If Trump had not been born a multimillionaire racist landlord/slumlord, he'd have become a preacher.

Think, Burt Landcaster, in "Elmer Gantry." Different hair, otherwise . . .

Cohen to "testify" . . .

Like Jerry Falwell and Oral Roberts, Trump founded a "University."

UPDATE: Fred Trump having son Donald take over Fred's fortune and Fred's ways is the best argument around for a high estate tax at the federal level and a high inheritance tax among states. Two generations of such stuff is overbearing.

Wall banging.

On Feb. 22 Dan Burns published: "MN AG: Ellison joins one of many Trump-blocking lawsuits," pointing out that the stage is being set for consideration of a Constitutional balance-of-powers question. Read it.

It would not have been so, had the 1.15 million Minnesotans (poor deluded souls) who voted Doug Wardlow had been a majority. How can there be that many stupid people in Minnesota, yet able to find their polling place?

Housley got 1.1 million votes. HOUSLEY! Those Housley-Wardlow rote GOP voters made it through childhood to adulthood. How? By daily viewing of FOX? There has to be some other explanation.

Twitter is not a seat of rational discourse and one example stands as particularly good proof.

Link.

Being led to believe from Google Blogger available statistics of viewer interest, one 2007 Ramsey-specific post touching on fairness of growth planning has rung some bells.

Link. Beliefs written there are still held; Comp Plan directions away from fairness to existing homeowners to subsidize growth wanted by Met Council is BAD POLICY to be opposed; regardless of who advocates subsidization, or benefits from it.

Pork barrel Northstar politics in Minnesota.

Some contend that Minnesota's metro transit Northstar commuter rail thing was a boondoggle sold us as a service whereas its actual purpose was as a sop to developers along the route, so that new homebuyers could be told "there's a rail stop in town so buy here;" the net result being the thing led to much heavier U.S. Highway 10 congestion, because - yes there is the commuter morning/evening rush hour rail available but - nobody [or two few] take it to pay its costs; given the fact that the new housing development residents, in fact and in the great majority, drive back and forth from home to their downtown jobs.

In effect, a cosmetic thing to goose up north metro housing expansion. But a very expensive cosmetic measure, one needing ongoing subsidy from day one to exist.

With that as background:

New Strib "reporting,"

Minnesota lawmakers hear calls to extend Northstar rail to St. Cloud --- Commuter train from downtown Minneapolis now ends in Big Lake.
By Janet Moore, Star Tribune, February 22, 2019 — 8:23pm

For several years, some lawmakers have tried to correct a miscue that has vexed public transit in the Twin Cities and beyond for a decade — the abrupt halt of the Northstar Commuter Rail line in Big Lake instead of St. Cloud, one of the largest metropolitan areas in the state.

Start an ostensible news report with an editorial "miscue" "to correct" judgment and the flavor of pork or at least the smell of it cooking up is inescapable.

The item expands:

Rep. Dan Wolgamott, DFL-St. Cloud, has sponsored a bill that would provide $7.3 million to get the project rolling. Of that amount, $850,000 would pay for an analysis to see if an extension is appropriate. The remaining money would fund preliminary work, such as engineering, environmental analysis and land acquisition.

"Getting this train to St. Cloud will change people's lives," Wolgamott said. "I thought the testimony today was extremely powerful."

Cost estimates for extending Northstar to St. Cloud have varied over the years, from as $40 million to $150 million.

Wolgamott said the assessment will help better quantify those costs, [...]

"... will change people's lives" seems hyperbole, the highly subsidized commuter rail line not being as ubiquitous as the microwave oven as an innovative means to cook pork faster. In the real sense, not figurative "pork."

Yup however, "pork" cooking. If the bulk of $7.3 million is for implementation detail, why eight-fifty thousand for a study of whether or not it's a sound idea? That rings of either of two indirect and suspect things. Either the eight-fifty thousand is a giveaway to somebody's friends/relatives over a done deal to do the start-up of the spending either way, or it's the only aim of this legislator, to kick the can along, with the remainder of the suggested money only a bargaining chip.

Presuming the best of two possibilities, the bargaining chip idea, and letting interested readers pursue the remainder of that Strib article; history suggests:

MN Senate approves study on extending Northstar commuter rail to St. Cloud
April 27, 2018 By Bill Werner

The state would spend 850-thousand dollars for a study on extending the Northstar commuter rail line from Big Lake to Saint Cloud, under a measure the Minnesota Senate approved Thursday night over objections of Big Lake Republican Mary Kiffmeyer. “The entire route, just a one-way ticket, is subsidized 22 dollars — round trip, 44 — and that’s at four-years-ago prices or so,” Kiffmeyer says. Minneapolis Democrat Scott Dibble, a strong backer of mass transit, fired back, “The most heavily-subsidized form of transportation we have are cars and roadways, bar none.” Backers argue extending Northstar to Saint Cloud will improve ridership on the commuter rail line which has been plagued by low numbers.

A short item, that being the entirety of it. As a first step of analysis, Kiffmeyer does represent Big Lake, and what's the status of Northstar, re her district? Wikipedia teaches, "The maintenance facility for the Northstar trains was built just to the south.[4]"

So Kiffmeyer's Big Lake (little town, big lake?) has gotten its pork, a terminus station and jobs in a maintenance facility for the entire shooting match. Not bad for the town, given that its state senator has been a total throbbing hemorrhoid over her entire political career, especially during a sad tenure as Minnesota Secretary of State, and likely was one from childhood onward. Voting suppression motivations being part of her extreme partisan politics.

And she's satisfied with the line's terminus being where it presently is located.

Gee. Folks in St. Cloud can think as they will, but Kiffmeyer offered "subsidization already, as it stands" argument to keep a terminus in place.

