How Establishment/Corporate Politics Are Played Today

Career of Evil

Bill Clinton was only allotted 5 minutes to speak last night-- and not in prime time. The NY Times called it a "blink-and-you’ll-miss-him moment before a party that once revered him" and noted that that "is testimony to how his influence has faded... [and] of the baggage he carries with the re-examination of allegations of sexual assault and harassment over his years in public life in the wake of the #MeToo movement."

Even in John Harris' Politico opus yesterday-- The Bill Clinton Comeback is Coming Soon-- he immediately made sure his readers understood that Clinton's Republican-lite "centrism" isn't what he's talking about, and that it's just his way of making an argument that deserves a revival." Whew. Clinton's "brand of centrism," wrote Harris, "is seen as too compromising, and his private life and disreputable personal associations too compromised." Harris, a New Dem type centrist like Clinton, tries excusing his fear-based-- he was kicked out as Arkansas governor for being a liberal-- conservativism to make the case that he deserves a revival. He doesn't.

This morning I found a 44 page document, a complaint in the New York State Supreme Court pitting Rimylan Enterprises, LLC, Project Applecart, LLC, Tormima, LLC and Minino Productions against Clinton administration scumbags Mark Penn and Nancy Jacobson, two of the worst characters-- a husband and wife team-- in American politics. I spent a lot of time and energy in 2018 and 2019 explaining how their malignant operations against progressives were especially detrimental to Marie Newman in Illinois, Dena and Alan Grayson in Florida and Matt Heinz in Arizona. The lawsuit is against their crooked front operations: "No Labels, Inc. , Forward Not Back, Inc, United For Progress, Inc. United Together, Inc., Citizens For A Strong America, Inc., Govern or Go Home, Inc., Americans Committed For Progress, Inc., Citizens for America, Inc., Progress Together, Inc., Patriotic Americans PAC, Inc., No Labels Action, Inc., and Progress Tomorrow, Inc., as well as Nancy Jacobson personally. The suit claims Rimylan is owed $3,708,214.26 by Jacobson and her nefarious entities. Rimylan wants the $3.7 they're owed plus about a million in damages plus another $3.7 million from Jacobson personally "for fraudulent inducement on the ground that she omitted to tell Rimylan that No Labels did not intend to be bound" by the contract.

Applecart is the trade name for Rimylan, Tormima, and Minino and it is a technology company that provides political data and analytic services. You know what Brad Pascale did for Trump-- the tsunamis of micro-targeted ads? That's what Matthew Kalmans and Sacha Samotin, co-founders of Applecart, do for candidates. Last year Applecart hired a new president, Democratic operative Joe Shafer, who was the head of the Democratic Governors Association’s (DGA) independent expenditure arm, and has begun an association with Rahm Emanuel's brother Ari. The Kalmans and Samotin big idea-- the "Social Graph"-- "uses a combination of human and artificial intelligence to mine publicly available data to identify online and offline social relationships between Americans. In the time since, Applecart has since mapped over 17 billion relationships between more than 250 million Americans and has been deployed as the analytics engine behind the highest stakes advertising campaigns of major politicians, corporations, and advocacy groups." One of their most successful campaigns was Conor Lamb's first congressional run.

Applecart, which had been working for John Kasich was introduced to Jacobson by former Utah Governor and former Applecart client John Huntsman, who was also one of No Label's "Honorary Co-Chairmen."

The suit says that "In October 2015, Kalmans and Samotin proposed to Jacobson that No Labels hire Applecart to demonstrate the impact of their strategy for supporting moderate [meaning conservative] candidates in congressional primaries in two such races, one Republican and one Democrat. In May 2016 Jacobson agreed to this proposal and selected two of several races proposed by Applecart. One, to support moderate Roger Marshall against three-term incumbent Freedom Caucus leader Tim Huelskamp in the Republican primary election in the First Congressional District of Kansas. The other, to support moderate Darren Soto to succeed far-left incumbent Alan Grayson in the Democratic primary in the Ninth Congressional District in Florida. No Labels formed two super PACs to support the elections of Marshall and Soto: Strong Leadership for America ('SLA') and Concerned Citizens for America’s Future ('CCAF'). No Labels established the super PACs because it, as a 501(c)(4) organization, is subject to limits on how much of its budget can be spent on political activities. No Labels also established the super PACs so that their work on behalf of Marshall and Soto would not be tied to No Labels, a bipartisan organization, because such an association was thought likely to be unhelpful in a partisan primary election. No Labels established separate super PACs for Marshall and Soto so that the work of one, on behalf of a Republican, would not be tied to the work of the other, on behalf of a Democrat."

The 44 pages are fascinating-- at least to me-- but what I really want to talk about how how a significant portion how U.S. politics has now come down to laundering money from vain billionaires-- Penn and Jacobson's specialty-- and laundering it into campaigns against progressives through an aggressive campaign of libel and slander while pocketing as much as the vain billionaires are unaware of. In this particular case, the vain billionaire/patsy was Nelson Peltz (chairman of Wendy's), who gives humongous amounts of money to conservative operations-- both the GOP's and Penn's and Jacobson's.

So basically it comes down to a small gaggle of manipulative vultures like Jacobson and Penn enriching themselves by sucking up to virulently anti-progressive billionaires like Peltz so that they can destroy the champions of the working class-- only and always-- in order to do well for themselves while... well, how else to say it: doing evil. This is the dark corruption that pervades American politics.

In 2018 Jacobson failed in her efforts to defeat now-Congresswoman Deb Haaland (D-NM) and this year all those millions she spent against Marie Newman went up in smoke as Newman beat reactionary Blue Dog Dan Lipinski. And, like I said... Bill Clinton was not allowed to address the Democratic convention in prime time.

A member of Congress who I asked about No Labels unethical and probably criminal activities turned me on to some Ryan Grim and Rachel Cohen work looking into No Labels funny business back in December, pointing out the built in conflicts of interest that should have long ago landed Penn, Jacobson and their board members in prison. For example, in late March of 2018, the reporters found an email in which "a representative for a No Labels donor expressed concern over the organization having 'perceived or potential' conflicts of interest. They urged Jacobson to disclose potential conflicts to the No Labels governing board. 'We believe that all Governing Board members need to be aware of the situation in order to prevent any misunderstanding and confusion going forward,' they wrote."

