Will Governor Gavin Newsom Drag California Off The Same Corona Cliff That Bill Lee Is Dragging Tennessee Off?

Clueless Tennessee Trumpist, Governor Bill Lee, was eager for his state to lead the way... to mass graves. So just as his lax policies on social distancing started a steepening of the curve, he decided to... open up for business! Tennessee had 11,891 confirmed cases on Friday, up 1,156 new cases since Thursday. On Thursday there were 1,614 cases per million. One day later that had changed to 1,788. That is exactly what a steepening of the curve means. And it means that even if Tennessee's Republican Party wasn't forcing new infections by opening up too fast, it would mean an increasing number of deaths in June and July. Tennessee-- along with Florida, Georgia, Iowa, the Dakotas, Indiana, Mississippi and Nebraska will be the center of the contagion this summer.

Politico reported that, worse yet, "States like Georgia, Texas and Colorado have begun lifting stay-at-home orders without a robust army of public health workers to quickly identify people who’ve come into contact with coronavirus patients, worrying health experts that they could be at heightened risk for a new wave of infections." These moron governors are "erasing weeks of progress made in slowing the virus" because they're opening despite their states not having an extensive system for identifying patients and tracing their contacts. "The number of contact tracers states need depends on factors like infection rates, testing availability and population density. But those moving to relax restrictions have far fewer contact tracers per capita than many of those remaining locked down for at least a few more weeks... The governors in states with sparser contact tracing programs said dire unemployment numbers have left them little choice, but to begin gradually sending people back to work while case counts still grow, even if it means reopening before they can fully bolster public health measures. They say weeks of unprecedented shutdowns have ensured their health care systems won’t be overrun if coronavirus cases creep upward, and they can move swiftly to reimpose lockdown orders should new hot spots emerge."

That would be more true of states that had real-- or at least quasi-real-- lockdowns like New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey. The states we have to worry about are the ones like Tennessee. Fox News reported that the verifiably insane U.S. senator, Marsha Blackburn "says she thinks her state is 'doing very well with the reopening,' despite those who say businesses should remain closed. 'We have heard from so many people that say, We were ready for this. We wanted to go back to work. Our businesses are being incredibly careful,' Blackburn told Fox News. 'I have been very impressed with how the business owners are talking about having PPE [personal protective equipment] that is necessary for their employees.' Even with less than satisfactory COVID-19 numbers, the senator still believes that people will continue to do all that they can to ensure their own safety." She's a sociopath and an ignoramus. And many people will not do the right thing-- and will then spread it through the community.

Some medical experts are predicting a “second wave” of the coronavirus and say states that reopen too soon could possibly be the force behind that wave. When asked whether or not Tennessee would shut down again if new waves broke out, Blackburn said she believes her state will not have to.

“I think that my state is going to be one of those that does not have to revisit this. We have done a very good job of working through the quarantines. People have followed the CDC recommendations, they are taking so many precautions to reopen places of business,” Blackburn told Fox News.

To those who criticize Tennessee’s reopening, Blackburn had this to say:

“You've got a choice. You can bet on hope or you can get bet on fear. And I think this is one where the American people are willing to bet on hope and they are going to find a way to make this work. We overcome obstacles. We are innovators, and we are going to find a way to live and work and prosper and to deal with a coronavirus.”

To be honest, though, I'm more worried about California than I am about Tennessee. The governor, Gavin Newsom, is a full-on neoliberal corporate whore. He takes a lot of credit that he doesn't deserve for shutting down the state. Like Cuomo, Newsom resisted calls to shut down and, in fact, the 6 Bay Area counties told him to go fuck off and shut down before he acted. When he saw how much better they were doing that the rest of the state, he followed. Same with L.A.'s mayor, Eric Garcetti.

Friday, the neo-lib governor said state officials are "very, very close to making some announcements" that will be very meaningful to people in the retail and hospitality industries, including restaurants, although modifications will be in place. He said "it will be days, not weeks" before California joins Tennessee on the highway to hell. Newsom is buckling to pressure from corporate powers who want to economy up and running. He's all hot air and no guts/no brains.

California has come through this fairly well, although lately the worst indicator has been ticking up every day-- the number cases per million. A week or so ago it was less than a thousand; today it it rapidly approaching 1,400. This is no time to open up. All Californians' good work will be wasted. Newsom is playing dangerous game.

Are Trump And The GOP Leaving The U.S. Defenseless?

In late October-- and again last week-- Trump had Senate Republicans kill 3 election security bills by Mark Warner (to require campaign officials to report contacts with foreign nationals who are trying to make donations or coordinate with the campaign to the FEC and FBI), Amy Klobuchar (to require campaigns to report "illicit offers" of election assistance from foreign governments or individuals to both the FBI and the FEC and to take steps to ensure that political ads on social media are subject to the same rules as ads on TV and radio) and Ron Wyden (to authorize more funding for the Election Assistance Commission, including language that would ban voting machines from being connected to the internet and being produced in foreign countries). Crackpot Trumpist from a single-party state, Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) blocked each one for McConnell and Trump.

Why would Blackburn and the Senate Republicans insist of keeping the back door to our elections open for our country's enemies? Good question but I think Trump extremists like Blackburn are more about protecting Trump than protecting our country, let alone a concept that is so alien to them like democracy. Trump is gutting the intel capacity of the country-- a big bonus for the support Putin has given, and is still giving, him electorally. And the GOP seems to be revealing in it-- all of them (not just the clinically insane ones like Blackburn).

Utah Congressman Chris Stewart (R) would have been a standard choice for director of national intelligence and Trump was leaning in that direction. But someone showed Trump a video of Stewart calling Trump a fascist and stating flatly that he is our Mussolini. He told a group of students at the Hinckley Institute of Politics that "The world is standing on the edge of a knife and it is a very dangerous time... If some of you are Donald Trump supporters, we see the world differently, because I can't imagine what someone is thinking... Donald Trump does not represent Republican ideals, he is our Mussolini. Donald Trump's approach is-- I am just going to do it."

