Last Call For That's Real White Of You, Con't

I understand that "My dad will disown me if I marry you" is a story as old as time and not every parent is going to give their blessing to their children when they get hitched to somebody they dislike, that trope is prominently featured in half the catalogue of Brit Lit and at least partially responsible for about a quarter of wars stretching back to the Bronze Age.

But apparently we're still playing this particular game in America in 2018.

Vickers “Vic” Cunningham, a former criminal district judge now in a Republican runoff for Dallas County commissioner, acknowledged Friday that he set up a living trust with a clause rewarding his children if they marry a white person.

Cunningham spoke to The Dallas Morning News about the trust after his estranged brother, Bill Cunningham, came to the paper earlier this week saying his brother had been a lifelong racist.

Vic Cunningham denied harboring racial bigotry but did confirm one of his brother’s primary allegations — that his trust includes a stipulation intended to discourage a child from marrying a person of another race or of the same sex.
“I strongly support traditional family values,” Cunningham said. “If you marry a person of the opposite sex that’s Caucasian, that’s Christian, they will get a distribution.”

Cunningham said his views on interracial marriage have evolved since he created the trust in 2010. He said he has accepted his son’s relationship with a woman of Vietnamese origin, though he said he couldn't change the terms of his trust.

However, a former political aide of Cunningham's described him making repeated racist statements. A text message from Cunningham’s son showed concern that his father would not accept his relationship with an Asian woman. And in a recorded conversation, Cunningham’s mother, Mina Cunningham, acknowledged her son had been a longtime bigot.

Bill Cunningham brought the allegations to The NewsMonday, shortly after he said Vic Cunningham arrived at his home and threatened him and his husband, who is black, and referred to his husband repeatedly as “your boy.”

“His views and his actions are disqualifying for anyone to hold public office in 2018,” said Bill Cunningham, 50. “It frightens me to death to think of people in power who could hurt people.”

Now this is clearly a fight between two brothers over the family money, and there's still no law that mandates you can't be racist asshole, but this man is running for public office, and voters should weigh in on that.

Of course it's entirely possible that voters will approve of it.

That's the real problem, isn't it?

Russian To Judgment, Con't

 Former Blackwater CEO Erik Prince has long been a subject of ZVTS (a primer on the private mercenary kingmaker and long-time GOP donor is here) and he's definitely mixed up in the Trump/Russia affair.

 We know Prince wanted back into Afghanistan where it was a cash cow during the Dubya era for him.  We know Prince and a fixer working for the UAE, George Nader, set up backchannel meetings in the Seychelles that set up foreign contributions to the GOP, possibly with contributions from the Russians and a lot more.  We also know that the payoffs were made as the Saudis and the US took a hard line on Qatar last year, the UAE's traditional foe.  Finally, we know that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has flipped Nader and has him cooperating.

Not that this wasn't already all but assured, but one more piece of the Prince puzzle just fell into place today: the NY Times now places Prince and Nader at Trump Tower meeting with Don Jr. months before the 2016 election, along with an Israeli social media specialist.

Erik Prince, the private security contractor and the former head of Blackwater, arranged the meeting, which took place on Aug. 3, 2016. The emissary, George Nader, told Donald Trump Jr. that the crown princes who led Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were eager to help his father win election as president. The social media specialist, Joel Zamel, extolled his company’s ability to give an edge to a political campaign; by that time, the firm had already drawn up a multimillion-dollar proposal for a social media manipulation effort to help elect Mr. Trump.

The company, which employed several Israeli former intelligence officers, specialized in collecting information and shaping opinion through social media.

It is unclear whether such a proposal was executed, and the details of who commissioned it remain in dispute. But Donald Trump Jr. responded approvingly, according to a person with knowledge of the meeting, and after those initial offers of help, Mr. Nader was quickly embraced as a close ally by Trump campaign advisers — meeting frequently with Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, and Michael T. Flynn, who became the president’s first national security adviser. At the time, Mr. Nader was also promoting a secret plan to use private contractors to destabilize Iran, the regional nemesis of Saudi Arabia and the Emirates.