Elizabeth Warren gets a Young Turks interview. Mainstream media will not give the two progressives due attention. So use your internet access to explore what the mainstream outlets will not tell you.

Warren in an interview with Cenk; here. Note the new top sidebar item; posted for the same reason citing a non-mainstream media extended Warren interview on the web is necessary.

Bernie also did an interview with Cenk, broadcast by the Young Turks. AND - this cycle he even got a campaign kickoff interview on CBS. Which is encouraging. View the CBS interview and learn. Know where alternate news and views exist on the web. Know where Bernie's and Warren's views on the issues may contrast, or may be congruent.

Inform yourselves because this election is important. I believe the Young Turks ran the Bernie and Warren interviews sequentially, in fairness to both. This is actual journalism at its best.

Speculation: Pushing so hard on the border wall wastfulness to satisfy a big part of the base, and to deflect "weakness" attention when he caves on the trade war with China because of soybeans in the midwest in 2020?

Soybeans, set to undermine the Trumpster in Ag states.

Is the speculation wrong that he will cave on the trade war, a/k/a "settle the dispute on favorable terms" since he spins up to the point of clear and absolute lying? That will remain to be seen. But as the elevators reach full capacity, the storage silos farmers own doing so also, and the market fails to yield price gains, the pressure will mount to try to appease that "Farmer Brown" segment of his base as well as the wall-bangers.

Note that the idea is published here and now; but the analysis is not at all sophisticated. It is merely judging the will and skills of the man and his standing on principles vs elasticity toward expediency. No will to push the trade war into a 2020 election pinch; little skill; and few to no principles vs expediency, are all presently established traits which will collectively lead to a cave-in on the trade war with China. That being the guess here. Expect it by January of next year if not sooner.

Presidential?

Hardly presidential, is the opinion here, but readers can view and decide. There are options, the opinion here being: better Dem candidate options exist. Better minds; progressive policy. Better minds and less track record garbage even in the middle road Republican-lite area Biden lives in. Even Klobuchar, staff turnover worry and all. Biden likely is the singularly positioned Dem candidate who could lose to Trump in 2020. Bernie is felt here as the one who'd best get out an active and dedicated vote; but even Harris.

[Note: the post was updated Saturday, Feb. 21, 2019.]

Bernie 2020. Us against them.

Day One Frontrunner. Among Relative Lilliputians. Send money.

Campaign website.

BBC, here and here.

NYTimes:

A self-styled democratic socialist whose calls for “Medicare for all,” a $15 minimum wage and tuition-free public colleges have become pillars of the party’s left wing, Mr. Sanders is among the best-known politicians to join an already crowded Democratic field and one of the most outspoken against President Trump, whom he has repeatedly called a “pathological liar” and a “racist.”

“Three years ago, during our 2016 campaign, when we brought forth our progressive agenda we were told that our ideas were ‘radical’ and ‘extreme,’” Mr. Sanders said on Tuesday in an early-morning email to supporters, citing those health, economic and education policies as well as combating climate change and raising taxes on wealthy Americans.

“Well, three years have come and gone. And, as result of millions of Americans standing up and fighting back, all of these policies and more are now supported by a majority of Americans,” he said.

Strib, carrying an AP feed:

Sanders could be well positioned to compete in the nation's first primary in neighboring New Hampshire, which he won by 22 points in 2016. But he won't have the state to himself.

Sen. Kamala Harris of California, another Democratic presidential contender, was in New Hampshire on Monday and said she'd compete for the state. She also appeared to take a dig at Sanders.

"The people of New Hampshire will tell me what's required to compete in New Hampshire," she told shoppers at a bookstore in Concord. "But I will tell you I'm not a democratic socialist."

Sen. Elizabeth Warren of nearby Massachusetts will be in New Hampshire on Friday.

One of the biggest questions surrounding Sanders' candidacy is how he'll compete against someone like Warren, who shares many of his policy goals. Warren has already launched her campaign and has planned an aggressive swing through the early primary states.

Aside from Bernie and Warren, none of the others matter. Even if one finagles the nomination, it is Bernie and Warren as the only two to be actual progressives. Party regulars abound. Progressives number two, so far. And Harris spoke correctly. She is not a progressive. Neither Bernie nor Warren are in it as an ego trip. Neither need be in the process of redefinition from their past records.

An early Bernie supporter in 2016 is acting as the progressive he is, Strib reporting:

The states cite federal government figures to argue that no crisis exists at the border: Customs and Border Protection numbers show unlawful entries are near a 45-year low, and the State Department acknowledged a “lack of credible evidence” that terrorists are using the border to sneak into the U.S.

Becerra has led dozens of suits against the Trump administration since taking office in 2017. Ellison recently joined his former U.S. House progressive caucus ally in suing to block the government from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census and last week joined 21 other attorneys general in an amicus brief asking the Ninth Circuit to uphold a lower-court ruling that blocked Homeland Security from terminating Temporary Protected Status for people from Haiti, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Sudan.

“When the president or the federal government harms the people of Minnesota, I’ll use the power of my office to protect Minnesotans,” Ellison said Monday.

_____________UPDATE______________
Bernie's announcement is what we've all been waiting for. It was placeholders until then. Elizabeth Warren is great as a hedge, and would be a fine president where now Trump sits and embarrasses the entire nation before the entire world. (Trump and Bolten rattling sabres.) Beyond Warren and Bernie it is - same old, might as well be a Clinton, same old - evidence of the two party disdain for what people want and believe government should provide. Yet, Steve Bullock from Montana is fresh. Remember that.

________FURTHER UPDATE________
Big question: Where will Goldman-Sachs money go this cycle without a Clinton? How much will Wall Street and Big Pharma spend to try to block Sanders and Warren? A ton of money will be spent; but who's their favorite, besides Trump? Have they a player in the Democratic side mixed bag? Some names come to mind, Biden atop the list.

