consultants are sandburs

Saturday, September 19, 2020

Ginsberg's death raises a need to stymie Trump and McConnell mischief with the open seat. Sirota and Perez write of this. They suggest Schumer needs a primary challenger to come forward NOW because he's played footsie with Republican judicial aims. Schumer donors may want that, but New York has an electorate which might think differently and Schumer understands that. I.e., threaten incumbancy to cause decency.

 Most of the below excerpt is from mid-item. Readers are encouraged to read the entire original item, " Primary Schumer To Guarantee Opposition To Trump’s SCOTUS Pick -- Schumer has power to try to stop Trump’s nominee, but he has previously caved to the GOP on judges. Announcing a 2022 primary challenge right now is the best chance to prevent that." Excerpting:

As Republicans are already promising a vote on a nominee from Donald Trump, the obvious question is: What can be done to stop conservatives’ full takeover of the nation’s high court for the rest of our lives? 

We don’t have all the answers, but we have one answer among many: A serious New York Democratic candidate needs to step up and announce a 2022 primary challenge to Sen. Chuck Schumer — who already has a record of helping fast-track Donald Trump’s judicial appointments.

That primary challenge needs to be announced right now — and it needs to be clear that the primary challenge will be a referendum on Schumer’s record on Trump judges.

[...] Schumer needs to face maximum pressure every single day to use all possible power that his caucus has — and it has power — to stop a Trump appointment. 

Not just pressure as in phone calls and protests — pressure as in you-will-be-voted-out-of-office pressure.

[...] You could argue that there was nothing Schumer could do to prevent conservative Democrats from voting the way they did, but that’s bullshit. Schumer controls the party apparatus and its fundraising machine — if his excuse is he can’t do anything, then he shouldn’t be the leader.

Schumer and Democrats have chronically mismanaged judicial appointments. Obama left office with a Supreme Court seat open and far too many district and court of appeals vacancies. Republicans have rushed to fill those seats, and Democrats have rubber-stamped most of their nominees with little fight. While House Democrats and Senate Republicans haven’t managed to agree on a new COVID relief bill since March, Democrats this week helped confirm eight new district court judges this week.

It’s true that if Republicans hold together, then they can vote a Supreme Court nominee through with a simple majority — that is, if they are able to force a vote, and it’s not a given they will be able to if Democrats use all of their power.

Grinding The Senate To A Halt

[...] if Arizona Democrat Mark Kelly wins his race against GOP incumbent Martha McSally (to fill the remainder of John McCain's term) he would be seated at the end of November, rather than in January. But continued obstructionist tactics might yet be needed to prevent them from using the lame duck session to ram a nominee through.

If Republicans still go forward with an appointment, then all of this becomes the justification for Democrats to immediately pass legislation in the new Congress to expand the court. 

It would certainly be unprecedented, but we are living in unprecedented times — and this is what a Democratic leader must be forced to try to do, and the best way to force a senator to do something is to make clear they are risking their job if they don’t do that thing.

New York Has Plenty Of Dems Who Could Primary Schumer


[italics added] (Expanding the Court is NOT an unprecented idea. Roosevelt having New Deal counter-Depression steps voided step-after-step floated an intent to pack the Court; Justices noticed, and behaved better.) Credibly pushing to pack the Court if needed would require a new President with balls:


Another Sirota post  - by photographic implication - suggests women politicians may be the answer for progressives, at least short term, (and that does not mean Pelosi, but rather women with actual not feigned progressive consciences), Sirota posting:

This week was a long year, and now there are less than seven weeks until one of the most important elections in our country’s history. 

Everyone is on edge from everything — climate disasters, a pandemic, an economic emergency and Trump’s endless effort to sow anxiety. We should acknowledge that things will get more turbulent before they get better. But I fear that we are reaching a point where too many are starting to conclude that things can never get better — and ignoring signs that things can get better, and in some cases actually are getting better.

I see the despondence in my own email box everyday: In the last month, some readers have suggested that there is no reason for any hope, because even if Trump is defeated, there is no way to ever move our government to do anything good at all, ever. 

It’s an understandable feeling — year after year, decade after decade, it has felt like our country cares less and less about us, and that we are all on our own. Those feelings are backed up by cold, hard numbers: A new RAND Corporation study this week found that since the 1970s, about $47 trillion of national wealth that should have gone to the bottom 90 percent instead went to the top 1 percent. As New York Magazine put it: “If income had been distributed as evenly over the past five decades as it was in 1975, the median full-time worker in the U.S. would enjoy annual earnings of roughly $92,000 a year. As is, that worker makes just $50,000.” 

There’s no way to sugarcoat those figures — they illustrate a breakdown of the basic social contract in America, a breakdown deliberately created by the oligarchs, politicians and corporations that are building their gilded careers and palaces atop the rubble of a once-vibrant economy. And day after day, the propaganda propping up this avarice is blasted at us by the corporate media, which indignantly tell us that a new president must represent Wall Street arsonists, not just the millions of people being set on fire.


[links and italics in original]

Friday, September 18, 2020

The Schmuck appears to believe that internment of Japanese citizens during the Second World War was not "a great intrusion on civil liberties." How so? Just complacent superlative-laden bullshitting around for the hell of it - Japanese citizenship being second class or something - or an inexcusable gross negligence (by omission) committed by a simpleton Trump servant who unfortunately is entrusted with running the Department of Justice and royally fucking up the job, mouth ahead of brain while letting Trump criminals off the hook?

 Aside from insulting citizens of Japanese extraction (some of whom spent part of an American childhood in an internment camp), the schmuck also overlooks that pandemic management was equally important, and similarly practiced, during the 1918-1919 flu pandemic. An unreliable exposition of history, for drama over substance while bloviating is a character defect for this character. Watch:


 Hat tip for the embedded video, DWT, with the video there, in context:


 In America... it's all denialism from the nation's leaders-- pretending. Trump and the Trumpist governors first and foremost. Oh... and the goons I hope to see at Nuremberg-like trials one day, like his consiglieri William Barr. He likened the effort to protect the country from a pandemic he doesn't understand to slavery. Watch the idiot:

-- video here --

New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio thought again about opening up his city's schools. He was smart to do so, while most "leaders" are trying to shove decisions like that off on anyone they can. The NY Times' Eliza Shapiro reported that he acknowledged that "the system had still not fully surmounted the many obstacles that it faced in bringing children back during the pandemic." Shapiro is too dull-witted to understand that DeBlasio was doing the right thing and the courageous thing and she slanted her entire piece to disparage him. What a piece of crap this one is! Most of her writing made me want to vomit. It could have been written by anyone from inside the Trump Regime.

She did note, however that "The mayor said that he decided to delay the start of the school year and opt instead for a phased-in reopening after a three-hour conversation at City Hall on Wednesday with the leaders of the unions representing the city’s principals and teachers, along with senior mayoral aides. Those union leaders have been explicitly warning for weeks that schools were not ready to reopen for myriad reasons, from poor ventilation in some aging buildings to a severe staffing crunch that the principals’ union estimated could leave the city needing as many as 10,000 educators.

