We Know Exactly Who The Democrats Want To Bail Out-- They Passed A Bill Months Ago... What About Trump And The Republicans?

Lambchop by Nancy Ohanian

Doesn't it seem like the GOP actually wants to inflict misery on the working class? It seems that way because it is that way. McConnell purposely let the eviction moratorium and enhanced unemployment benefits expire before allowing even a discussion in the Senate about what to do to alleviate Trump's COVID-economy. While flaming asshole and coke freak Larry Kudlow was on the elitist Fox Business channel promising GOP donors "increased business deductions for meals and entertainment"-- long a self-serving priority for Trump-- as part of the relief package being thrashed out in Congress, Mnuchin told reporters that McConnell's and his proposal would reduce the expanded $600 weekly unemployment benefit to $200 a week. Asked about Mnuchin's announcement, Kudlow called it just a "technical adjustment." Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) called it something else:

Erica Werner, Jeff Stein and Seung Min Kim, reporting for the Washington Post, wrote that "Senate Republicans want to reduce the $600 payment to $200 until states can implement a new approach that would pay the unemployed 70 percent of the income they collected before they lost their jobs. The states are supposed to phase in the new formula within two months under the new GOP plan, though it’s unclear how cumbersome that process could prove to be. Many state unemployment systems are expected to have difficulty implementing the more targeted program, so the $200 weekly payment would be designed to serve as a bridge until the other changes are made. The $200 would come on top of whatever unemployment benefits states already pay, which vary but generally replace 45 percent of a worker’s wages before they lost their job." Reducing that $600 payment has been a key GOP focus of both Trump's, the Senate Republicans' and Republicans in the House.

In addition to the reduced unemployment benefits the legislation is expected to include a new round of $1,200 checks to individual Americans, billions of dollars for schools with some of the money aimed at helping classrooms reopen, and a five-year liability shield for businesses, health-care providers and others.

The legislation also includes at least $100 billion more for the small-business Paycheck Protection Program. It does not contain any new money for state and local governments-- a key Democratic demand-- but instead gives state and local leaders additional flexibility in spending the $150 billion approved in the Cares Act in March.

...“We have unemployment running out, we have renter protection running out, we have state and local governments going into a new month and won’t have the money and will lay off thousands and thousands of people,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) said Monday morning on MSNBC. “We’re at all these cliffs and we still at this very moment don’t have a plan from the Republicans. We want to sit down and negotiate. But you can’t negotiate with a ghost.”

...Congressional Democrats oppose both GOP plans to curb the benefit amount and to transition the payment system to the new model. Critics point out state unemployment offices have already been overwhelmed. The National Association of State Workforce Agencies has warned in a memo circulated on Capitol Hill that targeted wage replacement could take most states “8 to 20 weeks or more” to implement from the date of the Labor Department’s guidance.

“We are skeptical that state UI infrastructure has improved dramatically since the CARES Act given how overloaded the system has been,” Evercore ISI, which conducts market research, said in a Monday note.

Julie Oliver (TX) and Kara Eastman (NE) are both running against Trump enablers who the came close to dislodging in 2018. Each has a great chance to do so in November. I asked them to give me their takes on the way the relief package is moving. "Pay and benefits for tens of millions of American workers," said Julie, "was too low before the pandemic. Millions of people have lost their jobs. Now, instead of getting Texans the relief necessary to stay afloat, Roger Williams wants to end the $600 UI extension and let your boss allow you to get coronavirus. And that's after he funneled millions in undisclosed taxpayer bailout funds to his own personal business in Weatherford. We need real relief, and we need it now. Direct cash payments, moratorium on evictions and foreclosures, and a suspension of consumer debt collection, rent and mortgage payments. We're facing an unemployment crisis, eviction crisis, a health crisis, a child care crisis, and a business failure crisis, all feeding each other at once. We need someone fighting for the people in this district in Congress, not someone only in it to help himself.

Kara Eastman's incumbent is a lot like Julie's-- a big waste of a seat. She told that "Unfortunately, Rep. Bacon is aligned with the Republican approach. He voted 'no' on the HEROES Act, and has repeatedly stated that the government is spending too much on COVID relief. That's funny, because he seemed to be fine with the $1.5 trillion giveaway to corporations and wealthy interested in the 2017 tax bill. He voted 'yes' then and still brags about it. My approach is different: we need to listen to the people who are struggling because they can't pay rent, are losing their unemployment, and are juggling between putting food on the table and paying bills."

Cathy Kunkel is running for office for the first time. Republicans in West Virginia would be smart to hear what she's saying: "Thousands of West Virginians are still struggling in this ongoing economic depression-- and as WV utilities start processing shutoffs over the next month, this pain will intensify. Now is not the time to cut pandemic unemployment compensation. Clearly Senate leadership is more interested in pursuing their ongoing war on working class and poor Americans than in getting us out of this economic depression-- which requires getting money into the hands of people who will actually spend it, not Wall St billionaires."

Transpartisan Failure

Our political leadership-- and not just Trump-- has failed us... dismally so. Even blue state governors like Andrew Cuomo (New York), Phil Murphy (New Jersey) and Gavin Newsom (California) have been taking ineffective baby steps that have already been proven to only make the pandemic worse. Like Trump, they are more afraid to be blamed for an economic turn-down than to watch thousands and perhaps millions of Americans die. Despite bad examples of behavior with resultant calamity in Italy, Spain and Holland and good examples with quicker resolution in Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea, they have all been masters of "too little too late," thereby putting us all at risk-- and showing how utterly worthless they are as political "leaders." The American people are savvier about the pandemic then our political leaders are. A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll by Hart Research.