It's the Grand Unifying Theory for Cartoon Supervillains, folks!  We've got it all: Prince, Nader, Israeli social media manipulation, Iranian destabilization, the Russians, and a whole lot more!

After Mr. Trump was elected, Mr. Nader paid Mr. Zamel a large sum of money, described by one associate as up to $2 million. There are conflicting accounts of the reason for the payment, but among other things, a company linked to Mr. Zamel provided Mr. Nader with an elaborate presentation about the significance of social media campaigning to Mr. Trump’s victory.

The meetings, which have not been reported previously, are the first indication that countries other than Russia may have offered assistance to the Trump campaign in the months before the presidential election. The interactions are a focus of the investigation by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, who was originally tasked with examining possible Trump campaign coordination with Russia in the election.

Mr. Nader is cooperating with the inquiry, and investigators have questioned numerous witnesses in Washington, New York, Atlanta, Tel Aviv and elsewhere about what foreign help may have been pledged or accepted, and about whether any such assistance was coordinated with Russia, according to witnesses and others with knowledge of the interviews.

The interviews, some in recent weeks, are further evidence that special counsel’s investigation remains in an intense phase even as Mr. Trump’s lawyers are publicly calling for Mr. Mueller to bring it to a close.

It is illegal for foreign governments or individuals to be involved in American elections, and it is unclear what — if any — direct assistance Saudi Arabia and the Emirates may have provided. But two people familiar with the meetings said that Trump campaign officials did not appear bothered by the idea of cooperation with foreigners.

So this brings up an excellent point.  It wasn't just Putin who wanted to see Trump win.  The Trump campaign was open for business, and Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Russia, and possibly more foreign influences knew that Trump was open to the highest bidder.  And they took them up on the offer.

This is huge, of course.

Mueller knows all about it.

These guys are screwed.

Stay tuned.

The Authoritarian Check Is In The Mail

Once again for the cheap seats: the primary motivating factor in Donald Trump's daily decision-making is punishing those who slight him, real or perceived, and in 2018 that means using the power of the federal government to try to destroy his critics.

President Trump has personally pushed U.S. Postmaster General Megan Brennan to double the rate the Postal Service charges Amazon.com and other firms to ship packages, according to three people familiar with their conversations, a dramatic move that probably would cost these companies billions of dollars. 

Brennan has so far resisted Trump’s demand, explaining in multiple conversations occurring this year and last that these arrangements are bound by contracts and must be reviewed by a regulatory commission, the three people said. She has told the president that the Amazon relationship is beneficial for the Postal Service and gave him a set of slides that showed the variety of companies, in addition to Amazon, that also partner for deliveries. 

Despite these presentations, Trump has continued to level criticism at Amazon. And last month, his critiques culminated in the signing of an executive order mandating a government review of the financially strapped Postal Service that could lead to major changes in the way it charges Amazon and others for package delivery. 

Few U.S. companies have drawn Trump’s ire as much as Amazon, which has rapidly grown to be the second-largest U.S. company in terms of market capitalization. For more than three years, Trump has fumed publicly and privately about the giant commerce and services company and its founder Jeffrey P. Bezos, who is also the owner of The Washington Post. 

Trump alleges that Amazon is being subsidized by the Postal Service. He has also accused The Post as being Amazon’s “chief lobbyist” as well as a tax shelter — false charges. He says Amazon uses these advantages to push bricks-and-mortar companies out of business. Some administration officials say several of Trump’s attacks aimed at Amazon have come in response to articles in The Post that he didn’t like. 

The three people familiar with these exchanges spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the White House’s internal deliberations.
Brennan and Trump have met at the White House about the matter several times, beginning in 2017, and most recently four months ago, the three people said. The meetings have never appeared on Trump’s public schedule. Brennan has spent her career at the Postal Service, starting 32 years ago as a letter carrier. In 2014, the Postal Service’s Board of Governors voted to appoint her as postmaster general. 