Trump felt blindsided when he learned belatedly that intelligence officials briefed House lawmakers that Russia is continuing to interfere in U.S. elections-- and that Democrats elicited their view that the Russians favor Trump’s re-election, according to people familiar with the situation.

Trump blamed Joseph Maguire, the acting director of national intelligence, for the episode and the failure to inform him. On Wednesday, the president announced that he was replacing Maguire, a veteran intelligence official, with Ric Grenell, the U.S. ambassador to Germany and a staunch Trump supporter.

The chain of events underscores the continued tensions between Trump and intelligence officials that he and his supporters often depict as part of a “deep state” undermining his presidency.

The classified briefing on Feb. 13 was delivered by Shelby Pierson, the intelligence official charged with monitoring issues related to election security. Among those attending were Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who led the House Democrats who impeached Trump, and the panel’s top Republican, Representative Devin Nunes of California.

In response to questions from Democrats, lawmakers were told that Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin, prefer Trump over his Democratic challengers and is still actively interfering in this year’s election, according to the people. But little information has emerged on any specific or ongoing interference by Russia detailed in the briefing last week.

...Schiff tweeted that “we count on the intelligence community to inform Congress of any threat of foreign interference in our elections.” At the same time, Schiff seemed to hedge on what information, exactly, had been provided to him and other House members. “If reports are true and the President is interfering with that, he is again jeopardizing our efforts to stop foreign meddling,” Schiff said.

Democrats have blasted Trump for replacing Maguire with Grenell, who has little experience in intelligence-gathering or analysis, and several key Republicans have remained silent on the decision.

“By firing Acting DNI Maguire because his staff provided the candid conclusions of the Intelligence Community to Congress regarding Russian meddling in the 2020 Presidential election, the President is not only refusing to defend against foreign interference, he’s inviting it,” House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson of Mississippi complained in a statement.

On Friday, Maguire’s deputy Andrew Hallman said he was stepping down as the DNI’s principal executive, offering praise for his former boss, who he called a “lifelong patriot and public servant.”

A phrase like "lifelong patriot and public servant" is to Republican of the Trumpist stripe like waving a red flag in front of a bull. John Parkinson reported for ABC News that Trump is trying to reshape the intelligence community-- long the target of his ire-- [but that] his search for a permanent director of national intelligence is proving to be a formidable challenge-- even as he claimed Friday he had 'four great candidates' and called reports Russia is helping his reelection a Democratic 'misinformation campaign.' Although Trump made a point of telling reporters on Air Force One Thursday that he was considering Rep. Doug Collins, one of the president’s leading defenders during the House impeachment inquiry, the Georgia Republican quickly declared Friday that he’s not interested in the nomination. 'This is not a job that’s of interest to me, and it’s not one that I’d accept,' Collins, who is running in a competitive primary for U.S. Senate, said on Fox Business. Trump has had substantial difficulty identifying a confirmable nominee since former DNI Dan Coats resigned Aug. 15, settling instead on two acting directors who did not require Senate confirmation, avoiding tough questions."

People are starting to worry he may add the position to Jared Kushner-in-law's portfolio of 57 positions. Grenell, who has done a miserable job as Ambassador to Germany-- and who is keeping that job as well-- has no experience whatsoever working in Intelligence.

Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden expressed doubt that Grenell meets the DNI’s basic job requirements for expertise in intelligence-- even if he’s only on the job in an “acting” capacity.

“If there was any doubt that Donald Trump values unquestioning obedience over the safety of the American people, this appointment settles the question,” Wyden said. “Senators who take their oath of office seriously must oppose Trump's practice of dodging Senate confirmation practices to place unqualified individuals into highly sensitive national security posts.”

CNN: "It's happening again. America is blundering into a new Russia election-meddling hall of mirrors that's already doing Moscow's work: tearing fresh political divides and threatening to again tarnish democracy's most sacred moment, a national election. Revelations Thursday about intelligence assessments that Russia has launched a new interference effort to help reelect Donald Trump-- and the President's furious reaction-- mark the return of a recurring nightmare for the country just nine months before the presidential election. Trump was informed that the House Intelligence Committee was told of the Russian intelligence operation last week by Rep. Devin Nunes, his Republican ally from California and was frustrated that Democrats would be able to use the information against him, a source told CNN. A more conventional reaction by the commander-in-chief given his institutional responsibilities might be anger that again a foreign power was trying to manipulate US politics-- however it might affect his own fortunes."

Yesterday, Wired published a piece by Garrett Graff, How Trump Hollowed Out U.S. National Security. "By the end of the day," he began, "almost all of the roles created after 9/11 literally to prevent the next 9/11 will be either vacant or lack permanent appointees. While vacancies and acting officials have become commonplace in this administration, the moves by President Donald Trump this week represent a troubling and potentially profound new danger to the country. There will soon be no Senate-confirmed director of the National Counterterrorism Center, director of national intelligence, principal deputy director of national intelligence, homeland security secretary, deputy homeland security secretary, nor leaders of any of the three main border security and immigration agencies. Across the government, nearly 100,000 federal law enforcement agents, officers, and personnel are working today without permanent agency leaders, from Customs and Border Protection and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. All the posts, and many more top security jobs, are unfilled or staffed with leaders who have not been confirmed by the Senate. Trump has done an end-around, installing loyalists without subjecting them to legally mandated vetting and approval by Congress."

And the Intelligence agencies are far from the only government departments dealing with national security that Trump has managed to screw up and leave in shambles. Other departments without personnel in crucial positions include the Justice Department, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon. Worst president ever? Oh yeah. I don't even want to think about the consequences of a full-blown coronavirus outbreak here, with Trump and his incompetent greed-driven crime family in charge!