And all we need to do is elect reformers to change this-- not defenders of the status quo like Biden, who makes excuses for lobbyists and crooked operatives, every member of his family being one. Instead we wind up with a classic lesser of two evils "choice" between an outright fascist who is an undeniable existential threat to democracy and the integrity of our nation or a feeble, status quo nothing. Last night, AOC reminded us what could have been (if not for Obama's orchestration of the neoliberal forces against it):

Mark Penn Is No Democrat-- And The Democratic Party Is WAY Better Off Without Him

In 2018, Chicagoland Blue Dog Dan Lipinski-- who is virulently anti-Choice, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-healthcare-- and who has a solid voting record for a moderate Republican-- was on the verge of defeat in the primary. One poll had the 2 candidates within the margin of error and the other showed progressive challenger Marie Newman beating Lipinski by 5 points. At that point, the Republican version of EMILY's List (the Susan B. Anthony List) started spending big to support Lipinski and the web of dark money super-PACS run by Mark Penn and his wife, Nancy Jacobson, through No Labels let loose a $975,894 direct mail and television campaign smearing Newman with baseless charges. The result was a swing towards Lipinski the week before election day and a narrow 51.1% win for Lipinski. (Last night Newman told me that "We now know that No Labels’ extreme lies were tightly tied to the Lipinski campaign and if Congressman Lipinski wants to continue his very close relationship with them, it will simply continue to eliminate what is left of his credibility.")

In every part of the country, Penn and Jacobson jumped in to back Republican-lite Blue Dog and New Dem candidates against progressives, spending immense amounts of money-- almost all of it coming from Republican plutocrats, like the Murdoch family, and Wall Street Democrats. You've heard the term "Fox Democrat," right? Mark Penn is the prototype. Politically he's another Bill and Hillary Clinton-Tony Blair fox in the henhouse, always working to pull the Democratic Party rightward-- for which he gets paid-- and handsomely so-- by wealthy conservatives. They are the couple from hell behind the corporately-funded No Labels cabals and SuperPACs that finance the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. And they make their living by taking a cut from every penny that comes in.

Penn spreads his poisonous corrupt conservatism all over the world-- supporting right-wing candidates from Menachem Begin in Israel, Carlos Andrés Pérez (El Gocho) in Venezuela and Belisario Betancur in Colombia to Tony Blair, Ed Koch and, of course, the Clintons. Here in the U.S. their sewer money-- from charter school fanatics, hedge fund managers and GOP financiers-- that flooded into Democrat primaries against Marie Newman, Alan Grayson in Orlando, Deb Haaland in Albuquerque, Matt Heinz in Tucson and Susan Wild in the Philly suburbs was spent through shady conservative PACs like United for Progress, United Together, Forward Not Back, Progress Tomorrow, Patriotic Americans PAC, Citizens for a Strong America, etc, entirely funded by contributions from 5 and 6-figure right wing donors, sleaze bags trying to turn the Democratic Party into another corporately-owned arm of Wall Street, just like the GOP. Most recently, Penn's and Jaconson's No Labels operation was behind the failed Seth Moulton coup plot against Pelosi.

Please consider contributing to progressive Democrats battling Penn's Blue Dogs and New Dems by clicking on the 2020 primaries thermometer on the right. And pushing the Republican wing of the Democratic Party isn't the only thing Penn is up to these days. He's a regular contributor to the influential right-of-center Beltway rag, The Hill, This weekend's OpEd was the all-to-predictable, Mueller's done, and Dems should be too-- because Trump is no Nixon. This is what the right-wing of the Democratic Party has to say in defense of Trump, voiced by the venal Penn: "There was, at the end of the day, no evidence whatsoever of any collusion-- and there was nothing but a president frustrated at being wrongly accused and wrongly investigated over a very effective hoax." Before going any further with his bullshit, I just want to list the members of the so-called Problem Solvers Caucus, which Penn and Jacobson control. They once had Trump address the group. Most of the GOP problem-makers were defeated in November, so the group, which prides itself on having an even number of Dems and Republicans is now way over-balanced with Dems, but since they're virtually all from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, many on their way to the same inevitable "metamorphosis" Penn is in the midst of, it doesn't really matter anyway; does it? These are the ones who call themselves Democrats:

• Sanford Bishop (Blue Dog-GA)
• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)
• Julia Brownley (New Dem-CA)
• Salud Carbajal (New Dem-CA)
• Tony Cardenas (D-CA)
• André Carson (New Dem-IN)
• Jim Cooper (Blue Dog-TN)
• Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA)
• Charlie Crist (Blue Dog-FL)
• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)
• Debbie Dingell (D-MI)
• Vicente González (Blue Dog-TX)
• Josh Gottheimer, chairman (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Derek Kilmer (New Dem-WA)
• Susie Lee (New Dem-NV)
• Dan Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)
• Stephanie Murphy (Blue Dog-FL)
• Eleanor Norton (D-DC)
• Tom O'Halleran (Blue Dog-AZ)
• Jimmy Panetta (D-CA)
• Scott Peters (New Dem-CA)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Dean Phillips (New Dem-MN)
• Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY)
• Brad Schneider (Blue Dog-IL)
• Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR)
• Darren Soto (New Dem-FL)
• Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA)
• Tom Suozzi (New Dem-NY)
• Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Peter Welch (D-VT)

Yesterday, Digby, writing for Salon, explained Mueller's purpose-- a roadmap Democrats now need to pick up, real Democrats,not the Mark Penn variety. "No matter how many times," she wrote, "Trump and his minion Barr say the words 'no collusion, no obstruction' over and over again like a couple of malfunctioning robots, the report shows something very different. The Trump campaign clearly 'colluded.' Its officials clearly knew a hostile power was helping them by sabotaging their rival and they never reported it to the authorities. Indeed, they welcomed it and eagerly encouraged more of it. There is apparently no law against doing that, largely because, I suspect, no one ever anticipated that a presidential nominee for a major political party could possibly do such a thing. But it was an ethical lapse of epic proportions, and the belated recognition of that fact partially explains the president's frenzied denials that the interference and sabotage ever happened. He has shown in dozens of different ways that he believes that he can manipulate reality by repeatedly denying that it exists... Mueller concluded that his investigation didn't establish that Trump and company conspired and coordinated with the Russians. But the detail he provided shows that Trump's dishonesty and unfitness for the office he holds is indisputable. And the second section shows that despite Barr's contention that Trump was just frustrated (as if that were a valid excuse) and couldn't have committed obstruction of justice because he had committed no underlying crime, he had ample, serious motivation to try to cover it up." Penn has an entirely different persopective. I wonder how many of his Problem Solvers agree. Here's more of his defense of the Trumpist interpretation of the Mueller report:

Most people don’t understand what it is to not only to be personally investigated for something you didn’t do but to have your friends, family members and associates placed in legal jeopardy over it. Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team systematically targeted the people around the president, squeezing them like lemons, indicting them on mostly process crimes created by the investigation itself. They reviewed everyone’s emails, text messages, phone calls, bank statements-- and yet, their conclusion on collusion was clear and definitive. It has to be believed.