________FURTHER UPDATE________
DETAILS: CBS, "Bernie Sanders announces 2020 run: "We're gonna win;" "Bernie Sanders' 2020 campaign raises more than $1 million in less than 4 hours[not billionaires];" "Bernie Sanders announces 2020 run: Full transcript."

CNN:

Along with GOP Sen. Mike Lee and Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, Sanders last year won bipartisan backing for a War Powers resolution calling for an end to military support for the Saudi-led offensive in Yemen. His pressure campaigns on major corporations like Amazon also helped secure a $15 minimum wage for workers there and a pledge from the company to back legislation raising it nationwide.

"He has reached out more to work with colleagues in the last few years to show that effectiveness and that's his biggest plus point on a substance level," said Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, who led the successful push for a matching resolution this year in the House.

The policy principles behind a second Sanders campaign are expected to be largely the same as in 2015 and 2016. Still, he has over the past few weeks begun to roll out or re-up proposals to combat economic inequality and fortify programs like Social Security. He is also planning to reintroduce his Medicare for all legislation in tandem with Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal, who has taken over developing and shepherding the accompanying House bill.

Over two weeks in January and February, Sanders unveiled plans to buy more than 50 years of padding for Social Security by raising payroll taxes on income above $250,000 and hike the estate tax on the wealthiest Americans -- suggesting a top rate of 77% on billionaire heirs.

"Our bill does what the American people want," Sanders said in a statement ahead of the rollout, "by substantially increasing the estate tax on the wealthiest families in this country and dramatically reducing wealth inequality. From a moral, economic, and political perspective our nation will not thrive when so few have so much and so many have so little."

Grounding Social Security's future against the onslaught of the likes of Paul Ryan; and putting a hold on dynastic aristocracy possibilities by fairly taxing massive estates cannot be logically attacked as bad policy; even by those who've enjoyed privilege by buying time against such sensible reform. Bernie knows what's best for a nation, and those bought by the billionaires can go their way, where a Washington with the Clintons in the rear view mirror offers every chance of being a better Washington for "us."

__________FURTHER UPDATE__________
Clinton 2016 staffers have to feed their families; here, here, here and here. If Robby Mook or either Podesta brother has attached onto someone's campaign it has not been noted here. Yet.

Beltway and other names which might attach at some point to somebody's campaign: here, here, here and here. So far it looks as if Harris has the lead in recycled Clinton people. As far as online reporting suggests. Behind the scenes, regular beltway consultants make their living consulting in exchange for money. Those used by the Clintons can be thought of as "regulars."

___________FURTHER UPDATE__________
With multiple women seeking the presidency Emily's List is keeping mum. Last cycle they stunk of Clinton. Lesson learned?

Michelle Alexander, talking truth to a brick wall. Plus a second video featuring Alexander.

Video. A brick wall showing unaccepting body language.

Alexander giving a TED talk. One deserving attention and an effort by all of us at systemic remediation.

I like her more than Kamala Harris. Particularly when the Harris climb upward is examined in policy terms.

______________UPDATE_________________
Strib sensing a mood change afoot, addresses the over-incarceration and over-criminalization issue with an item featuring a white woman victim, a white face put upon a problem that weighs proportionately less on the white sector of our communities.

Gee.

Briahna Gray at The Intercept questions: "A Problem for Kamala Harris: Can a Prosecutor Become President in the Age of Black Lives Matter?"

Focused on Kamala Harris. From last month. Might it also apply to ex-prosecutor Klobuchar?

It is a long and detailed item, beginnng:

She’s running for president as a progressive, but as attorney general of California, she criminalized truancy — making it a crime for kids to be late for school and dragging into the criminal justice system even more disproportionately low-income, predominantly black and Latino families. She’s overlooked the misconduct of her prosecutors and fought to uphold their wrongfully secured convictions. She defended California’s choice to deny gender reassignment surgery to a transgender inmate, and in 2014, she appealed a federal judge’s holding that the death penalty was unconstitutional.

The list goes on and on. But in some ways, the details don’t matter. The problem isn’t that Harris was an especially bad prosecutor. She made positive contributions as well, encouraging education and re-entry programs for ex-offenders, for instance. The problem, more precisely, is that she was ever a prosecutor at all.

To become a prosecutor is to make a choice to align oneself with a powerful and fundamentally biased system. As Paul Butler, former prosecutor and author of “Chokehold: Policing Black Men,” told The Guardian, “as a lawyer who went to law school with a goal of helping black people and using my legal skills to make things better, the realization that the law itself was a mechanism to keep African-American people down was frightening.” He added, “Lawyers are competitive and ambitious, and the way that manifests itself in a prosecutor’s office is you want to get tough sentences. I got caught up in that world. You feel like you’re doing the Lord’s work — you tell yourselves that you’re helping the community.” But, he vividly recalls, the expectation is far from reality.

Compare his self-reflection with Harris’s reply when asked about her decision to become a prosecutor: “There is a duty and responsibility to be a voice for the most voiceless and vulnerable and to do the work of justice. And that’s the work I wanted to do.”

Harris’s response might be understandable coming from someone with less experience — a layperson, a law student, or even a junior district attorney. But who, especially in the era of Black Lives Matter, would flatly describe the enforcement arm of the criminal justice system as doing “the work of justice”?

[links omitted] Subsequently in the item Gray does a compare/contrast flaying of Harris:

Harris’s choices are thrown in a more unflattering light when compared to the relatively short tenure of former public defender and civil rights lawyer Larry Krasner, district attorney of Philadelphia.