In a NY Times report early this morning, Michael Crowley and David Sanger outlined a new role for the NSC-- not advising the president, but defending the illegitimate and insane "president." The head guy, Robert O'Brien, could just as well be a janitor, a job he's probably better suited for anyway. When he "convenes meetings with top National Security Council officials at the White House, he sometimes opens by distributing printouts of Mr. Trump’s latest tweets on the subject at hand. The gesture amounts to an implicit challenge for those present. Their job is to find ways of justifying, enacting or explaining Mr. Trump’s policy, not to advise the president on what it should be. That is the reverse of what the National Security Council was created to do at the Cold War’s dawn-- to inform and advise the president on national security decisions. But under Mr. O’Brien, the White House’s hostage negotiator when Mr. Trump chose him to succeed John R. Bolton in September, that dynamic has often been turned on its head... [D]eveloping policy is not really Mr. O’Brien’s mission. In the fourth year of his presidency and in his fourth national security adviser, Mr. Trump has finally gotten what he wants-- a loyalist who enables his ideas instead of challenging them."

As Mr. O’Brien has whittled down the council he manages, declaring it was all about efficiency, the president has made little effort to disguise his appetite for purging his own government. “DRAIN THE SWAMP!” he tweeted last week, adding: “We want bad people out of our government.”

The same day, Mr. Trump said in a radio interview that he may drastically limit how many national security officials can listen in on his calls with foreign leaders, breaking from decades of White House procedure. “I may end the practice entirely,” he said.

Such commentary “creates the clear impression that this is about retribution, not reform,” said Senator Christopher S. Murphy, a Democratic member of the Foreign Relations Committee.

But Mr. Murphy questioned how much the National Security Council’s structure really matters under a president who often rejects professional advice in making impulsive policy decisions. “It’s not terribly clear what the N.S.C. has been doing for the last three years,” he said. “The N.S.C.’s function now seems to be war-gaming for potential presidential tweets instead of developing policy recommendations for presidential decision-making.”

Mr. Trump is unlikely to mind that. After more than three years in office, he feels more confident than ever in his management of national security, aides say, especially after some of his major decisions-- including the killing of the Iranian commander Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani-- failed to elicit the disastrous consequences many experts predicted.

Mr. O’Brien’s willingness to trim the National Security Council, Mr. Gans said, “says something about Trump’s Washington.”

“The national security adviser should have the strongest staff possible,” he continued. “But it seems like Robert O’Brien is focused more on that audience of one-- and making sure that Donald Trump is happy.”

In a Washington Post OpEd today, Admiral William McRaven (retired)-- U.S. special forces commander from 2011 to 2014 (think 2011 SEAL raid that killed bin Laden)--wrote that "As Americans, we should be frightened-- deeply afraid for the future of the nation. When good men and women can’t speak the truth, when facts are inconvenient, when integrity and character no longer matter, when presidential ego and self-preservation are more important than national security-- then there is nothing left to stop the triumph of evil. He was referring to the swampy, proto-fascist Trumpist regime, of course. "Over the course of the past three years, I have watched good men and women, friends of mine, come and go in the Trump administration-- all trying to do something-- all trying to do their best... But, of course, in this administration, good men and women don't last long."

Trumpanzee: "The FBI Director Is Wrong"

Barbara Lee is ready for impeachment proceedings to begin.Thursday, she told her constituents that "The Trump administration’s corrupt behavior surrounding the Mueller report has been startling to say the least. Both Trump and his right-wing surrogates have pushed blatant lies, twisting the truth in a thinly-veiled cover-up. After a nearly two-year long investigation into the Trump campaign’s criminal behavior, Special Counsel Robert Mueller made it clear: 'If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.' This is a big deal. After two years' worth of extensive interviews, intense background checks, and multiple convictions of Trump’s closest allies, Mueller could not clear Trump of any wrongdoing. And just last night, Trump admitted he would use dirt on political rivals from foreign governments. That’s right, Trump just welcomed foreign governments to interfere in our elections-- again... Mueller and his report gave the House everything we need to start impeachment proceedings."

Jonathan Chait's headline was a provocative Trump Goes on TV to Solicit 2020 Foreign Collusion. "Trump," he wrote, "continues to show every sign of hoping and expecting to benefit from foreign collusion in 2020. In May, he intended to send Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to pressure the government to supply dirt on Joe Biden. He and his ally, Mitch McConnell, are blocking measures (including ones with bipartisan support) to help safeguard elections against foreign attacks and social-media propaganda. His message to Russia, or any other government that wants a close relationship with him, is obvious: Do anything you can to help me win. Trump also said the whole Republican caucus takes foreign dirt on their opponents. "When you go and talk, honestly, to congressmen, they all do it, they always have, and that’s the way it is. It’s called oppo research."

That has made-- this whole controversy has made-- Republicans on Capitol Hill very nervous. McCarthy is trying, absurdly, to blame it all on Adam Schiff! Less sleazy Republicans than McCarthy-- pretty much meaning any other Republican-- are taking this more seriously. Tom Cole (R-OK): "I don’t think it’s appropriate to ever do anything like that and I think you have an obligation to pick up the phone and call the FBI if we know this is from a foreign government. I am just worried about the general carelessness of that remark. I don’t think that’s going to sit well with most Americans. It shouldn’t. It’s just not an appropriate way to behave in a political campaign." Mike McCaul, one of the most vulnerable Republicans being targeted for political extinction is 2020, said "I wouldn’t accept it,” said Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), adding, “I don’t trust Russians." Mike Siegel, the progressive Democrat who nearly defeated McCaul in 2018-- with no help from the DCCC-- is going to finish the job next year. He noted that "McCaul's refusal to criticize the President, even when Trump flouts the rule of law and undermines the foundations of our democracy, is unfortunately par for the course. If McCaul and his Republican buddies would use their power to keep the President in line-- instead of occasionally distancing themselves through ineffectual comments-- we would not be in the position we are in now. Instead, we have an out-of-control President, openly courting foreign interference in our elections. Again."

George Conway and Neal Katyal teamed up for a full-fledged editorial at the Washington Post, Trump Just Invited Congress To Begin Impeachment Proceedings.

On Tuesday, Trump gave us direct evidence of his contempt toward the most foundational precept of our democracy-- that no person, not even the president, is above the law. He filed a brief in the nation’s second-most-important court that takes the position that Congress cannot investigate the president, except possibly in impeachment proceedings. It’s a spectacularly anti-constitutional brief, and anyone who harbors such attitudes toward our Constitution’s architecture is not fit for office. Trump’s brief is nothing if not an invitation to commencing impeachment proceedings that, for reasons set out in the Mueller report, should have already commenced.