Although most Americans report that they have not changed their behavior in ways that could slow down the pandemic, most still recognize that Trump has failed in protecting the country:

47% of respondents say they have either stopping attending large public gatherings like movies, concerts or sporting events or plan to, while 49% have neither stopped nor intend to stop. It gets worse when asked about canceling travel plans and eating in restaurants. Just 36% have canceled or rescheduled travel plans-- as opposed to 58% who have not or don't plan to-- and just 26% have stopped eating in restaurants, as opposed to 69% who have not stopped eating in restaurants. Americans are worried-- but not worried enough to act on those worries. One of my sisters-- the Trumpier one-- refused to cancel plans for a cruise. The cruise company canceled it. She also planned to see a Michael Bublé concert in Atlantic City last week and much to her chagrin-- she insists this is all "media hype"-- the concert was canceled. Last week I stopped wearing my hospital masks and started wearing a heavy duty N-99 Base Camp mask with exhalation valves whenever I go out. I noticed that when I wore it to the grocery store over tiger weekend, I was the only one in the entire (huge) store with any kind of a mask and that everyone looked at me as though I had the plague and moved quickly away from my vicinity-- a bonus as far as I was concerned.

Excursion to the grocery store for more daikon root

At every step of the way, conservative politicians have prioritized the economy over health. Kara Eastman, the Omaha progressive running against one of those conservative politicians, Donald Bacon (R), told me yesterday that "Our fractured and inefficient collection of private and public health programs leaves millions of Americans out in the cold during a crisis like COVD-19. A well-designed national health program would cover every U.S. resident and would ensure timely care for those who need it most. The fact is that millions of American citizens in our growing gig-economy are at risk and single payer can greatly mitigate that risk." Jim Harper, the progressive candidate for the open blue seat in northwest Indiana. He had a similar perspective. "Every day," he told me, "I meet Hoosiers who are terrified about their ability to access healthcare during this public health crisis. They know that our healthcare system is broken and that the inability of some to access care puts everyone at risk during this public health crisis. Medicare for All would ensure universal healthcare was important before this pandemic. But the current public health crisis shows how serious the issue is and how Medicare for All would protect all Americans."

Trumpist Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin was on This Week yesterday when Jonathan Karl asked him if the pandemic would cause a recession, which every credible economist is predicting. Being part of the Trump Regime requires lying... so he did. "I don't think so. The real issue is not the economic situation today… This is a unique situation. We are going to have a slowdown. Later in the year economic activity will pick up as we confront this virus." Except the U.S. isn't even close to adequately confronting the pandemic so it will only get worse and the chances of escaping a humongous recession will diminish. Larry Elliott reported for The Guardian that travel bans, prohibitions on mass gatherings like sporting events and concerts, stock markets in freefall, deserted shopping malls (and the coming closures of restaurants, bars, schools, most service jobs and pretty much anything other than grocery stores and pharmacies), we need to prepare for a global recession.

If history is any guide, the global economy will eventually recover from the Covid-19 pandemic, but the idea that this is going to be a V-shaped recession in the first half of 2020 followed by a recovery in the second half of the year looks absurd after the tumultuous events of the past week.

What’s more, policymakers know as much. The Federal Reserve-- the US central bank-- does not need to be told by Donald Trump that it needs to cut interest rates and resume large-scale asset purchases known as quantitative easing. Wall Street is looking to the Fed to pull out all the stops when it meets on Wednesday and the world’s most powerful central bank cannot afford to disappoint.

In the UK the coordinated response by the Bank of England and the Treasury last week was seen as a textbook example of how policymakers ought to respond to the crisis. It was, though, only the start. Airline companies will quickly go bust unless they receive financial assistance. The same goes for retailers, many of them hanging on by their fingertips even before Covid-19. Britain has a new chancellor of the exchequer in Rishi Sunak and, from Monday, a new governor of the Bank of England in Andrew Bailey, and they will both be aware that the risks of doing too little too late are far greater than those of doing too much too soon.

So, in the coming weeks the Bank can be expected to cut interest rates to 0.1%-- the lowest they have ever been-- and to resume its QE programme. Sunak will have to add to the £12bn he has set aside to deal with Covid-19.

As in 2008-09, the authorities in the eurozone have been slowest to act but there have been welcome signs in recent days-- from Germany, most significantly-- of the need for governments to spend, and spend big.

The perfect time to implement Medicare-for-All.

Mark Levine is a City Councilman and chair of the City Council Health Committee in hard-hit NYC. On Sunday he came clean with his constituents: "Our city is facing a mounting threat in the coronavirus epidemic. We must move aggressively-- now-- to slow the outbreak in New York City. This is going to require extreme measures to ensure that the public avoids crowded places to the maximum extent possible. That is why I support the closure of all non-essential services, including schools, bars, restaurants, gyms, movie theaters, and courthouses."

Moments later it was announced that all NYC schools would close "until April 20," a silly aspirational random date.

New Yorkers shouldn’t wait for such an order to take responsibility for their own actions. I urge everyone to avoid any and all social gatherings if at all possible. We all need to adhere to aggressive social distancing, slow the spread, of the virus to protect the vulnerable, and prevent our health system from becoming overwhelmed.

Those who can work from home should. Families who are able to keep their children home from school should. If you must travel to work and are able to walk or bike you should.

And if you are feeling ill, it is imperative that you stay home. You should not go to work, you should not be in public.

And here’s the hardest part: if you are only mildly ill with COVID-19 symptoms (fever, dry cough) and do not have other health complications, you should not go to the hospital. You should rest at home and have a phone by your side to call for a doctor if your condition worsens. These extraordinary recommendations are necessary because we must preserve every element of our healthcare system for the seriously ill, as the number of coronavirus cases continues to rise.

These coming weeks and months will be a time of unprecedented challenges for our city.

Our world; and, possibly, our species.

It has been clear from the start that Covid-19 affects both sides of the economy: supply and demand. The supply of goods and services is impaired because factories and offices are shut and output falls as a result. But demand also falls because consumers stay at home and stop spending, and businesses mothball investment.

Conventional policy measures-- such as cutting the cost of borrowing or reducing taxes-- tend to work better when there is a demand shock. There is a limit to what they can do in the event of a combined supply and demand shock.

...[T]he economic disruption caused by Covid-19 is enormous. Entire countries-- Italy and Spain-- are in lockdown. The problems facing airline companies are symptomatic of a crisis facing the global travel industry, from cruise companies to hotels that cater for tourists. Discretionary spending by consumers appears to have collapsed in recent days.