Clouding the matter even further, Trump’s aides have also disagreed internally about whether Amazon is paying enough to the Postal Service, with some believing the giant commerce company should be paying more, while others believe that if it weren’t for Amazon, the Postal Service might be out of business, according to the three people. 

Trump has met with at least three groups of senior advisers to discuss Amazon’s business practices, probing issues such as whether they pay the appropriate amount of taxes or underpay the Postal Service, according to the three people.

These groups include Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, then-National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn and Domestic Policy Council Director Andrew Bremberg. Bremberg has served as a key liaison with Brennan.

Openly seeking to harm a business like this, even as one as big and as detrimental to the world as Amazon, is a textbook authoritarian move.  And we're supposed to be grateful for the people keeping Trump's rage in check, when the real issue is if there was any justice in the world, Trump would probably be sharing a cell with Jeff Bezos anyway.

It's hard to root for either side.

But this is America, as Childish Gambino says.

The Tyrant Needs A New Foil

The constant Trump search for the new bad guy du jour continues as the regime needs a new foe to scream about to the GOP base.  After all, the perpetual poutrage machine has to be fed continuously, lest it turn on its masters.  With former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Director McCabe gone, the quest for firing Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein needs a new "corrupt Obama FBI" target, and the geniuses at the White House think they have their scapegoat.

If they knew who they were, that is.

President Trump’s allies are waging an increasingly aggressive campaign to undercut the Russia investigation by exposing the role of a top-secret FBI source. The effort reached new heights Thursday as Trump alleged that an informant had improperly spied on his 2016 campaign and predicted that the ensuing scandal would be “bigger than Watergate!” 

The extraordinary push begun by a cadre of Trump boosters on Capitol Hill now has champions across the GOP and throughout conservative media — and, as of Thursday, the first anniversary of Robert S. Mueller III’s appointment as special counsel, bears the imprimatur of the president. 

The dispute pits Trump and the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee against the Justice Department and intelligence agencies, whose leaders warn that publicly identifying the confidential source would put lives in danger and imperil other operations. 

The stakes are so high that the FBI has been working over the past two weeks to mitigate the potential damage if the source’s identity is revealed, according to several people familiar with the matter. The bureau is taking steps to protect other live investigations that the person has worked on and is trying to lessen any danger to associates if the informant’s identity becomes known, said these people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence operations. 

Trump reacted on Twitter on Thursday to recent news reports that there was a top-secret source providing intelligence to the FBI as it began its investigation into Russia’s interference in the election process.

“Wow, word seems to be coming out that the Obama FBI ‘SPIED ON THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN WITH AN EMBEDDED INFORMANT,’ ” Trump tweeted. He added, “If so, this is bigger than Watergate!”

It's all breathless stupidity, but it's red meat to the grinder.  Even Trump's supporters say that Mueller should be allowed to finish his investigation (because they've been told for years that you can't trust a president, you know).  So, the only way forward for Team Tangerine is to try to muddy the waters and escape in the confusion. Greg Sargent explains:

The explicitly, openly stated motive for doing this is to create a rationale for Trump to either try to close down Mueller’s investigation by removing him, or to fire Rosenstein, which would allow Trump to install a loyalist to oversee and dramatically limit the probe’s scope. A replacement for Rosenstein could also do a lot more to keep Mueller’s findings under wraps. 

Soon enough, we may find out the truth about this alleged informant. But here’s what we know so far: Career intelligence officials believe what House Republicans are now doing could imperil lives and compromise ongoing intelligence investigations, harming our national security. 

Now, surely House Republicans would respond that in saying this, intelligence officials are merely trying to resist legitimate oversight into their activities. But here’s what we also know at this point: Previous efforts by Nunes and his fellow House GOP travelers to exercise such oversight have proved to be thoroughly bogus.

The Nunes memo was supposed to reveal dark new details about the genesis of the probe that would undercut its legitimacy. It ended up doing the opposite. The final House Intelligence Committee report concluded that Russia didn’t interfere in the election for the purpose of helping Trump. But the Democratic response revealed that Republicans didn’t take key investigative steps that could have fleshed out what Trump knew about the Trump Tower meeting and when. And the House GOP conclusion was undercut by Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee, which concluded that the intelligence services’ original assessment — that Russia favored Trump — was correct, boosting their credibility.