The case involves a House committee’s efforts to follow up on the testimony of Trump’s now-incarcerated former attorney, Michael Cohen, that Trump had allegedly committed financial and tax fraud, and allegedly paid off paramours in violation of campaign finance laws. The House Committee on Oversight and Reform subpoenaed Trump’s accountants in mid-April for relevant documents, and Trump tried to block the move, only to be sternly rebuked in mid-May by a federal judge in Washington.

The appeals brief filed Monday by Trump attacks that decision. But to describe Trump’s brief is to refute it. He argues that Congress is “trying to prove that the President broke the law” and that that’s something Congress can’t do, because it’s “an exercise of law enforcement authority that the Constitution reserves to the executive branch.”

But in fact, Congress investigates lawbreaking, and potential lawbreaking, all the time. Mobsters, fraudsters, government employees, small companies, big companies-- like it or not, all types of people and businesses get subpoenaed from time to time so that Congress can figure out whether current laws are effective, whether new laws are needed, whether sufficient governmental resources are being devoted to the task, whether more disclosure to the government or the public is required, or greater penalties, and so on.

To this, Trump’s brief complains that “Congress could always make this (non-falsifiable) argument” to justify any investigation. But that’s simply the result of the fact that, as the district court explained, Congress’s “power to investigate is deeply rooted in the nation’s history.” Congress, relying on English parliamentary tradition, has performed this function since the founding.

To accept Trump’s argument to the contrary-- to say Congress can’t look into matters that might involve crimes-- would in many cases gut Congress’s ability to gain information it needs to legislate. And perversely, in Trump’s case, it makes a virtue of the fact that he has been accused of committing crimes.

Which brings us to the main point: England’s King George III was above the law, but the founders of our republic wanted a system that would divide power and have the branches check one another. The idea that only the president can investigate the president is an argument for autocrats, not Americans.

Trump says “trust me,” but that was exactly the argument the founders rebelled against. They knew that public officials would not always be angels, and that power had to be checked and dispersed. As James Madison put it in Federalist No. 51, “It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.”

The only redeeming quality of Trump’s legal brief is its seeming, grudging acknowledgment that Congress’s powers might be greater in an impeachment proceeding. That has things only half-right. Yes, Congress could investigate Trump’s finances in an impeachment proceeding, but it can do so without launching the formal process of impeachment.

That said, Trump’s brief can be construed as an invitation to commence impeachment proceedings. In those proceedings, Trump’s attitudes toward our Constitution’s checks and balances, in addition to evidence of obstruction of justice, must play a key role. Indeed, the third article of impeachment against President Richard M. Nixon, adopted by the House Judiciary Committee in 1974, charged him with defying lawful subpoenas issued by the House Judiciary Committee.

Not only has Trump done that, but he has also demonized judges who disagree with him and insulted the press (despite its constitutional status) for calling him to account. Other leaders around the world may behave this way, but these are not proper actions of a president of the United States. What makes the United States exceptional is its commitment to its constitutional architecture, particularly divided powers.

For the past three decades, many constitutional law classes have begun with Nixon’s breathtaking statement to David Frost in May 1977: “Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Generations of students have gasped, shocked that a former president could say such a thing. This time, it’s not a former president but a sitting one. Every principle behind the rule of law requires the commencement of a process now to make this president a former one.

As the morning crew at Politico pointed out, Trump handed those who want to impeach him a gift. "far be it for us to divine why the president said this," they wrote, "and what exactly is going through his head. But the people we spoke to Wednesday night said it is rooted in a win-at-any-and-all-costs mentality -- a life-is-complicated vibe that tries to paint everyone else as rubes, and yet ignores the guts of American law. Furthermore, it reflects his thinking that he hates the idea the 2016 election was stolen from him, so he tries to rationalize the very things he and his campaign stand accused of doing. In our time covering Congress-- going back a decade-- we’ve never heard anyone ever even privately say they would accept foreign assistance in an election. Ever. And a lot of members have said crazy stuff to us privately!... If you are a Republican or a Democrat and you'd like to defend the president here, drop us a line. OK... how about a floor objection from Trump puppet Marsha Blackburn?

Pelosi's comment was some bullshit about what a bad boy Trump is but said Democrats are "no closer" to impeaching him. At Bloomberg News, Jonathan Bernstein wrote that Trump's Awful Comments Need a Real Response. He wants Republicans to take a stand, reminding his readers that Senor Trumpanzee supplied "a helpful reminder on Wednesday that he’s entirely unfit for the office he holds by once again welcoming foreign interference in U.S. elections... How bad is all this? Most of the comments I’ve seen condemning Trump’s remarks-- none, I should note, from Republicans in Congress, although perhaps I missed some-- treat it as grievous misbehavior for a political candidate. True enough. But it’s considerably worse coming from a sitting president. Trump’s obligations in office extend far beyond following campaign laws. He’s the country’s commander in chief and top diplomat, and as such responsible for making clear to all foreign nations and other groups that messing with the internal affairs of the United States will have serious consequences. Instead, he’s basically inviting everyone in."

As the political scientist Jennifer Victor says: “Democracy happens when people use a legitimate process to select leaders from among its citizens. If people from another country influence the selection of leaders, the sovereignty of the democracy is eroded.  If foreigners affect an election, the results are comprised.” The flip side is that the U.S. government is supposed to conduct foreign policy on behalf of the nation, not on behalf of the personal interests-- political and private-- of the president.

So what should happen now?

For one thing, it would be helpful for Wray to speak up and explain why Trump is wrong. If he doesn’t do so on his own, perhaps the House Judiciary Committee could invite him to explain it to them. This would be an appropriate time, too, for former President George W. Bush to say something. (Whatever one thinks of Bush’s terms in office, it’s hard to imagine him inviting a foreign nation to disrupt our elections.) The same for any former FBI directors, secretaries of defense and state, and other heavyweights, especially Republicans.

