Ads.

Here and independently, here. Where do we go next? Will the Democratic Party awaken to its only future being opening up to the young? Do the inner party ones say, again as in 2016, "It's our football, we're taking it home, be without one. Fuck you very much," The death wish seems to persist, needing a decisive burial. There seems a mood that four more Trump years would be okay, but Bernie would not be. That is a mood to be buried deep, quickly, and finally.

UPDATE: Aspirations. Compare that with the earlier linked ad about empathy. There is a difference between positive and negative advertisements, in politics. But when a man clearly says he has no empathy, he is stating policy. As clear as AOC in the latter item states aspirations. Pick your winner, shun your loser. Or be the same old, same old, with four more years of Trump running things and distributing the spoils. Bernie is the answer. The question? Who, really stripped of BS, can beat Trump? Not a man lacking empathy for an increasingly important voting demographic. Not yesterday's heartbeat away. After all, that is Mike Pence now, so it's nothing special, not at all.

This has to be somebody's idea of a bad joke.

Link. Flabbergasting. Not funny. Not funny at all. They want to impeach one narcissist, and then this. Shut it down, nail it shut.  End it now.

Juxtaposition.

Free the Democratic Party from itself.  Bring it home.

Conscienceless thugs, nationwide, want to suppress voting by the young. Frustrate them. Get Out The Vote - the old GOTV, but aim at the young who are freer of built in prejudice and are not married to business as usual.

See, e.g., Strib, carrying a NY Times feed. Do not expect Joe Biden supporters to be enthusiastic about millions of the young voting. Biden supporters embrace a status quo that aims to hammer the young, to keep the military and the healthcare industries in control of things, to mess up our planet and climate, and to advance perpetual war against terror, (despite it being an abject failure and a sucking of resources better spent on making things decent and promising at home). The wealth is there if we tax it, wealth sufficient to improve the lives of all our people. Just tax the greedy bastards, and we as a nation will prosper.

BOTTOM LINE: Pound those thugs, of either party, wanting to suppress voting among any of us.

2016 TRUTH - Bernie would have won. We'd already be a better nation, had the DNC and others not stymied the Bern. Hillary Clinton, for Christsakes, what were those people thinking? Have they a learning curve, or are they currently Biden touts? Sad.

Zach Stephenson, a Rep from the Champlin area in Minnesota's House, has an idea which is overdue. That more legislative might has not been mustered over the glaring social need is an indictment of Stephenson's colleagues. Follow the question, Zach promoting righteousness and good sense against an array of vested evil ways and means.

Stevenson has a Wikipedia page and a campaign website,
https://www.zack.mn/

so bio background is given by link. He is DFL, not the dark side of the force. So what earns him today's gold star? Strib's featured online editorial today explains:

We can put an end to those awful robocalls - My bill will require companies to use preventive technology at no extra cost.
By Zack Stephenson -- November 8, 2019 — 5:44pm

We all have experienced it — the perpetual buzz on our mobile phones from familiar numbers, with a local area code, but are actually spoof calls, commonly known as robocalls. However, these calls aren’t just a nuisance — swindlers also use them to prey on senior citizens, vulnerable adults, and landline phone users, many of whom do not have caller-ID.

According to statistics gathered by the State Department of Commerce, Minnesotans have received more than 387 million robocalls so far in 2019, which is approximately 58 calls per impacted person. Scammers use “spoofing” technology, which allows telephone calls originating from across the world to show up on a caller ID with a local area code.

Once a robocaller gets someone on the phone, they engage in increasingly aggressive fraud. Posing as a utility company, bank, or the IRS, fraudsters attempt to convince people that their power will be shut off, their checking account closed, or even that a warrant will be issued for their arrest unless they make an immediate payment.

In fact, cases of financial fraud and exploitation against senior citizens are on the rise nationwide. According to the 2010 Investor Protection Trust Elder Fraud Survey, one out of every five people over the age of 65 has been a victim of a financial swindle.

In Minnesota, several cases of fraud have emerged. In September of 2016, the Star Tribune reported on an 88-year-old Robbinsdale man with Alzheimer’s disease who was swindled out of more than $200,000. Eagan Police Chief Roger New reported last month that he expected telephone fraud to result in over $500,000 in losses just in his city.

As the explosion of fraudulent robocalls grows, we must demand a strong response that holds bad actors accountable. That is why I am proposing bold legislation to crack down on these predatory schemes.