 Compare that degree of due caution with an AG who puts politics first and foremost; especially by non sequitur; Barr quoted:

“Just think about the way we vote now,” Barr said. "You have a precinct, your name is on a list, you go in and say who you are, you go behind a curtain, no one is allowed to go in there to influence you, and no one can tell how you voted. All of that is gone with mail-in voting. There’s no secret vote. You have to associate the envelope in the mailing and the name of who’s sending it in, with the ballot.

“There’s no more secret vote with mail-in vote. A secret vote prevents selling and buying votes. So now we’re back in the business of selling and buying votes. Capricious distribution of ballots means (ballot) harvesting, undue influence, outright coercion, paying off a postman, here’s a few hundred dollars, give me some of your ballots,” the attorney general said.

[...] “You know liberals project,” Barr said. "All this bulls--- about how the president is going to stay in office and seize power? I’ve never heard of any of that crap. I mean, I’m the attorney general. I would think I would have heard about it. They are projecting. They are creating an incendiary situation where there will be loss of confidence in the vote.

“Someone will say the president just won Nevada. ‘Oh, wait a minute! We just discovered 100,000 ballots! Every vote will be counted!’ Yeah, but we don’t know where these freaking votes came from,” Barr said, promising to watch “Key Largo.

Ah, the art of non sequitur practiced most crudely. If you honestly see a true difference to going to a precinct to fill out a ballot where you can converse before that with anyone about anything and everything, even exchange of money, vs filling out a ballot at home during a pandemic and using a mailback or drop box which equally but no more allows talking in advance with anyone about anything and everything, even exchange of money; then you value a distinction without a difference. Where does the actual total equivalence of risk leave this unconscionable Republican bloviator, once you examine his glib remarks?

Either way, the honesty of a voter is of concern, and election dishonesty if existing at all has historically been tiny fractions of a percent of votes being thought suspect. When voting by precinct.  And without cause to see any meaningful true difference, in voting safely by mail during a mortal pandemic Trump claims to present a threat of panic among the public. The Barr stuff is pure sophistry spun by a lightweight (intellectually).

When voting by mail, yes the post office must be effective and beyond reproach; but Barr neglects to acknowledge his and Trump's henchpersons are now busy deliberately poisoning post office effectiveness even while he was pontificating as quoted

If not a statutory crime what DeJoy and the board chair are up to, there nonetheless is no moral compass to fucking over the postal service and its hard working people who provide the most regular (indeed daily) show of need among the people for a federal government to exist and be of service. 

Barr only sees the ghosts and hob-gobs he wants to demonize; not the ones needing public shaming and firing from Republican positions of influence. Like a flounder with eyes only on one side of his head because he, as a bottom dweller, is more effective that way, for his purposes, keeping well fed being one he and the flounder share.

Tina Smith honked off environmentalists by sucking up to Iron Rangers wanting dangerous sulfide mining to happen. What's it gotten her, and is her judgment that way biting her in the ass in terms of reelection endorsement?

 Losing the trust of environmentalists was Tina Smith's gamble. 

Hat tip to Gary Gross at his blog for citing this WashExam [biased] item.

In that item the writer states:

Two weeks ago, Lewis announced after a business roundtable that he had earned the support of the Iron Range region's Democratic Party mayors: Mayors Larry Cuffe of Virginia, Robert Vlaisavljevich of Eveleth, and Andrea Zupancich of Babbitt. The group also announced it was endorsing Trump at a “Workers for Trump” rally held by Vice President Mike Pence in Duluth, Minnesota.

A backfiring ploy: Good show, Tina. Great act of judgment advancing sulfide mining extreme environmental risks upon US in trying to suck up Iron Range reelection votes. 

In 20/20 hindsight, was it worth it?

There is truth when Trump talks of outside agitators flying into hot spots by plane. Just, not as he meant it. As it is.

Link. To instigate no good. To sow disruption and division. To diminish fairness to a part of our people, or to show solidarity with those having that intent. 

Power may exist to do that. Justification does not. 

There must be justice. Justice is a prerequisite to having lasting, real peace. Among US. 

Aiming the other way is not helping the people. Not helping US. It is feeding the problem. It is not fixing one damned thing that's wrong. It is the current federal executive being what it is. - A menace. 

Should you doubt, just look at Bill Barr. An unappealing disaster. Ugliest part of the man, his mind.

Thursday, September 17, 2020

A websearch. A neat tune. Of course - no continuity intended. Two things. Separate.

 Here. Marley. 

New top sidebar item. DWT inspired.

Go to: The Orange Menace Must Be Defeated-- Biden Needs To Rev Up The Democratic Base

And do note the last item in that post. It tells us what we already know, and must accept. Lesser evil sucks. But it's all THEY for now allow US. Show sense. Moreover, show perseverance. Schumer and Pelosi and their donor-owners will not cave in. They must be overrun by numbers. TAKE OVER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. To make it, of all things, democratic. If they be sharks, we be piranha. Keep nibbling at them. 


The linked DWT post in turn quotes and excerpts Sirota, and - excerpting the excerpt from Sirota's item titled, "You’re Not Being Loyal By Staying Silent As Biden Depresses Voters (As Biden has ignored the Democratic base, polls now show he faces an enthusiasm gap. Progressive pressure is needed to force him to energize Democratic voters and defeat Trump):

 The Democratic electorate has voted over and over and over again for change, and their party’s leaders have returned the favor with bank bailouts, record oil exports during a climate emergency, an abandonment of the labor movement, corporate-written trade policies that crush workers and health care reform that props up insurance profits.

[...]  Indeed, throwing shade at voters for feeling burnt out and unenthused is the modern-day “let them eat cake”-- and the impulse to engage in as self-destructive a tactic as vote-shaming evinces the dangerous ideology at work here.

You’ll notice that Democratic vote-shamers rarely complain the other way. Typically, they lament progressive pressure, but don’t lament big donors constantly demanding ideological fealty to an incrementalist corporate agenda that makes sure nothing fundamentally changes-- which inevitably leads to voter disillusionment.

They celebrate efforts to policy pander to affluent conservatives, but scoff at the notion of having to do any work to secure support from disaffected lower income Americans who might consider sitting the election out or voting third party because they are so completely disgusted with both parties.

In this world view, Democrats promising tax breaks to wealthy suburbanites is seen as laudable pragmatism and shrewd politics to attract affluent Republicans. By contrast, the idea of having to promise a Green New Deal to young people who see a lifetime of climate dystopia and think about voting third party-- that’s seen as uncouth behavior and detestable pandering to petulant serfs who supposedly don’t deserve even minimal respect or attention. The political class tells us to pay them no mind-- they are the electoral arena’s “no real person involved.”

As an election strategy, this attitude presumes that Chuck Schumer was right in 2016 when he insisted that “for every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.”

Of course, that theory has been electorally shellacked for a decade. And yet, these Democratic elites adhere to it-- and vote-shame anyone who questions it-- not because it has been successful and is the best strategy to win back Congress, expand health care or save the planet from climate change. They cling to the hypothesis because it at least provides a rationale-- however absurd-- to continue running campaigns whose number one directive is comforting the donor class.

