The Honolulu Congressional District Is One Of America's Bluest-- But The Establishment Is Trying To Sneak An "Ex"-Republican Into The Seat

There's only one real Democrat running for the open seat in Honolulu

Sunday I sent Marianne Williamson, an old friend, a note introducing her to Hawaii state Rep. Kaniela Ing. I'm guessing most people on Maui think of him as the guy who writes legislation that's a step or three ahead of where the rest of the state-- and country-- are. He's working on things like tuition-free education, guaranteed minimum income (advocated in the past by Abu Bakr, Thomas Paine and Napoleon and, more recently, by Friedrich Hayek, Richard Nixon, John Kenneth Galbraith and Daniel Patrick Moynihan), 100% renewable energy (by 2035), scrapping the cap on Social Security and, of course, impeaching Trump. But when I introduced him to Marianne, what I brought up was his commitment to mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food, pesticide disclosure and bufferzones, common-sense regulation of harmful chemicals like Glysophate and regenerative, o‍‍‍rganic agriculture.‍‍‍ In Maui, Kaniela led the citizens' initiative campaign against Monsanto and won-- the first time a citizens initiative campaign won in the state's history.

Marianne has been traveling around the country introducing progressive congressional candidates like Jenny Marshall in North Carolina to her own supporters. I'm hoping she'll include Honolulu on her list of events. Kaniela, the most progressive Democrat in Hawaii's legislature is running for Congress. But what's really strange is that his 3 opponents in the Democratic primary are conservative Republicans pretending to be Democrats. You think I'm kidding? Let's start with the only other declared candidate, EMILY's List Special, Donna Kim, an anti-LGBQ fanatic. A few years ago when EMILY's List failed to foist Kim on Hawaiian voters I wrote that "Many elderly ladies who remember when EMILY's List was founded by Ellen Malcolm 30 years ago don't realize EMILY's List has swung from being a basically progressive organization to being one of the most conservative and untrustworthy elements in the Democratic coalition. 'We don't care about anything except electing pro-choice women to office,' they use as their excuse for backing absolutely horrible conservatives most of the time-- even when their conservative candidate, like Kim, isn't even really pro-Choice. It's identity politics at its ugliest. EMILY's List is backing Kim because Kim is a woman. Other candidates in the race are much more pro-choice than Kim but… well, that's EMILY's List 2014. Maybe EMILY's List should have consulted with the Patsy T. Mink PAC, which is Hawaii's progressive version of EMILY's List. They have never once endorsed the conservative Donna Kim in her 30 years of politics. There's a reason for that.

For one thing, Kim regularly campaigns at vehemently anti-Choice fundamentalist churches, and even partners with them in her official capacity. It hasn't been clear Kim is even pro-contraception. In 2012, when seeking the endorsement of the anti-choice Hawaii Family Forum, she described herself as undecided on whether rape victims should be entitled to emergency contraception. She very pointedly hasn’t commented on the Hobby Lobby decision.

EMILY's List head Schriock, who apparently knows as little about Hawaii politics as her organization knew about Memphis when they waded into an anti-semitic campaign there with their bulging wallets wide open, also described Kim as "pro-labor" and "pro-education," which was equally surprising to anyone watching this race for an open seat in Hawaii's First Congressional District. Kim is well known for railing against public-employee unions and what she regards as excess in social services and public education. In fact, that's probably what she's most known for (well, in addition to corruption, always a big turn-on for EMILY's List). Opposition to public investment is certainly what she wants to be known for, as she brings it up at every opportunity. It’s why she’s called “outspoken."

She regularly appears on right-wing media to argue for cuts in government programs with the type of impassioned outrage that would make a Tea Partier blush. As we once reported, when she appeared on the local Christian Coalition's TV show (as a "very, very special guest"), she exclaimed to the enraptured host that educators “getting paid huge dollars!” She complains to birther-friendly bloggers that educators’ salaries are “bloated.” Her campaign website notes that Kim supports a balanced-budget amendment, which of course would be ruinous.

On its website, the Christian Coalition describes Kim as "fantastic." She is the always that organization's favorite, as she's regarded as the only reliable anti-LGBT candidate of any party. So Hawaii is seeing a partnership of EMILY's List and the Christian Right for the first time. Donna Kim is the Nikki Tinker of the Pacific, the face of EMILY's List's downward trajectory. Kim’s unwavering loyalty to corporate interests and the Religious Right have helped turn her into a prodigious fundraiser. While the media can be expected to focus on the horse race and always lauds Kim for her prowess at generating campaign cash, her right-leaning record usually goes unexamined. She has always favored business over labor and consumers:

"My first priority to help businesses will be to work with the business community for their suggestions on ways that we can eliminate unnecessary regulations and requirements that make it difficult to run a business. On a long-term note, I will make a comprehensive review of existing laws, compare them with other more business-friendly states and come up with a comprehensive package to make Hawaii attractive to national and international businesses."

She has a well-earned reputation for trying to humiliate public employees and fight public projects during legislative hearings. Her incessant attacks on the public sector, which often include allegations of unethical conduct, have been praised in conservative media outlets. (Meanwhile, Kim occasionally gets called out on her own ethics.) And while long a foe of environmentalists (dating back to her days as a pro-development Honolulu City Councilmember), Kim has been lauded by the Hawaii Christian Coalition (for introducing a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage) and New Hope Honolulu (a Christian fundamentalist church where she’s been received as a VIP attendee).

OK, two more arch-conservatives are running against Kaniela as well. Remember Beth Fukumoto? Earlier this year Republicans in the state House fired her as GOP minority leader after she criticized Trump. As far back as 2013, national media was lauding her as one of the new breed of conservative Republican women remaking the right. She was lumped in-- rightfully-- with hardcore Republican politicians like drunken New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez (NM), Scott Walker's extremist Lt. Governor Rebecca Kleefisch, corrupt Trumpist Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, Alabama Congresswoman and current Roy Moore supporter Martha Roby, Utah rightist Mia Love and Nicole Malliotakis, the female Michael Grimm, a corrupt Staten Island wing nut who went with Grimm to Cyprus to visit a Putin-owned bank. Of Fukumoto they wrote that after she had been in office for just a year she was "selected by the RNC in Washington to showcase its Women on the Right Unite program to elect more conservative women to office."

After she was dumped for calling Trump a bully, she didn't change her bigoted right wing positions on issues-- she's anti-Choice, an incredibly homophobic asshole and has always opposed all legislation meant to give Hawaii's working families a break. She just changed the "R" next to her name to a "D." That's pure opportunism, not a Saul on the Road to Damascus conversion. Instead, she told HKON2 that "If you followed what happened at the state convention, I got booed for about 10 minutes straight for raising concerns about President Trump... [T]here have been many calls for my resignation, and my caucus members have raised concerns about whether or not that means I’m a Republican, whether or not that means I’m fit for leadership, whether or not that means I should even be an elected official. My caucus has asked me to stop speaking out about Trump and to make a commitment. They’ve said they’ll keep me as minority leader if I make a commitment not to speak out against Trump for the remainder of his term." Although Fukumoto backs every single reactionary Republican policy she couldn't make a deal and the other 5 GOP legislators in the state House fired her as Minority Leader.

Democrats let her join their party, even though she hasn't indicated she would ever vote with Democrats. Example: when the House voted to require gun owners to register in a database, she supported her NRA allies and voted NO. Similarly, when the Dems voted to end the sale of tobacco products to people under the age of 21, she was one of 7 votes in opposition. And, of course, when the House passed a bill legalizing same sex marriage, she voted against it-- and lead the opposition against it (as did Donna Kim, who had also voted against Civil Unions twice in 2011 and once in 2010).

Meanwhile, Hawaii's Democratic political establishment-- basically the folks who pushed Clinton during the primary and were rebuffed by Hawaii's voters 70-30%-- want to see Attorney General Doug Chin win the seat. Before being appointed AG, he was a sleazy Republican lobbyist. The party feels it has an anti-Trump candidate and they hope they can confuse voters into thinking anti-Trump= progressive. It doesn't. Chin challenged the Trump travel ban-- he was chosen to do it by the Association of Democratic Attorneys General because the Muslim ban isn't a big issue in Hawaii-- and got tons of press for it. Chin has never run for office before. A not very sterling former lobbyist, if he runs, you can count on lots of heretofore hidden baggage emerging. He was a lobbyist for Wasserman Schultz's favorite private prison racket, Corrections Corporation of America and he worked under Honolulu's throw-away-the-key Republican Mayor Peter Carlisle for years as deputy prosecutor, where he opposed criminal justice reform and added to Hawaii's overcrowded prisons, eventually authorizing a deal to send Hawaii prisoners to a Corrections Corporation of America prison in Arizona. Cozy! As a corporate lawyer for Carlsmith Ball, Chin worked for Wall Street banksters against the legitimate interests of Hawaii's working families, reason enough to oppose his attempt to get into Congress.

In September Karen from Maui wrote at Daily Kos that Chin has "been defending business interests who have violated the law and quite rightly the courts have smacked him down. Don't let his one good act (suing over the Muslim Ban) mislead you into thinking he is not the ultimate corporate tool. He is no progressive. Not even close." While other states and cities have stood up to ICE, Chin has been more than compliant. in fact, under Chin Hawaii's per capita deportation rate has been the highest in the nation. Meanwhile, he has a well-earned reputation for approving lots and lots of pay-to play sweetheart deals with millionaire developers and contractors. Chin isn't a progressive, just an anti-Trump Democrat, with more in common with Fukumoto than with an actual Democrat. And, yes, he's a crazy anti-LGBT nutcase too, a gay-hating pastor of a gay-hating church. The church supports ignorant homophobic conversion therapy. And Doug Chin wasn't just attending this anti-gay, anti-marriage equality, conservative, "cult-like" church-- he was the preacher who helped build it, and led his congregation to oppose gay-rights and support gay-conversion therapy for over 20 years. And he's still there! This resistance stuff is opportunistic and inauthentic. If Hawaii was a red state, he'd be running as a Republican.

2 anti-progressive crackpot gay-haters, Chin and Kim

An Open House Seat In Hawaii-- Beware The Fake Progressive

Lobbyist Doug Chin

Whether she wins or loses, the biggest wave from Colleen Hanabusa's decision to primary Governor David Ige is that her plum Honolulu-based House seat (PVI is D+17-- won last year by Clinton 63.1% to 30.5%) came up for grabs. Last year Bernie swept the Democratic caucuses in Hawaii, beating Hillary 23,530 to 10,125 (and out-polling Trump's limp 5,677). It would make sense for the Democrats to run a progressive and not some corporate shill. But... well, you know the Democratic Party.

They have an anti-Trump candidate and they hope they can confuse voters into thinking anti-Trump= progressive. It doesn't. The establishment pick, Attorney General Douglas Chin challenged the Trump travel ban-- a good thing to do-- and got tons of press for it, but Chin was appointed to the job by the governor and he's never run for office before. A not very sterling former lobbyist, if he runs, you can count on lots of heretofore hidden baggage emerging. He was a lobbyist for Wasserman Schultz's favorite private prison racket, Corrections Corporation of America and he worked under Honolulu's throw-away-the-key Republican Mayor Peter Carlisle for years as deputy prosecutor, where he opposed criminal justice reform and added to Hawaii's overcrowded prisons, eventually authorizing a deal to send Hawaii prisoners to a Corrections Corporation of America prison in Arizona. Cozy! As a corporate lawyer for Carlsmith Ball, Chin worked for Wall Street banksters against the legitimate interests of Hawaii's working families, reason enough to oppose his attempt to get into Congress.

This week Karen from Maui wrote at Daily Kos that Chin has "been defending business interests who have violated the law and quite rightly the courts have smacked him down. Don't let his one good act (suing over the Muslim Ban) mislead you into thinking he is not the ultimate corporate tool. He is no progressive. Not even close."

While other states and cities have stood up to ICE, Chin has been more than compliant. in fact, under Chin Hawaii's per capita deportation rate has been the highest in the nation. Meanwhile, he has a well-earned reputation for approving lots and lots of pay-to play sweetheart deals with millionaire developers and contractors.

Doug Chin isn't a progressive, just an anti-Trump Democrat. There will likely be several actual progressives who do run, one of which-- we're hoping-- will be Hawaii's most progressive state legislator, Kaniela Ing. We'll let you know if he decides to jump into the race. One extremely right-wing fake Democrat who is almost certainly running for the seat is the wretched state Sen. Donna Mercado Kim. Two other state senators, Karl Rhoads and Stanley Chang, are also considering the race.

Not Every Red District Is Susceptible To The Blue Wave-- But Blue Districts Are Susceptible To The Progressive Wave

After Blake Farenthold was forced out of Congress earlier in April for being a workplace perv, there was a vague hope Democrats could win his seat in a special election-- very vague. The DCCC gave the seat a thumbs down and refused to engage, especially after it was clear that the leading Democrat, Eric Holguin, is a progressive. The very gerrymandered district (TX-27) stretches along the Gulf from Corpus Christie and Port Aransas up through Victoria and Port Lavaca to Bay City and, incongruously, west through Shiner and Gonzales into the exurbs southeast of Austin. The PVI is R+13, very safely red, and Trump won the seat 60.1% to 36.5%.

In the 9-person jungle primary on Saturday, the winner was Michael Cloud, who was already primarying Farenthold when he resigned in disgrace.Saturday, Cloud won enough votes to avoid a runoff. He spent $326,449 compared to Holguin, who came in second, after spending $65,722. Virtually all the outside spending, around $700,000, was in support of Cloud. Neither the DCCC nor any other outside groups helped Holguin. All 3 Democrats combined didn't get to 40% Turnout was very low. Cloud, this time as an incumbent, will face Holguin again in November for a full two-year term. Every Beltway pundit rates TX-27 as "safe Republican."

Cloud has been endorsed by the far right-- Club for Growth and the Freedom Caucus, which he is expected to join. Like Holguin, Cloud came out against Trump's family separation policy. Holguin took a very strong stand against Trump's child abuse policies, making Cloud nervous. Holguin on election day: "The human rights violations that are occurring on our borders right now is reprehensible, inhumane, and against everything that we as Americans stand for today When our children and grandchildren look back on our history, they will be asking 'Why?' we terrorized children. Now is our opportunity to unite to speak out."

Holguin's issues page on his campaign website looks pretty progressive, especially for such a red district. He comes out for single-payer healthcare for example.

Eric is a real long shot for the November election. But he's been a long shot before. In the original March 6 primary, he just barely made it to the runoff with 23.31% of the vote, while the frontrunner, a perrenial candidate with plenty of name recognition, received 41.22%. Then came the May 22 runoff and Holguin went on to win with over 60% of the vote, putting him in position to become the first openly gay Latino congressman.

He's campaigning for the November general election already.

These long shot races are still long shots, "a venture," says the Merriam-Webster dictionary, "unlikely to succeed, an entry (as in a horse race) given little chance of winning, a bet in which the chances of winning are slight but the possible winnings great." When Alexandria asked for a Blue America endorsement I thought she was a long shot. In fact, I thought she had almost no chance to win. Blue America endorsed her because we hoped she would build up skill and name recognition and run again in 2020 and win then. We saw something special in her, worth investing in for the long game. She's a hard worker and a smart worker with a dedicated crew around her. We decided to do more than endorse her; we spent money in the campaign independently. There were only two outside groups that did-- the Sierra Club spent money-- albeit just a small symbolic amount-- on behalf of Crowley and the establishment they always suck up to. And Blue America put down our biggest investment of 2016 (so far) on behalf of the candidate we felt was working the hardest and earned our support... even if we didn't think she had a chance. Even as the votes started coming in on election night, the returns in her favor appeared to be to be errors that would soon be corrected by the Department of Elections. But that isn't what happened. The distance between her and Crowley continued to grow. I thought it was impossible and that maybe the early votes were from the Bronx where our I.E. had been concentrated and where she worked incredibly hard and where no one has ever heard of Crowley. But I was wrong again-- she was winning in Queens as well... by a lot. A long shot that paid off.

That pay off is giving hope to candidates and campaigns across the country. Pelosi tried to tamp it down, calling it a fluke and an outlier (while working her knuckles to the bone to sabotage Kara Eastman who won her primary in Omaha and who Pelosi's DCCC absolutely refuses to assist. NE-02 was a must-win district when Pelosi was backing disgusting Blue Dog Brad Ashford but as soon as progressive Kara Eastman won, the district vanished as a DCCC priority. Pelosi will be pleading with Democrats to unite for November but that's a one way street for the lousy corrupt establishment. We have to united around their crap candidates while they work to crush ours.

I saw another Democratic Socialist, Kaniela Saito Ing in Hawaii, renew his efforts after after Ocasio gave him a shout out on Chris Hayes' show the day after the election. The establishment candidates, a bunch of establishment conservatives from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, are ganging up against him, with the assistance of the establishment media. But Kaniela is flighting harder than ever now to win the crowded August 11 primary, which includes conservatives Ed Case, Doug Chin, Donna Mercado Kim and Beth Fukumoto. While the establishment freaks out at the thought of a Democratic Socialist representing Honolulu, Civil Beat featured him in an OpEd as The real progressive in the race. Before you read this, keep in mind that Hillary was endorsed by every single Democratic politician in Hawaii who endorsed at all except by two Kaniela and then Tulsi Gabbard. Bernie beat Hillary by a preposterous margin-- 69.8% to 30.0%. Hawaii was clearly ready for an alternative to the status quo the establishment was offering again. Last week:

For those inspired by Bernie Sanders’ mantra that we deserve better than career politicians who are bought and sold by corporations, we can now wrap our enthusiasm around Kaniela Ing, candidate for U.S. Congress-- the only real progressive in the race.

For so many of us, the Democratic Party’s charge to advocate for working families has been totally undermined by its refusal to directly challenge corporate power, enabling our current president to masquerade as a voice for working people.

Prior to and since that election, progressive candidates have risen up in record numbers offering a different kind of Democrat who will truly represent and look like America, by virtue of  gender, race, religion, profession, economic status-- and most importantly-- who represent people, not corporations.

We’re fortunate to have one such candidate running for Hawaii’s 1st District seat in Congress-- Kaniela Ing. When Kaniela, a Justice Democrat, and his fellow progressive legislators arrive in Congress, they will start on day one, united around an agenda focused on people, not profits, to enact policies that the majority of Americans support:

Ending the corruption of big money in politics, allowing everyone access to a Medicare-For-All single-payer system, providing free tuition for public colleges, creating a renewable energy revolution, enacting common sense gun legislation, fighting for women’s equality and our LGBTQ family, enacting comprehensive immigration reform, implementing a real infrastructure plan, and more.

Not all Democrats are the same. A Democrat who takes corporate money, who’s been a Republican just before they became a Democrat, who talks about being “for the people” but whose votes imply influence by special interests, are not in this fight for the benefit of Hawaii residents and the American people.

It’s only Kaniela who has demonstrated the political courage to turn his back on big corporate donors. It’s only Kaniela’s track record that is long and strong in fighting for working families. Kaniela is the only candidate who supported and aggressively championed marriage equality for Hawaii, while one of his opponents, who claims to be “revolutionary,” opposed marriage equality, and another opponent’s history includes homophobic rants.

Kaniela is a long shot worth gambling on. Blue America is-- and you can support his campaign by clicking on the 2018 congressional thermometer on the right. But, alas, not every candidate inspired by Bernie has an equal chance to win, nor is every one of them as smart and as hard a worker as Ocasio and Ing are. If deploying your limited resources wisely is a factor, it's probably better to concentrate them strategically. (If you have unlimited resources just go wild and write checks for every candidate endorsed by Blue America, Our Revolution, Justice Democrats, DFA, People For Bernie, PCCC, etc.)

I want to point to a low-key campaign in Washington state that I hadn't really looked into until this past weekend-- the primary in the 9th district, which is a heavily Democratic area in the southern and eastern Seattle Metro including Mercer Island, Kent, Bellevue and Renton. When Adam Smith, a conservative Democrat first won the seat in 1996, it was a more competitive district. Now the PVI is D+21. Hillary won 70.5% to 23.3% against Trump, even stronger than the 68% Obama got both times he ran. The district's minority make-up has grown tremendously and it is now just 50% white. A trajectory not unlike Crowley's 14th in New York, although not as developed... and Smith isn't as bad as Crowley. Bad not but as bad. There are a couple of Washington state Dems in Congress who are even worse than he is. Smith has a lousy voting record and ProgressivePunch rates him "F." He's a New Dem, a corporate tool and a stooge for the Military Industrial Complex. The district has outgrown him.

The only way to replace Smith is through a primary. No Republican is ever going to win that district. Adam Smith has raised $426,466 and Sarah Smith, his very progressive opponent, has raised $36,968. $37,000 isn't enough to let voters know who you are-- or even that you are. But there's still time. The local Fox channel (Q13) reputed on the race last week: Could progressive newcomer Sarah Smith upset 11-term incumbent in Washington primary?. She could like Ocasio:

Thirty-year-old Sarah Smith and a team of volunteers are hitting the pavement, knocking on door after door to spread the word: She's running for Congress and taking on 11-term Democratic incumbent Adam Smith in the primaries.

"I had to struggle to overcome this thought in my head of: I'm not from a political dynasty; I'm not supposed to go into politics; I'm working class; I haven't gone up the ladder; I haven't done it the right way; I haven't asked for permission," Sarah Smith said. "I had to really get out of that mindset because at the end of the day, we don't need to ask for permission to run to represent our neighbors."

Sarah Smith is a candidate under Brand New Congress and Justice Democrats, the same slates that supported New York's Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who just dealt a crushing defeat to 10-term Democratic Congressman Joe Crowley.

"I cried when she got elected. I'm a sucker," Sarah Smith said.

Both women are part of a push to elect progressives aligned with Sen. Bernie Sanders. In a state that caucused strong for Sanders in 2016, Sarah Smith's platform is gaining ground.

"I am for single-payer medicare for all; I am for debt-free education; I am for abolishing (Immigration and Customs Enforcement); I am for investing in our infrastructure; and I am for getting us out of, what is it, nine to 11 different military occupations we're in?"

Her opponent is on the House Armed Services Committee. Congressman Adam Smith has a long history in the 9th Congressional District. So who is Sarah Smith?

"I work full time," Sarah Smith said. "I manage a mechanic garage. I have student debt. I have a husband. I can't afford to have a kid. I'm every person in this district."

This political novice is putting the Democratic establishment on notice. The full-fledged progressive told Q13 News Correspondent Simone Del Rosario that compromise is a last resort.

"If you are elected to Congress you are not just representing the progressives in District 9, you will be representing everybody who lives in District 9. Are you prepared to do that?" Del Rosario asked.

"Absolutely I am," she replied. "I recognize that my platform is going to get me elected, so I want to commit to my platform as much as possible and as strongly as possible, because if I get elected it's because of my values and it's because of what I stand up for."

That's what she hopes to take to Congress.

Rep. Adam Smith has served in Congress for 22 years. Q13 News spoke to him over the phone to talk about the progressive movement, his opponent and the upcoming primary.

"For me, this is not about a national movement," Rep. Adam Smith said. "This is about the people who live around Sea-Tac Airport who deal with the noise problems. This is about helping the very large immigrant community that I have with immigration issues. This is about helping the education system in the city of Seattle and south King County.

"I've lived my entire life in the district; raised my children here; sent them to public schools in the district; and I have a very, very strong connection to the people there and I have been very, very effective in being their voice in Congress."

Again, Bernie won Adam Smith's district; Adam Smith was out of touch with his own voters. While Sarah Smith volunteered and then caucused for Bernie's campaign, Adam Smith endorsed Hillary and was a super-delegate for her. Ocasio didn't have a great deal of money-- around $300,000-- but it was enough to get her and her message out to the voters. Sarah is going to need more if she's going to square the circle in time for the August 7th primary.

Trump Drove Another Republican Out Of The Party-- Who Cares? Keep Your Eye On The Ball And In Hawaii That Means Electing Kaniela Ing To Congress

Right now there are 3 candidates running for the open Honolulu-based seat (HI-01), two conservative Democrats from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, Donna Mercado Kim and Doug Chin, and the state's most progressive and deep-thinker political leader, Kaniela Ing.

Rumors abound that a 3rd Republican masquerading as a Democrat, Beth Fukumoto, is about to jump in as well. A few months ago Fukumoto was the minority leader of Hawaii's House of Representatives, where she voted like... a Republican, of course-- anti-Choice, anti-LGBTQ, anti-environment, anti-working family... you know what Republicans are; she was the leader. Then she said something uncomplimentary about Señor Trumpanzee so they threw her out of her leadership position and she quit the party. After being an independent for a while she saw an opportunity to run for office as a "Democrat" and joined that party. She, Chin and Kim are three of a kind, all calling themselves Democrats after having run up ugly Republican records.

And now another Republican is jumping ship, ex-Congressman Charles Djou. Who knows what he'll be running for. He wrote an Op-Ed, making himself sound heroic, yesterday for Civil Beat. He lost his last 3 elections as a Republican.

Today, after much consideration, I abandon my party because I am unwilling to abandon my principles. I can no longer stand with a Republican Party that is led by a man I firmly believe is taking the party of Lincoln in a direction I fundamentally disagree with, and a party that is unwilling to stand up to him.

I have long believed that America’s strength lies in our nation’s diversity-- not its exclusion or isolation. We are a nation of immigrants and benefit from a national fabric woven with the threads of many people, of many backgrounds and cultures, all united in the common belief and love of American liberty. That’s why I championed immigration reform as a congressman.

It disturbs me that the Republican Party under President Donald Trump is now defined as a party hostile to immigration. We are the leader of the free world, not because we are great (or need to be great again), but because we are good.

I have always supported robust international diplomacy and free trade. As a congressman, I advocated for passage of the free-trade agreement with South Korea and strongly supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership initiative to expand free trade across Asia with the U.S. Trump’s decision to withdraw from the TPP, his threats to leave NAFTA, and now his desire to launch a “good trade war”-- even with our allies-- will lead to long-term economic decline and weaken our country.

I believe in peace through strength. That is why in the days after Sept. 11, 2001, I joined the Army Reserve and subsequently deployed with an infantry combat brigade in Afghanistan. That is why I am so disturbed by Trump’s repeated callousness toward the select few of our citizens who volunteered to defend our nation with their lives. From ridiculing John McCain’s service as a POW in Vietnam, to trivializing the grief of gold star mothers who lost their children in service of our country, Trump’s actions are indicative of a man ignorant of honor and true sacrifice.

I believe the free market is the engine of America’s economy. Like Trump, I, too, am a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Finance. Unlike Trump, however, I oppose favoring corporations based on their political relationship to the president. That is exactly the sort of socialist-style interventionist meddling that leads to economic ruin.