But we all know the truth: This is really on the current Republicans who could do something about it. That includes the people at Fox News and other Republican-aligned media, who don’t actually have to pretend that encouraging foreign nations to influence U.S. elections is exemplary behavior for a president. And it includes Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other congressional Republicans, who have the ability to put an end to this if they want. As long as they’re all willing to join Trump in this kind of despicable behavior, there’s no reason to expect him to stop.

Notice, in the video, how agitated Trump got at the mention of the FBI chief-- the one he hand-picked as head of the FBI? According to reporting from Darren Samuelsohn and Natasha Bertrand yesterday, Trump's willingness to accept foreign assistance has essentially invited overseas spies to meddle with 2020 presidential campaigns, undoing months of work. They wrote that "Nearly two years ago, FBI Director Chris Wray set up an office tasked solely with stopping the type of Russian interference efforts that infected the 2016 campaign. On Wednesday night, President Donald Trump undercut the whole operation in a matter of seconds... America’s enemies will see Trump’s comments and likely 'come out of the woodwork like never before to try to influence the president,' said longtime FBI veteran Frank Figliuzzi, who served as the bureau’s assistant director for counterintelligence until 2012. 'And it’s going to be more difficult to defend against because they’ll try harder than ever to mask their attempts.'"

Other Than The Blow Voters Are Delivering Trump Today, Will We Defeat Any Of The Worst, Most Vile GOP?

You know who I'm thinking about, not the run-of-the-mill Republican garbage who "just" want to take away peoples' healthcare and see them starving in the streets; I'm mean the real neo-Nazi's inside the pup tent. Many of them are in blood red districts that are infested with brain-washed Fox zombies, like, for example, Matt Gaetz in Florida. But there are a handful up for reelection today who could go down, as long a shot as each case is. The defeat of Chris Collins (NY-27) and Steve King (IA-04) would be immense wins for political decency. So would an abrupt end to the political career of Devin Nunes (CA-22).

No one likes being lumped into the same category as Steve King, but there is another Republican incumbent-- a substance abuser currently out on bail and kicked off his committee by Paul Ryan as a national security risk-- who has earned the company: suburban and exurban San Diego County's Druncan Hunter (CA-50). And there are still hours and hours of voting left in California. Yesterday The Atlantic allowed McKay Coppins to lay the whole ugly Trump Era mess out: Duncan Hunter Is Running the Most Anti-Muslim Campaign in the Country. Before we start down this road though, it's important to know four facts about his progressive Democratic opponent, Ammar Campa-Najjar. (Yeah, I know, tough name, but otherwise as all American a kid as anyone you'll ever meet; besides, did you pick your name?)

• Ammar was born and raised a Christian and has been active in his church for his whole life
• Ammar was born 16 years after his grandfather in question had died. (For any Trump fan who might be reading this: that means he never met his grandfather.)
• Ammar worked in the Department of Labor and was thoroughly vetted for the Secret Service, passing a test that Druncan Hunter couldn't pass if his life depended on it
• Ammar, when asked, told me his favorite band is Metallica.

Hunter's problem isn't that his R+11 district has changed, it's that he was indicted of various and sundry corruption charges, arrested by the FBI and is hoping to be reelected despite being out on bail. Coppins is a gentleman and steers clear from some of the tawdry details of Hunter's lifestyle-- the hookers, untreated alcoholism, bribery, etc-- but even the polite stuff is eye-popping enough. He explained that "on August 22, federal prosecutors charged the lawmaker and his wife with stealing $250,000 in campaign funds. In a 47-page indictment littered with galling details, the Hunters were accused of using campaign cash to fund lavish family vacations; to pay for groceries, golf outings, and tequila shots; and even to fly a pet rabbit across the country. To cover their tracks, the indictment alleged, the Hunters often claimed that their purchases were for charitable organizations like the Wounded Warrior Project. The political backlash was swift and severe. Hunter was stripped of his committee assignments in the House. His fund-raising dried up, and Democratic money flooded into the district. When he tried to defend himself on Fox News, he exacerbated the crisis by appearing to pin the blame for the scandal on his wife." You want that for a congressman?

Publicly disgraced, out of money, and facing both jail time and a suddenly surging challenger-- what was an indicted congressman to do?

Eventually, Hunter seemed to arrive at his answer: Try to eke out a win by waging one of the most brazenly anti-Muslim smear campaigns in recent history.

In the final weeks of the election, Hunter has aired ominous ads warning that his Democratic opponent, Ammar Campa-Najjar, is “working to infiltrate Congress” with the support of the Muslim Brotherhood. He has circulated campaign literature claiming the Democrat is a “national security threat” who might reveal secret U.S. troop movements to enemies abroad if elected. While Hunter himself floats conspiracy theories from the stump about a wave of “radical Muslims” running for office in America, his campaign is working overtime to cast Campa-Najjar as a nefarious figure reared and raised by terrorists.

As multiple fact-checkers in the press have noted, these smears have no basis in reality. Campa-Najjar-- a 29-year-old former Barack Obama aide who is half-Latino, half-Arab-- is a devout Christian who received security clearance when he worked in the White House. His grandfather was involved in the massacre at the 1972 Munich Olympics, but he died 16 years before Campa-Najjar was born, and the candidate has repeatedly denounced him. (Growing up, Campa-Najjar became estranged from his father, a former Palestinian Authority official, and was raised primarily by his Mexican American mother.)

But facts do not appear to be Hunter’s chief concern. The political strategy here is self-evident: Feed on anti-Muslim prejudice to scare enough conservative voters into pulling the lever for the incumbent-- indictment be damned.

California’s Fiftieth District hasn’t drawn much attention from horse-race obsessives this year. There are other races with tighter polls, other House seats more likely to flip. But what’s unfolding here in the suburbs of San Diego represents an unnerving microcosm of this campaign season: white Republicans frightened by cynical conspiracy-mongers; religious minorities frightened by the fallout; a community poisoned by Trumpian politics-- and a bitter question hovering over the whole ugly affair: Will it ever get better?

Duncan Hunter is not an easy man to find these days. He rarely holds campaign rallies, and doesn’t attend town halls or debates. When I emailed his office asking for an interview, I was politely told my request would be added to the “list”-- and then ignored when I tried to follow up.

...On the whole, Campa-Najjar said he was surprised by how ham-fisted Hunter’s strategy had been. “I thought there would be more finesse to it,” he told me.

Now, though, he was more confident than ever that victory was at hand. With Obama-esque audacity, he began ticking off all the reasons to be optimistic. The district was more diverse than many realized. “McCain Republicans” were repelled by the Muslim-bashing. While his own campaign was infused with idealism and “youth,” Hunter’s was cloaked in the stench of “desperation.”

Very soon, he assured me, the good voters of the California Fiftieth would reject the ugly politics that had permeated their community this year and send him to Congress.

Perhaps detecting my skepticism, Campa-Najjar tried to conjure an alternative happy ending. “And if we fall short,” he tried, “we proved that we exceeded expectations and that...” but then he stopped himself. He couldn’t do it.

“I think we’re going to win.”

3 more hours to vote

Come to think of it, one of the House's most horrible creatures, Marsha Blackburn is running for the U.S. Senate in Tennessee. That's a very red state-- PVI is R+14 and Trump beat Hillary there 1,522,925 (60.7%) to 870,695 (34.7%). The results between Blackburn and Bredesen won't look like that tonight. Here's why:

• Early voting in Tennessee is at 95% of the total turnout for 2014.
• Early vote turnout among 18 and 29 year olds is up 317% compared to 2014.
• Early vote turnout among first time voters increased by 973% from 2014 (57,253). New voters represented 8% of the total early vote.
• 566,666 Tennesseans who did not vote in 2014 voted early this year. In other words, 40.81% of this year’s early voters did not vote in 2014.
• 105,487 Tennesseans (8% of the early voting electorate) did not vote in August 2018, 2016, or 2014. Half of these voters are under 50 years old.
• Women 40 years and younger increased their early vote participation by 266% from 2014.
• African American midterm early vote increased by 169% compared to 2014, largely due to increased participation among young African American voters.
• African American women vote increased by 172% compared to 2014.

Compared to all other states, Tennessee is now:

• #1 in overall increase of early votes cast compared to 2014
• #1 in the increase of 18-29 year olds voting

Still... it is Tennessee, so don't get your hopes up too high.

Meanwhile, NBC News reported this morning that top Republicans are shitting a brick over Trump's racist, xenophobic closing message. He's costing them independents and he's costing them the suburbs. Most of them believe "that his campaign rhetoric has gone too far and will cost some GOP candidates their races and jobs. Trump has spent the final stretch of this election season in some of the most conservative areas in the country, rallying his base of supporters by warning that Democrats will usher in an age of 'socialism' and 'open borders' if voters put them in charge of either chamber of Congress... [A]s voters head to the polls, some Republicans worry that message could backfire and cost some of the most vulnerable GOP House incumbents and candidates in suburban districts or in districts with larger minority populations." Because the fools looking for red meat and cheap entertainment who come to his rallies cheer all his lies, Trump has lost the ability to understand that 65% of the country doesn't believe a thing he says.

One Republican strategist said that Rep. John Culberson, who is in a tough re-election bid in a solidly Republican district in the Houston area, was polling four points ahead of his opponent, Democrat Lizzie Pannill Fletcher, in the days after the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

After Trump escalated his anti-immigrant rhetoric and visited Houston, internal polling showed Culberson down three points.

In some races, including Culberson's, “the certain tone and the certain issues he’s chosen to focus on is not helpful” the Republican strategist said.

...Other vulnerable Republicans are trying to counter Trump by focusing their campaign on local issues. Rep. Jeff Denham, who represents an agriculture district with a large Hispanic population in central California, has ignored Trump's national messaging on immigration and instead focused largely on water, a crucial issue there.

But if Republicans lose a large number of seats, someone will be blamed. And some Republicans are already pointing the finger at Trump.

Food fight coming tomorrow!

More Women In Congress Isn't Just A "Nice" Thing-- It's CRUCIAL For This Country's Success

Two of the most important Senate races this cycle pit women against each other. One of the Senate's most progressive Democrats, a courageous reformer with a fantastic voting record that spans a career as a state legislator, a congresswoman and more recently as a senator, Tammy Baldwin, is up against a conservative Republican, Leah Vukmir, in Wisconsin. My lens on this race frames an outspoken progressive against a Trump-enabling reactionary. The woman-thing is removed as an identity politics factor. Another identity politics factor may or may not be in play: Tammy has always been upfront about being a lesbian.

Over in Arizona, there are also two women competing, both congressmembers looking to ascend to the Senate. Kyrsten Sinema is running as a Democrat, although she votes more with the Republicans than anyone would ever expect from a Democrat. She is the head of the Blue Dogs and has the single worst voting record of any Democrat in the House. You think Joe Manchin, Joe Donnelly and Heidi Heitkamp are bad? Just wait 'til this monstrosity is in the Senate. Her opponent, a mainstream conservative Republican, Martha McSally, is worse. Again the identity politics factor is removed and again there's a wiggle here because Sinema self-identifies as LGBT.

Without the "women thing" as a determinant for identity politics voters, it might make for a race where voting records-- readily available-- become more meaningful than anatomy, not a bad thing. The Senate needs more women members and I didn't pick the word "needs" randomly. I want to tell you why I chose that word. At worked at a company a long time ago where senior management would meet once a week for house and hours and hours. There were no women-- and eventually there was one woman-- and it was, among other things, dysfunctional and not in the best interests of the company. Forget about anything like "fairness" for a moment. Senior management of a company cannot make good decisions-- CANNOT-- without diversity. Without diversity you fail-- that simple. This is not a "bleeding heart" observation. Quite the contrary. There have been lots of studies that have shown how important diversity is in decision making. Companies need to take it serious and eventually mine did, which gave them an enormous advantage of our competitors who were more male-dominated. This Forbes article from last year, New Research: Diversity + Inclusion = Better Decision Making At Work, explains that "inclusive teams make better business decisions up to 87% of the time" and why "decisions made and executed by diverse teams delivered 60% better results." Believe me, that isn't just true in business.