More than even defeating Trump, satisfying the big contributors is the top priority because at least that is guaranteed to keep their checks going to Washington super PACs, consulting firms, think tanks and advocacy groups that are the permanent full-time employment machine for the entire Democratic political class, regardless of whether that political class ever actually wins elections or materially improves the lives of voters.

As long as donor maintenance is the prime directive and the money keeps flowing, that political class will be safely insulated in their second homes in the Hamptons, still getting the big TV invites and the fat corporate lobbying contracts even if Trump wins.

When progressives criticized Biden for loading up his transition team with corporate cronies, that wasn’t some evil plot to tank the Democratic ticket-- it was an effort to root out the soft corruption that has defined Democratic politics for three decades and that has contributed to voters being unenthused about the party.

When progressives wondered aloud why Biden was giving a platform to unpopular Republican politicians like John Kasich at the Democratic convention, it wasn’t some pointless temper tantrum-- it was an attempt to steer Biden away from touting the GOP politicians who turn off Democratic voters and toward generating the massive Democratic turnout that will be necessary to defeat the current president.

Loyalty is not falling in line and shutting up while leaders coddle donors and create a dangerous voter enthusiasm gap.

That’s political suicide-- and all of us who do not want to see another election-night disaster have an obligation to speak up and try to avert it before it happens.

DWT's post ends with a show of a plain fuck-Rahm-Emanual truth:

It feels better to UPDATE via an excerpt for the benefit of any reader not caring to follow earlier links.

It is better. Things written which deserve repeating should be repeated.

DWT and Sirota are painting a true picture of how Joe Biden can follow his campaign guru bunch into a Clinton-Podesta result; coming in second to a swine by dint of stupidity and complacency.

And there is plenty of that; and hubris, within the Biden advisors all content in believing "anybody could beat Trump." At least offer "anybody" and not a junk heap of disdain for the voting public and its wants and needs. So far, Biden-Harris has been DOA, with Trump busy fighting for his base. Either Biden has no base, his base is plutocrats only, or he can't find his base with both hands.


John Kerry ran a very measured campaign to "not blow it and lose" to young Bush, anybody could beat Bush after that one term - and Kerry lost to young Bush by being  - - - all the things Joe is/does/believes/is told.

The smell of a John Kerry style defeat is in the air, The Biden team cannot see all the people holding their noses. Or - does not care, if indeed, the game is all about and only about plutocratic-donor cashflow.

You'd think the spoils of office at least would mean something to somebody within this clown show. That there'd be a GOTV spirit somewhere among the advisory cadavers.

Time passes. We shall see. Going with Lincoln Project types is shallow thinking and insulting to ones who want some fucking cause of any kind to vote for an owned stiff like Joe Biden.

Ante up. Liven the pot or lose the hand.

Monday, September 14, 2020

Republicans have sacrificed every last belief and principle they held dear on the bonfire of Trump’s vanity.

The headline is an early sentence from a Vanity Fair item where a known truth is retold

The major problem with Lincoln Project Republicans bemoaning sacrifice of all manner of principle the party had, is it never had any. Aside from that, readers might find the link worth the time it takes to read.

Russ Feingold's prediction has come true that Democrats would "lose our soul" if they allowed Big Money into the party. Just look at Chuck Schumer.

 Schumer is emblamatic of all wrong with the "party of the people." Simply explained, Democrats are the party of big money, Republicans too, so really, only one party exists with differing cabals after spoils.

DWT, again, this link. Source of this post's headline. As to contesting for spoils, DWT's opening image stands correct.

As to much else, try this excerpt:

Is One Party's Politicians More Or Less Corrupt Than The Other's?

Hard Ball by Nancy Ohanian

In terms of political parties, it was once clearer who the good guys were and who the bad guys were in the Dark Money world or legalistic, systemic bribery. [...] Poke a Democrat about taking legalistic bribes and he or she will start screeching about "unilateral disarmament." But as new report by Alex Seitz-Wald for NBC News makes it clear that if the Dems were once the party opposed to Dark Money, they are now the party getting the most out of it. [...] "Democratic super PACs are spending more than Republican ones" and that Democratic Super PACs outspent conservative Super PACs in 2018. Russ Feingold's prediction has come true that Democrats would "lose our soul" if they allowed Big Money into the party. Just look at Chuck Schumer. There isn't a person on earth who would say he has anything even resembling a soul-- and he's one of (many) go-betweens connecting the Wall Street banksters with the Democratic Party.

 Advocates are concerned with super PACs, which can accept donations of unlimited size but have to reveal the names of their donors and regularly disclose their activity. But they're more worried about dark money groups: nonprofit organizations that can't be as explicitly political as super PACs, but can keep their donors secret forever and don't have to reveal much about activities before elections.

 While concerns about campaign finance reform that once animated Democratic voters have been eclipsed by the desire to oust President Donald Trump, advocates are left to wonder if the party can really be trusted to follow through on its promises to dismantle a system that may help them get elected.

[...] The Democratic National Committee adopted a platform last month calling for a ban on dark money, and Joe Biden says one of his first priorities as president would be signing the sweeping reform bill House Democrats passed last year that would, among other things, match small donations 6-to-1 to encourage grassroots giving.

But his campaign also says they'll take all the help they can get for now and that bill, known as H.R.1, would have to compete for limited legislative bandwidth with efforts to address the coronavirus pandemic, the economy and much more.

Republicans, who generally oppose major campaign finance reform efforts, cry hypocrisy.

"It's just like everything else Biden stands for. He believes it until it's of political benefit to reverse himself," said Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh.

Democrats, however, argue that the only way they can rein in big money in politics is to first use big money in politics to win.

"We aren't going to unilaterally disarm against Donald Trump and right-wing conservatives, but look forward to the day when unlimited money and super PACs are a thing of the past, even if it means putting our own PAC out of business," said Guy Cecil, the chairman of Priorities USA, the super PAC first founded to support Obama's re-election.

On principle, Democrats opposed Citizens United, the Supreme Court's landmark 2010 decision that opened the floodgates to virtually unlimited money in politics. But they also were against it because they were sure Republicans and their big-business allies would outspend them.

At first, Obama set the example for his party by trying to keep his hands clean of the super PAC game. [...]

Quickly, though, party leaders concluded their position against unlimited donations and dark money wasn't tenable, and it turned out there was plenty of it flowing on the Democratic side, too. Obama eventually blessed Priorities USA, which helped kick off a proliferation of liberal big-money groups.

"If Democrats don't compete, it would be like preparing for a nuclear war by grabbing your fly swatter," said Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic operative who has worked for both campaigns and outside groups.

 [italics added - words are cheap]

Further in the DWT post - continuing the quote within the item:

 ...Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, which runs the campaign finance data warehouse, said her group has tracked liberal groups "taking dark money in politics to a new level of opacity" and caught them trying new tricks, such as creating faux news sites to make their attack ads seem more credible.

While overall dark money spending is roughly even between the parties right now, Democrats have a clear edge in congressional races, Krumholz said. Around 65 percent of dark money TV ads in 2020 Senate races and 85 percent of dark money TV ads in House races are sponsored by liberal groups, according to Krumholz.

"Unfortunately, there has been comfort with this that has grown over time on both sides of the aisle," Krumholz said. "Nobody wants to be the sucker that is playing by the rules when someone is getting away with murder."

Bloomberg. Can you identify any greater source of slush money? Of course not. Continuing, still more of the item the DWT post is quoting:

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) remains one of the fiercest opponents of campaign finance reform, not only blocking bills like H.R.1 and disclosure measures, but even intervening in legal battles to overturn state campaign finance rules.

He sees it as a free speech issue, hailing the Citizens United decision as "an important step in the direction of restoring First Amendment rights."

All this leaves campaign finance reform advocates dependent on Democrats winning in November-- even if it takes some dark money to get them there.

"We are on the cusp of having the best opportunity to repair the campaign finance system since the Watergate scandal of the 1970s," said Fred Wertheimer, a veteran good-government advocate and president of Democracy 21. "But that depends on how the elections come out." 

After posing the argument, DWT begins its own analysis:

What a crock of crap. "Depends on how the elections come out?" Why? Are the corrupt conservatives the DCCC and DSCC recruited going to suddenly become reformers? It takes real effort and real talent-- of a kind most politicians don't possess or even strive to develop-- to raise campaign cash without resorting to criminality.

Then DWT segues to commentary about promising progressive candidacies its Blue America effort is backing, and those specific observations are again at this link

The problem is Schumer. The problem is Pelosi, Hoyer, Clyburn - takers of donor money and following donor wishes. That is how/why we face a stinking, awful Biden-Trump election where you puke before you vote.

That bad. The Bloombergs of our nation must be laughing long and loud.

They own this nation, as theirs to laugh at. To cynically scorn. US. Getting screwed.

So, what is your definition of fascism?

So, is there any answer when the people entrusted with the levers of power to reform the stinking cesspool got there by being corrupted with original sin in the process?  Is anything real beyond hypocrites bleating?

The Dems did pass that number one bill, knowing it would be dead on arrival once reaching the serial bill killer, McConnell. All show. However, a text exists, and while words are cheap, having a textual roadmap toward betterment is a step better than not having it. The problem, Pelosi, Schumer, the DNC, among such there is no will nor motive to change their ways. They prosper. They age, comfortably. They cherish their gatekeeper roles. And then -

Consider how Bernie got flummoxed by the mini-candidates nipping at his heals up to South Carolina  all metamorphosing into Biden love creatures while Clyburn played his tune.


No other word for it. Remember - Beto, the little South Bend mayor, law and order Amy, and never again believe a single word any of them say.

That is a first step. Reject known, shown corruption which got in the way of better times and better chances. 




Sunday, September 13, 2020

Courtesy of WaPo - How to vote in your state.

The presumption is that the link will stay alive and not go dead before election day.

Which one looks to have real teeth and which looks like a replicant from Blade Runner?

From ZeroHedge:

President Trump has accused Joe Biden of being a puppet of the "radical left," and it would appear the left-est of leftists - Bernie Sanders - has confirmed this opinion with his latest, somewhat surprising (but perhaps CYA-based) comments.

As Biden is forced to emerge from his subterranean safe-space, addressing some awkward positioning of the Democrats amid mass violence in America, and shifting towards the center, Sanders, according to a Washington Post report on Sunday, “told associates that Biden is at serious risk of coming up short in the November election if he continues his vaguer, more centrist approach.”

What all that means is anyone's guess. What it will mean may be clearer after Nov 3. From appearances of the image it looks as if Bernie is taking Biden out behind the wood shed.

You want news? Bloomberg appears to still believe Trump must go.


Saturday, September 12, 2020

Another easy post. Pandemic-wise. Down With Tyranny captures the mood of things, and there is no Crabgrass purpose in wanting to reinvent the wheel.

DWT link, this starting image and excerpt:


by Noah

We now know what the president knew and when he knew it. He knew that COVID-19 was a mortal threat to untold numbers of Americans and elected to do nothing about it. We know, in fact, that he knew at least as early as the first week in February of this year. That was when he admitted, on tape no less, to writer Bob Woodward, that he knew what was coming. Then, he lied to our faces repeatedly, just as any true psychopathic killer would. This is who he is. I've been saying it for months. It didn't take any stroke of genius on my part, just a bit of perception. He is what he is. Once you know what he is, his actions or lack thereof can only be interpreted in one way. Still, a lot of people who are smart enough to know better chalked up what Trump said to stupidity. Not me. Even a stupid person, when faced with the ever-growing crisis of a pandemic, doesn't do the wrong thing or make the wrong decision every single damn time. A person that does that is doing it deliberately. A person who puts the premature deaths of tens of thousands of people and then hundreds of thousands in motion is a mass murderer, a serial killer, a psychopath. For Christ's sake, stop trying to pass this asshole off as just a narcissist.

Well, it was not me trying to say "just a narcissist." For months the top sidebar image has been as it is, with good reason for it being exactly that. 

More train wreck than mere narcissism. Fred Trump's sick shaping hand being a dimension too.  

Tune time, Middle Class Joe does a Woodie Guthrie cover; taking a liberty or two on lyrics which Woodie would approve, times evolve and lyrics with them:

The DWT link is, again, here, and the post continues from the quoted point. Also, for other DWT commentary and reporting:


Let's talk Libya, guys.

Zerohedge, a partial but contiguous excerpt. 

There are truths that must be made plain lest they be buried like so many bodies in the desert sand.

The War on Libya: A Criminal Conspiracy

To understand the depth of criminality involved in the US-NATO war on Libya, we must unravel a complex story involving actors from both the US and Europe who quite literally conspired to bring about this war, while simultaneously exposing the unconstitutional, imperial presidency as embodied by Mr. Hope and Change himself.

In doing so, a picture emerges that is strikingly at odds with the dominant narrative about good intentions and bad dictators. For although Gaddafi was presented as the villain par excellence in this story told by the Empire’s scribes in corporate media, it is in fact Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, former French President Nicholas Sarkozy, French philosopher-cum-neocolonial adventurist Bernard Henri-Levy, and former UK Prime Minister David Cameron, who are the real malevolent forces. It was they, not Gaddafi, who waged a blatantly illegal war on false pretenses and for their own aggrandizement. It was they, not Gaddafi, who conspired to plunge Libya into chaos and civil war from which it is yet to emerge. It was they who beat the war drums while proclaiming peace on earth and good will to men.

The US-NATO war on Libya represents perhaps one of the most egregious examples of US military aggression and lawlessness in recent memory. Of course, the US didn’t act alone as a wide cast of characters played a role as the French and British were keen to involve themselves in the reassertion of control over a once lucrative African asset torn from European control by the evil Gaddafi. And this, only a few years after former UK Prime Minister and Iraq war criminal Tony Blair met with Gaddafi to usher in a new era of openness and partnership.

The story begins with Bernard Henri-Lévy, the French philosopher, journalist, and amateur foreign service officer who fancied himself an international spy. Having failed to arrive in Egypt in time to buttress his ego by capitalizing on the uprising against former dictator Hosni Mubarak, he quickly shifted his attention to Libya, where an uprising in the anti-Gaddafi hotbed of Benghazi was underway. As Le Figaro chronicled, Henri-Levy managed to talk his way into a meeting with then head of the National Transition Council (TNC) Mustapha Abdeljalil, a former Gaddafi official who became head of the anti-Gaddafi TNC. But Henri-Levy wasn’t there just for an interview to be published in his French paper, he was there to help overthrow Gaddafi and, in so doing, make himself into an international star.

[links and formatting from original] Biden's war credentials date back at least to gung ho championship of the Iraq War, which we as a people were lied into by the Bushco White House and friends.

Libya had a leader wanting to price oil in gold instead of dollars. Dead man, now.

Biden replacing Senor Bone Spurs might prove more a war monger than the man exiting. It is a worry. He should now be pressed to commit to a policy on military aims that way, good, bad or ugly. Wait and see seems the media darling of the day for Bidenville. But that's abdication, not journalism.

Ms. Harris? What the donors want the donors get? Or is that too harsh?


Read the complete origina ZH post. Gowdy, bless his soul, only rattled the email and Behghazi cage, stuff from well after Libya's leader was deposed and disposed. 

Not a profile in courage, but Gowdy is as Gowdy does.


In fairness, Biden was part of the Obama administration's declining to fight a war Israel wanted, but did not itself fight. Instead, diplomacy was used. A treaty with Iran resulted.

Trump tore it up. Trump drone-killed an Iranian general.

Relative war-mongering scores, as best we can guess, have Trump ahead as the hotter head. Trade war with China. Continued war in Afghanistan. Withdrawal except for oil field occupation, Syria - that is the Trump record.

Biden comes out better. And then Harris against Pence on the heartbeat-away measure. No contest. Pence is a clear and present danger. Making Trump Lives Matter. A difficult task, but the former talk radio guy, he is impeachment insurance. 

In total, Trump-Pence and its performance in office, vs. Biden-Harris and a "can't be worse" truth, are immediate facts making much else irrelevant. Yes Trump has red baseball caps and Biden has that dental sculpted smile and hair transplants. Despite that physical appearance dimension - NOBODY can be as phony as Trump. Whatever way Biden was raised he has no Fred Trump monster in his closet. Harris has potential, but a sad record.

Welcome to Oz. Dorothy and Toto have the votes. By mail. Trump's got the flying monkeys, Biden the Munchkins. Donors are behind the curtain. Nov 3 cannot come soon enough.

Thursday, September 10, 2020

Woodward's silence cost much sufferning and many lost lives by letting the Trump lies about the pandemic go unchallenged when he had the perp's clear, contradictory words on tape. Book revenues have their price.

 Just saying. Seriousness about the truth of the risk early in events was deliberately made MIA. The damned book is blood-tainted. Its cover should show the Reaper's grin. 

Buy healthy food, comfortable shoes, and warm winter clothing instead. And don't skimp on your mask. This guy, waiting to show up masked until mid-July did not skimp:

Trump wears mask in public for first time during visit to Walter Reed

It was a noteworthy evolution for the president, who has balked at wearing protective face coverings as a deadly pandemic surged across portions of the U.S.

President Trump


july 11! Downplayed previously.

Woodward just sat on his tape.



 Sirota, in the link give earlier, wrote:

 It is important to remember two things: 1) the first set of comments came in FEBRUARY, well before there was widespread public awareness of the lethality of the virus and 2) as much of a buffoon as he is, Trump is not some rando just speculating. He is quite literally the president, with access to the world’s top scientists. So he was divulging crucial, newsworthy and time-sensitive information. Clearly, he knew more about the lethality and transmission of the virus than he was publicly letting on, and yet he was still downplaying the severity of the disease and insinuating that it is like the common flu.

That’s a horrific crime against humanity -- but it was aided and abetted by the popular face of investigative journalism: Mr. All The President’s Men himself.

Crimes like this often happen in secret. They take years to suss out -- and in many instances, their details never see the light of day. Journalists’ job is, in part, to try to prevent disasters from happening and to protect the public interest -- indeed, the motto of the Washington Post is literally a warning that “democracy dies in darkness.”

 Is Sirota being too tough on the early autumn book author and publisher?

You decide. The belief at Crabgrass is some things have to be said in as stark a set of terms as merited. Nobody else had the access and tape recording. Was there a quid pro quo at play, for delay? Would a quid pro quo be admitted?

Nothing to fear but fear itself? I fear stupidity.


A statistic I cannot find online. The comparative pandemic death rate among Wall Street wealth managers and trailer camp residents. It is not online.

 Trump is bad and Biden will provide no relief. Biden is Trump without the bluster. 

From DWT:

Click the image to enlarge it and weigh it in light of Clyburn on the eve of Super Tuesday, along with the other drop-out perps, where Clyburn takes money from the same donors who back Biden - and Clyburn surprisingly backed Biden.

Bernie would have won, 2016. Bernie would have won, 2020. Bernie would have still had Congressional friction stopping him from all he'd wanted to do, but Biden doesn't even want to do a pinch of it. Biden's history has been taking a lead in generating Congressional friction  - against the people, and in favor of the plutocrats at war with the people. Biden's constituency is wealthy mean folks who are treating the nation and its bounty as a zero sum game. A rigged casino.


Presuming Biden will be an Obama rehash, do YOU care who gets the spoils?

Do YOU believe that if Biden or the Clintons had been at the helm when Covid-19 landed then things would have been better and the death toll lower? Thinking it cannot get worse is contradicted by history. 

Four years after this election day, will the nation be treating its people better by any significant measure? What's your guess?








Billboards can carry simple, effective messages, whoever maddogpac is ...

Monday, September 07, 2020

60 Minutes-Australia put a Mary Trump interview online.

Click and watch. No commentary posted here. You be the judge.



UPDATE: That video has already had a bit less than two million views. It is the first Mary Trump interview seen by Crabgrass. Here are links to three other Mary Trump interviews posted online, two having fewer viewings, the final one having four million views: Democracy Now! - MoJo - ABC Network

The question of a second term for Trump will be decided Nov. 3

Sunday, September 06, 2020

Neutral people knowledgeable of the law characterize Bill Barr as more syncophant than a fit credit to the job he holds. Aside from a deficient fitness for his job as AG, Barr is morbidly obese, i.e., failing in another sense of "fitness."

Below, linking and excerpting from Guardian, (with an opening image proving the second sentence of the headline). With 650 pounds of meat deplaning, the aircraft heaves a sigh.

Health risk and body shaming dimensions aside, the first sentence of the Crabgrass headline is the one that matters day-to-day, and is the one requiring judgment and reliance upon those who have been entrusted to know applicable norms.


First Guardian, dated Sat 5 Sep 2020, "Bill Barr is acting like Trump's attack dog, not his attorney general" and aptly categorized as OPINION. By: Austin Sarat and Dennis Aftergut.

Credibility of the author pair, from the item's footer: Austin Sarat is William Nelson Cromwell professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College and the author of Gruesome Spectacles: Botched Executions and America’s Death Penalty. Dennis Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor who writes on national affairs,

From the opening, excerpting:


In a recent interview with CNN, Barr reached a new level of naked partisanship. Here are the worst examples

Earlier this year a slew of distinguished lawyers signed an open letter to the Washington DC legal bar, asking it to investigate and discipline the US attorney general, William Barr, for possible ethical violations.

The complaint charged him with violating his oath and the constitution by, among other things, representing “the personal and political interests of Donald Trump, not the interests of the United States”. It quoted a legal ethics professor, Stephen Gillers: “We don’t have an attorney general now. We have an additional lawyer for the president.”

If Barr’s outrageous interview with CNN on Wednesday is anything to go by, the professional discipline complaint gave him too much credit.

In his interview with Wolf Blitzer, Barr acted less like America’s highest law enforcement officer and more like a campaign press aide for Donald Trump.

The distinction is extremely important. Lawyers deal in evidence and law. Campaign press spokesmen mimic their candidate’s talking points. Prosecutors are careful not to speak publicly about a criminal investigation. Campaign press aides make unfounded charges to dip into culture wars.

This is not the way an attorney general should behave. After Watergate, Edward Levi affirmed that “our law is not an instrument of partisan purpose”. The next attorney general, Griffin Bell, proclaimed the justice department “a neutral zone” beyond politics.

Barr lowered the bar even on his prior public appearances. Let’s look at five things he said.
1. Mail-in voting [listing headers only - read the original for details]
2. Foreign ballot interference
3. Voting twice
4. China, not Russia
5. Kenosha culture war

With interview quoting and commentary mixed, rather than err in excerpting, readers have the link and should seek out the item to flesh out the opinion.

The Guardian item itself links to an earlier July 2020 report by Politico, "Past D.C. Bar Association chiefs call for probe of William Barr - In a new letter, the former bar presidents allege that the attorney general has broken the association's rules," statingt:

Four former presidents of the D.C. Bar Association have signed a letter calling on the group to investigate whether Attorney General William Barr has violated its rules. The District of Columbia Bar authorizes lawyers to practice in the city and has the power to punish them for breaking its rules and to revoke their law licenses.

The complaint argues that Barr has broken Washington's ethics rules by being dishonest and violating his oath to uphold the Constitution, along with other charges. And it highlights four episodes in Barr’s time as attorney general to make the case: his characterization of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russia’s 2016 election interference, his criticism of an inspector general report on the Russia probe, his criticism of FBI officials in a TV interview, and his role in the disbursement of peaceful protesters from Lafayette Square, outside the White House. A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to comment.

“Mr. Barr’s client is the United States, and not the president,” the letter says. “Yet, Mr. Barr has consistently made decisions and taken action to serve the personal and political self-interests of President Donald Trump, rather than the interest of the United States.”

Barr’s early description of the Mueller report and his handling of protesters in Lafayette Square have long drawn pointed criticism. But his comments on the inspector general report on the FBI’s Russia probe hasn’t drawn as much attention. In an NBC News interview after the report’s release, Barr called the FBI’s basis for opening the Russia probe “very flimsy.” The letter argues that the criticism was dishonest.

“Indeed, the notion that the legitimacy of an FBI investigation’s initiation should be judged by its end, if applied broadly, could easily chill the initiation of wholly legitimate inquiries for fear of being second-guessed,” the letter adds.

The letter also argues that Barr broke the D.C. Bar’s rules when he criticized former FBI officials’ decisions regarding the Russia probe and suggested they could be prosecuted. [...]

[...] The complaint’s signatories include a host of legal ethics experts and former government lawyers. Andrea Ferster, Philip Allen Lacovara, Marna S. Tucker, and Melvin White — all former presidents of the D.C. Bar — also signed on.

Bar associations can take years to review disciplinary complaints, and their processes are kept confidential. The letter comes as Barr faces sharp criticism from leaders in the legal profession. Late last month, the president of the New York City Bar Association and chair of its task force on the rule of law sent a letter to top members of Congress calling him “unfit” for his job and raising some of the same concerns raised in this letter.

So, there is a host of people able to form and argue informed opinions about Barr being an entirely "unfit" Attorney General. 

He is a disaster. As much a train wreck as Trump.

Trump has a penchant for finding mediocrity, (a criticism a biased mind might level against Ivanka. However, Jarad can be argued to be a cut above the Trump offspring, which is faint praise, but among family, he distances himself).

Barr uniquely makes his predecessor Sessions look good. Not everyone with a law degree could do that. Barr is special, that way.

Saturday, September 05, 2020

An easy post. Worth a thousand words, or better, admit that all in the below-povertyline community "can't breath."

 A Strib image.

UPDATE: Accompanying this published item. Late in the item. Not the lead image.

An easy post. Linking to and excerpting from DWT, to encourage readers to bookmark the site. And because truth needs to be shouted out to non-believers.

Link, and an excerpt - italics added:


A Conservative Is A Conservative, Whether He Calls Himself A Republican Or A Democrat And It Doesn't Matter If He Passes Himself Off As A "Moderate"-- They Own All Society's Problems

The two parties aren't "the same." Democrats aren't the same as Republicans. There are some good Democrats. There are no good Republicans. The identity politics Democratic politicians play-- pro-woman, pro-gay, anti-racism, for example-- is better, way better, than the identity politics Republicans play. As for corruption... well corruption is part of, and even lionized by, conservatism. Liberals at least feel guilty about their own corruption, for whatever that's worth.

When he was younger than I am now, my grandfather told me that the only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican. I'd say he hit that one out of the park. A few days ago, The Independent published an OpEd by North Carolina academics Kevin Singer and Alyssa Rockenbach, People worry that 'moderate' Democrats like Joe Biden are the same as Republicans. Our study suggests they may be right. They offered a new set of criteria to look at politicians. It helps explain why there is so much energy around the Republicans for Biden movement right now and so much more enthusiasm from that direction than from progressives, who generally dislike him less than they dislike Trump [...] deceiving themselves into thinking they will be able to have an impact on his neoliberal agenda after he's in the White House.

Friday, we put together a ritual denunciation of consevative Democrats-- misnamed "moderates" by the media and misguided academics like Singer and Rockenbach-- who had just accepted, and celebrated, endorsements by the very right-wing U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Singer and Rockenbach, though, address the idealization of "moderatism" as the ultimate political virtue. "When it comes to addressing climate change," they wrote, "Eric Levitz of New York Magazine argued that 'a major [obstacle] is the tendency of moderate Democrats to mistake their own myopic complacency for heroic prudence.' Political researcher David Adler found that across Europe and North America, centrists are the least supportive of democracy, the least committed to its institutions, and the most supportive of authoritarianism. Furthermore, Adler found that centrists are the least supportive of free and fair elections as well as civil rights-- in the United States, only 25 percent of centrists agree that civil rights are an essential feature of democracy. This finding dovetails with observations made by Martin Luther King Jr. in his letter from Birmingham Jail: 'I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the… great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Councilor or the Klu Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice.' Even Arthur Books, a self-avowed moderate, admits to 'the failure of the mainstream, moderate, progressive formula for how to create a more equal pluralist America,' adding, 'I’m a moderate guy, but the evidence doesn’t support moderation when it comes to racial equity.' That’s all well and good. But what does the data show?"

