
• Ohio- D+3
• Arizona- D+4
• Pennsylvania- D+6
• Wisconsin- D+8
• Michigan- D+9
• Minnesota- D+12
• Illinois- D+14

How could this turn around so rapidly? We're not looking at numbers that factor in heavily Democratic states like California, New York and Massachusetts. These are the states Russia used to put Trump into the White House. The numbers have a lot to do with revulsion for Trump among 3 key groups: suburbanites, women and white with college degrees. The suburbs in all 9 states have turned away from Trump. These are his approval/disapproval numbers:

It's even worse for him among women, who have traditionally protected their children (and the species) from existential danger. And that's what they sense Trump and his Republican enablers are. I've never seen numbers like this among women for an incumbent president. The understand their children are in danger. They are going to vote in drove in November-- like their lives and their children's lives depend on it-- even in Texas and Florida!

Whites with college degrees have been the traditional backstop for the Republican Party. They see what Trump is and what the Republican Party has turned into. And they're not happy about it.

It's now become laughable when pundits say "but the election is a long way off and anything could happen between now and then." Yeah-- but what has been happening as the months tick down is that Trump has gotten crazier and crazier and the Republicans have horrified more and more people by showing themselves as pathetic rubber stamps. IN all likelihood what will happen between now and the midterms will be that Trump makes it even worse for the GOP, not better.

Thursday, Time published a piece by Martin London, I Was a Lawyer for Spiro Agnew. President Trump Should Consider Resigning.

This is half-time. We do not know what the Mueller investigation knows, what it has learned from Flynn, Popadopoulous, Gates, Van der Swan, Pinedo-- who have all pleaded guilty. Nor do we know what, if anything, Michael Cohen has already told investigators. Or what White House counsel Don McGahn said in 30 hours of interviews with them. Or what Mueller’s team has learned from what we can sure is the scores, if not hundreds, of other witnesses they have interviewed. And, of course, there are the millions of tapes, computer files and documents seized in the Cohen raid, along with those handed over by Trump’s former lawyers.

Mueller can and likely will name Trump as an unindicted co-conspirator on any case he brings going forward, if he abides by Department of Justice guidelines and does not indict a sitting president. And Trump needs to worry about his criminal liability (and that of his son and son-in-law) when he leaves office.

Impeachment aside, given all that the President now faces, does anyone in his camp have the courage to discuss a so-far unmentionable strategy? Do what we did for Spiro Agnew, and the country. Negotiate a deal: You end the Mueller investigation, and I’ll send out of a tweet: “No collusion, I did nothing wrong, rigged witch hunt, but this is bad for the country, and I am a patriot. So I hereby resign. Sad.”

Good theory. But it won't work in real life. Trump is not-- not even remotely-- a patriot. He doesn't care about this country. He only cares about himself. Yesterday the Wall Steet Journal reported that the Trump Organization long-time CFO Allen Weisselberg, who has already testified for a grand jury, was granted immunity. This actually could be curtains for the Trumps. And it sure isn't going to help Trump enablers in tight reelection battles for their political lives. What do people like Ron Estes in Wichita, Mimi Walters in Orange County, Michael McCaul in the Austin-Houston corridor or Cathy McMorris Rodgers in Spokane do now? These are all members of Congress who have attached their political fortunes to Trump and who rubber-stamp everything he does and everything he stands for.

Mike Siegel is a progressive Texas Democrat who won his primary and was promptly abandoned by the DCCC. That just makes him work harder to defeat reactionary Republican Michael McCaul in an Austin/Houston area district. He just told us that "McCaul votes with Trump 98.9% of the time, as loyal as any Texas Republican. At the same time, the president is eroding his base in the Texas 10th: hurting rice and sorghum farmers with a foolish Trade War, sabotaging Affordable Care Act health insurance policies, even insulting law enforcement officials in his zeal to attack Michael Cohen as a 'flipper.' No matter what Trump does, you can count on McCaul to let it happen. As I knock on doors across the district, I keep hearing from Democrats, but also from Republicans and independents, that folks want a real system of checks and balances. When they vote this November, if they want real Congressional oversight, they have to vote blue."

Yesterday, Lisa Brown, the progressive Democrat who resigned as chancellor of Washington State University to oust McMorris Rodgers and her detrimental agenda from Congress told me that McMorris Rodgers is "doubling down on the Trump administration, bringing Kellyanne Conway in for a fundraising event just a few weeks after a closed door lunch with Devin Nunes. She announced that Ben Carson will be next."

James Thompson, the progressive taking on Ron Estes in Kansas, is on the same page. "Instead of acting like a congressman and waiting to see what the evidence shows," he told us, "Ron Estes is simply doubling down on his support of President Trump. He is not concerned with guilt or innocence, right or wrong. Estes is only concerned with maintaining power for his political bosses and corporate donors.  Without seeing any evidence, or hearing any testimony, Ron Estes simply choosing the politically expedient course of action and supports Trump come hell or high water. As a congressman, Estes should be doing what is best for the country, rather than what is simply best for his career and party."

The decision by prosecutors in the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office to grant immunity to Mr. Weisselberg escalates the pressure on Mr. Trump, whom Mr. Weisselberg has served for decades as executive vice president as well as CFO for the Trump Organization. After Mr. Trump was elected, he handed control of his financial assets and business interests to his two adult sons and Mr. Weisselberg.

...The Journal couldn’t determine whether Mr. Weisselberg told prosecutors that Mr. Trump had knowledge of the payments.

Last year, Mr. Weisselberg arranged for the Trump Organization to reimburse Mr. Cohen, who had in October 2016 made a $130,000 payment to Stephanie Clifford, a former adult-film actress who claimed she had sex with Mr. Trump a decade earlier, in exchange for her silence about the alleged affair. A person familiar with Mr. Weisselberg’s thinking said he didn’t know that money was intended to pay Ms. Clifford, who goes professionally by Stormy Daniels, when he agreed in January 2017 to a $35,000 monthly retainer for Mr. Cohen.

That month, according to charging documents filed Tuesday, Mr. Cohen gave executives at the Trump Organization a copy of the bank statement from his bank account for Essential Consultants LLC, the company he used to pay Ms. Clifford the previous fall. The statement reflected Mr. Cohen’s $130,000 payment to Ms. Clifford, as well as an additional $50,000 that Mr. Cohen added in handwriting was for “tech services.”

Executives at the Trump Organization “ ‘grossed up’ for tax purposes” Mr. Cohen’s requested reimbursement, doubling it to $360,000, and added a $60,000 bonus, the document said. The next month, one executive at the company asked another executive to pay Mr. Cohen’s monthly retainer “from the trust” and to “post to legal expenses.”

At the Trump Organization, Mr. Trump was known for being meticulous about payments the company made. Mr. Weisselberg would bring Mr. Trump checks to sign for the company on a daily basis, according to a person close to the company. Mr. Trump would routinely ask questions about the checks and what they were for, at times requesting Mr. Weisselberg hold off on specific payments, the person said.

“He would say, ‘That’s too much,’ ” the person said.

Democratic candidates really should be doing a lot more of this kind of campaigning. Democratic voters and independent voters know what Trump is and know what the congressional Republicans are and they want leaders with the guts to oppose it. Democratic candidates who think they're going to offend Republican voters need to understand that Republican voters aren't going to vote for them anyway-- other than the few Republican voters who agree with this kind of sentiment: