President Joe Biden and his administration continue to endure criticism for enacting a program to forgive some college loans but some of the Republican politicians who have criticized that program did not respond to questions about whether they support the farm loan help.

Charlott NC broadcasting and web publishing outlet carries an AP web feed about farm debt relief per USDA assistance.

It is only fair, students who foresaw jobs that never happened, help them.

Farmers who foresaw good crops, prices, good weather and then faced pressure, help them.

Two sides of the same coin. The government assisting those in a pinch. It is what government is for, as part of providing for the common good per roads, bridges, public goods, where help for those facing distress situations - that is a common good. 

Keeping concentration in farming down by helping the marginal survivors, a public good.

Educating a part of the population able to be gaining access to higher education leads to a better educated, inventive and entrepreneurial populace - wiser voters too - and is a public good.

And all that good a tiny, tiny fraction of the cost of the military industrial complex's annual upkeep. 

What could be more sensible?

And why do the Republicans not act like good citizens and praise both sensible programs? Because - 

FURTHER: Another public good program, where Republican support should be expected. (Whether there or not.)

Reinventing oneself for intended purposes. Yet, still, talk fast, stacato, and sell the product.

 This is James Schultz, looking like a young Robert McNamara:

click to enlarge and see the McNamara glasses

 

 He's the successful alum St. Thomas touts, among others. And he remains the same man:

Harvard Law School graduate James Schultz ’08 currently serves as in-house counsel for global investment firm Värde Partners. His work spans a wide range of services from purchasing and investment, to leasing office space, to looking at regulations to ensure his firm is compliant with applicable law.

He credits his time at St. Thomas with helping to form his mind, not just for lawyering but as a lifelong learner.

“[Catholic studies] develops in its students the ability to think about the world rigorously and with an authentically broad perspective. Those habits of thought apply to nearly every bit of work I do day to day.” Schultz noted that he reads 60-plus books a year, and that “This starts with the faculty who themselves are examples of a lifelong pursuit of truth.”

YET -

Now he's "Jim," dressing humbly, ditched the McNamara glasses and the big office halo. Fast talker, back in the suit for PBS, with the focus changed - corporate no longer; and Wardlow wrong on "Jim's" anti-abortion bona fides chops. AND - Crime oh my! Oh my!

As said, he remains the same man. 

 Next an image collage. On tour, rural Minnesota. An Everyman, meeting folks?

click to enlarge and see that phony final image

LAST: They say for a movie, (even for a short negative election ad posted by an opposition outside player), you should never disclose the end. However, here's the end where you can see who posted the ad; and this link allows you to see the entire preparatory commentary to reach the famous final scene.

Scrubbing "Elections" from a campaign website arguably implies an intention to not crash and burn in flames if Trump does. "Elections" is Kim's issue. Sheriffs really like me. I really like them. SO - My campaign. My issue. My lean and hungry look.

Judgmental of Jim Schultz? Yes, but not the first one to judge. Ceaser judged Cassius. Etc.

Here is evidence:

 Beyond never seeing Schultz in a MAGA cap, Schultz hides from issues whenever his finger to the wind suggests it wise. Seamlessly switching.

The man hides by scrubbing his campaign website. Specifically, his present Issues campaign webpage:

The Schultz campaign "ISSUES" webpage as first archived Feb. 17, 2022, by Internet Archive's Wayback Machine:

Compare and contrast. You may need to click each image to enlarge and read.

Yes. He cut weak GOP candidate Kim Crockett loose with no lifeboat. It seemed appropriate to his own campaign, apparently.

 Iissue to non-issue. Easy enough. Just talk differently from yesterday. Webmaster makes a few keystrokes to nullify elections as a Schultz issue. Keep Trump's election challenge screeds well distanced, but not in a way to alienate MAGA voters. They vote, they're fine, they're lovable.

Make of that what you will. Headlining of the post gives the Crabgrass impression.

 A lean and hungry look? (Videos posted by his own hand.)