Despite globalisation, much economic activity remains local but here, too, there will be an impact as people cancel appointments at the dentist, put off having their hair cut and wait to put their house on the market.

Paul Dales, the chief UK economist at Capital Economics, has estimated that output in Britain will shrink by 2.5% in the second quarter but says a 5% fall is possible. The more pessimistic estimate looks quite plausible.

What’s more, in a service-sector dominated economy much of the lost output is never going to be recovered. If people do not go out to their weekly meal at their favourite local restaurant for the next two months they are not going to eat out four times a week when the fear of infection has been lifted.

It also seems likely that the economic pain will go on for longer than originally estimated. Having imposed bans and restrictions, governments and private-sector bodies will be cautious about removing them. Countries such as Italy will be wary of opening their borders while there is a fear of reinfection. The idea that Premier League football will be back by early April is fanciful.

There is also a question of how long it will take consumer and business confidence to recover. Policy action by central banks and finance ministries can help in this respect but only so much. The chances are that the imminent recession will be U-shaped: a steep decline followed by a period of bumping along the bottom. There will be recovery but it will take time and only after much damage has been caused.

People who tell you schools will reopen later in the month or next month or that "postponed" events will be rescheduled soon are either stupid or deceitful. Our politicians need to do two things immediately:

• remote voting for Congress and state legislatures
• removing voting for primaries and the 2020 general election

Immediately means now. Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf did the right thing by ordering a total lockdown for Bucks and Chester counties but the Speaker of the state House, Michael Turzai (R), is refusing to postpone the election, knowing it is the only chance the GOP has to hold onto the seat.

Jay Ponti wrote over the weekend that words like "reckless," "criminal," and "villainous" only begin to describe the Democratic Party’s "willingness to threaten the lives of voters by not postponing voting at the polls" due to the pandemic.

The NHL, NBA and MLS have shut down.

Italy’s government imposed the closure of restaurants, bars and almost all shops except food stores and pharmacies. Three weeks ago Italian citizens were going about their day, business as usual, and today the country is in chaos.

Given the alarming rate of contagion, our country may be on the verge of the worst health catastrophe in modern U.S. history.

World leaders. A-list Hollywood actors. Members of Congress have tested positive for Covid-19. Not even POTUS was able to avoid being exposed to the virus that is ten times deadlier than the flu.

The difference between them and millions of poor people is that they have access to the best health care and will be at low risk to die from exposure.

Major museums, schools, and Universities. All closed.

Fucking Disney World.

Why? Because lives are at stake.

AEG has canceled Coachella and all North American concerted tours, but the democratic party is determined to put thousands of lives at risk just so it can push through their establishment candidate, Joe Biden.

The extent to which the virus is contained depends entirely on how the country responds to the crisis. Singapore and Taiwan are the gold standards in Coronavirus containment.

“While other countries waffled on acknowledging the danger of the outbreak, Taiwan took action immediately under the guidance of its National Health Command Center, which the country established after the deadly SARS outbreak in 2003 that killed 73 people there.”

Anywhere there are crowds of people in public is an unacceptable risk.

It is not overstating to say that holding primaries in the middle of a global pandemic is state-sanctioned genocide. To continue down this path following the fiascos in California and Texas that witnessed voters in line for up to 2–4 hours. Who were these people who stood in line for hours, refusing to be denied their sacred franchise?

Poor and working black and Latino voters.

These will be the ones to suffer the worst impact.

The effects won’t stop there. We need to understand that it is not just those who are infected in public spaces. It will affect the loved ones at home and everyone else that each infected person comes into contact with. Elders are the highest risk. Approximately 70–80% of senior citizens in other countries contracted the virus from a family member.

The only way to “flatten the curve” of Coronavirus is through quarantine. Global supply chains have been disrupted due to Trump’s trade war. Critical supplies for citizens and health workers like n95 respirator masks are all running out. The administration has forced the CDC to cut spending.

We are at a watershed moment.

The shelves of supermarkets are already being stripped bare, but we have not begun to see the worst.

We are in the moment when the shoreline is receding before the tipping point when the tsunami hits. The administration has been aware of this virus since December and has done nothing about it. Are we to believe that no one in the democratic leadership has been aware of this or the decimation of the CDC? Did anyone raise the alarm? Where was our media?

Failed leadership. Our institutions continue to fail us.

Liam O'Mara is the progressive Democrat and history professor running for the Riverside County congressional seat held by corrupt and incompetent Trump stooge Ken Calvert. O'Mara, however, knows that the incompetence isn't partisan and that there are Democrats every bit as bad as Republicans. This morning je told me that "Recently John Delaney tweeted that during a pandemic was a bad time to be discussing Medicare for all. With all due respect, it is the best time to be discussing it, since if we had done it decades ago we would be in far better shape to face a pandemic. Better late than never, though, and we need to be looking at how to prepare America for health care emergencies. Outbreaks like this are as inevitable as the sunrise-- they have recurred throughout history, and the best we can do is to be ready for them. Medicare helps to accomplish that, so here are a few points to consider:

Recently John Delaney tweeted that during a pandemic was a bad time to be discussing Medicare for all. With all due respect, it's a great time, since if we'd done it decades ago we would be in far better shape to face a pandemic. Better late than never-- we need to prepare America for health care emergencies. Outbreaks are as inevitable as the sunrise; they've recurred throughout history, and the best we can do is to be ready. Medicare helps to accomplish that, so here are a few points to consider:

1. 28 million Americans are uninsured, and tens of millions more are under-insured, with large co-pays and deductibles. People cannot afford to seek treatment and have been conditioned by experience not to try. It doesn't matter if the gov. says, "come on and get tested, it's free"-- lots of people won't hear it and a lot more won't believe it. (In fact, they should not, since our leaders have already lied about what they are providing in the way of emergency relief. Consider the sick-pay issue and the exemptions offered to so many businesses.) People who seek treatment for COVID-19 can get stuck with huge bills they cannot afford, raising again the spectre of ruined lives. We are the only rich country in the world where people declare bankruptcy over illnesses.