In his first week, Krasner fired 31 prosecutors who weren’t committed to his reforms, and last February, he promulgated a list of new policies with massive, “revolutionary” scope. The office no longer charges sex workers with fewer than three convictions, nor does it prosecute marijuana possession. It no longer starts the plea negotiation process with the highest possible sentencing, a practice that privileges leverage over substantive justice. And he instructed his prosecutors to tally the cost of incarcerating everyone sentenced with a crime and to demonstrate why the expense — upwards of $42,000 a year per person — is justified in a city where the average total family income is $41,000. Although it’s hard to make a difference from inside a prosecutor’s office, Krasner has shown that it can be done from the very top.

Notably, the dramatic reforms he has put in place were informed by his experiences on the defendants’ side of the courtroom, which offers a clearer view of systemic inequities intrinsic to the criminal justice system: clients who languish in jail due to a failure to come up with a few hundred dollars in bail money; undocumented parents who go to trial because taking a plea would mean deportation and separation from their children; exculpatory evidence wrongly withheld, and, all too often, the lack of consequences for the prosecutors who withhold it.

Importantly, if Harris had to be tougher on crime because she is black, it wasn’t for the sake of some higher ideal. It was because her personal ambitions demanded it.

As California’s “top cop,” Harris was no Krasner. While Krasner has made headlines for commanding the full scope of prosecutorial discretion in service of vulnerable communities, Harris most notoriously used her discretion to let Steve Mnuchin, a chief villain of the housing crisis cum secretary of Treasury, off the hook.

[italics added] The last sentence of the quote links here. Other links within the quote are omitted.

That failure of Harris to prosecute [a/k/a exercise of white collar prosecutorial discretion while pursuing truancy] has received widespread merited online attention.

A side note, how would a compare/contrast of Klobuchar and Krasner turn out?

Tyler Durden at ZeroHedge gives Ilhan Omar a well earned "BRAVO."

Read it. Embedded video.

Item title, "Watch Venezuela Envoy Elliott Abrams Lose His Cool During Tense Exchange With Rep. Ilhan Omar."

Four and a half minutes, hardly time for popcorn. The woman has the will and chutzpah to confront. Emile Zola would like her. Yes, Elliot Abrams, pardoned by George W.H. Bush. And this destabilizer-provacateur gets recycled by the Trumpsters. They have no shame. War Hawk retreads are a shame to this nation and the people.

ABRAMS - a twit in a snit. False outrage over being called out for the thug he was and the thug he seems headed toward being again.

Durden links here, and quotes from the item.

In a speech standing out in the falling snow Klobuchar spoke as expected, saying she's seeking the Democratic Party nomination for president. A day earlier Elizabeth Warren made official that she is doing the same. Warren's and Klobucher's announcements were both expected, Warren's being the more important.

Klobuchar covered by Reuters. As of the timestamp of this post, the Klobuchar Wikipedia page only gives a sidebar link to the Senate page; hence, it appears she has not yet set up a campaign website or has not publicized it. Facebook, who cares.

Strib and Reuters both said Klobuchar said she was for "universal healthcare." Someone should tell her the operative words to inspire trust are "single payer." She's not signed onto Bernie's senate bill. Earlier she cosponsored a pharma bill with Bernie.

Whisper the words "single payer" to her. They're less equivocal than other wording. They have impact.

_____________UPDATE_____________
The Klobuchar Wikipedia page text did carry an early link to the Klobucher campaign website, via this intermediate Wikipedia page. The link:

https://www.amyklobuchar.com/

She has an ActBlue page for any who'd want to contribute to the Klobuchar effort.

I accessed the page with script blocking on, and did not see if ISSUES was highlighted. "Single Payer" or ho-hum.

I did give name and email to see if Single Payer shows up in emailing along with "give money" messaging. I tried, but even with softening the scrip blocking, it hung up. Gee, that means I will not be getting cash solicitations. Sad.

_________FURTHER UPDATE___________
With Bernie and Warren favored here, in that order, Klobuchar is in the pack. Meaning viewed here more favorably than Biden, Booker, Beto, Gillibrand, and probably ahead of Harris although the jury is still out on the pair of prosecutors. Tilting well toward Klobuchar over Harris, but we'll see. Who else declares, or is declared, might weigh into things, but time resolves much, and much time remains before Nov. 2020. In a heartbeat, Klobuchar over Biden. Ditto, Gillibrand. We'll see. VP as well as the top of the ticket remains open and viable in terms of ticket-balance, etc., so . . .

___________FURTHER UPDATE____________
Putting your campaign platform on Wikipedia is a novel approach, and seems at cross purposes to what the intention behind the site has been. And then, a platform so tepid.

Not a Wellstone, not close.

Public option, not single payer. Nothing about cutting the war budget for domestic needs, as Wellstone championed.

Featured endorsement: Tina Smith! Atop the Klobuchar endorsement list at the foot of that Wikipedia page. An endorsement list absent anyone of stature outside of Minnesota Democratic politicians. Not even one from Iowa. As if to imply Democratic office holders in State either are onboard for Amy, and better not back anyone else unless or until the Klobuchar effort runs aground. A shot across the bow of Bernie or Warren backers, in state. The one key Minnesota statewide office holder most respected here, the new (and also most recent) Attorney General has not gotten in line. Or has not been asked to endorse. The one with past courage and good judgment to have backed Bernie in 2016; speaking of which, the Tina who also backed Bernie in 2016 is not on the list; Tina Liebling. Progressives need to look to other candidates from other venues, apparently. But that is already a known fact. Sanders and Warren, each a progressive well beyond anything listed as policy on that Wikipedia campaigning page.

LAST: Politicians crowding up Wikipedia that way seems a questionable trend, should others be as bold toward the the site and its purposes. Linking over to it from the more traditional Wikipedia page on Klobuchar might have been thought a keen idea by the candidate or some campaign aide, but, really . . .