I was there working with President Clinton in 1998 when he pondered whether to send missiles against Osama bin Laden but was concerned it would be viewed as “wagging the dog.” We missed bin Laden that day. It was symbolic of how everything in the White House was affected by the Monica Lewinsky investigation; it changed everything we did. And, yes, there was a good bit of cursing then, too.

The big difference between today and what happened in 1998 or during the Nixon era is that, at the end of the day, the Mueller investigators found no stained dress, no break-in, no hush money, no enemies list. There never was a crime, and what seemed far-fetched was simply that-- this time, a duly elected president was investigated for a crime that never even existed. In fact, evidence is mounting that the investigation itself was launched on phony grounds.

And so, the screaming partisan antics of Democrats in the House are likely to set the Democratic Party back a decade if they do not get a grip on themselves. In partisan unison, with scripted talking points, they keep calling everyone else “partisan.” It simply does not pass the laugh test at this point.

But the problem is that Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Adam Schiff (D-CA) are congressmen from safe districts who are nobodies if they have no investigations to launch. It’s in the interest of their egos to keep it all going so that they can have daily press availabilities. And they are whipping up their political bases. It will take some Democrats of courage to turn this off and stop the abuse of going after the president’s financial records. These are the kinds of things Nixon was doing, and there is no justification for those in Congress to be doing exactly those things for which Nixon resigned from office-- going after his political enemies.

...It’s time for Democrats and the country to move past the Russia collusion narrative, and for the media to ’fess up. If we are not going to respect the outcome of the Mueller report, then what was the point of the whole exercise? They found no collusion and they did not charge obstruction.

The cloud under which the president and his associates have lived for more than two years deserves to be lifted. The officials who launched this aborted investigation should be held accountable for their actions. And the country deserves a Congress focused, not on investigations, but on issues like health care, infrastructure and immigration.

The hell with Mark Penn. That's not a Democrat-- and hasn't been for a very long time. Are his "Problem Solvers?" Go over that list above again. Let's face it-- that's largely where the opposition to impeachment is coming from. Any of them yours?

Turn Over The Shit-Smeared Rock And You'll Find... Mark Penn Fellating Trump

Mr. and Mrs. Penn

Yesterday, reporting for the New York Times, Annie Karni wrote of Mark Penn's "inevitable... long-running political metamorphosis." An alternative interpretation of Penn's meeting with Trump last week is that the inevitability is that two sticky-palmed grifters were meant for each other. Him and his wretched wife, Nancy Jacobson, are two of American politics' most dishonest people, stealing massively from anyone they come in contact with foolish enough to take an eye off either of them. We'll get to the latest fraud case working its way against them in a moment. First I just want to list the members of the so-called Problem Solvers Caucus, which Penn once had Trump address. Most of the GOP problem-makers were defeated in November, so the group, which prides itself on having an even number of Dems and Republicans is now way over-balanced with Dems, but since they're virtually all from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, many on their way to the same inevitable "metamorphosis" Penn is in the midst of, it doesn't really matter anyway; does it? First all the ones who call themselves Democrats:

• Sanford Bishop (Blue Dog-GA)
• Anthony Brindisi (Blue Dog-NY)
• Julia Brownley (New Dem-CA)
• Salud Carbajal (New Dem-CA)
• Tony Cardenas (D-CA)
• André Carson (New Dem-IN)
• Jim Cooper (Blue Dog-TN)
• Jim Costa (Blue Dog-CA)
• Charlie Crist (Blue Dog-FL)
• Joe Cunningham (Blue Dog-SC)
• Debbie Dingell (D-MI)
• Vicente González (Blue Dog-TX)
• Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Derek Kilmer (New Dem-WA)
• Susie Lee (New Dem-NV)
• Daniel Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)
• Stephanie Murphy (Blue Dog-FL)
• Eleanor Norton (D-DC)
• Tom O'Halleran (Blue Dog-AZ)
• Jimmy Panetta (D-CA)
• Scott Peters (New Dem-CA)
• Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Dean Phillips (New Dem-MN)
• Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY)
• Bradley Schneider (Blue Dog-IL)
• Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR)
• Darren Soto (New Dem-FL)
• Abigail Spanberger (Blue Dog-VA)
• Tom Suozzi (New Dem-NY)
• Jeff Van Drew (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Peter Welch (D-VT)

And here are all the Republicans who have signed up for the Mark Penn/Nancy Jacobson cabal:

• Earl Carter (R-GA)
• Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA)
• Mike Gallagher (R-WI)
• Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon (R-Puerto Rico)
• Dusty Johnson (R-SD)
• David Joyce (R-OH)
• John Katko (R-NY)
• Peter King (R-NY)
• Adam Kinzinger (R-IL)
• Dan Meuser (R-PA)
• Tom Reed (R-NY)
• Lloyd Smucker (R-PA)
• Glenn Thompson (R-PA)
• Fred Upton (R-MI)
• Steve Watkins (R-KS)

Penn consistently paints himself "one of the primary architects of President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign." He's trying to sell himself to Trump as the guy who can get Trump back into the White House. Penn and another scumbag ex-Dem, Andrew Stein (a crooked Trump crony and felon) arrived at the White House together. I've long maintained that one way for Democrats to start winning elections and rebuilding their tattered brand would be to pay very close attention to all the advice they get from Mark Penn-- and then do the exact opposite. Penn has teamed up with Andrew Stein to tell the Democrats all they need to know about how to continue losing. Penn's an ad guy, pollster and political strategist. He's always wrong about everything and his advice very much helped turn the personal brands of both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair to shit. He was a key Hillary Clinton advisor in 2008 and most observers of that race give him immense credit for her loss. [Example: he urged Hillary to go subtly racist against Obama.]

More recently, Penn worked with hereditary multimillionaire Andrew Stein-- a former boyfriend of Ann Coulter, a failed, dumb-as-brick New York politician who once famously was caught soliciting the Republican nomination for mayor of New York City and was later arrested for his involvement with a ponzi scheme and endorsed Trump for president-- on their centrism-uber-alles OpEd in The Times. I can't imagine anyone would be surprised to hear Penn and Finkelstein (Stein's real name) denouncing progressives, urging the Democratic Party to move right the way they and all their greed-obsessed cronies have, and rewriting history to glorify their reactionary instincts. Both are masters of collaborationist politics. They would have been perfect advisors to Marshall Pétain in France or Vidkun Quisling in Norway during WWII. And now they've joined up with Trump. What could be more natural and inevitable?