There is more, at Strib, with that being Stephenson's opening.

Fraud in the robocalling is real, but the actual burning nuisance is the plethora of such calls, themselves with whatever orientation the caller has - your bank account in peril, social security needs, or your computer needs attention from the caller misrepresenting himself as "Microsoft" when he's doing a sham if you let him. The calls themselves are the essence of evil, even when we stand not gullible enough to be suckered, but bothered from better things by the asshole callers. Any bill that curbs that abuse of the population is a godsend. So read the remainder of the Stephenson editorial, and get behind the effort to end the unnecessary abuse the phone companies are selling to swindlers and grifters as a way to annoy everybody.

End that crap, and the world will spin better on its axis; ya sure, ya betcha. Again, the Strib link, and this from the online item -

Under my proposed toughest-in-the-nation anti-robocall legislation, all telecommunications companies would be required to use the latest and strongest anti-robocall technology at no extra cost to the consumer. Criminal charges would result in a felony whenever identify theft or a swindle is a result of a robocall. My bill also gives legal tools to the Minnesota Department of Commerce, the Attorney General and consumers themselves to take action when they receive these would-be illegal calls.

LAST: Strib does not link to Stephenson's bill text. Nor is it listed here, suggesting the bill text exists but has not yet been put on record. Which is the case. Websearech, and this item explain,

Under Rep. Stephenson’s legislation, robo-calls would be illegal, and would include criminal enhancements to felony level whenever identify theft or a swindle is a result of a robo-call. The bill also gives legal tools to the Minnesota Department of Commerce, the Attorney General, and consumers themselves to take action when they receive these would-be illegal calls.

Rep. Stephenson’s legislation requires all telecommunications companies to implement the latest and strongest anti-robo-call technology at no additional cost to the consumer. While current technology exists to allow telecom companies to block spoofed calls before they ever reach a caller, Rep. Stephenson’s priority is to ensure technology is strengthened and working to benefit every single Minnesotan.

“Robo-calls are at best a constant nuisance for Minnesotans and at worst a scam targeting some of the most vulnerable among us,” said House Majority Leader Ryan Winkler. “It’s time for us to act and make sure Minnesotans are protected.”

Rep. Stephenson’s legislation will be introduced when the 2020 legislative session begins on February 11.

[italics emphasis added] Interestingly, Stephenson is lead author on a Minnesota proposed Net Neutrality bill, so the man understands what the public needs from service providers - decency and respect, net neutrality, and an end to the abject evil of robocalls.

What is there NOT to like? Bless wisdom, in all its manifestations.

UPDATE: Reporting, PiPress, Strib, Bemidgi Pioneer.

Bloomberg, a billionaire, does not want his wealth taxed. Fuck him.

He feels the Bern. Marley Tune time: The Bern.

Mainstream corporate-owned media, and Bernie.

A sidebar post points to a ZeroHedge item explaining the reality of concentrated corporate media's biased coverage of "news" involving Democratic Party presidential contenders seeking the party's endorsement. The bias is as it was during the Sanders run in 2016. You doubt?

The Onion works the theme. The only way Bernie would be able to get fair attention from within the corporate media machinery is
______________________________________,
[fill in the blank, if there is an answer]

Steve Bullock calls bullshit on what is, (there being no other fit characterization), pure and unmitigated BULLSHIT. From the Biden folks, of all people; apart from any money to Hunter [or at least his name is not featured in reporting although there is money on the table].

Here is an image of Hunter, Hunter's partner on the Ukranian gas board, and Joe, golfing. Where Hunter's business dealings ostensibly were not discussed. It is just an opening bonus link, having nothing to do with the main part of the story. An appetizer.

ONWARD - The Hill, "Bullock blasts Biden for being open to super PAC funding - BY JUSTINE COLEMAN - 10/29/19 05:54 PM EDT, stating in part:

Presidential candidate and Montana Gov. Steve Bullock (D) blasted former Vice President Joe Biden for reversing his [Biden's] stance on super PACs.

Bullock called out Biden after reports emerged that his [Biden's] former aide filed paperwork to form a super PAC a week after the Biden campaign indicated its openness to super PAC money.

“You don’t ‘Unite the Country’ by buying an election,” Bullock said in the release. “Vice President Biden and I are fighting for similar core values, but as long as super PACs and dark money groups are able to flood our elections with millions of dollars, Washington won’t be able to make true progress on the big issues facing our country.”