CAESAR

[aside to ANTONY]  [...]  Seldom he smiles, and smiles in such a sort As if he mocked himself and scorned his spirit That could be moved to smile at anything. Such men as he be never at heart’s ease Whiles they behold a greater than themselves, And therefore are they very dangerous. [...]

Sour-faced but on script when Laura Ingram throws him attention. She shines scorn on Ilhan Omar with Schultz eager to use airtime to segue to shining scorn on Ellison. In common, stated MN5 representation, unstated but in common, Muslims. 

Each speaker in Ingrahm's video with converging agendas. 

All the videos are grim faced, the only smile shown at all is in the headlining banner; and if ever there's been a forced smile on anyone, it's there. Few take themselves that seriously. Cassius was not Caesar's friend. Conclude what you will.

It could be the event of the year; parents later tell their children, I was there, live, they really rocked the house.

 

An alum and a buddy. What more? Kim Crockett? Follow the blueprint, stick to the plan, Dan; or will they make it a memorable event, a jam session to remember, like only true entertainment artists can?

Abortion is the giant single overarching issue that Knight of Malta Sam Alito and cohorts made it this election cycle. Republican candidates cannot hide from it, try as they might.

Women are not to be forced to be child-bearing slaves against their will, no matter what, under the vulnerable Minnesota Supreme Court's Doe v. Gomez judicial holding. There is in Minnesota a general right to privacy reaching to include womens' abortion rights being Constitutional rights under Minnesota's Constitution. Open access to morning after pills or early-term pharmaceutical arbortificants included. No pharmacist should be allowed to stand in the way of dispensing lawful medicine over his/her own personal mythologies. If unwilling for that, get out of pharmacy into other work. And if politics ends things other than that, keep up the fight.

PiPress, a week ago:

With abortion rights shaping up to be a central issue in the 2022 election, Democratic candidates continue to press their Republican opponents on the issue, including in the race for Minnesota attorney general.

Republican attorney general candidate Jim Schultz has expressed views against abortion in the past and has served on an anti-abortion nonprofit, but he insists the race is about combating rising crime. Democratic incumbent Keith Ellison, meanwhile, says his GOP challenger misunderstands the role the attorney general’s office should play in prosecuting crime, and should stand up for abortion rights, which are guaranteed under the state constitution but no longer protected federally following the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison (right) is being challenged by Republican Jim Schultz. (Schultz photo by Dana Ferguson of Forum News Service; Ellison photo by Jean Pieri of the Pioneer Press)

“This is absolutely an issue in this campaign, and I want to be clear that my opponent is not committed to these rights,” Ellison told Capitol reporters Friday, later adding: “Nobody can escape, being accountable to the public as to what they will do to stand up for a woman’s right to choose.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James and Planned Parenthood North Central States president and CEO Sarah Stoesz also spoke in support of Ellison.

“Abortion rights are very, very, very much on the ballot in this election,” said Stoesz. “And Minnesotans are rightly curious as to where candidates stand.”

The worse offender on trying unsuccessfully to duck the issue is Auditor candidate Ryan Wilson, who has published in the Diocese of Duluth's Northern Lights website recently, characterized there as "Ryan Wilson - a law clerk at the Minnesota Catholic Conference." He, so far, has been opaque on the issue. Wilson assertively wants to audit public schools if elected; whereas schools of his faith, Catholic schools, presenting a World of difference as private entities under his watch, if elected, would escape audit responsibility. That much is of record. The man needs to better tell the public who he really fully is. On all issues which matter. Where he stands on privacy and specifically, the unfettered Constitutional right to abortion access in Minnesota. As well as rejection of vouchers to private schools, so far, in our State.

Back to  PiPress reporting on the AG race, and the abortion issue there:

Schultz, who became the GOP nominee after defeating challenger Doug Wardlow in the August primary, supports some restrictions on abortion, including a 20-week ban, but insists the central issue in the campaign for attorney general is crime. He has said he would not use the office to pursue further restrictions on abortion. Ahead of the Aug. 9 primary, Wardlow [ref. concluding: " 'Doug Wardlow is a desperate candidate who consistently loses and lies,' Schultz’s campaign says. 'Jim’s pro-life record speaks for itself.' ”] attempted to paint Schultz as weak on abortion, but ultimately the strategy failed to win over the majority of GOP voters.