_____________FURTHER UPDATE____________
Jennifer Rubin in a WaPo tout piece dated Feb. 6 wrote [links omitted] --

If she enters the race, she’d be the first candidate in the so-called moderate lane. She favors expanded health-care coverage but declined to sign onto Sen. Bernie Sanders’s Medicare-for-all bill. She won’t pound the table to eliminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement nor to slash the defense budget.

Aside from ideology, it’s her disposition that most separates her from the field of high-wattage, inspirational voices that are populating the presidential field.

One link within that quote was to here.

____________FURTHER UPDATE___________
Rubin ended her tout piece with these three paragraphs --

If one thinks that the country is ready for a sober, calm and self-contained figure, someone in control of her emotions and in command of her facts, Klobuchar might be the right candidate. Her biggest problem might arise if former vice president Joe Biden, cast in the role of Democratic centrist, enters the race.

She’ll need to use Iowa as a springboard to propel her to the top echelon of candidates, a tough but not impossible task. She has at least as good a chance as the half dozen or so U.S. senators who conceivably could run. And if she doesn’t make the top of the ticket, she might provide the right balance as a running mate for a more progressive presidential candidate.

The Democratic race is getting predictably crowded — and we all know that we haven’t seen the last candidate to enter the fray.

Already stated, Klobuchar is viewed more favorably here than Biden. Favoring her that way, "in a heartbeat" subsumes in an eye blink, whichever takes the least time. Biden, of all names in consideration, offers Trump/Pence the greatest chance at four more years. At least that is the judgment here. Opinions can differ. Anita Hill likely has an opinion, Clarence Thomas too, perhaps. I remain respectful of the legacy of Thurgood Marshall.

______________FURTHER UPDATE______________
This is an uninspiring continued embrace of welfare for insurance firms; a/k/a the ACA. This says not only keep rattling the sabre, but fatten it. Neither flavor rings my bell. Neither is Wellstonian. Wellstone was a visionary. This is pedestrian vanilla Biden-stuff. If serious about wanting first spot on a presidential ticket and not VP, Amy's main challenge is to form the narrative that she's not Biden, and better. Iowa - will Biden skip it, or not? If Klobuchar can out-draw Biden in wherever Biden first enters, she will have earned accolades from many. Her and Beto seem closest to Biden in policy, with Gillibrand there too but I refuse to acknowledge Gillibrand other than as disqualified for pushing her ambition at Al Franken's expense, (where Klobuchar provided not cold comfort, but no comfort at all). Greasing the skids for Tina Smith is not a presidential thing to me as much as inner party politics distastefully dressed. It fails as motivation to me, for support, attention, or contribution.

This probably will be the last post making any mention of Klobuchar unless she derails Biden. More likely, she's running for second spot on Biden's ticket. Others can beat that drum. Not me.

Sackler smack, logically leading to Tango. All in a day's profiteering.

Ars reporting and linking to a recently available unredacted complaint online.

Having made it clear that Bernie and Warren are my favored 2020 presidential candidates; have I a third choice, among the field? You bet I do.

Dark horse, but one who on the second spot could really balance a ticket geographically with a more progressive and active resume than "what's she ever really done" Klobucher, Montana Governor Steve Bullock. There's web info. Three links; here, here, and here. Compare/contrast that with Klobuchar. With Harris and her truancy publicity stunt. With Gillibrand who used Al Franken as a diving board. With Biden, Beto or Booker.

Pay attention. The man has not declared, but he's been to Iowa. Unlike press favorites, Bullock really is presidential in mood and spirit as well as capability.

Distanced from the beltway, and that's in his favor.

What's not to like?

From a state with a history of political dominion by copper barons he is a vocal public lands protection advocate. He defeated Greg Gianforte for Governor; Gianforte later following the footsteps of Ryan Zinke and getting to DC as likely the wealthiest House member; Gianforte who spent millions of his own money in running against Bullock, and then millions more running for the seat vacated by Ryan Zinke's cabinet appointment.

BOTTOM LINE: The man has gravitas. Not to be discounted despite beltway press and pundit love for others encamped deeply within beltway elites. In a sense as much outside of that ilk as Bernie and Liz. However, expect the beltway lean if looking for an outsider to be toward Beto, who lost.

Credit is due Jeff Bezos. It is illuminating and encouraging to see someone with twelve tons of money to take on super sleazy blackmailer effort; or so it seems so far from publicly available documents. Bezos deserves supportive encouragement.

Read what you need, here and here. Tune time.

Hopefully good First Amendment law will ensue. Blackmail is not journalism. Blackmail is as sleazy as six figure hush money, paid by a sleazy man via sleazy intermediaries. Take on the sleazebuckets, Jeff, and may it only add to your credit and public persona, rather than detracting.

"We have these compromising photos . . ." has aptly earned the take-'em-on-publicly Bezos "Fuck you!" response. Politely worded, clear in the message.

Anything less from Bezos would be enabling that which is inexcusable in a civilized world.

Bury the bastards, Jeff.

Take it all the way and then some. It's necessary, and Bezos is showing the courage to fight. May he gain justice; odds being against him or not.

He is fighting. And righteously so. Privacy should be free of invasions of the sort at issue. For everyone. Without qualification.

Or else, there is an enormous failure of the system; which failure is the existing situation Bezos is addressing.

UPDATE: Classic album version from the original band. "Don't tell me this town ain't got no heart; you just gotta poke around"? We'll see.

FURTHER: Thinking of what kind of lawyer/law firm would represent and participate in blackmail, the term "shyster" comes to mind. The firm might be a major New York or DC mover and shaker with federal judges coming from the ranks, but the term "shyster" comes to mind. Perhaps there are lobbyists at the same firm.

Skeletons rattling? Fact or speculation?