The Montana governor called the news about Biden “deeply disappointing.”

“I’ve spent my entire career fighting to get Big Money out of politics, and I’m not going to back down now,” he said in the release.

Bullock also touted his own record in fighting “Big Money,” saying he passed “the most progressive finance disclosure laws in the country,” and he’s been described as the “biggest threat to Citizens United.”

Progressives were also quick to criticize Biden after his campaign signaled that super PAC money might be necessary to defeat President Trump. Candidates such as Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have vowed not to take money from super PACs, opting instead to fundraise mostly from small donors.

However, Biden defended his stance earlier Tuesday in an interview with MSNBC, saying his campaign’s announcement last week was an “understandable response” for people who want Trump out of the White House.

[...] The Biden campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

[links in original omitted] " ... interview with MSNBC" means Comcast putting its corpoirate thumb on the scale, Comcast whose chief lobbyist was the very first big-money fundraiser host for Creepy Ol' Joe. Anything but an unbiased outlet being used by Biden to tell his story, sans any speculative questioning. Earlier the same day of its reporting of Bullock's condemnation of PAC money influence buying, The Hill independently reported of MSNBC's playing softball with Joe:

Biden said in an interview with MSNBC that his campaign has the necessary funds to win the presidential race in 2020.

“The fact is we got in several months later than most of the candidates did, but we’re doing well,” he said. “And we’re approaching a significant number of individual contributions. I think we’ll have all the money we need to run a full-blown campaign in every one of the early states.”

The former vice president said he’s not currently accepting PAC or super PAC money but hinted that he may need to in order to take on Trump.

“Here’s what happened: You know there’s been a grassroots response out there to the fact that Trump has gone out and decided to not only ask the Russians and the Chinese to get involved and making sure I’m not the nominee, but he has his folks are [sic] spending an awful lot of money … telling lies about me,” Biden said on MSNBC.

He called his campaign’s signaling last week to be open to using super PAC money in an election an “understandable response” for those who want Trump out of the White House.

“My guess is they would have done the same thing for anybody who was attacked in the Democratic primary if they were leading,” he added.

The former vice president has fallen behind other candidates in fundraising in the most recent quarter, raising $15.2 million last quarter and having $8.9 million on hand.

Other presidential candidates like Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have refused to take money from super PACs, saying they will mostly accept donations from small donors. Sanders raised $25 million and has almost $34 million in cash on hand for his campaign, while Warren has collected $24.6 million last quarter and has $26 million on hand.

Dissembling? You decide. Consider this days-later https://unitethecountry.com/about/ astroturf website, which insultingly publishes stock disclaimer language: "Paid for by Unite the Country, unitethecountry.com, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee." Yeah. Sure. Look at the screen capture.

click image to read phony disclaimer for Joe's PAC

Do you think those PAC folks and Biden campaign folks golf? While ostensibly not telling one another about anything besides strokes per hole and running score? Fat chance. They even have an asshole video. Blowing smoke, yelling loud, absolutely no content, none whatsoever. An insult to anyone who thinks, (even a little). Trump does empty-of-content videos much better than Biden, without that violent yelling at the end, at us. Like a bad boss would.

Jez. SO - Who are these PAC promoters; read this and this, (linking here for further detail), for truth. Hangers-on having an ongoing past to present investment interest in Joe, each a sort of shareholder, bets placed on Joe's number as the wheel spins.

And the money sources? All dark money. Joe's moved to the dark side of the force. How much from whom is inside-the-PAC info, and do you expect that is info for which there is insider interest to share?

To share: With real people, with real needs and sick and tired of the same old shit shoveled at them? These PAC-Man people aim things as if they collectively presume that there is reality to the mythical herd of unicorns, independents who voted for Trump but now would bet on Joe's number? They, those convertible independents, are nonexistent, despite our being told by Pelosi and others that it is myth to believe in energizing the young and those now excluded and disenfranchised (of any age) who want reform, that as the myth but with their unicorn herd being so real you can close your eyesand  touch one. Pelosi is out of touch with a trend.