Now confronted with a challenge from the other side of the abortion debate, Schultz continues to downplay the issue’s importance in the race. He argues the attorney general’s office ultimately has very little influence over abortion policy in the state of Minnesota and said the question is fundamentally for the Legislature to decide.

Compare, Schultz saying he'd have appealed the Gilligan abortion decision, a step which would have shown a will toward great influence on the issue; this link. Same item, Ellison declined incurring further cost on what he viewed as a futile appeal. Schultz now appears to backpeddle from that position. 

Back to the PiPress report:

Asked what he thought of Ellison’s June pledge to protect out-of-state abortion seekers from prosecution or liability in their home states, Schultz said his opponent was merely invoking a hypothetical situation in an attempt to make the race about abortion.

Lame! Very, very lame. 

And this anti-hypothetical comment from the candidate who is insisting adding an entire host of criminal specialist lawyers to the AG payroll will quell violent crime - that claim being a total hypothetical since there's nobody to prosecute on an unsolved crime. A minor expansion of criminal law expertise in the AG office, as Ellison contends necessary, would leave additional funding to be allocated to investigating and solving crime by bolstering such functions, so that prosecutor numbers balance their need in processing such cases as law enforcement solves. Balance is good. Excess in a wrong direction is bad. Now. back to basics -

ABORTION IS NOT MERELY AN ISSUE. IT IS THE ISSUE, ALL ELSE BEING SUBORDINATE. Republican Federalist Society Supreme Court actors put it there.

And yes, opinions can differ, but attempted ducking an issue, one that major, is fantasy. You cannot get away with it. Trying to minimize the issue in any sense rings untrue. 

Ellison is the trustworthy ballot choice for protection of a general Minnesota Constitutional right of privacy as the bedrock upon which ancillary rights stand; rights to abortion, contraception use, gender identification choice, and open marriage rights - full legal protections between a pair of consenting, willing adults wanting to legally marry and be recognized as being married. Live and let live.

 

Minnesota's two Attorney General candidates held a recent debate moderated by MPR. Schultz debated his "thoughts" and agenda. Ellison, as incumbent, knows the range of requirements of the office, which have coalesced over decades. Ellison would have liked to have added a few criminal law specialists to his payroll to aid county attorneys when they request assistance from his office, hence, he sought legislative funding to do so, (it being county attorneys who charge and prosecute crimes on info brought to their offices by investigating sheriffs or police officers, with the AG uninvolved unless expressly requested). Mary Kiffmeyer led other MN. Senate Republicans, holding the majority, in denying additional AG funding for Ellison to expand staff. Packing the AG office with a vastly higher number of new prosecutors, spending for that, as Schultz says he'd do, what benefit at all would that bring? Schultz is taking a hot-button issue and jiving everybody who'll take him seriously in what basically reduces to fear-mongering. When facts are examined, his agenda of spending on a trove of new AG lawyers, as crime-busting prosecutors, is a pipe dream fantasy Schultz is trying to sell that makes no real sense.

Clearly the headlining of this post is judgmental. The question for readers, what hangs together, what does not?

First, reporting - Pioneer Press reported, this link. First observation, Schultz tried an amateur "Gotcha" which, in reporting, was a self-inflicted wound:

Schultz asked Ellison whether he knew the name of the special agent in charge of the Minneapolis FBI office, which is overseeing the investigation. He didn’t give Ellison a chance to answer before naming the agent as Joseph Thompson. Schultz suggested that Ellison had failed the test and was “missing in action.” But Schultz failed his own test. Thompson is not the head of the FBI office; he’s a federal prosecutor on the case. The local special agent in charge is Michael Paul.