2. Without actual coverage, many Americans will be forced into emergency rooms when their symptoms get too bad to ignore. This can swiftly overwhelm capacity, since the need for profit slows investment in hospital capacity. We do not have existing capacity to treat a major pandemic regardless-- look back to the Spanish Flu of 1918, and at what China did in Wuhan, for an example of what is needed to manage a large-scale outbreak. But emergency rooms are especially costly and easily overrun by high demand, and the lack of regular coverage makes them the only option for many. This is a problem unique in the rich world, and makes no logical sense.

3. Cost considerations have compromised our readiness in other ways-- health care centres nationwide are short of equipment needed to treat a pandemic, from masks and sterilizing agents on down to beds and staff. As it is, rural America is chronically short of health care providers. The need to make a profit from health care leads to very different calculations than a simple emphasis on the public good.

4. Regular check-ups and preventive care also increase the resilience of a population. We are the 35th healthiest population in the world, despite extraordinary spending on health care, so we are getting poor value for our money. With universal health care, Americans would be healthier overall, and we would not have a large pool of citizens & residents who never see a provider and may be at higher risk due to untreated chronic heart & lung illnesses.

5. And again, lack of coverage means that by the time many seek treatment, their condition will be quite bad, and they'll have exposed more people, both at the medical facility and in their daily lives and workplaces. 44% of Americans report they do not seek treatment when sick due to cost. The outrageous cost of health care in the US puts us all at far greater risk. This is inexcusable. It's time for Medicare for all.

Nabilah Islam doesn't agree with John Delaney's position any more than Liam is. She's running for an open suburban seat north of Atlanta and a few hours ago she told us that "There is nothing I have more confidence in than the American people and our ability to persevere. I know that like we have in the past so many times, we will too overcome the coronavirus. What we CANNOT do is wait for the next pandemic to fight and pass Medicare for All. While the costs of testing are being waived, what about the cost of treatment? Without a centralized system, we will have a hard time streamlining supply orders. By states and hospitals estimating bed counts by the insured instead of populations, we will not have the capacity needed. If the coronavirus has shown us anything, we need Medicare for All Now."

Montana state Rep and congressional candidate Tom Winter reminded us that "It shouldn't have taken a global pandemic for us to finally realize our government and healthcare system does not work for America's working families. I've been working as a state legislator throughout this crisis to connect public health and healthcare professionals with our state and local government to help with triage plans and general preparedness. What immediately jumped out to me was how little capacity our hospitals and healthcare providers have to deal with an influx of patients. If the other wealthy countries of the world that have single payer healthcare systems-- and much greater capacity than us-- are bending to their breaking points as this pandemic reaches new levels, then I worry our system is woefully unprepared for the approaching storm. In the meantime, our politics is finally catching up on certain baseline policies like guaranteeing paid sick leave, waiving out-of-pocket expenses for life-saving testing and care, lowering drug costs, and countless other commonsense things that already exist in single payer systems. When we get through this crisis I think Americans will have a much greater appreciation for the security a single payer healthcare system could provide for their family's health. Not to mention the blowback that will happen when we all realize the ridiculousness that all of these life-saving policies were only temporary. Healthcare is a right for all, whether we are in a pandemic or not."

Kamala Harris Failed-- One Very Big Reason Why She Deserved To: Her Record As Attorney General

Aaron Glantz's new book, Homewreckers: How a Gang of Wall St. Kingpins, Hedge Fund Magnates, Crooked Banks and Vulture Capitalists Suckered Millions of Out of Their Homes and Demolished the American Dream is generally horrible for Trump's inner circle. Amy Goodman: "Aaron Glantz reveals how the 2008 housing crisis decimated millions of Americans' family wealth but enriched President Donald Trump's inner circle, including Trump cabinet Steve Mnuchin and Wilbur Ross, Trump's longtime friend and confidant Tom Barrack and billionaire Republican donor Steve Schwarzman." In short, crooks from the Trumpland Swamp-- the aforemented Mnuchin, Ross, Schwarzman and Barrack-- took advantage of a rigged system to transfer billions of dollars from individual homeowners into their own pockets during the Great Recession. None are in prison and none have been charged for their grand scale crimes. But one of them was almost charged and could have easily been serving prison time now... instead as Trump's crooked Treasury Secretary helping Trump violate the emoluments clause of the Constitution every day of the week.

But, as Politico reported yesterday, Glantz also reveals Kamala Harris' sordid and disgraceful role in this mess. He wrote that "Harris not only allowed Steve Mnuchin’s OneWest bank to get away with foreclosing on tens of thousands of state homeowners, but then tried to bury the evidence."

"Consumers wonder how is it that we all got so far behind" and so many Americans lost their homes in the Great Recession, Glantz-- a two-time Peabody Award winning journalist with California-based Reveal and the Center for Investigative Reporting-- said Monday in an interview.

“The answer is all of these officials screwed up and dropped the ball-- and hid it. The time period when all this homewrecking occurred was during the Obama presidency, and when AG’s like Kamala Harris were on the job," he said. "It happened on her watch. And she’s never been really forced to tell the other story-- and wrestle with the truth of what happened."

In California, Mnuchin-- now the Treasury secretary-- acquired regional banks like OneWest with the federal government’s help; the banks got billions in subsidies as they foreclosed on 35,000 homeowners in the Golden State alone, Glantz reports. Harris did little to stop that bleeding-- and later tried to suppress evidence of her inaction, he argues.

"Harris’ deputies recommended that their boss sue the bank," Glantz said, citing the bank’s loss-share agreement with the FDIC, which stated that Mnuchin’s bank could only receive payments from the government if it followed proper foreclosure procedures. "If the state of California found OneWest violated those rules, the payments could stop-- saving not only homeowners... but government coffers as well."

"[But] despite a strong recommendation from her staff," Harris never legally pursued Mnuchin’s OneWest bank, he says. "As a result, no one at OneWest faced prosecution-- and no one got their homes back."

...Earlier this year, Harris told the San Francisco Chronicle that she "didn’t have the legal ability," because "the rules were written in favor of the banks"-- an argument Glantz reports was disputed in a 25-page memo produced by Harris’ own staff. "Case NOT filed despite strong recommendations," reads a cover sheet atop the memo, Glantz writes.