Howard Schultz; investment in a for profit student loan mill? Kamala Harris; tough on crime campaign to unseat a progressive prosecutor? Amy Klobuchar, hard on staff?

Seriousness of each? Here, fault is suggested greater for Harris based on policy she now seems to be backtracking on; then Schultz, with no reason to have done what he did to the disadvantage of many, though not as bad as Trump University. Klobuchar gets a pass. The claim is nebulous and disputed. The other two are factual, i.e., objective, while the Klobuchar attack is judgmental and subjective.

Schultz, in a report by an author already critical of the candidacy:

Schultz co-founded an investment capital group, Maveron, that put $7.5 million into for-profit Capella University in 2003, with a 2008 Securities and Exchange Commission filing revealing that Schultz owned 50,000 shares of Capella stock.

[...] In making Maveron a minority shareholder in Capella, Schultz said at the time: "Capella wants to transform education for working adults by making the online experience as compelling and rewarding as possible."

Maveron severed its connection when the online university went public in 2006.

As Politico reported Wednesday, the Inspector General's office did an audit of Capella in 2008 and found the university had overcharged the federal student aid program by $588,000 between 2002 and 2005. It recommended that the Federal Student Aid Office ask for the money back.

Capella responded that it had failed to return some money loaned to students who dropped out early, but pegged the amount at $278,000.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP), in a 2012 report, voiced "serious concern" at the dropout rate of Capella students, and noted "an unusually high portion of revenue on marketing and a relatively small amount on instruction for its exclusively online program."

The Senate committee found that in 2009, Capella spent $1,650 per student on instruction, compared to $4,538 per student on marketing and $2,912 on profit.

It quoted from a "Sales Training Overview" to describe the school's student recruiting strategy, telling recruiters:

"Dig deep into the prospect's needs, goals, motivations, dreams, aspirations, etc. (uncovering the 'why'). Use this information to position Capella as a solution."

[...] The for-profit higher education industry gets the vast majority of its income from federal student loans.

The man, Schultz, is as reprehensible and unprincipled as Minnesota's former CD2 Rep., Col. John Kline who took money from that industry into campaign coffers while giving comfort to such an enemy.

Taking the Schultz situation seriously in any feasible way is difficult, with it seeming more circus than substance.

Unlike the other two, Schultz is easily dismissed. As to Klobuchar, besides the HuffPo item already cited, this search. Leaving only Harris and her waffling.

A legendary civil rights activist, defense attorney, former city supervisor, and an outspoken advocate for marijuana legalization, Hallinan rode a wave of discontent and squeaked by in his election to become San Francisco district attorney in 1995. He swiftly fired senior prosecutors in order to hire more minorities and reformists. He instructed his deputies to avoid the practice of objecting to a proposed juror for a criminal trial — an unusual stance that weakened the hand of the DA’s office — to avoid empaneling all-white juries.

Sex work, said Hallinan, was a public health problem — not a criminal offense. He quickly made waves by claiming that he would fight for nonviolent offenders to receive social services over jail time and called drug use a victimless crime, an argument that invited contempt from law enforcement officials.

Yet Hallinan — considered one of the “most left-wing politicians in the country” — was expelled in 2003 after just two terms in office, despite San Francisco’s notorious liberal bent. An up-and-coming young career prosecutor named Kamala Harris, running in her first bid for public office, unseated him.

Many in San Francisco view the campaign as a defining moment for Harris, who carefully cultivated a base of support among police officers, domestic violence advocates, wealthy donors, and a diverse range of local officials and community leaders who had bristled at Hallinan’s leftist politics and abrasive style.

Despite starting the race as a relatively unknown candidate against an incumbent viewed as a radical icon, Harris vaulted over Hallinan and easily won a runoff election. The race launched Harris’s political career, which culminated in her announcement last month at a rally in Oakland to seek the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

Far from the “smart on crime” mantra she touted later, Harris’s first campaign reflected familiar tactics in an era of booming mass incarceration.

The 2003 race stands apart from the image she has projected in more recent years.

You ask, "Will the real Kamala Harris stand up," and get the answer, "For which audience?" It does not foster trust.

Of the three, being bitchy with staff, if true, is not as bad as disqualifying profiteering akin to Trump University, or being different things at different times for different purposes, which suggests no coherent integrity, but to ambition.


_________________UPDATE________________
The Seattle PI item of Schultz is deficient, and that must be noted. How large was the investment vehicle, total capital, so that the share of its holding in the phony university scam can be measured; and what level of investment control did Schultz exercise? A billion dollar pooled fund indepentently managed might be more like holdings in a mutual fund than an active chosen investment in the thing. Such details matter. Why the author decided to not go there, the devilish detail, can only be guessed at, yet his writings have uniformly been hostile to Schultz. That Schultz is a flawed person and flawed candidate independently of that particular allocation of a part of his wealth remains as the major criticism of the man and his new adventure.

The Harris current adventure troubles more. Being one thing in the past, in part out of intense ambition, while now being yet more ambitious, or ambitious as ever but aiming higher, troubles because of the ease with which she appears to change gears. Recall that Trump made social security and healthcare promises in the course of his bombastic run which he had no intention of keeping, thereby showing that ambitious, ideologically over-flexible individuals can be problematic down the line. Indeed, Obama promised CHANGE, set aside HOPE for now, that Guantanomo would be closed, and delivered the Heritage/Romney welfare for the insurance industry thing instead of any true and decent healthcare reform; so distrusting promises of a politician should be a norm, particularly one such as Harris with her on-the-record flip-flopping, much as Gillibrand is in redefinition mode as Senator vs her policies on which she ran to capture an upstate New York conservative district.

Trust either? I trust Warren, despite the native American dimension, it is inconsequential in light of her policy consistency in protecting folks from the wolves of banking's worse actions. Bernie has been as consistent as a rock in who he is and what he stands for, and neither Warren nor Bernie need to even contemplate redefinition to be more in tune with actual popular sentiments. They are there already, and consistently have been there.