Besides being a dumb mistake, there is more to this. Schultz confuses function. Investigators investigate criminal events in hope of identifying, apprehending and detaining suspects. They solve a crime or fail to. Prosecutors are uninvolved bystanders until results of a successful investigation has happened. Surely things such as added liability, such as a felon in possession of a handgun, or discovery of contraband can be side benefits, but first a perp must be identified and confronted. 

 Prosecutors analyze and act on investigation results. Their job is to neither imperil an ongoing investigation, nor to try to co-opt the investigative function, for which they are not trained. In his attempted Gotcha Schultz showed his confusion over functions.

Back to PiPress:

Democratic Attorney General Keith Ellison defended his record on crime Friday against aggressive attacks from his Republican challenger, Jim Schultz, who charged that the state’s top prosecutor has failed in his duty to keep Minnesotans safe.

Ellison — a former congressman, state legislator and criminal defense attorney — countered that the 36-year-old Schultz, a hedge fund lawyer who has no courtroom experience, lacks the background needed to be Minnesota’s chief legal officer.

Crime, abortion rights and the Feeding Our Future scandal — a $250 million food program theft that has raised questions about whether state officials responded properly to it — dominated their spirited debate on Minnesota Public Radio, their first of four before the Nov. 8 election in what’s seen as a tight race. Here are some key takeaways:

CRIME

Crime has been Schultz’s signature issue, and he renewed his claims that Ellison supports “defunding the police,” something Ellison has long denied.

“That is extraordinarily wrong, and it is reckless, and it has helped deliver extraordinary crime to our communities,” Schultz said.

While Ellison supported a Minneapolis charter amendment last year to replace the police department with a loosely defined department of public safety, which voters rejected, he insisted he never supported cutting funding for police. He said he even asked the Legislature for “millions of dollars” to fight crime but was thwarted by key Republicans.

“If I’m supposed to be this ‘defunder,’ I must be the worst one ever because I am seeking more resources for law enforcement,” Ellison said.

Schultz called Ellison’s response “complete lies” and added, “Everyone knows that the Minneapolis charter amendment was focused on defunding and deconstructing the Minneapolis police force.”

What the ballot measure said and commentary on it:  Strib, FOX9, MPR, Ballotpedia.

PiPress earlier published:

 The Attorney General’s Office currently has three attorneys working in its criminal division and Ellison said the current staff has been unable to meet the demand around the state.

The criminal division is a backstop when local prosecutors need help to bring a criminal case. State prosecutors can’t step in without an invitation from those local attorneys, under state law.

The $1.8 million boost would allow the division to hire seven additional prosecutors and two administrative assistants, Ellison said.

“It would put us in a position where we don’t have to triage and tell people ‘no,'” he said.

Minnesota House Democrats have included the additional funding in their supplemental budget proposals, meanwhile, Senate Republicans have opposed the extra funding, saying that Ellison’s office got a budget increase last year.

“The attorney general had plenty of time and resources to shut down businesses last year, I think he has enough time and resources to prosecute crime now,” Sen. Mary Kiffmeyer, R-Big Lake, said, referring to the office’s enforcement of COVID-19 related state regulations.

Senate Majority Leader Jeremy Miller, R-Winona, on Thursday said members of a legislative conference committee would determine whether to approve the money during negotiations in the next two weeks.

Three Twin Cities metro area county attorneys flanked Ellison during his news conference and said their greater Minnesota peers didn’t have the staffing or resources that they did to bring complex criminal cases.

“I stand here in support of my colleagues who are doing the great work that they do in greater Minnesota,” Anoka County Attorney Tony Palumbo said. “They are fighting the battles that we in the Metro also have to face and I also have to fight but we have many resources to be able to do that. They do not when they have a major case.”

[Italics added.] Upon request of the Hennepin Country Attorney Ellison's office successfully prosecuted Derek Chauvin for his murder of George Floyd. Despite Republicans squeezing him via denial of his budget request to expand criminal staff.