Most of all, I have long believed that our government leaders must lead by example. Character counts.

This is why I made the lack of ethics at City Hall and abuse of power by Honolulu Mayor Kirk Caldwell a key issue in the last mayor’s race. This is why I fought so hard to clean up the corrupt City Liquor Commission. This is also why I roundly condemn the immoral behavior toward women by Democrats like Al Franken and Bill Clinton, as well as Republicans such as Roy Moore and, yes, Donald Trump. It should not matter if you are conservative or liberal, Republican or Democrat, a breach of public trust is a breach of public trust.

Civility is an inner trait of true character. Trump’s belittling of Sen. Jeff Flake and immature name-calling of Sen. Bob Corker reflect a weakness of character. Trump’s penchant for conspiracy theories, such as his assertion that Sen. Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the assassination of JFK, is disturbing. His poorly constructed stream-of-consciousness tweets are not only immature, but provide real harm to the stability of our democracy.

As President George W. Bush recently lamented, “Bullying and prejudice in our public life sets a national tone, provides permission for cruelty and bigotry, and compromises the moral education of children. The only way to pass along civic values is to first live up to them.”

But I am most disappointed by the failure of the GOP to clearly and consistently condemn Trump’s childish behavior. Sadly today, too many Republicans either applaud Trump’s tirades or greet them with silent acceptance. This leads to an implicit ratification by the GOP of Trump’s undisciplined, uninformed, and unfocused leadership as a core part of the Republican Party. This is something I cannot accept and will not be a part of.

In 1904, one of the brightest leading members of the British parliament, Winston Churchill, abandoned the Conservative Party. Churchill believed in free trade, a strong defense and capitalism. When the Conservative Party turned away from these principles, Churchill placed his principles ahead of politics. Churchill articulated his consistency of conviction years later with this declaration: “Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never-- in nothing, great or small, large or petty-- never give in, except to convictions of honour and good sense.”

Today I humbly follow in Churchill’s footsteps.

I'm not sure if retired Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, a Fox News analyst for a decade, quit the GOP but Tuesday he did quit Fox News-- pretty much the same thing. "I feel that Fox News is assaulting our constitutional order and the rule of law, while fostering corrosive and unjustified paranoia among viewers," he explained to friends and colleagues. "Over my decade with Fox, I long was proud of the association. Now I am ashamed. In my view, Fox has degenerated from providing a legitimate and much-needed outlet for conservative voices to a mere propaganda machine for a destructive and ethically ruinous administration. When prime-time hosts-- who have never served our country in any capacity-- dismiss facts and empirical reality to launch profoundly dishonest assaults on the FBI, the Justice Department, the courts, the intelligence community (in which I served) and, not least, a model public servant and genuine war hero such as Robert Mueller-- all the while scaremongering with lurid warnings of 'deep-state' machinations-- I cannot be part of the same organization, even at a remove. To me, Fox News is now wittingly harming our system of government for profit."

Back to Hawaii, no one needs, more self-serving Republicans in the Democratic Party to water down an already tarnished and nearly unrecognizable brand! Please, consider supporting Kaniela Ing for Congress. I promise he'll be at least as good a member of Congress as Ro Khanna, Pramila Jayapal, Barbara Lee and Mark Pocan-- and God knows we need more members like those four!

Trouble In Paradise-- Another Republican Pretending To Be A "Democrat" Is Running For Congress

Another fake Democratic careerist running for Congress

Hawaii's first congressional district (Honolulu) is almost as blue as the second district. The PVI of the 2nd district is D+19 and the 1st district's is "only" D+17. Trump got 29.6% of the vote in HI-02 but actually climbed over 30% in HI-01-- 30.5%. Hawaiians didn't buy the bullshit and Hawaii is not Trump territory. In fact, Republicans there have been fleeing his toxic party. The problem, though, is when they leave the GOP and migrate over to the Democrats, it isn't because they have seen the light in terms of Democratic values; it's because they hate Trump. And they bring their conservatism with them. And that's especially problematic when the Republicans are ambitious politicians. Let's take the congressional race for the open seat in HI-01.

There are already two very conservative Democrats in the race, two anti-LGBQT whackos with awful records, Donna Mercado Kim and Doug Chin. They're both perfect exemplars of politicians from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. And, of course, they are darlings of the monied establishment. Could it get any worse? Sure-- one of these actual Republicans fleeing Trump is jumping into the race this week.

Beth Fukumoto is an attractive, well-spoken young woman (34 years old). She was elected to the state House in 2012, representing red-leaning Mililani, Mililani Mauka, and Waipio Acres, and quickly clawed her way to the top of the heap, becoming House Minority Leader. In 2017 House Republicans fired her after she made some anti-Trump remarks at the Honolulu Woman's March. Should Democrats be happy she switched parties? Well, sure-- except now Democrats have another anti-Choice, pro-NRA, anti-gay, pro-Big Business politician muddying up the party brand. Remember, she not so long ago she was also the chair of Hawaii's Republican Party. So that makes 3 conservatives running as Democrats for the HI-01 open seat. That's the seat one of the most cutting edge progressives anywhere in America, Kaniela Ing, is also contesting the seat.

An old buddy of mine, Stanley Chang is the progressive Democrat who recently banished the last Republican from the state Senate. He reminded me a while back that although a lot is made about Hawaii being a functional one-party state, the party is very much split between progressives and garden variety corporate Dems. There's little question about which side of that divide Fukumoto comes in on. She's been anti-choice, anti-LBGTQ, anti-gun control, and has stood firmly against virtually the entire Democratic Party platform throughout her entire career. The Democratic leadership was, predictably, excited by her switch but in a one-party dominate state, it's fair to ask whether she made this move for political expediency with higher office in mind, using Trump's insidious yet convenient comments to manipulate the public. A Hawaiian friend based in DC told me that morning that in his opinion "the Democratic Party has opened its tent far too wide, to the point where its founding values no longer matter. We accept more party members from the right than the left. People wonder why the bluest legislature in the nation struggles to pass progressive legislation? This is why." Please consider contributing to Kaniela Ing's campaign by tapping on the ActBlue congressional thermometer above.

Democrats Don't Want The Status Quo Ante Candidate, Do They? How Do You Know Which One Is Which?

Gonzalez and Massie

I haven't looked into the Massachusetts gubernatorial primary too closely-- probably because I expect the incumbent, Republican Charlie Baker, to win no matter who the Democratic candidate is. All the polls show him beating either Deval Patrick's former Secretary of Administration and Finance Jay Gonzalez or author and activist Robert Massie, Setti Warren and Maura Healy both having taken themselves out of contention.