He said the Mortgage Fraud Strike Force Harris launched does get credit for taking action, but mostly went after "small potatoes" offenders. On bigger fish, however, her staff "did investigate OneWest, and did recommend prosecution-- but she did bury their report and declined to launch a prosecution," he said. "That happened."

Glantz writes in Homewreckers that "the only reason we know about California’s investigations into OneWest today is because David Dayen of the news website The Intercept obtained a leaked copy," and published it in January 2017. "By then," Glantz reports, "Harris was no longer California attorney general-- she was a U.S. senator."

It's worth noting that Mnuchin was a mega-donor to politicians-- all Republican politicians... except one: Kamala Harris. These were the Mnuchin contributions I was able to dig up for 2016

• Republican National Committee- $309,600
• New Jersey Republican State Committee- $10,000
• Connecticut Republican Campaign Committee- $10,000
• Republican Party of Tennessee- $10,000
• Republican Party of Wyoming- $10,000
• Republican Party of Louisiana- $10,000
• Republican Party of West Virginia- $10,000
• Republican Party of Virginia- $10,000
• Republican Party of Mississippi- $10,000
• Republican Party of Arkansas- $10,000
• Republican Party of South Carolina- $10,000
• New York Republican Federal Campaign Committee- $10,000
• Paul Ryan (R-WI)- $5,400
• Scott Walker (R-WI)- $2,700
• Donald J. Trump (R-NY)- $5,400
• Kamala Harris (D-CA)- $2,000

Just a coincidence?

By the way, Harris' RealClearPolitics polling average is 5.4% and in her home state, which she once hoped would propel her into the presidency, she's not in the top tier:

• Elizabeth Warren- 23%
• Status Quo Joe- 22%
• Bernie- 21%
• Kamala- 8%
• Mayo Pete- 6%

Getting To Know You, Getting To Know All About You... Kamala Harris

2010 saw a red tidal wave sweep Democrats out of office across America. Democrats lost 63 House seats and watched John Boehner take over the speakership from Pelosi. Democrats lost 6 Senate seats-- Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Indiana, Wisconsin (Russ Feingold) and North Dakota. Republicans also picked up new governors' mansions in Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Maine, Wyoming and New Mexico. But California was a different story. No Democrats lost their House seats. Barbara Boxer was reelected to the Senate (against Carly Fiorina) with a healthy 10 point margin-- 5,218,441 (52.2%) to 4,217,366 (42.2%). Jerry Brown was elected governor against Meg Whitman by more than a 13 point margin 5,428,458 (53.8%) to 4,127,371 (40.9%). In the Lt. Gov. race, Gavin Newson clobbered his GOP opponent, Abel Maldonado, 50.12% to 39.94%. In the state Assembly races, Democrats got 5,121,423 (54.27%) votes and Republicans just 4,121,280 (43.67%) and picked up 2 seats. There were no changes in the state Senate races that were up but statewide Democrats got 2,279,834 votes (55.57%) and Republicans 1,736,816 votes (42.33%). It was similar for most statewide offices:

• State Controller
• John Chiang (D)- 5,315,196 (55.1%)
• Tony Strickland (R)- 3,481,167 (36.1%)

• Secretary of State
• Debra Bowen (D)- 3,786,174 (53.1%)
• Damon Dunn (R)- 2,751,863 (38.6%)

• State Treasurer
• Bill Lockyer (D)- 5,423,219 (56.5%)
• Mimi Walters (R)- 3,473,543 (36.2%)

• State Insurance Commissioner
• Dave Jones (D)- 4,630,988 (50.6%)
• Michael Villines (R)- 3,453,694 (37.7%)

• State Supervisor of Public Instruction
• Tom Torlakson (D)- 4,222,946 (54.52%)
• Larry Aceves (R)- 3,476,243 (44.88%)

And then came the Attorney General election, pitting San Francisco County District Attorney Kamala Harris against Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley (R). Even with President Obama actively supporting her and appearing at her rallies, Harris barely won. With other statewide Democrats running up million-plus vote margins, Harris scraped through with 4,443,070 votes (46.1%) to 4,368,617 (45.3%). In fact, Cooley was so far ahead in early counting that by midnight the networks had declared him the winner. The next morning late returns from L.A. that had been expected to come in for Cooley, came in for Harris but it wasn't until November 24, 3 weeks later, that the votes were finalized and Harris declared the winner.

California voters didn't really know who she was in 2010. She was reelected in 2014 by a much healthier margin-- finally that million vote cushion-- but voters still didn't know much about her. Two years later, she ran for the U.S. Senate seat Boxer retired from. By that time the California GOP had passed away and been cremated. With no Republican on the ballot, it was a Democrat vs Democrat race and Republicans generally either stayed home or rallied around Blue Dog Loretta Sanchez. Harris-- representing both the status quo establishment and the liberal wing of the party-- beat Sanchez overwhelmingly-- 7,542,753 (61.6%) to 4,701,417 (38.4%). It was a rout, with Sanchez winning just 4 of California's 58 counties (Glenn, Fresno, Madera, and Imperial), but voters still weren't clear about who Harris was, just that she was better than a conservative, not-too-bright Blue Dog Democrat.

Now Kamala Harris is running for president. She has an indisputably progressive voting record-- marginally more progressive than Elizabeth Warren's, Cory Booker's, Jeff Merkley's, Sherrod Brown's and even Bernie's. Going strictly by the numbers, she has the best voting record in the Senate-- 99.63% in the crucial roll calls. She's only been in the senate for 2 years though, so she doesn't really have any record of accomplishment yet. I bet that there's a good chance that if she stays in the Senate a couple of terms, she will have accomplishments and will be recognized as a progressive champion. Now... she just seems like a careerist, like most of the senators. And then there's her record as California Attorney General. Lara Bazelon's NY Times piece Thursday night, Kamala Harris Was Not A 'Progressive Prosecutor', opens that up for discussion in a big way. One savvy correspondent noted after reading it that "Nothing is so telling as the abuse of power just because one can. The calculating ways of Harris, her willingness to destroy people for political purpose, for notches on her belt, are a fright. If she can rationalize the actions detailed in this essay, she can rationalize anything. Like Hillary, in order to prove she’s tough. I hope this begins the end of the presidential/VP aspirations of Harris." And there I was, imagining that she would be Bernie's VP choice! Instead... is this the end of RICO?