Penn, Jacobson and Stein especially hate Bernie and Elizabeth Warren and everything they stand for-- especially honesty, ethics and opposition to elite corruption, elite corruption being the center piece of Penn's and Stein's entire lives. To them, the Democratic Party has "embraced sharply leftist ideas" and they blame all the losses the party has suffered, on the left instead of on the Republican wing-- their wing-- of the Democratic Party. 'If only the Democrats were more elitist, more corrupt, more bigoted they would still own the working class' is the tired Penn/Stein thesis. Lee Fang had a better explanation of Penn's OpEd at The Intercept in 2017: Penn now invests in Republican advocacy firms-- and profits from the electoral defeat of Democrats. He's a part owner of the GOP consulting firm that advices Trump and developed strategy for the Handel win over Ossoff in Georgia. But certain types of Democrats still take Penn seriously and value his advice. Personally, I hope he takes some of his Problem Solvers Caucus fake Dems with him, especially the real garbage like Gottheimer and Van Drew from New Jersey, Brindisi and Rose from New York and Lipinski and Schneider from Illinois.

As Karni mentioned, Penn has even adopted Trump’s "deep state" conspiracy theories for his appearances on Fox, where he accuses Democrats of sabotaging the Trump administration from within the government.

In an email, Mr. Penn played down the significance of the visit. “I tagged along with my friend Andrew Stein at his request to one of his meetings, and for the first time to meet the president,” he said. “I have had hundreds of meetings with presidents and I don’t relay their conversations but this was a cordial meeting and no advice was given or taken-- but old-time politics was discussed.”

Mr. Penn added, “Despite my misgivings about the Mueller investigation, let me be clear as a lifelong Democrat under no circumstances would I work paid or unpaid for President Trump nor was this meeting about that in any way.”

...[H]is fallout with the onetime reigning brand in Democratic politics began during Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, where he clashed with other advisers and was ultimately removed as the chief strategist. Over the past year, like Mr. Schoen and Mr. Morris, he too has won praise on the other side of the political spectrum as he has become seen as a heretic on the left.

Mr. Penn has been praised internally at the White House, and by the president himself, for his fulsome attacks on the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. In his appearances on Fox News-- he has been banned from appearing on MSNBC and CNN-- and in his opinion pieces in the conservative-leaning opinions pages of The Hill, Mr. Penn has accused Mr. Mueller of overreaching in his investigation.

But an actual sit-down meeting with the president in the Oval Office was, for some former colleagues of Mr. Penn, the inevitable outcome of what they see as his rightward lurch. “Some people are loyal to Republican red, some people to Democratic blue and some capitalism green,” said Philippe Reines, a longtime aide to Mrs. Clinton, who served as her gatekeeper in the Senate and at the State Department.

Mr. Penn currently runs the Stagwell Group, a private equity firm, and claims his political career is behind him, even though his firm owns two public affairs agencies that have worked for both Democratic and Republican officials.

I'm glad to see Mark Pocan finally see the light and jump ship, leaving Penn and Jacobson and their anti-progressive Problem Solvers, though that's probably where he learned to love New Dems. It's hard to believe that Debbie Dingell, Peter Welch and Eleanor Norton are still along for the ride. Penn is the prototypical Fox Democrat, a real shitbag always working to pull the Democratic Party rightward-- for which he gets paid-- and handsomely so-- by wealthy conservatives. His wife, a professional fundraiser, is even worse. And aside from the Problem Solvers, they are the couple from hell behind the corporately-funded No Labels cabals. Their web of dark money PACs and SuperPACs finance the Republican wing of the Democratic Party with money from-- for example-- Republican billionaires like the Murdoch family. And they make their living by taking a cut from every penny that comes in.

In the past cycle, Penn and the Mrs. were behind the sewer money-- from charter school fanatics, hedge fund managers and GOP financiers-- that flooded into Democrat primaries against Marie Newman in Chicago, Alan Grayson in Orlando, Deb Haaland in Albuquerque, Matt Heinz in Tucson and Susan Wild in the Philly suburbs. They are behind shady conservative PACs like United for Progress, United Together, Forward Not Back, Progress Tomorrow, Patriotic Americans PAC, Citizens for a Strong America, etc, entirely funded by contributions from 5 and 6-figure right wing donors, such as Rupert Murdoch, his son James Murdoch, Chicago White Sox and Bulls owner Jerry Reinsdorf, hedge fund manager Louis Bacon, former Major League Baseball Commissioner Allan Selig and Wheels Inc. executive Jim Frank and like-minded sleaze bags trying to turn the Democratic Party into another corporately-owned arm of Wall Street, just like the GOP.

Late last year Penn and Jacobson were behind the failed Moulton coup against Pelosi. Ryan Grim put up a related blockbuster at The Intercept: Who's The Mystery Man Behind The Latest Pelosi Putsch? It's Mark Penn. Grim's right on target: "a small group of billionaire-backed Democrats, part of the so-called Problem Solvers Caucus in Congress, has launched a last-ditch effort that threatens to derail Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s election as House speaker. They’ve framed their challenge to Pelosi, a California Democrat, in terms of good government and high-minded bipartisanship. Yet the force behind their campaign is one of the most toxic and notorious partisan warriors the Democratic Party has produced in the past three decades: political and corporate consultant Mark Penn." No bullshit about "moderates," especially not when he introduced Penn-protégé and Wall Street whore-- founder of the Problem Makers Caucus-- Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ)

The links between Gottheimer and Penn go back decades. Gottheimer was Penn’s assistant in the Bill Clinton White House in the 1990s. Then in 2006, when Penn was CEO of the consulting firm Burson-Marsteller, he hired Gottheimer as an executive vice president, with Gottheimer reporting directly to him. When Penn became chief strategist of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign, he brought on Gottheimer as an adviser. In 2012, Penn set up shop at Microsoft, where he built a guerrilla PR operation to do battle in Washington with rival Google. There, too, he brought on Gottheimer.

Gottheimer had the full-throated support of both Bill and Hillary Clinton when he ran for Congress in 2016, with Hillary Clinton calling him “something of a family member.”

No Labels launched what it called “The Speaker Project” in this past June, proposing a sweeping set of rules changes that lawmakers should demand before agreeing to elect the next speaker, which by then was presumed to be a Democrat. The next month, the Problem Solvers Caucus embraced the plan. In September, Penn went on Tucker Carlson’s show on Fox News to talk up the project. “There’s a problem-solvers group that is looking to have some influence if the result is close, in terms of changing the rules and naming the speaker,” Penn said.