It won't work, but there's always a lot of damage Trump can do on the way out.

Last Call For Animal Farm

Paul Ryan's plan to wreck SNAP and gut food assistance for women and children in the yearly farm bill ran into an insurmountable force on Friday, that force being Ryan's own party, who went into full revolt basically because the hardliners didn't get their vote on immigration mass deportation .

House conservatives tanked a GOP farm bill on Friday over an intra-party feud over immigration, delivering a stunning blow to Republican leaders as they try to find a path forward on immigration. 

In a 198-213 vote, GOP conservatives essentially joined Democrats in rejecting the measure, which would have introduced tougher work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program [SNAP] that were a priority for Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). 

The whip count remained in question in the hours leading up to the dramatic vote, despite GOP leaders expressing confidence just minutes before hand that they would have enough support to pass the bill.

Ryan and other GOP leaders frantically tried to flip members of the House Freedom Caucus from no to yes during the amendment vote series leading up to final passage.
At one point, Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), a chief deputy whip, was seen working Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.) while Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) was locked in an intense conversation with Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.)

Ryan, McCarthy and Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) huddled with House Freedom Caucus leader Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Scott Perry (R-Pa.) earlier as lawmakers voted on amendments to the bill. 

Leadership made an offer to the Freedom Caucus that they could pick any date they wanted in June for a floor vote on a hardline immigration bill crafted by Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), according to a source familiar with the discussion.
In the end it, it wasn’t enough. Meadows said his members needed more of a commitment from leadership on the Goodlatte bill.

House Republicans desperately want to save their jobs by putting an immigration bill in front of the Senate and forcing Senate Republicans to save them, so the Freedom Caucus is now apparently ready to scuttle the farm bill in order to get their way. 

I've talked about how horrible the Goodlatte immigration bill is before, and it's essentially the end of legal immigration as well as setting the stage for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.  The House passing it would be pretty lethal to Senate Republicans, and they know it.

But not passing a farm bill would be worse (and the Freedom Caucus can blame Democrats, they figure.)  We'll see who wins, but no matter what, Americans lose.

We can fix that in November.

The War On Women, Con't

The Trump regime is going directly after women this week with a new directive that will essentially bring the "Gag Rule" to the US and prevent federal funding to Planned Parenthood. 

Clinics that provide abortions or refer patients to places that do would lose federal funding under a new Trump administration rule that takes direct aim at Planned Parenthood, according to three administration officials.

The rule, which is to be announced Friday, is a top priority of social conservatives and is the latest move by President Trump to impose curbs on abortion rights, in this case by withholding money from any facility or program that promotes abortion or refers patients to a caregiver that will provide one.

The policy would be a return to one instituted in 1988 by President Ronald Reagan that required abortion services to have a “physical separation” and “separate personnel” from other family planning activities. That policy is often described as a domestic gag rule because it barred caregivers at facilities that received family planning funds from providing any information to patients about an abortion or where to receive one.

Federal family planning laws already ban direct funding of organizations that use abortion as a family planning method. But conservative activists and Republican lawmakers have been pressing Alex M. Azar II, the secretary of health and human services, to tighten the rules further so that abortions could not occur — or be performed by the same staff — at locations that receive Title X federal family planning money.

Dawn Laguens, the executive vice president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, called the new proposal “outrageous” and “dangerous.”

The policy, she said in a statement late Thursday, is “designed to make it impossible for millions of patients to get birth control or preventive care from reproductive health care providers like Planned Parenthood. This is designed to force doctors and nurses to lie to their patients. It would have devastating consequences across this country.”

Several states, including Texas, are already doing this to Planned Parenthood and the results have been nothing short of disastrous. 

Cuts to family planning funding in Texas led to an increase in teen births and abortions in the state, according to a forthcoming research paper in the Journal of Health Economics.