They reported on a study of beliefs and attitudes of college students across the country (IDEALS) and found that "as America battles a global pandemic and an economic collapse and reckons with systemic racism, IDEALS suggests that moderate men may be the least likely to make a positive difference.


 That moderate men most resemble Republicans has been confirmed, of all places, on dating apps. Brittany Wong of HuffPost writes, “It’s almost become a coastal cliche at this point: If someone lists their political views as ‘moderate’ on a dating app, the thinking goes, go ahead and assume the person is a conservative.” [...]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has grown increasingly frustrated with moderate Democrats during her tenure, saying at a recent event, “The Democratic Party is not a left party. The Democratic Party is a center or a center-conservative party.” Her [ex] chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, recently deleted a tweet comparing two moderate Democrat coalitions-- consisting mostly of men-- to Southern Democrats who favored segregation and opposed civil rights. During this election cycle, a recurring criticism of Vice President Biden has been his record on school desegregation.

Have a nice Labor Day weekend. The day itself - In a cursory and wholly token-ceremonial way celebrates the only day of the year labor gets anything but imposed grinding class warfare from and by the rich, instigated since before Rome and still going; with the whine from that quarter being of ingratitude with clucking scripts from "think tanks" about economy, natural law, founder intent, order, and instigation of conflict. Each script a lie. An occasional half-truth. 

If you read "rule of law" text or hear the term, clutch your wallet or coin purse. The reach is imminent.

Run the other way. 

They'll get you anyway. But buy time.

The rich take it. As theirs all along. And will do it again. Forever if having their way. Holding your health and sheltered hunger-survival at bay. In hostage.

Peasants through history have always been scoped by the aristocrats as on the verge of rebellion requiring its being put down by brutality before it might even start. Brutality and guile.

Bless Mitch McConnell. A sort of Sheriff of Nottingham. Bless Rand Paul. Bloomberg. 


Again, best wishes for the weekend to sentient people.

Kamala Harris was California's AG from January 3, 2011 – January 3, 2017. She never prosecuted cop brutality or murder by cop. A websearch and a few links about "inked" police gangs suggested the problem may not be new, i.e., not arising after Harris left the AG office. A do-nothing question exists: What did she know and when did she know it?

 Harris AG service dates are Wikipedia fact. Unlike her "race," where bullshit predominates the issue, The Atlantic publishing, "The Wikipedia War That Shows How Ugly This Election Will Be - An editing battle over Kamala Harris’s race is a sign of what’s to come." by Joshua Benton - August 13, 2020.

That is a story in itself, but different from the story posted here today.

Websearch = los angeles sheriff department ink tattoo gang

from :

Over the last several decades, there have been a number of cases that have led many to believe that there is racial bias within the United States' police force. From the murder of civilians like Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin to the racial profiling instituted in stop and frisk—there have been many instances of police brutality that some suggest are rooted in systemic racism. In some instances, these acts are allegedly being committed by neo-nazi and white supremacy gangs that exist in secret within the LA police force—as seen through the Vikings gang of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department. Take a look at how a superior court judge is attempting to find existing gang members at Los Angeles county's Compton station below and let us know what you think about this controversial debate in the comments section on Facebook. 

The judge is not seeking out officers, like the one above, who are adorned with non-controversial ink.

The judge is not seeking out officers, like the one above, who are adorned with non-controversial ink.

A superior court judge has recently ordered the Los Angeles County Sheriff's department to reveal the names of police deputies who have a specific skull tattoo design. These tattoos, which feature a skull with a military helmet, riffle and flames, have been linked to a notorious neo-nazi gang within the Los Angeles Police Department's Compton station.

In an effort to crack down on secret societies within the Los Angeles Police Department, Superior Court Judge Michael P. Vinencia is pushing have the department interrogate officers about their tattoos in order to determine which deputies are involved with the gang.

There have been many people who have fought against Vincencia, including county attorney Chandler Parker who believes the questioning to be an inappropriate invasion of an officer's privacy.


The Vikings gang first surfaced approximately 30 years ago and has been affiliated with various police stations throughout Los Angeles, including Lynwood. They've been linked to a number of crimes against the African-American community, including the 2016 murder of Donta Taylor. 


 As concerns over police misconduct and use of force have drawn increased national attention in recent years, activists have argued that a key part of the problem is the ability for officers to shield one another from accountability.

But in California, critics of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department have been faced with a unique version of the issue: the existence of what have been called “deputy gangs” — cliques of officers who allegedly engage in violent and potentially criminal behavior while protecting their members and clashing with other law enforcement officers.

These groups, which have reportedly been around in some form or another in Los Angeles County since the 1970s, have been a frequent topic of local media reporting. Outlets like the Los Angeles Times have highlighted how other officers have filed formal complaints about the “secretive groups,” describing them as powerful forces within the sheriff’s department who beat and harass local residents and, at times, actively work to intimidate other nonaffiliated officers.

Many of the deputy cliques share common features: hierarchical structures, intensive recruitment, hazing of younger officers, and a resistance to outsiders. But one of the features that has been most commonly cited is tattoos. Members of a specific group often have a shared “ink” that symbolizes their membership. In some instances, according to reports, this ink is only granted after a deputy commits an illegal act or violates department protocol to show their loyalty to the group. In other cases, deputies allegedly received additional markings after fulfilling certain conditions, like committing police brutality or being involved in a shooting.

Such groups are not exclusive to Los Angeles County, but the area has reportedly had a particularly difficult time dealing with the groups. “Defenders say the cliques are harmless fraternities, likening them to close-knit groups in the military,” the LA Times noted in a July article. “But time and again, the deputy clubs have come under fire for promoting aggressive tactics and an us-versus-everyone mentality.”

According to the Times, there have been several clubs that have existed in the various stations under the sheriff’s department, with some groups becoming defunct, leaving new cliques to take their place. In late September, eight LASD deputies filed a lawsuit against one such group, called the “Banditos,” a deputy clique of several dozen members who operate out of the department’s East Los Angeles station.

Criminal justice news outlet the Appeal reports that according to the lawsuit, the group uses violence and intimidation to maintain a “stranglehold on the unincorporated communities east of downtown,” with members sporting “tattoos featuring a pistol-wielding, sombrero- and bandolier-wearing skeleton with a thick mustache and a unique number for each member.” In 2018, the outlet noted that the existence of nearly three dozen federal civil rights lawsuits against the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department pointed to a deputy “gang culture that encourages excessive force, particularly against minorities.”

Stomping on parents of truants was low hanging fruit, and an ambitious AG could gain press coverage by such a focus; fiddling while Rome burned. 

What was Harris thinking? Didn't she have a clue of what her actual job was? It was more than promoting PR stuff toward Kamala's career advancement goals. 

But she had her priorities. And it is not as if police-gang trouble was some big secret. It was there for serious law enforcement professionals to pursue, to investigate and prosecute, as seems to be the case, now.