Friday morning saw Bazelon's piece becoming part of the conventional wisdom about Harris. Her campaign moved into crisis mode. CNN reported that "University of San Francisco associate law professor Lara Bazelon took central aim at Harris' contention that she was a 'progressive prosecutor,' who sought to right injustice and change the criminal justice system from within." Team Trump, no doubt, has taken note.

"Time after time, when progressives urged her to embrace criminal justice reforms as district attorney and then the state's attorney general, Ms. Harris opposed them or stayed silent," wrote Bazelon, the former director of Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent. "Most troubling, Ms. Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors."

In an interview Thursday, Bazelon said that she was inspired to write the piece after Harris devoted a chapter in her new memoir, The Truths We Hold, to the idea that she was a progressive prosecutor.

"For some of us, that was just too much to bear. Because that's not her record," Bazelon said. "I think that the decisions she made had an eye toward running for higher office-- had an eye toward trying to walk this tightrope of not getting law enforcement and police and prosecutors upset with her."

Harris aides dismissed the piece as opinion and noted that a number of Bazelon's examples lacked proper context, or even an acknowledgment that line-level prosecutors made central decisions in a number of the most controversial cases.

"Kamala Harris has spent her career fighting for reforms in the criminal justice system and pushing the envelope to keep everyone safer by bringing fairness and accountability," said Lily Adams, Harris' spokeswoman, said in a statement.

"In 2004, when most prosecutors were using a tough on crime approach, Senator Harris was starting Back on Track in 2004 which diverted young people charged with first time drug offenses into apprenticeship and training programs instead of decades long prison sentences. When she was Attorney General, she brought accountability to the system with the first statewide training on implicit bias and procedural justice in the country, body cameras to the agents at DOJ, launched multiple pattern and practice investigations and demanded data on in-custody deaths and police shooting be made available to the public."

Citing the criticism of the fact that Harris did not take a position in 2014 on Proposition 47, a reform of California's three strikes law, Harris aides said her policy as attorney general was that she would not take a position on a ballot measure if she was responsible for writing the ballot language. She viewed it as a conflict of interest.

While Harris did favor reforming the three strikes law for low-level felonies to help reduce California's prison population, she also had concerns that if inmates were released there should be proper support services in place to help them. Aides noted that while Harris was district attorney and dealing with the three strikes law on a day-to-day basis, she did not seek any 25-year-to-life sentences on any low-level crime.

Bazelon also faulted Harris for refusing as attorney general to support statewide standards governing the use of body-worn cameras by police officers.

At that time, Harris, broadly, supported the use of body-worn cameras and required Department of Justice officers who she oversaw to wear them. But an aide said she believed that each police jurisdiction should have flexibility to set their own standards for how footage could be used, how long it should be kept and when it should be released to the public.

Bazelon's piece also criticized one of Harris' most controversial stances, which was her decision to defend the death penalty as California's attorney general even though she personally opposed it. Earlier in her career, Harris took considerable heat for refusing to seek the death penalty in 2004 for the killer of San Francisco police officer Isaac Espinoza.

In part because of the complexity of Harris' record, Bazelon touched off a vigorous debate about Harris' criminal justice stances, both on Twitter and in early voting states like Iowa and South Carolina, where Harris is scheduled to visit next week.

If Harris runs, it is a debate that will likely play out for many months among her 2020 rivals, particularly as Harris tries to consolidate the African-American vote in South Carolina and the early states of the Southeast where that demographic makes up a large portion of the electorate.

The Democratic California senator, who has worked closely with Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul on bail reform and co-sponsored legislation making lynching a federal crime, has clearly been expecting these attacks from the left, particularly as criminal justice reform became a focal point for Democratic activists.

In her new memoir and during her talks at book tour events, she frequently noted her family's surprise at her decision as a young woman to become part of a system that has disproportionately incarcerated black and brown men.

Harris writes in the book that she "knew that there was an important role on the inside, sitting at the table where the decisions were being made. When activists came marching and banging on the doors, I wanted to be on the other side to let them in."

At every event, she also noted her efforts to reduce recidivism, implicit bias within law enforcement and the program she launched giving first-time drug offenders an opportunity to get high school diplomas and jobs.

Some, noting the breadth and expanse of Harris' legal record over several decades, rose to her defense.

"It is an unfortunate byproduct of the campaign season to place Democrats into a box," said South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Trav Robertson. "I would believe that Senator Harris had significant input from her staff-- legal professionals in these circumstances. This opinion piece will have little impact on her chances in South Carolina."

"Most important, her performance during the (Supreme Court Nominee Brett) Kavanaugh hearing and the (attorney general nominee William) Barr hearing more than likely will have motivated those who consider themselves progressives in the Democratic Party," Robertson said.

Bazelon's opinion piece in the Times also sent ripples through some Iowa Democratic circles as they await an announcement of Harris' decision.

Andrew Turner, the former campaign manager for Iowa State Auditor Rob Sand-- who narrowly beat the GOP incumbent in the 2018 race-- said the piece was "widely talked about and passed around."

Turner acknowledged that most Iowans aren't making up their minds at this juncture, "but activists and staffers do, and I think some who had liked her a lot before don't feel the same way."

He called the opinion piece "troubling," especially to him, a young Democratic man of color.

"This op-ed for me, helped narrow down my choices," Turner said to CNN. "Senator Warren and Senator Booker both have tremendous records on these issues and don't need to explain why just as recently as 2014 they couldn't support a State Proposition (47) that would help curb some of the systemic racism in the criminal justice system and would improve the quality of life for so many young black and brown, men and women."

"I think there's lots of other black and mixed race Democrats out there thinking the same thing I am right now," Turner said.