A lawsuit this summer by former No Labels contractors who alleged that they were bilked by the group claimed that Penn was was “calling the shots” at the organization. Penn, according to the Washington Post, has denied involvement with the operation of No Labels, and the group rejected the assertion that he was in charge. Neither No Labels nor Penn responded to The Intercept’s questions about Penn’s relationship with the group.

But aside from the claims of the contractors, there are also direct links between groups Penn owns and No Labels’s political activity. Penn is a minority owner of the consulting firm Targeted Victory, which the group contracted with for some of its 2018 campaigns. No Labels uses an affiliate, Victory Passport, for its online fundraising. Penn’s firm Harris Interactive does the group’s polling; SKDKnickerbocker, of which Penn is an owner, produces and places the group’s television ads, as it did in its campaign to support the re-election of Rep. Daniel Lipinski in Illinois, according to the lawsuit. Hilary Rosen, an SKDK partner, said that the firm does not produce ads for No Labels.

The New Center, a think tank launched by No Labels to house its 501c3 nonprofit operation, listed Mark Penn as a contact for inquiries about its invitation-only “ideas summit.” Penn is managing partner and president of the Stagwell Group, the holding company that owns SKDKnickerbocker. Penn regularly talks up the great work of No Labels during his appearances on Fox News.

...Penn is notorious in Washington as the metaphorical devil on the shoulder, whispering toxic advice into the ears of Democratic candidates. Penn and Jacobson were both early players in the Democratic Leadership Council, a faction that emerged within the party in the 1980s to push it to align with corporate money and to move in a more conservative direction. He’s perhaps most well known for urging his client, Hillary Clinton, to attack Barack Obama as un-American during the 2008 presidential primary.

In a now-famous 2007 memo to Clinton, Penn noted that there had been much coverage in the media of Obama’s “boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii… geared towards showing his background is diverse, multicultural and putting that in a new light. Save it for 2050.”

In other words, Penn argued, an appeal to diversity wouldn’t work politically for another half-century. “I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and in his values,” he wrote.

How Penn planned to isolate Obama’s alleged otherness is a window into how he views the kind of glossy, good government rhetoric now deployed by No Labels-- its meaning is found less in what it says than in what it doesn’t. He advised Clinton that “we give some life to this contrast without turning negative” by elevating the values she grew up with as uniquely American. “Every speech should contain the line you were born in the middle of America to the middle class in the middle of the last century.”

That, Penn argued, would make an implicit contrast with Obama, who allegedly lacked those values-- “fairness, compassion, responsibility, giving back”-- due to his lack of American roots. “Let’s explicitly own ‘American’ in our programs, the speeches and the values. He doesn’t. Make this the new American Century, the American Strategic Energy fund. Let’s use our logo to make some flags we can give out. Let’s add flag symbols to the backgrounds,” he advised. “We are never going to say anything about his background-- we have to show the value of ours when it comes to making decisions, understanding the needs of most Americans-- the invisible Americans.”

Clinton, clumsy in her rhetoric, would occasionally make the subtext into text. In a 2008 speech in West Virginia after she beat Obama in Indiana, she said, “Senator Obama’s support among working-- hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again.” (Obama went on to win Indiana in the general election.)

A more effective dog-whistler, in the 2016 campaign, would boil the Penn approach down to just four words: “Make America Great Again.” Donald Trump was named by No Labels in 2016 as an official “Problem Solver.”

A Trump surrogate accepted the award, even though two months earlier, Trump had spoken at a No Labels conference and delivered a speech larded with Trumpisms. (Since his 2017 swearing in, Gottheimer, the Problem Solvers Caucus chair, has voted with Trump more than half the time, according to FiveThirtyEight.)

Today, among Democrats, only fellow Blue Dogs Collin Peterson and Henry Cuellar vote more frequently with Trump than Gottheimer. The Problem Solvers are putting all their energy into two problems right now: sabotaging the Green New Deal and sabotaging Medicare-For-All. This is the polar opposite of these shit-heads:

Nancy Jacobson: Career Of Evil

Nancy Jacobson-- it doesn't get worse in US politics

Marie Newman was on schedule to defeat anti-Choice, anti-gay, corrupt Blue Dog Dan Lipinski in Chicago in the March 20 Democratic primary. Marie had galvanized progressives locally and nationally and raised almost $1.5 million, more than the reactionary, Machine-backed incumbent. Suddenly a Republican virulently anti-Choice 501C, the Susan B. Anthony List jumped in with over $100,000 in anti-Newman ads. No one can remember them ever spending money on behalf of a Democrat before. This cycle, they spent $1,032,404 on campaigns and the only money they spent to help a Democrat went to Lipinski. But they weren't the only group funneling Republican money into Lipinski's campaign in a deep blue (D+6) district. A network of SuperPACs funded by GOP billionaires and directed by two of the most venal characters in Democratic politics, Nancy Jacobson and her repulsive husband, Mark Penn from the Clinton/Fox wing of the Democratic Party, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars smearing Newman on behalf of Lipinski. He pulled out a last minute win:

Blue America and other progressive groups have been urging her to give it another try in 2020. There is far more awareness of who Jacobson and Penn are and what their dark money No Labels organization is up to. Last March basically no one was calling them out but DWT; today the growing awareness precludes them launching any more sneak attacks on progressive Democrats. Yesterday, Sam Stein and Lachian Markay, reporting for the Daily Beast blew their cover for the widest audience yet-- How No Labels Went From Preaching Unity to Practicing the Dark Arts. "No Labels," wrote Stein and Markay, "took the unconventional position that Democrats were to blame for not being more willing to work with Republicans in the destruction of their party’s signature piece of modern legislation (the Affordable Care Act)... The group, which was founded as a champion of political bipartisanship, has been quietly courting donations from some of the most notoriously partisan money men and women in politics." [NOTE: congratulations to Sam Stein for not referring to Jacobson and her corrupt, right-of-center candidates as "moderates."]

According to internal documents obtained by The Daily Beast, No Labels encouraged financiers known for backing hyperpartisan causes to back its own super PACs. Among those courted were individuals who’ve bankrolled massive parts of the Republican Party’s infrastructure, including David Koch, former AIG head Hank Greenberg, and billionaire hedge-fund manager Paul Singer; as well as top supporters of President Donald Trump, including PayPal founder Peter Thiel, businessman Foster Friess, and Home Depot founder Ken Langone. No Labels also courted liberal-minded moneymen, including Michael Vachon, a top political adviser to George Soros (one of the biggest funders of Democratic and progressive causes) and Reid Hoffman, an investor and entrepreneur who has called Trump “worse than useless.” The group also targeted Wendi Murdoch (ex-wife of Rupert and rumored Ivanka Trump pal), uber-agent Ari Emanuel, and Dallas Mavericks owner and oft-rumored presidential aspirant Mark Cuban. Another possible 2020 candidate, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, was also among dozens of high net-worth individuals approached about donating to No Labels’ super PACs.