The JOEPAC cronies should have called the site "Sell out the country" because Biden wants big money to hold sway, his way. He poses, he struts, he fumbles his lines, and shouts out his video lines like a raging bull. Yet, surprisingly, Dem establishment donors have put their chips on his number, as the wheel spins, the ball landing later after months of primary voter spinning and spinning. Expecting all that to yield Joe's number is not real. It is virtual reality, told and sold by a really dumb looking amateurish PAC website. It will attract dark money, for sure, but will it delude enough voters to matter?

A competency link, updating an earlier post about Rudy Giuliani. UPDATE THOUGHT: Might it have been an intentional wipe? For cause?

 Rudy Giuliani - Legend is Trump at one point of frustration asked, "Where's my Roy Cohn?"

Rudy G -- ain't it.

Earlier post. Now, this -- via a screen capture of the item's opening:

click image to enlarge and read

No joke. A real post about true events, Ars Techinca. Follow the link to read beyond the screen capture, and to get to the butt-dialing part of Rudy, the cyber-sleuth.

Ain't Roy. Meanness alone, yes there with Rudy, and ruthlessness and complete disregard for ethics --- but that begs the question.

Just as Bush family foreign policy defined itself and stood when "Operation Iraqi Liberation," because the acronym was too raw, was rechristened "Operation Iraqi Freedom;" today we learn ---

Or not? You decide.

https://www.juancole.com/images/2019/10/trump-hands-oil-gas-to-syria-rus-750x422.jpg

"New War for Oil? Trump to Occupy Oil-Rich Syrian Province with Tank Corps, Asks for Kurdish Displacement There"
 --  Juan Cole 10/25/2019

- compare -

"What does THAT mean? Trump says US ‘secured the oil’ in Syria, causes confusion"
RT -- 18 Oct, 2019 17:53 (i.e., days ago)

https://www.bing.com/search?q=trump+oil+syria&FORM=HDRSC1

"After American troop withdrawal, Trump shifts focus to Syria oil fields," [undated]
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2019/10/25/after-american-troop-withdrawal-trump-shifts-focus-to-syria-oil-fields/

The latter item begins:

The Pentagon released a statement Thursday [Oct. 24] saying it is committed to sending additional military forces to eastern Syria to “reinforce” control of the oil fields and prevent them from “falling back to into the hands of ISIS or other destabilizing actors.”

No details were provided on how many or what kind of forces would be sent, or whether decisions on those details have been made.

Trump’s decision to withdraw the bulk of roughly 1,000 American troops from Syria drew bipartisan condemnation. The decision came after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told Trump earlier this month that he intended to carry out an operation to clear the Turkey-Syria border of Kurdish fighters who fought side-by-side with U.S. troops in beating back IS fighters in northeast Syria.

The president’s comments this week raised fresh concerns that he has an incomplete understanding, or is indifferent to, the fragile dynamics of the region, his critics say.

“The President of the United States of America appears to be calling for a mass migration of Kurds to the desert where they can resettle atop a tiny oil field,” Brett McGurk, Trump’s former special envoy to the global coalition to defeat IS, wrote on Twitter.

But the idea of keeping troops in eastern Syria to guard the oil fields resonated with Trump and presented military commanders with a way to keep at least a residual force inside the country. In addition to a presence near the oil fields in eastern Syria, some U.S. forces will remain in southern Syria.

Defense Secretary Mark Esper said the main goal of the American troop presence is to make sure the Islamic State is contained and unable to gain control of the oil fields and the revenue they generate. The administration also sees some benefit to Kurds being in control of the oil, according to a senior administration official, who briefed reporters on the administration’s deliberations on the Syria withdrawal.

A thought experiment - If you were a young couple with a new baby boy, wouldn't you want him to grow up just like Rudy Guiliani?

While the answer is easy, take time to think about all the implications. Such as how a Rudy Giuliani is allowed by the system imposed upon us to prosper. Then the hard question - that system, if described in a single word, which works best, "sick" or "corrupt?" (Making it hard, you cannot choose both.)

Yesterday's top sidebar item gets preempted. With all the garbage around, Ukraine this, Adam Schiff that, there was meaningful true news Saturday in Queens.

Yes, "Imeachment Roulette" stuff has its very ugly reality, so an earlier sidebar item got moved to the top as a reminder of how ugly a reality might ensue should any impeachment/Senate trial actually be other than the moot exercise in dithering that it seems to be.

That said, the real news is that crowds will prove more than polls by whoever, among some suspect demographic.

Reporting; Guardian, Jewish News, The Hill.

People attended. People rejoiced.