In 2011, The Texas State Legislature restructured funding for family planning, ultimately reducing the state’s family planning budget by 67 percent, from $111 million over two year to just $37.9 million for the next two years.

The restructuring also formed a three-tiered system that allocates more funding to clinics with comprehensive health services over those that provide only family planning services. Public agencies that provide family planning services, including public health departments and federally qualified health centers, were classified as Tier 1, while non-public providers that offered both preventive and primary care in addition to family planning were Tier 2.

Specialty clinics, including Planned Parenthood, were classified as Tier 3 and faced the brunt of funding cuts.

When the funding cuts first took effect on September 1, 2011, 14 family planning clinics lost funds immediately, according to another research paper on the effects of the cuts. By the end of 2012, a quarter of family planning clinics in Texas had shut down, while 18 percent had reduced service hours, and 50 percent had fired staff.

The new study, authored by Analisa Packham, an assistant professor of economics at Miami University, found that the 67 percent decrease in funding has resulted in an increase in the teen birth rate by 3.4 percent, or nearly 2,200 more teens giving birth.

Additionally, the effects of those cuts were primarily felt in counties with relatively high poverty levels, and the increased birth rate was concentrated between two and three years following the initial cuts.

“Although the primary stated objective of the funding cuts was to decrease abortion incidence, I find little evidence that reducing family planning funding achieved this goal,” Packham wrote in her paper.

She actually found the opposite effect.

Now these cuts are essentially coming to all of America and the results will be a massive reversal in the lowering of teen pregnancy rates, and given that birth rates in the US have already reached a 40-year low and infant fatalities among black and Latina women are already insanely high, this will only make things exponentially worse if fully implemented.  

Democrats, you just got handed the issue to win big this year.

Squeezed In The Middle (Class)

New data from the United Way finds almost half of American households don't earn enough to afford the basics of middle class living as the vast majority of jobs in the US pay less than $40k a year. Americans are employed, they just don't earn enough wages.

Nearly 51 million households don't earn enough to afford a monthly budget that includes housing, food, child care, health care, transportation and a cell phone, according to a studyreleased Thursday by the United Way ALICE Project. That's 43% of households in the United States.

The figure includes the 16.1 million households living in poverty, as well as the 34.7 million families that the United Way has dubbed ALICE -- Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed. This group makes less than what's needed "to survive in the modern economy."

"Despite seemingly positive economic signs, the ALICE data shows that financial hardship is still a pervasive problem," said Stephanie Hoopes, the project's director.

California, New Mexico and Hawaii have the largest share of struggling families, at 49% each. North Dakota has the lowest at 32%.

Many of these folks are the nation's child care workers, home health aides, office assistants and store clerks, who work low-paying jobs and have little savings, the study noted. Some 66% of jobs in the US pay less than $20 an hour.

The study also drilled down to the county level.

For instance, in Seattle's King County, the annual household survival budget for a family of four (including one infant and one preschooler) in 2016 was nearly $85,000. This would require an hourly wage of $42.46. But in Washington State, only 14% of jobs pay more than $40 an hour.

That's why talk of a minimum wage is useless because nobody in America can afford to live on $7.25 an hour.  Living wages and guaranteed basic income are much more of a solution, and at least some Democrats are embracing those ideas, but not enough.  The middle class in the US is basically dying, and if you're black or Latino, the middle class is already dead.

"Economic anxiety" may be the catch-all to replace racism in the Trump Era, but it doesn't mean that people aren't suffering.

StupidiNews!

• Miami-Dade police have arrested a man who opened fire in the lobby of Trump's Doral Golf Club early this morning, officers shot the suspect and detained him, no other casualties reported.
• Michael Jackson will have a street named after him in Detroit as Motown will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Jackson 5's start next month.
• China is denying rumors of a $200 billion concession to cut the country's trade deficit with the US, but Beijing has ended its investigation into the US's $1.1 billion sorghum trade.
• US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer says that the US, Mexico, and Canada are "nowhere close" to a new NAFTA deal as House Republicans are warning of a May 31st deadline.
• North Korea apparently created and spread Android malware apps in order to steal defectors' personal data, the defectors were targeted for the apps over Facebook and other social media.