Former Iowa Democratic Party chair Sue Dvorsky called the review of Harris' record "fair because she's expected to be top tier." Dvorsky noted that every one of the 2020 candidates is facing scrutiny of their records.

"It isn't too early. We're starting," Dvorsky said. "Every one of these candidates have three things they have to do: Lay out a positive vision of why them; explain how they are going to address the current occupant's style; and respond to their own record. The longer the record, the longer the response."

Dvorsky, a key influencer in Iowa politics who plans to remain neutral this cycle, was an early backer of Barack Obama in 2007 and also caucused for Hillary Clinton in 2016. This cycle, she said, "it will be vision, policy and record" that will determine Iowa Democratic support. "Everyone will have to answer to that."

Wow! And not even a mention of Mnuchin! You don't know about that? It's not about something she did; it's about something she didn't do and it troubles progressive insiders in a very big way and has been thought to be Harris' Achilles heel, maybe even something that would disqualify her from being named Bernie's running mate. OneWest was the crooked California bank founded by now-Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, an oozing slime ball among slime balls. As David Dayen reported for The Intercept early in 2017, Mnuchin "repeatedly broke California’s foreclosure laws" during his tenure with the bank (2009-15). He based his report on a previously undisclosed 2013 memo from top prosecutors in the state attorney general’s office, Kamala Harris' office.

The memo makes it clear that Mnuchin's bank "rushed delinquent homeowners out of their homes by violating notice and waiting period statutes, illegally backdated key documents, and effectively gamed foreclosure auctions. In the memo, the leaders of the state attorney general’s Consumer Law Section said they had “uncovered evidence suggestive of widespread misconduct” in a yearlong investigation. In a detailed 22-page request, they identified over a thousand legal violations in the small subsection of OneWest loans they were able to examine, and they recommended that Attorney General Kamala Harris file a civil enforcement action against the Pasadena-based bank. They even wrote up a sample legal complaint, seeking injunctive relief and millions of dollars in penalties. But Harris’s office, without any explanation, declined to prosecute the case." It would be really interesting watching Harris being forced to debate this with Elizabeth Warren on a primary stage.

“After years peddling the kind of dangerous mortgage-backed securities that eventually blew up the economy, Mnuchin swooped in after the crash to take a second bite out of families by aggressively-- and sometimes illegally-- foreclosing on their homes,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren said in a statement last month. Sen. Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, warned: “Given Mr. Mnuchin’s history of profiting off the victims of predatory lending, I look forward to asking him how his Treasury Department would work for Americans who are still waiting for the economic recovery to show up in their communities.”

The consistent violations of California foreclosure processes outlined in the memo would indicate that Mnuchin’s bank didn’t merely act callously, but did so with blatant disregard for the law.

And you know what makes this much worse? In 2016, Mnuchin contributed a lot of political money. Here's who he gave it to:

• Republican National Committee- $309,600
• New Jersey Republican State Committee- $10,000
• Connecticut Republican Campaign Committee- $10,000
• Republican Party of Tennessee- $10,000
• Republican Party of Wyoming- $10,000
• Republican Party of Louisiana- $10,000
• Republican Party of West Virginia- $10,000
• Republican Party of Virginia- $10,000
• Republican Party of Mississippi- $10,000
• Republican Party of Arkansas- $10,000
• Republican Party of South Carolina- $10,000
• New York Republican Federal Campaign Committee- $10,000
• Paul Ryan (R-WI)- $5,400
• Scott Walker (R-WI)- $2,700
• Donald J. Trump (R-NY)- $5,400
• Kamala Harris (D-CA)- $2,000

In August of 2017, Jesse Mechanic wrote at HuffPo that Harris had "been deemed the Democratic Party establishment’s next big thing. They’re pushing her as the figure head of the resistance, the anti-Trump: a staunch, strong progressive who relies on her intelligence and empathy to combat the authoritarian belligerence of the current administration. While Harris is certainly poised and intelligent, her progressive credentials are fuzzy and her past is punctuated boldly by her decision to not prosecute OneWest Bank and the 'foreclosure king' who ran it, current Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin... [D]espite internal memos explicitly mentioning numerous prosecutable offenses by Mnuchin and co., then California Attorney General Kamala Harris refused to prosecute... The Democratic party is a fractured entity. The anti-establishment, anti-corporatist, anti-centrist, anti-plutocratic wing of the party is growing every day and they are unwavering and passionate about their ideals. Harris, who met with Clinton donors last month and is against party purity tests, has certainly failed to impress those pining for Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren... For the most part, Harris aims to stay in the middle, but by all accounts, centrism is dead. While she may be able to distance herself from some earlier mistakes, the one looming specter from which she cannot escape is Steve Mnuchin. If she wants to be considered as a viable Democratic candidate, she needs to appeal to the Sanders/Warren wing of the party. And to do this, she must provide an adequate justification for this glaring omission, or, at the very least, admit she made a terrible error. Voters on both sides of the aisle have grown tired of the corporatist model. This issue will not go away, she had myriad reasons to prosecute a man who brazenly and illegally exploited the citizens of her state and failed to do so."

The Marist poll NPR released this week shows Harris with a 36% approval rating among Democratic (and Democratic-leaning independent) voters, not quite in the same ballpark as Biden, Bernie and Warren, but significantly better than Bloomberg (27%), Gillibrand (22%), Klobuchar (21%) or Castro (20%). A majority of voters either never hear Harris and the others she ranks better than, or didn't have enough information to form any kind of judgment.

White House Monkey Has A Christmas Present For America

The only problem with our economy is Trump (and the GOP)

Thankfully, the stock markets are all closed today. Yesterday's abbreviated session was another miserable down day. When I was much younger, I would get very worried when markets sank the way they have been lately. When you're young, it doesn't matter, unless you're foolish enough to lock in your losses by selling low. Eventually, if you're invested in strong companies, the prices always go back up to reflect values. Now I'm old and I'm not worried-- although if it take a long time to go back up...