Other links: BuzzfeedBrietbart; LATimes; and /, headlined, "In L.A. County, Gangs Wear Badges."

Yes, all the media coverage listed and quoted is recent. But from the quoting, the problem itself is not. During the Harris AG tenure, it existed - and could have been rooted out by a citizen-friendly top law authority. But not Harris?

And while inaction where action would have helped minority communities facing policing bias is troubling and cause to criticize law-and-order Harris; what about her or her people scurrying to rewrite the record?

Dumb Biden could have had either of two stellar progressive black women, Stacey Abrams or Karen Bass on the ticket second spot where each had better records in support of the black community, fighting voter suppression, etc. (Bass being a Californian like Harris); but each was an older heavier and less physically attractive woman than Harris, who is less well educated and more compromised than either. Biden could have enhanced his credibility among informed progressives and knowledgeable black community members with either as his pick.

Biden likely was told who to pick, and picked who he was told. Glitz over substance. A Senator! End of post.


A caveat. The Crabgrass understanding is that Harris during her "top cop" tenure prosecuted as many evil police officers as Minnesota's senior Senator, Ms. Klobuchar, which is zero. Both ran law-and-order election campaigns, both stayed away from going after bad cops. Neither is really presidential, but than that puts them in the same box as Trump, Pence and Biden. 

TRUMP MUST GO. That said; Biden and Harris will need to be strictly policed. No brutality, no truncheon or chemical weapons, but as Harry Truman said, "They say give 'em hell, but I only tell the truth. When it is about them, they think it's hell."

So - Give 'em hell. The Biden - Harris ticket, put together as it was with key mischief on the eve of Super Tuesday, deserves no mercy. Nor do the band of perps, "The Team" each-and-every who pulled off that Super Tuesday gambit. Biden owned brazenly by the donor class, Harris with career ambition uber alles. Both graceless and neither deservind grace. A pair of losers. About to run the nation for four years. Not eight, not that pair. They'll yield to a second Romney run, or Ted Cruz, or whatever worse slime the Republicans skim off the top of the swamp water, say Pence, and it will be - Trump onward, the fire, the frying pan, the fire again. Our nation, our people, deserve far better. Big money runs the circus freak show, and we have to buy popcorn or cotton candy and watch classless acts. 

Hang it up, see what tomorrow brings.

Thursday, September 03, 2020

America the Beautiful. Portly Republicans visit Kenosha. The term empty suits hardly applies. Rather, Truman's favorite term, stuffed shirts. fits the evidence..

The images are from Strib reporting. 

You can do the websearch, Trump Barr Kenosha [images] 

Returned images of the two, Trump and Barr,  deplaning and out politicking suggest that Biden and Harris each are trim and in better condition.

That is: Besides Biden and Harris being more decent humans. Besides not being the threat to Democracy that fascism poses. Besides being ahead in the polls. Besides many, many other things. 

You'd think a pair of white supremacists would care to look a bit more - supreme

Fine expensive suits, yes - full of Portly aged overfed Republicans. The slang expression "fat cats" unavoidably applies.

Wednesday, September 02, 2020

BOSTON — U.S. Sen. Edward Markey of Massachusetts defeated U.S. Rep. Joe Kennedy III in Tuesday's hard-fought Democratic primary, harnessing support from progressive leaders to overcome a challenge from a younger rival who is a member of America's most famous political family.

 The headline is the opening paragraph of an AP report carried by Strib.

The headline tells it all. 

Italics at the end of the headline? TAKE THAT! Chelsea Clinton, Jeb Bush. 

An excerpt:

Markey [...] teamed up with a leading progressive, New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, on the Green New Deal climate change initiative — and at one point labeled Kennedy "a progressive in name only."

[... Kennedy] sought to cast the 74-year-old Markey as someone out of touch after spending decades in Congress, first in the House before moving to the Senate.

At a victory celebration in his hometown of Malden, Massachusetts, Markey ticked off a series of priorities, from support for the Black Lives Matter movement to a call for Medicare for All, to combating climate change, a signature issue for Markey.

"Every other problem is linked to it. No solution to any challenge will be successful unless we address it. There will be no peace, no justice and no prosperity unless we stop the march to climate destruction," he said. "We must pass a Green New Deal."

To make good on those pledges, Markey said Democrats have to take back control of the U.S. Senate and oust President Donald Trump in November.

"He is the most corrupt, most racist, most incompetent president in American history," Markey said. "We must banish his agenda of division and destruction to the history books."

Markey also credited his win in part to support from younger voters telling them "when they say you're too young, show up with your friends."

[...] "The senator is a good man. You never heard me say otherwise," Kennedy told supporters at an outdoor rally. Kennedy also suggested that the movement of supporters the campaign pulled together would continue past the current election.

"We may have lost the final vote count tonight but we built a coalition that will endure," he said. "I would do this again with all of you in a heartbeat."

[bolding and italics added] Elizabeth Warren, you have a target on your back. A heartbeat away, a non-progressive wants to eat your progressive lunch. Be vigilant. 

Be soooooo progressive that the Young Kennedy will have no opportunity to waylay. He argued Markey was too old. Too entrenched. So address it directly, saying, "He's too Kennedy to gain US even a pinch of progress."

And Senator Warren, if you have to go nuclear, remind your sane electorate in Massachusetts that young Kennedy is a Pelosi endorsee. That will end his chances. It did this time, it will again. Entrenchment exists apart from time in office, and Kennedy is entrenched wrongly, no matter how much cashflow he can rain on Pelosi/Perez and consulting entrenched hangers-on.

Tuesday, September 01, 2020

NYTimes reports on Trump tweeting of a coup plot against him.

 Link. Quote:


In the blast of social media messages, Mr. Trump also embraced a call to imprison Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York, threatened to send federal forces against demonstrators outside the White House, attacked CNN and NPR, embraced a supporter charged with murder, mocked his challenger, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., and repeatedly assailed the mayor of Portland, even posting the mayor’s office telephone number so that supporters could call demanding his resignation.

One of the most incendiary messages was a retweet of a program from the One America News Network, a pro-Trump channel that advances extreme theories and that the president has turned to when he feels that Fox News has not been supportive enough. The message he retweeted Saturday night promoted a segment accusing demonstrators of secretly plotting Mr. Trump’s downfall.

“According to the mainstream media, the riots & extreme violence are completely unorganized,” the tweet said. “However, it appears this coup attempt is led by a well funded network of anarchists trying to take down the President.” Accompanying it was an image of a promo for a segment titled “America Under Siege: The Attempt to Overthrow President Trump.”


Mr. Trump likewise reposted messages asserting that the real death toll from the coronavirus is only around 9,000 — not nearly 183,000 — because the others who died also had other health issues and most were of an advanced age.

[links in original omitted]

Twitter has led to the death of coverage in depth, or at least has that aim.

When it comes to lack of depth, it's Trump's end of the pool. And he wades in that wading pool with gusto, and with no need for water wings. (Actually, deep end of the pool, he's got flotation, his body alone suffices.)