Most of those targeted for financial support didn’t end up donating to No Labels super PACs. But some notable names did, including former Major League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig, who was encouraged to donate by former Democrat-turned-independent Senator Joe Lieberman, according to internal records.

The attempt to recruit these financiers was, according to sources, part of a concerted effort by No Labels to steer emphasis away from its nonprofit arm and toward campaign operations designed to boost preferred political candidates and target those deemed too extreme or impediments to its policy agenda.

By the end of the 2018 cycle, six No Labels-affiliated super PACs-- No Labels Action, Forward Not Back, United Together, Govern or Go Home, Citizens for a Strong America, and United for Progress-- had collectively raised more than $11 million from 53 individual donors. The average contribution to the groups was about $124,000, illustrating their reliance on high-dollar donors rather than grassroots financial support.

To court those deep-pocketed donors, No Labels leaned on individuals with ties to other prominent potential givers. The group appears to have sought support from Mitt Romney, the former Republican presidential candidate who was just elected to the U.S. Senate, though it’s unclear whether it hoped that support would be financial, political, or both. In internal company notes, No Labels proposed having Lieberman contact Brad Bloom-- the leader of the private-equity firm Berkshire Partners and a high-dollar donor to a pro-Romney super PAC in 2012-- “to discuss Mitt” and arrange a meeting with other potential supporters in Boston. Internal documents also note that another super PAC donor prospect, financier David Nierenberg, is a “close friend of Mitt Romney.”

As it privately sought more money for its campaign activities, No Labels also grew more outwardly political. In early 2016, as the presidential primaries raged, No Labels hosted an event in New Hampshire, in which it applauded six candidates for taking its “Problem Solver Promise.” Individuals inside the group were rankled that Donald Trump was among those afforded the distinction. They also were disturbed by the price-tag of the event, which Jacobson confirmed was more than $1 million.

Jacobson-- like her disgusting husband-- is a money-hungry crook and rip-off artist who steals every cent she can get her grubby paws on. She is notorious for ripping off her donors. Jacobson and Penn are considered the two most personally dishonest-- and sestructive-- characters in the contemporary political landscape. Everything they do is to line their own pockets.

“The more one looks under the rock, the more one turns over that rock, it is not an attractive picture. It is a big fundraising operation run with limited results,” said one former No Labels official. “You go in first, there are donors, they’re having discussions and you think it’s healthy. And then you’re in it for a few months and you wonder, what are we doing?”

The overtly political approach has also landed No Labels in legal drama. The group is being sued by the firm Applecart, formerly one of its top political consultants, which has accused No Labels of not paying them for millions of dollars of work and of firing them in favor of consultants with personal ties to Jacobson. No Labels alleges Applecart’s performance was error-filled and ineffective and in an emailed statement, Dan Webb, counsel for No Labels’ political groups, blamed Applecart for the leaks of internal documents.

“No Labels is currently in litigation with Applecart, which limits what we can say at this time,” Webb wrote. “Having botched their work for the PACs, Applecart has chosen to sue their political clients and now, apparently, to leak emails and other confidential information in an effort to harm the PACs and No Labels.”

A spokesperson for Applecart declined to comment, but did direct The Daily Beast to a glowing testimonial that Jacobson had previously given for its website.

At the center of No Labels and its evolution is Jacobson. The group’s founder and president is one of the most plugged-in behind-the-scenes operators in all of Washington. At 56 years old, she has been in Democratic politics for decades, working for, among others, Gary Hart and Bill Clinton. Along the way, she served as the Democratic National Committee finance director, where she made a host of connections that would prove advantageous in years to come.

“As a female, it was a way to get a seat at the table,” she said of her time as a Democratic fundraiser.

' A proud, self-professed centrist, she said she felt disillusioned with the bitterness of politics when her last and closest boss, former Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), chose to leave office. “This process wore him down,” she recalled. So Jacobson set out to tone down the rancor.

In December 2010, Jacobson launched No Labels. The defining purpose was to “advocate & educate for greater bipartisan cooperation throughout all levels of government.” Though the launch event featured citizens from all 50 states, the concept was also catnip for the wealthy, who tend to see two solutions to every thorny problem: stoic leadership and gobs of money.

...The group also enlisted some of its top supporters to try to court high net-worth individuals on its behalf. Lieberman and Bayh have been integral to those efforts, personally soliciting donors on phone calls and in meetings. And they’ve been remarkably successful. According to internal documents obtained by the Daily Beast, some of the most prominent executives from Fortune 500 companies and leading financial-services firms have contributed to No Labels’ 501(c)(4) dark-money group and its affiliated 501(c)(3) charitable arm. They include:

• Josh Bekenstein, CEO of Bain Capital, who gave $250,000 in 2015.
• John Douglas Arnold, head of Centaurus Advisors, LLC, who gave $200,000 in 2017.
• John Catsimatidis, president, chairman, and CEO of Gristedes Foods, who gave $100,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• Douglas Durst, ‎president of the Durst Organization, who gave $10,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• Carl Ferenbach, co-founder of Berkshire Partners LLC, who gave $20,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• Former Rep. James Charles “Jim” Greenwood (R-PA), who gave $15,000 in 2016.
• Kerry Healey, former lieutenant governor of Massachusetts, who have $25,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• George Hume, president and chief executive of Basic American Foods, who gave $25,000 in 2017.
• Ted Kellner, a Milwaukee business executive, who gave $20,000 in 2017.
• Franklin Pitch Johnson, Silicon Valley venture-capital pioneer, who gave $25,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• Howard Marks, co-founder and co-chairman of Oaktree Capital Management, who gave $125,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• Nelson Peltz, founding partner of Trian Fund Management, who gave $500,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• Marc J. Rowan, co-founder of the private-equity firm Apollo Global Management, who gave $150,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• Andrew Tisch, co-chair of Loews Corporation, who gave $62,500 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”
• Christy Ruth Walton, a Walmart heiress, who gave $25,000 in 2017.
• Eric Zinterhofer, founding partner of Searchlight Capital Partners, who gave $50,000 in 2016 and was labeled a “reoccuring donor.”

All told, the document revealed that donors had pledged to give $4,792,000 to No Labels non-profit arm in 2017. The source who provided these documents asked that they not be published in full so as to not reveal their origins. Metadata confirms that they were company documents, as they were last edited in March 2017 by No Labels Chief of Staff Sasha Borowsky.

