Steven Miller (And Trump) Want To Sell You A Bridge... While Status Quo Joe Biden Says He Wants To Build One

Adam Schiff was on CNN yesterday, questioning questioning congressional Republicans' devotion to Congress as an institution (and the U.S. Constitution) in light of Trump's fake national emergency. "It will not be a separation of powers any more," he said, "just a separation of parties. So this is going to be a moment of truth for my GOP colleagues." When Republicans go on TV to discuss arguments they can't win-- like Trump's blatant lies about this or that or the other and all of the above-- they gravitate to their safe space: Trump TV. However, Steven Miller, one of the least sympathetic characters in current politics-- even without the shoe-polish on his head-- just may have been somewhat surprised by what happened to him yesterday on Chris Wallace's show.

Watch it above. Wallace hammered Trump's in-house Nazi when he tried vomiting out memorized press department talking points instead of answering the questions. Rachel Maddow would have be kinder and gentler. Miller could almost have been on with Lawrence O'Donnell. I wrote "almost" because O'Donnell wouldn't have let him get away with this bullshit for the sake of comity and politeness:

WALLACE: 'I didn’t need to do this.' How does that justify a national emergency?

MILLER: Well as you know Chris, we already have 4,000 troops on the border in light of a national emergency, a decision that was made almost a year ago, as we see an increasing number of people crossing the border as well as increasing violence in Mexico. What the president was saying is that like past presidents, he could choose to ignore this crisis, choose to ignore this emergency as others have; that’s not what he’s going to do.

Wallace should have called him out for asserting that because of Trump's election stunt of sending some troops to the border ("a decision that was made almost a year ago," as if that was relevant) there is a national emergency. There isn't. And Miller is insisting that the troops-- which don't need to be there, except in his mind-- must be protected with a wall. He also falsely claimed that "we see an increasing number of people crossing the border." There are fewer illegal crossings than in decades. He also stuck in-- pure fear-mongering-- that we see "increasing violence in Mexico." Not true, not relevant. Wallace didn't let it all go by without pushback though:

"The president talks about an invasion," he said, "used that word multiple times on Friday-- an invasion on the Southern border. But let’s look at the facts, I want to put them up on the screen; 1.6 million people were stopped crossing the border illegally back in 2000, less than a quarter that many were caught last year. The government’s own numbers show, for all the president is talking about drugs streaming over the border, 80 to 90 percent of the cocaine, heroin and fentanyl seized at the border is seized at ports of entry, not along unfenced areas.bAnd in 2017 twice as many of the new people in the country illegally were from visa overstays, as were from crossing the border. Again, where’s the emergency-- the national emergency to build a wall?"

Miller's response was to attack George W. Bush and accuse him of "an astonishing betrayal of the American people" for allowing illegal immigration to double from 6 to 12 million. Bringing in "cheap labor" has, of course been the agenda of the big industrial and agricultural backers of the GOP for far longer than a century. Miller isn't from that wing of the party, though. He's a proud and insistent Know Nothing Republican and he's dragged his mentally-impaired boss down that rabbit hole with him.

Wall Street Journal reporter Jess Bravin had some bad news for the Know Nothings this weekend. First of all, he wrote that within hours of Trumpanzee's Rose Garden speech, "the advocacy group Public Citizen filed suit in the Washington, D.C., federal district court to block implementation of the emergency declaration. The plaintiffs-- three Texas landowners who were notified by the government that their property could be taken to build the wall; and the Frontera Audubon Society, which operates a nature preserve in the Rio Grande Valley-- contend that no national emergency exists, and that even if one did, Mr. Trump exceeded the authority Congress gave the president to respond to military contingencies. 'The facts make clear that the premise of the president's declaration that the absence of a wall in the areas where construction is planned is an emergency is legally untenable and an impermissible basis for seeking to obligate funds that Congress has refused to appropriate for a border wall,' said Allison Zieve, a Public Citizen lawyer representing the plaintiffs."

Bevin also wrote, separately, that Democratic-led states and border communities said they were readying lawsuits to halt construction that Congress had not authorized. In Texas, El Paso County, which Señor Trumpanzee "visited Monday to make his case for a border emergency, said it would join with nonprofit groups to challenge the president’s action. 'President Trump has already made many negative and false statements about our community in the attempt to justify his border wall,' Ricardo Sanmaniego, the county judge, or chief executive, said in a release. The 'emergency declaration will further damage El Paso County’s reputation and economy, and we are determined to stop this from happening.'"