Last Call For The Coming Fight

Greg Sargent reminds us that the right-wing noise machine has been attacking the Mueller probe for a year now, and that when the trap jaws finally slam shut on Trump, FOX News and conservative talk radio will be there to bail Trump out and it's way past time for liberals to start digging in for the real fight coming later.

It’s hard to tell just how pervasive this all is. But one imagines that more reporting in coming weeks will flesh out just how far the reach of this alternative information ecosystem extends. The story of the rise of Fox News and the right-wing media — particularly the talk radio universe — is an old one, of course. But one has to ask whether this is all creating new levels of information polarization, particularly given the president’s unprecedented demonization of the mainstream news outlets and his ongoing efforts to actively promote pro-Trump propaganda outlets like Fox News and others. 

This directly intersects with several big ongoing stories in our politics right now. The first is the basic question of whether mainstream journalists are adequately reckoning with just how hostile Trump — and many of his allies and supporters — are to their fundamental institutional role, their values and their mission. The failure of many reporters to admit that Michelle Wolf was absolutely right about this White House’s level of bad-faith dishonesty, and about the challenges that creates for good-faith journalism, revealed that in many respects they are not adequately reckoning with the real problem here, which is that in the Trump era, their mission of objective truth-seeking is inevitably going to be divisive and alienating to millions of his voters. 

After all, majorities of Republicans now see the media as “the enemy of the American people.” And as Fischer’s reporting indicates, this alternate information ecosystem is actively amplifying Trump’s efforts to obliterate public faith in the media’s institutional mediating role in our democracy. If we learn more about its reach, that should shed more light on that deeper problem. 

That's the big one.  The absolute best case scenario from the Mueller investigation is "President Mike Pence", guys.  Keep that in mind.  The worst case, well, I don't want to think about it, but we should.

The second big story this intersects with is the coming confrontation between Trump and Mueller. 

Interestingly, last night’s focus groups outside of Milwaukee found that while Trump voters think Mueller is conducting a witch hunt, they nonetheless don’t think Trump should try to remove him. So there are at least some limits to the clout of this alternate media universe’s persuasive powers. But if Mueller finds serious or even criminal conduct, it is extremely likely that this alternate information ecosystem will play a critical role in Trump’s efforts to rally his supporters on his behalf and against Mueller and his findings. That could in turn make it less likely that Republicans act on them — and more likely that Trump escapes accountability.

In that coming confrontation, Trump’s ability to rely on an extensive media network that will back him to the hilt no matter what gives him an advantage that President Richard Nixon did not have during the climax of Watergate. As Fischer’s reporting indicates, we don’t really have a clear sense of just how extensive or influential that network really is. And we don’t have any idea yet what this really means for the country over the long term.

Yeah, so that worst case is Trump gets away with it, Republicans stay in power, and then they rain down vengeance upon Democrats.  And it gets worse from there.

The right-wing noise machine has never been more dangerous.

The Blue Wave Rises, Con't

No, Republicans aren't just going to roll over and give the Democrats the House in 2018.  Republican megadonors like Sheldon Adelson and the Koch Brothers have spent too much money on their pet lawmakers, and they're not about to let Nancy Pelosi up in things.

Republicans have amassed a sprawling shadow field organization to defend the House this fall, spending tens of millions of dollars in an unprecedented effort to protect dozens of battleground districts that will determine control of the chamber. 

The initiative by the Congressional Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), now includes 34 offices running mini-campaigns for vulnerable Republicans throughout the country. It has built its own in-house research and data teams and recruited 4,000 student volunteers, who have knocked on more than 10 million doors since February 2017.

The operation far eclipses the group’s activity in any previous election, when CLF didn’t have a single volunteer or field office. At this time last election cycle, the group had raised $2 million. As of Tuesday, CLF — which markets itself to donors as a super PAC dedicated to saving the House majority and can collect contributions with no dollar limit — had hauled in more than $71 million. 