Massie's campaign sent out an interesting e-mail this week though, headlined Clinton vs Bernie. It took me by surprise. Before we look at it. remember that Bernie did very well against Hillary in the 2016 primary, winning 7 of the state's 14 counties and beating Trump by a landslide in every single county. His message was overt: I'm the exciting Bernie candidate of change and Gonzalez is the status quo Hillary candidate. "Voters in Massachusetts," he wrote, "are starting to pick up on what the media has known for a long time. The strongest candidate for governor will be a Beacon Hill outsider with a record of bold, progressive leadership. The choice is clear: a centrist insider with political baggage, or Bob Massie, a fresh start to put Massachusetts back in the lead for progressive government."

Politico’s Lauren Dezenski defines the race as between a centrist insider, Jay Gonzalez, and a progressive outsider, Bob Massie. Following her commentary, you’ll hear a forum with Bob and Jay recorded the day the race was narrowed to two candidates.

WBUR

“Looks like to me an establishment Dem candidate versus an outsider [Bob Massie]. Looks like Clinton vs. Bernie.”

  “This is the time Bob Massie has been working toward for 40 years,” said Massie spokeswoman Mara Dolan. “He’s been working to create this time, this political climate.”

Boston Globe

Boston Globe Political Editor Shira Center says the race is defined as between progressive Bob Massie and centrist Jay Gonzalez, and that in this blue wave political climate, Bob Massie has the advantage.

...Massachusetts is bogged down by a Republican governor who is raising money to help Donald Trump. The myth of Baker’s invincibility has been shattered as polls show him failing to break even 50% approval on a single policy issue. Voters are catching on that a true progressive is the best way to defeat Baker and put Massachusetts back into a progressive leadership position. Bob Massie is the candidate we need, at just the right time. With your contribution, Massachusetts can have a governor the whole country can be proud of. Thank you so very much for all your support.

Most Democratic candidates won't take a stand like that because they feel they need both Bernie and Hillary backers to win an election. In a primary, though, it's not unheard of, especially for candidates who were former activists for one or the other. For example, in CA-49, the district that spans southern Orange County and northern San Diego County, Doug Applegate backed Bernie in the primary and Hillary in the general, while his primary opponents-- Mike Levin, Sara Jacobs and Paul Kerr-- were all Hillary activists. Ditto for Randy Bryce in Wisconsin. He was a Bernie activist during the primary and then worked for the Hillary campaign during the run up to the general. The other Democrat in the primary was a Hillary person in the primary and general. Bernie came to the district and endorsed Bryce at a big event. In Hawaii Kaniela Ing was a loud Bernie supporter. His opponents-- Donna Mercado Kim, Ernie Martin and Doug Chin were all for Hillary-- and pretend-Democrat Beth Fukumoto campaigned for Trump.

Ed Case-- The Silver Spike Must Have Been Aluminum

The best member of Congress from Hawaii was Patsy Mink-- a legendary FDR progressive-- served in Congress from 1965 2002, with a break to serve in the Carter administration. She was the first woman of color to be elected to Congress, as well as the first Asian-American woman elected to Congress. And a stalwart progressive. In 2002 she was succeeded by Hawaii's worst member of Congress, Blue Dog Ed Case, who served from Mink's death in 2002 until 2007 when he unsuccessfully challenged progressive U.S.Senator Daniel Akaka for his Senate seat. since then he's run against progressives several times and has always lost.

Finally, after being beaten by Mazie Hirono, in 2012, the Joe Liberman of Hawaii announced his political career was finally over. Now he's running again, for Congress, against Hawaii's most progressive political leader, Kaniela Soto Ing. Ironically, he'll probably make it easier for Ing to win, since he is now the 4th conservative Democrat to jump into the race, joining Donna Kim, Doug Chin and Beth Fukumoto.

In 2011 I wrote about Case:

Although he had one of the worst attendance records of any member of Congress, he consistently supported the GOP on job-killing trade legislation and on special interests legislation like abolishing the estate tax for the super-rich, making it easier for banksters to rip off consumers, screwing over working families on pensions and GOP proposals to shift the tax burden to the middle class. He generally voted with the most reactionary Democrats when they joined the GOP to stifle reform and anyone who likes Chamber of Commerce pawns and Patriot Act-type Dems like Dan Boren and Jim Marshall will be perfectly happy with Ed Case-- especially if xenophobia and war-mongering and making sure that victims of big corporations have no recourse to the courts are your cup of tea to boot.

Monday night news started leaking out that Case is trying it again and wants to run from the Honolulu-based congressional seat. "The 65-year-old Democrat," wrote Nathan Eagle, "pulled nomination papers Monday to run for the 1st Congressional District seat, according to the state Elections Office. He has until the end of business Tuesday to officially file for the Aug. 11 primary ballot."

New Animal: Fake Progressives In Democratic Primaries

Does this look like a Bernie supporter to you? Neither does his contribution record

Whatever their strategy for general elections, it's pretty important for candidates to present themselves a progressives during Democratic primaries. We've been using a foolish example of "ex"-Republican multimillionaire lottery winner Gil Cisneros having claimed ridiculously that he was a Bernie supporter during the 2016 primaries. He's a major campaign contributor but he didn't give a nickel to Bernie-- ever. But he did max out a couple of times to Hillary, including on March 31, 2016 a week before the California primary and again on July 7, still in time for plenty of other primaries. He also gave around $150,000 to the DNC which was being run by crooked Hillary booster Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who certainly wasn't using anything to benefit Bernie (to put it mildly). Cisneros is a conservative Republican masquerading as an establishment Democrat and the progressive pose is a little far-fetched. But, as Eric Draitser pointed out at CounterPunch Friday, there are other conservatives besides Cisneros pretending to to be progressives before their primaries.

Some people-- like Cisneros-- have records of one kind or another you can look at. Kaniela Ing, for example was loudly campaigning to Bernie and introducing Bernie-oriented issues in the state legislature. One of his candidates for Congress, Beth Fukumoto, was not just voting against all of Ing's legislation, she was the minority leader of the House GOP and was campaigning for Trump. She can't pretend to have backed Bernie-- open and shut case. The other congressional candidates, Doug Chin and Donna Kim, were also on record as Hillary primary backers... with conservative records to match.

Today, wrote Draitser, "Democratic incumbents from Texas and Illinois to New York and California now suddenly find themselves facing challenges from their left, forcing them to try to save their jobs by adopting progressive talking points. While this upsurge could be seen as a welcome development for anyone interested in progressive causes, there is a dark side to the burgeoning left movement, one that remains mostly shrouded behind a veil of secrecy and omission. For it seems that progressive candidates aren’t the only ones who learned the lesson of Bernie Sanders in 2016; the neoliberal Clintonites have too. So, while left-wing campaigns crop up in every corner of the country, so too do astroturf faux-progressive campaigns. And it is for us on the left to parse through it all and separate the authentic from the frauds."