While Lieberman and Bayh’s association with the group, and the impression that it’s backed by some of the biggest names in finance, has given No Labels a stately reputation, behind the scenes, numerous ex-officials say the organization more closely resembles a disorganized campaign apparatus.

Ex-aides said there is incredibly high turnover. And according to one former staffer, No Labels executives would ask employees to write positive reviews on the job-posting and workplace review site Glassdoor to counteract the more numerous bad ones. Asked if that was the case, Jacobson simply shrugged and casually said, “yeah.”

There have also been internal disagreements over the organizational mission. In one March 2018 email, Ryan Clancy, the group’s top strategist, expressed fears to Jacobson that Pelosi would advise her caucus to shut out No Labels if they went after her. She could, Clancy wrote, “go all Harry Reid on us.”

The reference was to an episode that remains part of internal No Labels lore. During the 2014 cycle, the group endorsed Rep. Cory Gardner (R-CO) in his challenge to Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO), after the congressman embraced their “Problem Solver” label and Udall declined to do so. Then-Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) was furious and, according to his former communications director Adam Jentleson, leaned on his members to dissociate themselves from the group. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) subsequently did, noting in part that Udall’s record was strong on bipartisanship.

“It seemed like they wanted to flex, to say if you’re not willing to be a ‘problem solver’ they might throw you under the bus,” said a source who previously worked for a member of the No Labels’ Problem Solver caucus. “The message was that all the bipartisanship didn’t count if you didn’t accept their branding.”

But instead of tamping down the politics after that 2014 episode, the group picked it up. And some officials say it has coincided with a larger role for Penn.

Best known for his work for both the Bill and Hillary Clinton presidential campaigns, Penn’s reputation is that of a numbers-crunching centrist who championed the concept of “micro-targeting” voters by their commercial, cultural, and political interests. His firm advised numerous clients before he left to do a stint at Microsoft. In 2015, he founded the Stagwell Group, a private equity firm. And within months, the firm had acquired SKDKnickerbocker, a powerhouse Democratic consultancy with a number of executives who worked on or with Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Though he has no formal affiliation with No Labels, Penn’s imprints are evident. He was once listed as a press contact for the group’s tax exempt arm, The New Center. And according to a source who worked with No Labels super PACs, Penn and two SKDK executives-- managing director Bill Knapp, a close friend of Jacobson and Penn, and political ad production director Andrew Shipley-- helped produce and place ads, and signed off on their substantive contents.

Internal emails sent in 2018 and obtained by the Daily Beast show Shipley editing the contents of one ad subject to Jacobson’s approval. Another shows Shipley briefing No Labels staff on the contents of another ad, and getting direct sign-off from both Jacobson and Penn to put the final product on air.

In another email thread, Penn instructed Knapp to “scope” an ad buy for a No Labels super PAC. Asked whether SKDK or another firm would make the actual buy, Penn wrote, “I’ll decide who to use based on which one I like better.”

Penn did not respond to a request for comment, though a source confirmed that he did personally see questions pertaining to the role that he has played. His presence within the No Labels orbit has caused a fair amount of consternation there, especially as he has emerged as one of the most vocal critics of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s 2016 election meddling-- a posture those who’ve worked with Penn assume he has adopted as a way to ingratiate himself with Donald Trump.

In statements prepared by No Labels for the Daily Beast, both Lieberman and Bayh took umbrage with any suggestion that Penn was the force behind the curtain; though, of the nearly dozen sources contacted for this piece, none made such a suggestion. Jacobson pushed back herself, calling “the fundamental premise” of such questions both “shameful and sexist.”

“If a man were running No Labels, would you be making the same suggestion-- based on little to no evidence-- that his spouse is serving as the puppet master behind the scenes?” Jacobson asked. “Eight years ago, I came up with the idea for No Labels and have led it, as a full time volunteer, ever since. I have put my life into this work with the singular goal of helping to heal our bitterly divided country and to support leaders who want to work together to solve America’s problems. I set the direction for No Labels, not my husband.”

Those who have worked with Jacobson said they weren’t surprised by her pushback. Despite running one of Washington’s higher-profile organizations, and being a fixture of the D.C. elite, she rarely does television and is incredibly protective of her reputation. Nor were they surprised when Jacobson personally emailed the Daily Beast hours later, requesting that its reporters come to her office the next day to talk in person.

“You don’t know me however you stand ready to tear down the work I have done for the past 10 years because you are being fed stories from disgruntled employees and contractors,” the email read.

The Take Over Of The Democratic Party By Big Money Is Very Real

The Ugly Face of the Takeover

During the this cycle’s primary season, first Marie Newman (Chicago), then Alan Grayson (Orlando) and then Matt Heinz (Tucson) were all calling on the media to look into and report how Rupert Murdoch and his family and a handful of other right-wing billionaires were funneling immense sums of money into a network of shady superPACs run by Mr and Mrs Mark Penn, who were working in overdrive to defeat progressives on behalf of reactionary candidates like Blue Dog Dan Lipinski and New Dems Darren Soto and Ann Kirkpatrick. They also ran campaigns against Deb Haaland in Albuquerque and Susan Wild in the Philly suburbs, again, on behalf of very right-wing, faux Democrats.

We’ve been covering the news extensively and yesterday I was overjoyed to see Lee Fang run with it— albeit way too late for Marie, Alan or Matt. His Intercept headline reads, Billionaire Republican Donors Help Elect Rising Centrist Democrats. It’s all the rage now for wealthy Republicans to put money into the campaigns of conservative Democrats in blue districts. They do it through Penn and his money-hungry wife, Nancy Jacobson, the Sugar Mama for the Republican wing of the Democratic Party and the most venal enemy of progressivism within the confines of the DNC’s way-too-big tent. “Just three years ago,” wrote Fang, “hedge fund manager Louis Bacon was writing a $19,600 check to a committee called “Boehner for Speaker.”

Now, the billionaire GOP donor has pivoted to influence the future of the Democratic Party. Records show Bacon is one of several deep-pocketed donors that have shifted to financing recent Democratic campaigns. Though national media attention has focused largely on newly elected democratic socialists and progressive members, the House Democratic caucus has also swelled with pro-business moderates, such as the Blue Dogs, the Problem Solvers Caucus, and the New Democrats.” I’ve tried explaining to Fang the mistake of calling conservatives “moderates,” but… he persists. Otherwise, his article is very good.

The newly ascendent centrists flexed their muscle this week when a bloc of moderate [Note: None of them are remotely “moderate;” they are all extreme] lawmakers imposed a set of rules on Rep. Nancy Pelosi in her bid for speaker of the House, forcing the California Democrat to accept parliamentary changes that are designed to give the GOP greater access to floor votes and amending legislation.