It is not gender bias, trusting both Warren and Bernie, nor racial in distrusting Harris, Booker, Beto, and Gillibrand each to a different degree and for a range of reasons. Beyond that, an openness to others having the choice against my one vote demands being open to a candidate, however flawed, (but not as odiously bad as the Clintons and Podesta brothers), who may emerge as one of the two party candidates to run in 2020 - the offering of the party not holding incumbency. Openness to that reality is required. Unfortunately so, given the stuff the both have offered; Clintons, Reagan, the Bush dad/son pair, and do not forget Nixon and the Ford "pardon me." Real winners. Having a viable third party would be nice but we don't. The Democratic Party inner party operatives, superdelegates and such, may force the issue to where a viable third party emerges, but 2020 remains closed to any such evolution. We will be stuck with a lesser evil than Trump. May it be beyond that a positive inspiring individual. Meaning Warren or Bernie.

Is Doug Wardlow still alive?

His Wikipedia page stops at AG candidacy; not even saying he lost. That was news, with updating appropriate. Yet after the votes were counted and Ellison sworn in; where's Wardlow?

Is he back to litigating for bigotry he termed "free speech?" And for freedom of action, no cakes for gay people, etc.

At least he never advocated separate entrances and water fountains for gay people.

But where is he? Doing what?

He had his one term in the legislature before the district grew tired and moved on.

He ran for Attorney General, speaking of which, is the Monahan family doing any new video items?

However, back to Wardlow, between the legislative ouster and the AG attempt; quiescent.

After the AG attempt, quiescent. Thinking of seventeen year locusts, we should be so lucky.

UPDATE: Quick web research shows two sites live on, frozen in time, pro and con.

FURTHER: Mitch Berg lost interest Nov 2, 2018. Kiffmeyer soldiers on. Perhaps Wardlow has a book contract. In a sense Wardlow is next door to Iowa, like others. A possible title for a Wardlow vanity book, "Police Endorsed."

FURTHER: While arguably not a sound use of time, about a half hour of web searching yielded only AG contest related articles and sites; with zippo found about currenrt residence, if any, for Wardlow in Minnesota, and current law practice listings, if any, for Wardlow in Minnesota. There are low profiles, and then profiles lower than a snake's belly in a wagon rut; Wardlow seeming to have fallen into the very low current profile category.

Back to Dobson land, outside of Minnesota? Perhaps.

There is a vague concern. Call it a morbid curiosity. HOWEVER, 1.1 million people, deluded in all likelihood, voted in November for Wardlow and now can any one of them even locate the man?

Perhaps Andrew Parker knows, but I do not know Andrew Parker to inquire, nor do I wish to.

Yet there remains a "Where's Waldo" curiosity.

FURTHER: One final search = Douglas Gary Wardlow
Returns, here, here and here. Closing out the post. This gives a Prior Lake, MN, address; but is pre-election. Presumably he is still practicing law at that address.

ANOKA COUNTY, MN; We're Number 3! Tied actually, but narrowly ahead of St. Louis, MN.

Link. On the rise?

Wellstone and Bernie. Had he lived, Wellstone would be where Bernie is now. More or less.

And that is cause to feature the fact per the top two sidebar item placements.

______________UPDATE______________
Deja Vu all over again. Do review that Bernie Peoples' Summit presentation, per its sidebar link. Wellstone. Issues ringing the same, decades ago and still the same struggle. May we end it soon. By victory, of course, the evildoers being the ones to capitulate; the middle-of-the-road GOP-lite Democrats to capitulate. Or better, to evolve; no capitulation needed.

FURTHER: Another Wellstone video link. Please take time to view it.

KLOBUCHAR: Seemingly as bright as Ms. Clinton, without that truckload of baggage, so given Ms. Clinton was wrongly taken seriously, why not Amy?

Having a scheduled EVENT in the middle of nasty winter to say, "No, not gonna," makes no sense. So she's doing it.

If not running for VP, why? If serious, why?

Not having the baggage of Booker, no Wall Street darling, and not seeming as abrupt as Harris, while not being Biden where Anita Hill will not be puking over Klobuchar; it's a factoid for the future. Not Gillibrand in shiving Franken, but letting Al twist in the wind, that's part of the resume.

Bernie and Lizzie inspire. Klobuchar had a dad who wrote sports columns. Klobuchar's Senate seat is secured, but taking a bender on moving higher?????

Let's say, not my first or second choice, and Steve Bullock cuts a better figure over net neutrality. Just saying.

Not anybody's Wellstone either, not by any measure imaginable. Not one you'd contribute a multiple of twenty-seven bucks to, that also is a certainty.

Besides inner party, who's going to trudge to the dear Senator's announcement thingy? Big crowd? A spillover onto the neighborhood, stopping traffic, tens of thousands? Is that likely?

________________UPDATE_______________
Cargill. Let them send a bunch of employees to stand around and lisrten, Sunday. After church? Brazilian soybeans. Wanna bet, Sunday Amy touches upon trade warrior stuff, w/o mention of Cargill?


_____________FURTHER UPDATE____________
It would be remiss to not link back in time a few weeks to a Steve Timmer post on KLOBUCHAR. Unfavorable, so check it and see if it resonates rightly or wrongly with your view. Timmer links to this Hill item touting KLOBUCHAR. To me Timmer's item is well reasoned.

Again, the OpenSecrets data on Klobuchar; how tens of million got raised with a four million dollar balance, end of 2018, likely has a background story. A quick look at numbers suggests less a passion to rein in Wall Street than Elizabeth Warren. Lawyers being lead contributors suggests a corporate-orientation; these are not the plaintiff's tort trial bar people, they are establishment firms; so go figure.