Nestled in the heart of New York’s beautiful Hudson Valley, the 19th congressional district (NY-19) encompasses some of New York’s most appealing scenery and towns: Woodstock, Kingston, New Paltz, Hudson and the majority of the Catskills Region. It is littered with historic sites dating back to the Revolutionary War, and boasts names like Oneonta and Shawangunk as a reminder of the indigenous peoples of the region. From artist retreats to an endless labyrinth of hiking trails and small farms, this area represents a microcosm of the state with its New York City expats and its upstate lifers.

And it is here in NY-19 that one of the more interesting congressional races is shaping up as a number of Democrats vie to win the party nomination and try to unseat the Republican incumbent, the loathsome John Faso who, according to Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight, has voted in line with President Trump nearly 90% of the time.

Beals has a crooked smile

One candidate currently generating some buzz in the race is Jeff Beals, a self-identified “Bernie democrat” whose campaign website homepage describes him as a “local teacher and former U.S. diplomat endorsed by the national organization of former Bernie Sanders staffers, the Justice Democrats.” And indeed, Beals centers his progressive bona fides to brand himself as one of the inheritors of the progressive torch lit by Sanders in 2016. A smart political move, to be sure. But is it true?

Beals describes himself as a “former U.S. diplomat,” touting his expertise on international issues born of his experience overseas. In an email interview with CounterPunch, Beals describes his campaign as a “movement for diplomacy and peace in foreign affairs and an end to militarism…my experience as a U.S. diplomat is what drives it and gives this movement such force.” OK, sounds good, a very progressive sounding answer. But what did Beals actually do during his time overseas?

By his own admission, Beals’ overseas career began as an intelligence officer with the CIA. His fluency in Arabic and knowledge of the region made him an obvious choice to be an intelligence spook during the latter stages of the Clinton Administration.

...Beals shrewdly attempts to portray himself as an opponent of neocon imperialism in Iraq. In his interview with CounterPunch, Beals argued that “The State Department was sidelined as the Bush administration and a neoconservative cabal plunged America into the tragic Iraq War. As a U.S. diplomat fluent in Arabic and posted in Jerusalem at the time, I was called over a year into the war to help our country find a way out.”

This is a Master’s class in blatant historical revisionism and outright dishonesty. Beals was not a soldier unwillingly drafted into service, but an intelligence officer who voluntarily accepted an influential and critically important post for the Bush Administration in its ever-expanding crime against humanity in Iraq.

Moreover, no one who knows anything about the Iraq War could possibly swallow the tripe that CIA/State Department officials in Iraq were “looking to help our country find a way out” a year into the war. A year into the war, the bloodletting was only just beginning, and Halliburton, Exxon-Mobil, and the other corporate vultures had yet to fully exploit the country and make billions off it. So, unfortunately for Beals, the historical memory of the anti-war Left is not that short.

Beals also claimed in his CounterPunch interview that he “turned down a lucrative job offer from Exxon because of my opposition to the fossil fuel industry.”

That was another lie that Draitser unmasked in great detail, pointing out that Beals was already looking towards a political career and "knew that Exxon on his resume would be an irreversible stain. This seems plausible considering the fact that Beals’ burgeoning political trajectory, presented as progressive in the Sanders tradition, is in fact carefully managed by one of Hillary Clinton’s most loyal henchmen. The district voted for Obama both times he ran and then rejected Hillary 50.8% to 44.0%. The PVI is now R+2. There are 7 full counties in NY-19 and parts of 4 others. This is how the 11 counties (the partial 4 at the end) voted in the primary:

• Columbia-- Bernie- 57.1% (more votes than Trump)
• Delaware-- Bernie- 60.9%
• Greene-- Bernie- 51.5%
• Otsego-- Bernie- 59.1% (more votes than Trump)
• Schoharie-- Bernie- 63.6%
• Sullivan-- Bernie- 56.1% (more votes than Trump)
• Ulster--Bernie- 62.6% (more votes than Trump)

• Broome-- Bernie- 56.6% (more votes than Trump)
• Dutchess-- Bernie- 51.5%
• Montgomery-- Bernie- 57.9%
• Rennselaer-- Bernie- 58.4% (more votes than Trump)

That's right-- the district didn't just go for Bernie over Hillary, voters also showed a preference for Bernie over Trump. Bernie beat her in every single county-- no exceptions-- and in some by landslides. They just didn't want Hillary, the status quo establishment candidate. Now there are 7 Democrats competing for the party nomination to take on Republican incumbent John Faso. Three Democrats have raised over a million dollars: Antonio Delgado, Brian Flynn (half of that in self-funding) and Pat Ryan. Beals has raised $233,580.

Beals’ burgeoning political trajectory, presented as progressive in the Sanders tradition, is in fact carefully managed by one of Hillary Clinton’s most loyal henchmen.

It is self-evident that Beals has a laundry list of things in his past that he must answer for. For those of us, especially Millennials, who cut our activist teeth demonstrating and organizing against the Iraq War, Beals’ distortions about his role in Iraq go down like hemlock tea. But it is the associations Beals maintains today that really should give any progressive serious pause.

When asked by CounterPunch whether he has any connections to either Bernie Sanders and his surrogates or Hillary Clinton and hers, Beals responded by stating:

“I am endorsed by Justice Democrats, a group of former Bernie Sanders staffers who are pledged to electing progressives nationwide. I am also endorsed for the Greene County chapter of the New York Progressive Action Network, formerly the Bernie Sanders network.  My first hire was a former Sanders field coordinator who worked here in NY-19.”

However, conveniently missing from that response is the fact that Beals’ campaign has been, and continues to be, directly managed in nearly every respect by Bennett Ratcliff, a longtime friend and ally of Hillary Clinton. Ratcliff is not mentioned in any publicly available documents as a campaign manager, though the most recent FEC filings show that as of April 1, 2018, Ratcliff was still on the payroll of the Beals campaign. And in the video of Beals’ campaign kickoff rally, Ratcliff introduces Beals, while only being described as a member of the Onteora School Board in Ulster County. This is sort of like referring to Donald Trump as an avid golfer.

Beals has studiously, and rather intelligently, avoided mentioning Ratcliff, or the presence of Clinton’s inner circle on his campaign. However, according to internal campaign documents and emails obtained by CounterPunch, Ratcliff manages nearly every aspect of the campaign, acting as a sort of éminence grise behind the artifice of a progressive campaign fronted by a highly educated and photogenic political novice.

By his own admission, Ratcliff’s role on the campaign is strategy, message, and management. Sounds like a rather textbook description of a campaign manager. Indeed, Ratcliff has been intimately involved in “guiding” Beals on nearly every important campaign decision, especially those involving fundraising.

And it is in the realm of fundraising that Ratcliff really shines, but not in the way one would traditionally think. Rather than focusing on large donations and powerful interests, Ratcliff is using the Beals campaign as a laboratory for his strategy of winning elections without raising millions of dollars.