The rule changes were proposed by the Problem Solvers Caucus— a nearly 2-year-old group affiliated with the organization No Labels that consists of 24 House Democrats and 24 House Republicans [Note: nearly all the Republican Problem Solvers were defeated on November 6]. Many of the members of the caucus were elected with financial support from Bacon, the billionaire hedge fund manager, along other wealthy donors with a long history of giving to Republicans.

When the House was previously under Democratic control, the Blue Dogs and New Democrats helped industry lobbyists kill health care reforms designed to lower costs and expand public insurance options. Earlier this year, the same bloc sided with House Republicans to repeal financial reforms on medium and large-sized banks. [Note: Fang has that right… so why does he persist in referring to them as “moderates?”]

On Monday, the Blue Dog Coalition also formally announced the addition of eight new members, bringing the total group to 24 members. The new members represent a rebound for the caucus, which has lost a lot of its members since the 2010 tea party wave. The recent electoral success is at least partially thanks to close ties to Democratic leadership — the Blue Dog caucus, notably, helped the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee identify pro-business candidates for swing districts ahead of the midterm elections.

The Blue Dog caucus is known for embracing a corporate-friendly agenda draped in rhetoric about finding common ground with conservatives. The caucus has a long history of supporting defense spending, fiscal austerity, and corporate-friendly free trade deals and regulations, while opposing civil rights legislation and expanded social services.

The three newly elected Blue Dog co-chairs, Reps. Stephanie Murphy (D-FL); Tom O’Halleran (D-AZ).; and Lou Correa (D-CA), are simultaneously members of the New Democrats. Murphy and O’Halleran are also members of the Problem Solvers Caucus and were two of the members who signed a letter demanding rule changes in exchange for their support of Pelosi. The three centrist caucus groups could boast as many as 90 members or more in January when new lawmakers elected this month are sworn in.

No Labels, Lots Of Cash

The newly empowered centrist Democrats rode a wave of big money into office.

Federal Election Commission records show that much of the centrist bloc has been financed by eight Super PACs associated with group No Labels, a centrist group that created the Problem Solvers Caucus.

Despite the litany of PACs, the donors remain largely the same group of about 13 wealthy businessmen, most of whom have a history of financing Republican campaigns.

Bacon, the founder of the Moore Capital Management hedge fund, gave $1.1 million in campaign contributions exclusively to GOP committees for federal office during the 2016 cycle. This cycle, Bacon gave $1 million to three No Labels-affiliated Super PACs, with much of that money flowing to races that elected centrist Democrats. One of the groups, United for Progress, played a decisive role in helping Rep. Dan Lipinski, a centrist Illinois Democrat who is anti-abortion, beat back a progressive primary challenger.

James Murdoch, chief executive of 21st Century Fox, the parent company of Fox News, gave $500,000 to United for Progress, a No Labels Super PAC. The group transferred $730,000 to another No Labels Super PAC, Progress Tomorrow, which helped Rep. Darren Soto (D-FL) fend off a primary challenge this year from former Rep. Alan Grayson, who has been highly critical of Fox News.

Lipinski and Soto, who are members of the Problem Solvers Caucus, both signed the letter to Pelosi. They are also members of the New Democrats, and Lipinski is the former policy co-chair of the Blue Dogs.

Investor Nelson Peltz, an adviser to No Labels, has donated $900,000 to No Labels Super PACs and directly to several centrist Democrats that pressed to impose new rules on Pelosi, including Reps. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey and Tom Suozzi of New York, and Murphy, the representative from Florida. Peltz is also a major donor to Donald Trump, having given to the president’s campaign and joint fundraising committee over the last two cycles.

Peltz, who made much of his fortune using junk bonds, has awarded himself very large pay packages. At one of his former companies, known as Triac, he paid himself $29 million for a company with only $1.2 billion in sales. After the election in 2016, he urged support for Trump and called for policies that give investors a special tax holiday on repatriated oversees profits.

Last year, the Washington Post revealed that the top aide to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin traveled on Peltz’s private plane, a trip that raised ethics concerns. Peltz notably has pushed for lower tax rates for corporations.

Dan Webb, co-executive chair of the law firm Winston & Strawn, gave $100,000 to Citizens for a Strong America, one of the No Labels Super PACs. Webb’s other direct federal donations this cycle only went to two incumbent House Republicans…

Blue Dogs Fetch Dark Money

One of the other Super PACs that worked to elect centrist members is known as the Center Forward Committee, an outgrowth of the Blue Dog Research Forum, a now-shuttered think tank affiliated with the House Democratic caucus.

The group was formed by former Rep. John Tanner (D-TN) and other retired centrist Democrats. Tanner now serves at the lobbying firm Prime Policy Group, which represents many corporate clients, including FedEx, Bayer, the American Hospital Association, Google, and the National Restaurant Association.

The Super PAC spent big on electing moderate, pro-business Democrats, including Florida’s Murphy, Arizona’s O’Halleran, and Rep.-elect Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) But unlike the New Labels PACs, the Center Forward Committee has virtually no identifiable individual or corporate donors. Out of $1.2 million the Super PAC raised, $980,000 came from Center Forward, an affiliated 501(c)(4) nonprofit that is not required to disclose its donors. Another $200,000 came from the New Democrats PAC and the Blue Dog PAC, two groups nearly fully funded by a range of corporate PAC money. Center Forward did not return a request for comment.

Despite the opaque nature of the big-money group, there are some hints.

The National Restaurant Association, an avowed opponent of expanding union rights and raising the minimum wage, is funded through company donations from the likes of McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, and Jack in the Box franchise owners, though the group does not provide a public breakdown of exactly how it is funded. The National Rifle Association, notably, directly contributed $40,000 to the Blue Dog-affiliated Super PAC, according to FEC disclosures.

Other corporate donors have given through a daisy chain of semi-disclosed entities. The Center Forward 501(c)(4), for instance, received $77,000 from NCTA, a trade group that represents Comcast, Cox Communications, and other cable giants, according to the 2017 tax filing made available to The Intercept last week.

Generally speaking, establishment Democrats seem utterly unconcerned that GOP billionaires are systematically replacing progressive candidates with conservatives from the Republican wing of the party. In fact, if you look at the candidates recruited by the DCCC this cycle, they are overwhelmingly, the same kind of business-friendly, military-industrial complex-loving, shitheads who are both hostile to the legitimate aspirations of the working class and very much in sync with the demands of the Bacons, Murdochs, Webbs, Peltzes, etc. After all, keeping the Bernie wing of the party— the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party— away from the levers of power is the overriding (bipartisan) goal of all concerned. They have their sites set on this for 2020:

Biden by Nancy Ohanian