More from the originally cited PiPress report on the debate: 

Schultz also accused Ellison of using abortion to distract from an alleged scheme that federal prosecutors say stole at least $250 million from a program to feed children during the pandemic. The nonprofit at the center was called Feeding Our Future. Nearly 50 people have been charged with federal crimes. But questions remain about what state officials including Ellison knew about the magnitude of the fraud, when they learned of it and whether they could have stopped it earlier.

Schultz said Ellison should have used the power of his office before $250 million in taxpayer money went out the door. Federal authorities have recovered about $50 million so far.

Ellison hailed the investigation as a successful collaboration between state and federal authorities. He noted that three of the defendants have already pleaded guilty. He repeated assertions by him and Gov. Tim Walz’s administration that the FBI asked them not to stop the flow of money in order to protect the secrecy of the pending investigation.

“Because of the collaboration, we believe that this whole thing has been pulled out root and branch,” Ellison said.

Schultz accused Ellison of lying about his role. “The FBI does not tell victims of theft to send out $200 million to people we know to be thieves,” he said.

Note, federal prosecutors, in the first sentence. It was a federal program, and the crimes are federal offenses. It is offensive Schultz, a hedge fund lawyer only, saying "The FBI does not tell victims of theft to send out $200 million to people we know to be thieves." He was not privy to any FBI discussions with State officials, and nothing, zero, zippo in his background bolsters his having any knowledge of how the FBI operates. Both candidates should hash out details, instead of repeating responses already made. The FBI likely would deny any statements about a pending investigation, so, Schultz slings mud, Ellison was there and conversed with federal officials about best steps as things evolved.

Moving from things said back and forth in the recent debate, facts exist, facts matter.

CBS News, Sept. 2021 -

Unsolved Crime Rate Increases In Minneapolis, With 88% Resulting In No Arrests

Yes. Schultz could put a thousand super-sharp prosecutors on an unlimited payroll and yet the truth is that crime stopping involves crime solving, and if Schultz were wanting to make an impact there he would run for mayor, or county attorney, or sheriff - because that is where bolstering the process would work. He's grandstanding and not looking at the effectiveness of those who are endorsing him, whereas Ellison wants better professionalism and accountability.

Police Tribune, July 2021 - stating -

Police chiefs from the Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Maple Grove, Plymouth, and New Hope police departments described the spike in gun violence that they’re seeing in their communities to KMSP.

Violent crime in Hennepin County was up 24 percent last year from the prior year, and it skyrocketed up to 36 percent in the last three months of 2020.

But when you take Minneapolis proper out of the calculations, crime was still up by 19 percent in the suburbs, KMSP reported.

[bolding added]. Ellison is attacking handgun straw buying presently, in litigation against Fleet Farm's negligent gun sales practices. Schultz has no handgun regulation proposal because - who knows? Schultz is dismissive of Ellison's litigation, but has no real promising answer to the situation. He just complains.

Moreover, despite crime, crime, crime from Schultz, and that is handgun crime, be it murder or car jacking at gun point; the fact is handgun suicide is a greater cause of death than handgun homicide. Handgun proliferation, the Schultz answer? He has none.

Strib debate coverage included:

When Ellison talked about sitting with crime victims, Schultz recalled being with his sister after her north Minneapolis home was hit by gunfire. Those sorts of gun crimes are "exactly" why his office is suing Fleet Farm for negligently selling guns, Ellison said.

Schultz had repeatedly referred to the Fleet Farm lawsuit as an election-year stunt.

Ellison responded, "It's not politics, man, it's real and going upstream with guns is the right thing to do."

Gun retailers are the source. Squeeze better responsibility, get better results. It is something Schultz could have advocated himself, but now that Ellison is already there, throw stones. Again, Schultz is not even saying stop-and-frisk, which would at least propose something concrete instead of being Chicken Little about the sky falling. Bloomberg proved in New York City that stop/frisk fails, but at least it is a proposal; and Schultz offers no real on-the-street answer. None. A hundred new prosecutors; a thousand angels, would make no difference if crimes happen and go unsolved.