This week, NBC reported that 100 women may be elected to the House in November-- with a very disturbing caveat: "the wave is being driven entirely by Democrats; on the GOP side, the number of women serving in office is expected to dip.

Keep in mind that there are plenty of woman v women races in the House, just like the two I mentioned in the Senate above. In Washington state, for example, an outstanding progressive leader, Lisa Brown, is facing off against a Trump/Ryan puppet in Spokane, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the top-ranked woman in the GOP leadership. (Her Trump affinity rating is a startling 97.8% of the time!)

NBC makes the point that if the 100 women are elected in the House, it will "put more new women in the House than in any prior election." That's a positive good for many reasons-- but especially for the country.

Between 30 and 40 new women are poised to enter the House next January, shattering the previous record of 24 set in 1992's "Year of the Woman." And much as pundits interpreted 1992's wave as a backlash against Clarence Thomas's Supreme Court confirmation, 2018 is now clearly a backlash to President Donald Trump's election.

Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton didn't just launch the Women's March; it set off an avalanche of Democratic women running for Congress, many of them first-time candidates, ranging from former Navy helicopter pilots to former CIA officers. Of the 254 non-incumbent Democratic nominees for the House, an unheard-of 50 percent are women, compared to 18 percent of Republicans.

Currently, there are 61 female Democrats and 23 female Republicans serving in the House. But after November, Democrats could expand their ranks of women by more than a third. Meanwhile, the GOP's ranks could shrink by up to a third.

Democratic primary voters have made clear they feel the best way to send a message to Trump is to send a woman to Congress: In Democratic House primaries featuring at least one man, one woman and no incumbent on the ballot, a female candidate has won 69 percent of the time. In the same situations on the GOP side, a female candidate has won just 35 percent of the time.

Keep in mind, not every woman candidate is any good. Some are more like Kyrtsen Sinema than like Tammy Baldwin, BUT... in races that pit women against Republicans? There's no contest. Even the worst, most reactionary female Democrats running for House seats-- say, Kathy Manning in North Carolina, Gretchen Driskell in Michigan, Ann Kirkpatrick in Arizona, Elaine Luria in Virginia-- are absolutely better choices than their Republican opponents (male or female).

Let me go back to the Senate races for one second, actually just this one in Tennessee which pits a woman against a man. The man is a fairly conservative, though not dogmatic, former governor, Phil Bredesen (D). The woman is an extreme right fanatic, very dogmatic, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R). She's currently one of the worst members on Congress-- absolutely dreadful by every possible metric. On top of that, she's one of Trump's top picks for the Senate anywhere in the country and is running a campaign that explicitly vows to protect him from impeachment. You going to vote for the woman candidate against the male in this instance?

Tennessee Shows That GOP Zombies Won't Vote For Anyone Unless Trump Explicitly Endorses

These 2 probably hurt Black's chances

According to the Trump Affinity tracker House Budget Committee chair and far right extremist Diane Black (R-TN) scores a 93.2%. The times she didn't vote with Trump it because she supported a position that was more right-wing and more extreme than his, like when she opposed raising the debt limit to extend government funding for victims of Hurricane Harvey last year. She's real monster. And Thursday, her bid for the Republican gubernatorial nomination tanked. She had started as the clear front-runner... and came in third. Of Tennessee's 95 counties, she only won 2, solidly Democratic Shelby County (Memphis) by a handful of votes, and tiny Stewart County. She didn't even win Knox County, where she's from or any of the counties she represents in Congress!

• Bill Lee- 289,699 (36.7%)
• Randy Boyd- 191,940 (24.3%)
• Diane Black- 181,719 (23.0%)
• Beth Harwell- 120,910 (15.3%)

Most of the media spin Friday morning was how Black was the 5th House Republican this year vying for higher office who lost. Fair enough. Black was a special case though. She's incredibly extreme with a 1.23 career long crucial vote score-- that's 1.23 out of 100-- which was the worst of any of anyone from Tennessee. Almost all of her TV ads tied her to Trump, but Trump, who has said publicly that he likes, refused to endorse her. Pence endorsed her but in the Party of Trump, Pence's endorsement means squat. She went front front-runner to loser as it became clear Trump wasn't going to back her. Two businessmen from outside political circles drew in more votes than she did. The primary winner, former plumbing executive Bill Lee will face off against Democrat former Nashville mayor Karl Dean in November.

Black ran loads of negative ads while Lee's messaging was all positive. Voters learned to dislike her fairly quickly. Multimillionaires, Black and Boyd self-financed their campaigns-- Black with $12,200,000 and Boyd with $19,400,000. Lee spent $5,200,000 of his own. Democrat Karl Dean also contributed $1.4 million of his own. He won a landslide victory over the more progressive House Minority Leader Craig Fitzhugh, 279,324 (75.1%) to 72,263 (19.4%).

In the Senate primaries, both former Governor Phil Bredesen and another congressional right-wing extremist, Marsha Blackburn, coasted to easy victories, each winning all 95 counties in the state. 723, 114 Republicans voted and just 380,651 Democrats participated. The average of all current polls show Bredesen beating Blackburn by 4.5 points. But Next week Republican superPACs will begin a multimillion dollar TV smear campaign against him. Trump has already endorsed Blackburn and is expected to campaign for her again, calling Bredesen "very liberal," although he is actually very conservative.


Strange that Trump can't get his rabid supporters to buy his daughter's crappy clothing line-- even when the junk is on deep, deep discount. This one started at an overly ambitious $64, quickly went down to $39.99 and is now available for $1.00. Alas, no takers. It still may be too high. Perhaps they should take the two labels off it. Or maybe she should give up on fine garments and try selling a line of MAGA chewing tobacco instead.