EMILY'S LIST money is interesting; the acronym being Early Money is Like Yeast, and yet heavy ongoing spending on Klobuchar plus trainloads of spending on the Clinton fiasco last cycle; it being mature career support above "early." Note also, List spending against Laura Moser in Texas last cycle all suggesting middle of the road orientation; however, that PAC has contributed to Warren. Emily's List seems a gender-biased operation, openly so, with less criticism raised by that than the "Bernie bros" crap that circulated last cycle. Warren and Bernie are both favored here. No gender bias. Only respect for those with respect for people and needs. At any rate, Amy sees herself as presidential. She may survive early winnowing of the expected landslide legions of those suggesting themselves as better for the nation than Trump. (Pence may feel that way of himself, but has not publicly said so. Romney has said his view of his own superiority. But I digress.)

____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
Establishment beltway pundits know best. Inclusive of getting the word out to Joplin, MO, via a carry by the Joplin Globe.

With George Will liking a Klobuchar candidacy, it makes you feel warm inside, warm all over, knowing where there is a Will there's a way. Will has been less kind to Elizabeth Warren; or per the other gender, Bernie. Will's thoughts should weigh in any informed voter's assessment of Klobuchar. They weigh here, cumulatively, with Timmer's weighing far more and in a direction favored here. Pop the popcorn, 2020 is starting early. And for fair disclosure, in Minnesota elections the vote here was for Klobucher when compared to the Republican offerings. Would one say Republican-heavy is the opposite of Republican-lite? Which brings to mind Tina, but again, I digress. Make it official and on the record: Amy Klobuchar is more presidential than Kurt Daudt. How could I be kinder?

Michelle Lee would have won.

If sufficiently backed by the machine from the start, she would have. But the inner party choice was dynastic. The inner party learning curve disappoints; where Lee as the Nov. 2018 candidate would have beaten Stauber too. Third strike?

Parts of the nation may harbor harsh viewpoints, but back home where a man is best known, views might be softer.

Or not.

Screenshot source. Supplemental coverage. In contemplation of a "dark horse" run for the roses, with Schultz what part of the horse comes to mind?

Incrementalism, gradualism, and the ACA - as in why diddle? It as presently implemented is welfare for insurers, and there IS a better way.

GRADUALISM: It is more than a tranquilizing drug, it is a hammer that opponents keep hammering away with as you and peers age and die. Healthcare, free at the point of service is a concrete policy aim for implementing the vague goal of "healthcare as a right." Make it cradle to grave, indeed, prenatal to grave.

People do not ask how do you pay for policing and fire protection, you do. It is a required public good, and it is government's role to provide it. The house is less likely to burn down, you are less likely to be mugged with fire fighting and policing provided but the drug companies can kill you by overpricing drugs? That surely makes sense. You cannot enjoy freedom from a burned down house, from a safe street, if you've croaked because of the indecency of current medical and dental ways and means. Cubans have a better system than we do; while we spend twice as much per capita as Canada, France or Norway. There is no sense to it, beyond those working the levers of power being indecent, which is more explanation than sense.

Mistakes happen. Why a retrospective? Because the 2020 campaign is spilling out at its seams.

Mistakes can be avoided at the primary/caucus level by an educated and informed electorate. I admit, I got fooled once. BERNIE surely seems real, as does Elizabeth Warren. Beto, Booker, Harris, Gillibrand - believe whatever you choose to believe. Biden? No way. [CORRECTION: Biden link omitted; see, also, video.] UPDATE: Mike Malloy in that linked video, has a related rant, online here; mentioning Davos.

FOXCONN in Wisconsin. Scott Walker's art of the deal? First a factory with jobs, jobs, jobs making display screens. Then a brain suck a/k/a a research facility. Thirteen thousand jobs. Then Trump and Foxconn executives talk. Next?

A websearch link. Latest saga installment. Days ago, NYT.

An opening image, shoveling it. Closing text, same item, italics added:

The White House also has yet to comment. Last summer, Trump highlighted his economic policies at a groundbreaking event for the massive Foxconn complex, which state officials initially said could house 11 football fields.

"America is open for business more than it has ever been open for business. Made in the USA: It's all happening and it's happening very, very quickly," Trump said in June after visiting the Foxconn site. "Today we're seeing the results of the pro-America agenda. America First, Make America Great Again. Greatest phrase ever used in politics, I suspect."

Still, the technology council head, said Foxconn can succeed if the plant becomes more research-oriented because their areas of interest match up with Wisconsin's strengths -- such as robotics, medical imaging, and industrial imaging.

A TED talk. Sci-Fi? Art of the Deal? Foxconn having a bipolar vortex?

Surprising - Bezos' newspaper editorializes, "Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax is no way to run government — but a good way to run a campaign." Why would Jeff think the first part? And publish the second?

Jeff, we speculate, is in negotiation with a Chinese plastics molding firm for one of these to market, looking like Elizabeth Warren. Or just a one-off for his mansion grounds. For his guard Dobermans with steel capped teeth, of course not for his personal use. (I'd like one looking like Mike Pence - yeah, for personal use.)

That last linked video, in between extreme gushing does present Warren describing her policy idea, and it is a marginal tax proposal and not on total; that video I regard as, "Kyle discovers Huey Long."

___________ UPDATE____________
I liked the Schultz who wrote Peanuts better. This one looks to be Trump, with a latte.

__________FURTHER UPDATE_________
Warren's presentation of the idea. Krugman. Young Turks. Bloomberg.

An interesting DemocracyNOW segment. Plus a tune.

DN link. Tune. Some say funding universal cradle to grave free healthcare in our nation for our people is impractical. Huh? That the money is not there. Huh?

 UPDATE: Read the letter.