Trump's freaking out because he's afraid he's going to take the blame, having unabashedly hitching his political fortunes to a rising stock market. Now, with stock prices in retreat, he's looking for someone else to blame and he's "become increasingly fixated on the idea that one man is to blame for the recent rout: Jerome Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve. After the Fed raised its benchmark interest rate on Wednesday, the fifth consecutive quarterly increase, Mr. Trump fretted to aides that Mr. Powell would 'turn me into Hoover,' a reference to the man who was president in the early years of the Great Depression. Mr. Trump has said choosing Mr. Powell for the Fed job last year was the worst mistake of his presidency and he has asked aides whether he has the power to fire him. But the volatile stock market, which just posted its worst week since 2008, is falling in part because of Mr. Trump’s own policies, including an escalating trade war with China, a shutdown of the federal government and the fading effects of the $1.5 trillion tax cut Mr. Trump ushered in at the end of 2017."

Before the markets closed yesterday, CNN was already reporting that Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin's attempts to calm investors backfired."

Mnuchin on Sunday released an unusual statement to say he had called the CEOs of the country's biggest banks. He said the executives assured him their banks are healthy and have "ample liquidity" to lend to consumers and businesses. "Markets continue to function properly," he said.

The major bank CEOs who spoke by phone Sunday with Mnuchin were "totally baffled" by the session, according to a person familiar with the call, who said the executives found the encounter puzzling and largely unnecessary.

"It was totally out of left field and an odd thing to do," the person said, describing the timing of the call-- on a Sunday before markets opened-- as strange. All were taken aback by the public nature of Mnuchin's tweet.

On Monday, shares in JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, Bank of Americ and Citi all lost ground.

"This is the type of announcement that raises the question of whether Treasury sees problems that the rest of the market is missing," Cowen & Co. analyst Jaret Seiberg wrote in a note to clients. "Not only did he consult with the biggest banks, but he is talking to all of the financial regulators on Christmas Eve. We do not see this type of announcement as constructive."

Mnuchin plans to convene a call on Monday with the President's Working Group on financial markets, which includes the chairman of the Federal Reserve and top market and business regulators.

Stocks are on pace for their worst December since the Great Depression. On Friday, the Dow ended its worst week since 2008. The Nasdaq is in a bear market.

Adding to the shaky start on Monday: The partial shutdown of the federal government will continue at least until Thursday, and possibly into January. Although the closure of some government services isn't expected to hurt the economy, the inability of lawmakers and President Donald Trump to put politics aside to enact a budget is unnerving to investors.

"The confusion and disorder surrounding this week's spending debate suggest fiscal deadlines in 2019-- including the debt limit deadline, which we expect to fall between August to October-- could be more disruptive than they have been since the 2011-2013 period," Goldman Sachs economists wrote in a research note.

The stock selloff in part reflects concern about a looming slowdown in economic growth. Investors' worries were exacerbated last week when the Federal Reserve signaled no slowdown in its plans to continue raising interest rates next year. The market is also reacting to the Trump administration's trade war with China. The trade war helped knock China's stock market into a bear market over the summer.

Still, some market veterans argue that a panicky Wall Street is prematurely pricing in a recession that may not hit until 2020.

Trump was lucky when he inherited a lot of money from his father and then went bankrupt 6 times and was bailed out with taxpayer dollars. More recently, he inherited a very strong economy from President Obama. His policies have been chipping away at what Obama put in place-- especially all the job growth. Now Trump's failed policies have killed the goose and no one doubts he's bringing on the first recession since Bush brought on a doozy with similarly bad policies. I wonder how far the market has to fall, how much pain investors have to feel, before enough Republican senators tell the Democrats to go for impeachment and that they'll be there for conviction. Funny how Republicans are likely to prioritize the markets more than the evidence Mueller finds.

Sunday night I went to a Christmas party one for my financial advisors threw. One of her clients is former GOP heavyweight, now retired from Congress but still a relatively young and energetic man. Unprompted, he walked over to me and told me Trump had offered him a pick of a dozen top ambassadorships-- from Russia and Australia to Brazil and Argentina. He was a foreign policy wonk in Congress and he would probably make an excellent ambassador. He told me he was really excited-- until he was told flatly that his job was to represent Trump, not America. He passed on the opportunity. Tighten your belts; this ride is going to get much worse before it gets better.

Midnight Meme Of The Day!

by Noah

Republicans love to bitch and moan about the Hollywood community. They would have you believe the canard that everyone involved in the film industry is well left of center. It gives the Repugs something to shake a stick at and wail that they are not being treated fairly.

The truth is, however, that Hollywood is full of creepy money cretins just like Steve Mnuchin. Mnuchin has long been one of the bankers of Hollywood, credited as being an executive producer for a lengthy list of Hollywood products. You can look up his filmography on IMDb. Just a short list includes Mad Max: Fury Road, Wonder Woman, The LEGO Batman Movie,  How To Be Single, the dreadful Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice, and the perfectly named Pan. He's put money behind both winners and losers, although, artistically, it would be hard to find many winners on his list of credits. To be fair though, and I'm always fair; one movie he backed was Sully. I did like Sully very much. Then again, it was a true story and Tom Hanks was the lead, so it would have been hard to mess it up; not impossible, but hard. Fortunately, they stuck to reality and there were no exploding cockpit controls, no giant Hudson River anaconda who ate the passengers, and the plane didn't clip the Statue of Liberty on its way to a safe landing in the water.

Given the quality of the movies Mnuchin has associated himself with, though, it's not surprising that he threw his lot in with the Trump administration; plenty of hideous real monsters there, from the lead actor on down, or is it up? After all, the Trump administration is one really bad movie. You would be hard pressed to make this script up and get it produced by Hollywood. No one would believe characters like Stephen Miller, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Mike Pence, and all the rest could possibly exist. I mean, come on, Kellyanne Conway and Obama spying on her from her magic microwave oven? This is Ed Wood Plan 9 From Outer Space stuff.



Anyway, tonight's meme is presented for your amusement in order to call attention to the rancid hypocrisy of Steve Mnuchin. I chose it now because this weekend is the weekend of the NFL draft. When it comes to being a total douchebag, Mnuchin has an inside track for a Oscar.