Trump Trade War Agenda Breathes New Hopes Into Democratic Hopes To Capture The Senate-- Tennessee

Trump Devours The GOP by Nancy Ohanian

Trump beat Hillary in Tennessee gigantically, 1,522,925 (60.7%) to 870,695 (34.7%)-- winning ever one of the state's 95 counties but 3. Today there aren't many states where Trump has an approval rating of 20 or above-- but Tennessee is one of them (along with Louisiana, Alabama, West Virginia, Mississippi and Wyoming). Tennessee clocks in at exactly 20-- but when he first took office, Tennessee was much Trumpier than it is today. His favorability rating has crashed from 33% when he first moved into the White House-- down 13 points, a bigger decline than any of the other Trump-worshipping states. But Trump disapproval hasn't reached bottom yet in Tennessee-- and his growing toxicity could help the Democrats take the U.S. Senate away from the GOP in November.

As we've seen, former 2-term Democratic Governor Phil Bredensen has been leading Republican Marsha Blackburn in every Senate poll since he announced-- by an average of 5 points. As unlikely as it sounds, Bredesen could actually win in a state no one thought could be a problem for the GOP. But, in a state as red as Tennessee, 5 points is too close for comfort. Steve Peoples and Jonathan Mattise, in a report for Associated Press over the weekend, suggested how things might get even better for Bredensen, courtesy of Señor Trumpanzee... and his trade war agenda that is killing Tennessee hog farmers. They spoke with Jimmy Tosh who has a huge hog farm 2 hours west of Nashville, in the middle of Trump country. "Tosh," they wrote, "a third-generation farmer who almost always votes Republican, said he’s voting this fall for Blackburn’s Democratic opponent, former Gov. Phil Bredesen, in part because Trump’s trade wars are hurting his family business-- a sizable one with some 400 employees and 30,000 pigs. The cost of steel needed for new barns is up, Tosh said, and the expanding pork market stands to suffer under new tariffs. "

“This tariff situation has got me very, very, very concerned,” Tosh told The Associated Press. “I just think Bredesen would be better on that situation.” He said Blackburn has shifted “toward the center” on tariffs, “but in my opinion, it’s a little late and not far enough.”

Similar concerns are roiling high-profile Senate contests in Missouri, Indiana, Pennsylvania and North Dakota and forcing GOP candidates to answer for the trade policies of a Republican president they have backed on almost every other major issue.

In 2016, populist attacks against free trade defined Trump’s political rise. Now, as he sparks an international trade war four months before the midterm elections, few policies could be more problematic for Trump’s allies in pivotal Senate contests.

The Trump administration imposed a 25 percent tax on $34 billion worth of Chinese imports on Friday, and China is retaliating with taxes on an equal amount of U.S. products, including soybeans, electric cars and pork. The administration has penalized steel and aluminum imports from allies such as Canada and Mexico, leading to retaliation against American-made products such as blue jeans, motorcycles and whiskey.

The tension has reshaped the race to replace retiring Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN). Blackburn, an eight-term congresswoman, has been one of the president’s biggest boosters for the past two years, yet with the business community up in arms, she’s dramatically softened her support for Trump’s trade policies, at least... Still, Blackburn opposed a proposal by Corker that would have given Congress new authority to check the president’s trade moves. She called Corker’s approach “a little bit too broad.”

Instead, Blackburn helped write a letter urging Trump’s commerce secretary to reconsider broad tariffs so as to avoid harm to Tennessee’s economy.

An estimated $1.4 billion in Tennessee exports are threatened by Trump’s trade moves, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a longtime Republican ally. Those exports are linked to more than 850,000 jobs in the state related to farming, steel, baked goods, car manufacturing, whiskey and more.

Nationwide, the U.S. Chamber reported that $75 billion in U.S. exports will soon be subject to retaliatory tariffs. Many of the hardest hit states are those that backed Trump and feature top-tier Senate races in November.

...Blackburn has been backed into a corner by the state’s business leaders.

Tennessee whiskey maker Jack Daniel’s, for example, sends roughly 60 percent of its business out of the country.

Jack Daniel’s parent company was forced to increase prices across Europe as a result of tariffs imposed by the European Union in response to Trump’s tariffs on U.S. steel and aluminum. Shares of the company dropped sharply last month after Mexico announced plans to impose a 25 percent tariff on whiskey in response to Trump’s moves.

“Tariffs such as these, they can only do harm,” said Jack Daniel’s general manager Larry Combs.

Another major Tennessee employer, home appliance maker Electrolux, continues to delay a $250 million expansion in Tennessee “given the uncertainty of U.S. trade policy,” said company spokeswoman Eloise Hale. “These tariffs are directly increasing our costs,” she said.

The Democrat in the Senate race, former Gov. Bredesen, has seized on the issue. Even in a state Trump won by 26 points, he’s betting he can use Blackburn’s loyalty to the president against her because of the tariff-related fallout.

“She clearly is very loath to do anything contrary to what the Trump playbook is,” Bredesen said.

“The way I’ve read her expression is, ‘We elected Trump president. I’m here to make sure he gets his agenda passed,’” Bredesen continued. “What I would like to do is say, ‘Look, I’m there to be with the president on stuff that makes sense for Tennessee, to be against him on stuff that is not.’ And that’s true whether it’s a D or an R president.”

Blackburn is eager to change the subject.

But back at the hog farm, Tosh is worried about the family business.

“The pork producers in the country are probably being impacted more so than any element of the economy right now,” he said. “We’re probably going to scale back some plans that we had, at least put them on hold.”

If the Democrats hold onto all their seats and win the Republican-held states they're leading in-- Nevada, Arizona and Tennessee-- it's bye-bye for Mitch McConnell running the U.S. Senate. The current partisan makeup-- 51 Republicans v 49 Democrats flips to 52 Democrats v 48 Republicans (and with McCain not voting, that effectively makes it 52 Democrats v 47 Republicans). Combine that with a likely Democratic House... and Trump will either be marrying his veto pen or will be compromising with Democrats to get anything done at all.

Trump Jumps Ship by Nancy Ohanian