A few words about El Paso County, the 6th most populous in Texas. Beto represented most of it in Congress and now that seat is held by a long-time ally of his, Veronica Escobar. The county is blue. Kerry beat Bush 56-43% there in 2004. Obama won it-- both times-- by even greater margins. Hillary win in 2016 was a landslide-- 145,509 (69.6%) to 54,567 (25.9%). El Paso County is not Trump-friendly. Even in the 2016 GOP primary, Trump came in 3rd, after Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. Not a great place for his racist policy agenda to face a jury.

The DNC: Crawling From The Wreckage

Many say Obama's first appointment after being elected was his worst appointment ever. That would be Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff and I couldn't argue against the characterization. But, keep in mind that it was Obama who also appointed Debbie Wasserman Schultz to chair the DNC. Wassermann Schultz had tried-- really hard bribes flying-- for the DCCC chair and Pelosi snubbed her by picking the equally worthless Steve Israel for the job. Wasserman Schultz's self-pitying caterwauling was so loud and unceasing that Obama gave her the DNC job just to shut her up. What, after all, could go wrong?

Well, she stunk the place up so bad, she had to be fired but her stench has damaged-- severely damaged-- the core of the organization, perhaps fatally. Establishment hacks go wild when someone reminds them that Wasserman Schultz and her DNC did all they could to fix the primaries for Hillary Clinton, helping the worst possible candidate to win the nomination and, setting in motion a series of events that led to the country's biggest political catastrophe since the Civil War.

Today, the DNC is still a smoldering ruin-- primarily because Obama insisted that his guy, Tom Perez, be the new chair. The Democratic base isn't buying it and the DNC is essentially bankrupt. Michael Sainato wrote last month that "The organization reported that May 2017 was its worst fundraising month since the Iraq War in 2003, and April 2017 was its worst fundraising month since 2009. In May, the DNC also reported that it has $1.9 million in debt. Despite the fact that former Secretary of Labor Tom Perez was recruited by Barack Obama to appease the party’s donors, lobbyists and PACs, even they have refused to prop up the failing brand.

Democratic voters have so far refused to fill the fundraising void left by the party’s corporate and wealthy donors. Tom Perez is a painful reminder that the Democratic establishment has suppressed reforms that would prove to voters that the party is prioritizing their interests. Democratic leadership subverted pro-Sanders DNC chair candidate Congressman Keith Ellison’s candidacy, ignored demands to ban superdelegates, and failed to re-enact the ban on lobbyist and PAC donations that Debbie Wasserman Schultz lifted to enable Hillary Clinton to keep up with Sen. Bernie Sanders’ fundraising. Perez’s Unity Tour with Bernie Sanders backfired; he was met with boos at several of the tour’s stops and supporters showed up in favor of Sanders-- not the DNC.

Every opportunity for reform has been shut down by leadership, and Clinton campaign officials have been rewarded with leadership positions in the party or cushy mainstream media gigs. Facing calls for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to step down, top Democrats have made excuses for her unpopularity and the fact that Democratic congressional candidates lose when opponents say the candidate is her ally. Perez gave Keith Ellison a fabricated position as deputy DNC chair, which Ellison has used to try to manufacture party unity while the party’s establishment remains in power. In May 2017, former Emily’s List Executive Director and Clinton supporter Jess O’Connell was appointed to DNC CEO. Even though former DNC Interim Chair Donna Brazile left resigned in embarrassment after leaked emails revealed she violated the DNC Charter to help the Clinton campaign, she has remained on the organization’s payroll and the DNC sent out two separate fundraising emails from her in July.

Instead of acknowledging that reform is needed to change the direction of the party, Democratic leadership is doubling down on failed strategies and rallying behind unpopular, failing leadership. The DNC has tried to enthuse its supporters with marketing campaigns and slogans, but its efforts have fallen short.

...The DNC has failed to salvage its reputation after former Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned in disgrace for rigging the Democratic presidential primaries. The DNC needs a drastic overhaul to recoup its losses. The party needs to stop relying on Trump’s ineptitude and develop clear messaging of its own. Unfortunately, the current Democratic leadership isn’t capable of mitigating failure in this respect.

This kind of thing is great for late night TV ratings but if this is what the Democratic Party is counting on to wingback Congress-- this and a slate of sub-par "ex"-Republican self funders and Blue Dogs as candidates-- they won't. Voters don't care about this and they don't care about the careers of self-absorbed politicians; they care about what the politicians offer them.