Aside from year-old statistics; Strib, weeks ago: 

Task force urges Minneapolis to be more aggressive against violent crime

The city has solved just 38% of homicides and 12% of carjackings, according to a new report 

By David Chanen Star Tribune

September 9, 2022

Again, the people endorsing Schultz are not solving crimes. Not apprehending. That is not to say solving crime is easy, because it is not. What it is saying is that Schultz is not too dumb to know the score, but he is not running for mayor or sheriff, so he is not saying more money and reformed thinking is needed in law enforcement; he is running for a job another holds and is doing better than a hedge fund lawyer could, so he is saying more prosecutors. 

More cops, better trained, is the answer, but that answer gives Schultz no mud to sling.

Rand has ideas. Individuals have ideas. Schultz likely has none, while certainly he offers none. Except, more prosecutors. 

Throwing more lawyers at anything has seldom if ever improved anything, much less solved how to solve and reduce crime.

When Schultz criticizes recidivism or "soft on crime" he's redoing the Bush revolving door ad. HOWEVER - If he thinks judges are too lenient, that they impose inadequate sentences or set low or no bail, then he should be running to be a tough-on-crime judge.  But the Bush revolving door ad taught, blame the guy you are running against, never mind the logic of who to blame and where you should be running, given your complaint. The fact is the Minnesota Attorney General does not set bail or terms of detainee release. Judges do. Police solve and apprehend. County Attorneys plea bargain and convict and recommend sentences. 

The Attorney General is not a cop. Not a prosecutor, but an administrator mainly focused on civil law involvements of state departments and officials, and also strongly focused on consumer protection - where the truth is you're far, far more likely to be cheated in a contract than shot to death on a steet; and the criminals that fuck over consumers are more numerous with money as an incentive so that deterrence can work there; quelling rational optimizers such as consumer cheaters, as with Fleet Farm being sued being notice to Gander Mountain and Cabala, notice that can rein in a money-driven motive to relax attention and/or to push boundaries, in a way making more money than if reined in and deterred. 

Deterring somebody seventeen years old carrying a stolen handgun and getting into anger-management problems with other similarly situated armed hot-heads at bar break is a far harder thing to accomplish; so put the effort into what works. Quelling the Gangsta outlook is also hard to deter; while legalizing recreational marijuana and taxing and regulating it as with liquor would take one of the incentives out of a lot of Gangsta posing and activity.

How can you deter ones who post on Facebook pics with a fanned out hand of hundred dollar bills or showing off a handgun while giving a hand sign, when prudent criminals would never do that? 

Schultz surely does not know how to deter. He likely has never seen such online demonstrations. He probably does not use Facebook. Making hedge fund money is something where a Facebook account is of no help.

LAST: With time having passed, viewing one or both of two interviews online of four Mpls. Police Union board officials is worth the effort, (here and here) now, when they say - We do not train. We do not investigate. We grieve some disclipline not all. We negotiate pay and other terms of employment. We do not set policy.

Mayor Frey, after effort to defeat the Public Safety Amendment, is moving to do something about police-community relations issues. That's positive. 

Schultz is throwing shit at his opponent over things where the problem he hinges his campaign on is headquartered far and away from his opponent and the office his opponent holds while he is shooting for it; and the facts line up proving that. 

Demagoguery, big time, with no answer but to criticize and bloviate and reinvent repackage the equivalent of the Bush 1988 revolving door ad hardly suggests capability if put in office. He is a dangerous man. His approach is reckless.

____________UPDATE____________

Strib's image. Body language.Who's smug? Who's not? What's your reaction?

click the image to enlarge and view better

  ___________FURTHER UPDATE___________

Axios has unusually lucid coverage.

FURTHER: Strib, covering responses from the two candidates in August, during the State Fair. Schultz's response as reported on Abortion has been reconstituted since then.

ABC Newspapers: "Ramsammy, West campaign for Minnesota House District 32A seat"

 Two candidates. One office. Each responding to key questions posed by the news outlet. No quote. Read it. Be informed, if in that district.