In fact, leaked campaign documents show that Ratcliff has explicitly instructed Beals and his staffers not to spend money on food, decorations, and other standard campaign expenses in hopes of presenting the illusion of a grassroots, people-powered campaign with no connections to big time donors or financial elites.

Ratcliff, along with Republican strategist John Pudner, is the founder of Take Back our Republic (TBOR), a well-funded, well-connected NGO that focuses on campaign finance reform. The organization has written a “People’s Democracy Playbook.” As TBOR’s own website noted:

“Take Back Our Republic is teaming up with the Bridge Alliance and the Pluribus Project to work with Pudner’s long-time data and analytics guru,  who launched the data effort for President-elect Trump, an original organizer of Occupy Wall Street, and a team that helped defeat Congressional Majority Leader Eric Cantor to create the People’s Democracy Playbook.”

Got that? Ratcliff and Pudner are using the same kinds of data-mining that we now know Cambridge Analytica (and possibly others) used to help Trump win the presidency. While this may simply be good strategy to some, it certainly raises serious questions about the authenticity of Beals and any other candidate connected with Ratcliff, Pudner, and the other Beltway ghouls and political lifers.

Essentially then, it seems that Ratcliff is the wizard behind the curtain, leveraging his decades of contact building and close ties to the Democratic Party establishment while at the same time manufacturing an astroturfed progressive campaign using a front man in Beals.

But how exactly is Ratcliff, and by extension Beals, connected to Clinton and the Washington power elites?

Ratcliff made his career working under Bob Squier, one of the founders of modern political advertising and campaigning. Squier worked for nearly every prominent Democrat from the late 1960s through the nineties, with then President Bill Clinton and then Vice President Al Gore even delivering eulogies at his funeral in 2000. Squier launched Ratcliff’s career, and even passed the torch to him when Ratcliff left Squier’s firm after having become Senior Vice President; Squier gave Ratcliff his client list which included nearly every influential Democrat.

And those relationships carried through to Ratcliff’s lucrative lobbying career when he became a point man for the Clintons on numerous occasions.

One of Ratcliff’s most infamous, and indefensible, acts of fealty to the Clinton machine came in 2009 when he and longtime Clinton attorney and lobbyist, Lanny Davis, stumped around Washington to garner support for the illegal right-wing coup in Honduras, which ousted the democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya in favor of the right-wing oligarchs who control the country today. Although the UN, and even U.S. diplomats on the ground in Honduras, openly stated that the coup was illegal, Clinton was adamant to actively keep Zelaya out. Clinton admitted as much in her book Hard Choices where, in an excerpt that was subsequently removed from later editions, Clinton wrote:

“In the subsequent days [after the coup] I spoke with my counterparts around the hemisphere, including Secretary [Patricia] Espinosa in Mexico… We strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot.”

But it was Ratcliff and Davis who enabled Clinton’s coup in Honduras by acting as a bridge between powerful interests in Washington, and actors on the ground in Honduras and the region broadly.

...Essentially then, Ratcliff is a chief architect of the right-wing government in Honduras – the same government assassinating feminist and indigenous activists like Berta Cáceres, Margarita Murillo, and others, and forcibly displacing and ethnically cleansing Afro-indigenous communities to make way for Carribbean resorts and golf courses.

And this Washington insider lobbyist and apologist for war criminals and crimes against humanity is the guy who’s on a crusade to reform campaign finance and fix Washington? This is the guy masquerading as a progressive? This is the guy working to elect an “anti-war progressive”?

In a twisted way it makes sense. Ratcliff has the blood of tens of thousands of Hondurans (among others) on his hands, while Beals is a creature of Langley, a CIA boy whose exceptional work in the service of Bush and Clinton administration war criminals is touted as some kind of merit badge on his resume.

What also becomes clear after establishing the Ratcliff-Beals connection is the fact that Ratcliff’s purported concern with campaign financing and “taking back the Republic” is really just a pretext for attempting to provide a “proof of concept,” as it were, that neoliberal Democrats shouldn’t fear and subvert the progressive wing of the party, but rather that they should co-opt it with a phony grassroots facade all while maintaining links to U.S. intelligence, Wall Street, and the power brokers of the Democratic Party.

Ryan, Blue Dog

Beals isn’t the only candidate for NY-19’s Democratic nomination with ties to the Iraq War and the intelligence establishment. Patrick Ryan, who served two tours in Iraq as an intelligence officer after graduating from West Point, is also running in the primary against Beals.

...Ryan is backed by right-wing elements of the Democratic Party, as evidenced by his receiving support from the New Democrat Coalition PAC, a conservative, pro-business element of the party. In contrast, Beals doesn’t have such overt institutional support, and is instead handled by a Clinton surrogate who actively discourages large-scale fundraising as part of his strategy to build up his candidate as the true voice of the grassroots.

As such, Beals is attempting to craft an image as a progressive who stands in contrast to the Blue Dog conservatism of Ryan. What can you call this farce? It is the primary equivalent of professional wrestling. A rigged game.

Beals and Ryan represent a disturbing trend taking place across the country: intelligence insiders and military officers running as Democrats in an election year that expects to see triumphs for Democrats in reaction to the Trump shit show.

The World Socialist Website’s Patrick Martin has compiled a rather exhaustive list of other candidates who fall into this trend as well, including, but not limited to:

• Elissa Slotkin (Michigan’s 8th District) – served three tours with the CIA in Baghdad
• Gina Ortiz Jones (Texas’s 23rd District) – Air Force intelligence officer in Iraq [And backed by the DCCC against an actual Berniecrat, Rick Treviño.]
• Abigail Spanberger (Virginia’s 7th District) – served as CIA operations officer for nearly a decade
• Jesse Colvin (Maryland’s 1st District) – Army intelligence officer in Afghanistan and Korea’s DMZ
• Shelly Chauncey (Pennsylvania’s 5th District) – CIA undercover officer in Latin America, East Asia, and, unsurprisingly, within the borders of the U.S.

These candidates represent only a small sample of the more than dozen races in which U.S. intelligence and/or military operatives are running as Democrats. Many of them directly participated in war crimes and crimes against humanity. And a significant number of this rogue’s gallery are posturing as “progressives” in the Bernie Sanders tradition.

What we are witnessing is the inevitable counter-insurgency by the forces of entrenched political power in Washington, and capital more generally. While Bernie Sanders was no revolutionary, his campaign ignited a grassroots upsurge that now threatens the power of the neoliberal wing of the Democratic Party and the neoliberal Clinton political machine that, for all intents and purposes, controls it.

By presenting real progressive voters with manufactured, faux-progressive candidates like Jeff Beals, the Clintonites think they’ll pull the wool over the eyes of the progressive left.

Will the Left allow them to? That depends on us.