That war chest and new infrastructure could be a significant factor in an election year dominated by expectations of a Democratic wave fueled by a backlash against President Donald Trump. 

“We have to do everything bigger and better to have a chance,” Corry Bliss, CLF’s executive director, said in a recent interview sandwiched between fundraising events with Ryan. (The speaker attends the events as a draw, but Bliss asks for cash later, in accordance with campaign finance law.) “If we do the same BS, cookie-cutter ads, we’re going to lose.” 

CLF’s midterm strategy, which emphasizes long-term voter engagement, is not normal for a super PAC. Typically, lawmakers’ campaigns and the National Republican Congressional Committee deal with field work and get-out-the-vote efforts — then PACs like CLF swoop in to fill in the blanks with what Bliss often refers to as “shitty TV ads.” 

But Ryan’s political allies decided last year that that model wasn’t working — and that CLF, with its seemingly endless resources, was a “sleeping giant,” as they called it. They agreed to turn the PAC into a massive, hyper-local grass-roots organization. And they tapped Bliss, a former campaign manager, to run the operation. 

“There was a belief shared by many that super PACs had become bloated in their role and, in some cases, did more damage than good,” said Ryan’s national finance chairman, Spencer Zwick, who helped steer the group’s makeover. “Ryan allies said: ‘How could they become more effective?’ and thought, ‘Why can’t super PACs basically run a shadow campaign?’" 

Turns out they can. 

The organization’s expansive operation has surpassed even the NRCC in its first year, at least as far as satellite field offices are concerned. The House’s traditional campaign arm has only one such office. And unlike CLF, which can spend its war chest wherever it sees fit, the NRCC has to cater to the more 240 dues-paying House Republicans, spreading its resources much thinner.

So while the NRCC is getting smoked in fundraising by the Dems, the GOP still has a massive SuperPAC money edge, and they're not afraid to flood the zone with ads to save their house majority.

We'll see how things go, but I still think the 2018 midterms will hinge on the Trump/Russia investigation and its outcome in September and October.  Don't count out the GOP just yet, they will fight for every seat.

So should Dems, and it looks like they will.

Russian To Judgment, Con't

Lost in the noise of yesterday's extremely busy news day on the Trump regime investigation front with the release of the Senate Intelligence Committee's second batch out of four preliminary findings, and those findings are extremely bad news for Donald and friends.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has determined the U.S. intelligence community was correct in assessing Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election with the aim of helping then-candidate Donald Trump, contradicting findings House Republicans reached last month.

“We see no reason to dispute the [intelligence community’s] conclusions,” the committee’s chairman, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), said Wednesday in a joint statement with its vice chair, Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.), who added: “Our staff concluded that the ... conclusions were accurate and on point. The Russian effort was extensive, sophisticated, and ordered by President Putin himself for the purpose of helping Donald Trump and hurting Hillary Clinton.”

This marks the second of four interim findings the intelligence committee has said it will disclose before tackling the more consequential question of whether Trump and his associates colluded with Russia to influence the election’s outcome, allegations the president has denied and sought to discredit. The committee, which earlier this month released related findings on election security, is expected to publish a comprehensive final report this fall.

Wednesday’s announcement comes amid growing Republican scrutiny of the investigation led by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, whose team also is examining whether Trump’s campaign coordinated with the Kremlin and if the president obstructed justice in a bid to limit the probe’s scope.

The Senate committee’s findings clash with the House GOP’s determination that the intelligence community did not follow its own best practices in concluding the Kremlin favored Trump in the election. The dispute — and the questions it now raises about which record of events is most accurate — could complicate the Republican Party’s messaging heading into the 2018 election season.

Again, this is all the more amazing because the Senate Intel Committee is headed by NC Republican Sen. Richard Burr, and Virginia Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, and both of them worked together on the report.  None of this nonsense by Republicans like we saw with Devin Nunes in the House.

But the Senate Judiciary Committee released their preliminary findings on Russian interference in the 2016 election too, and there are some explosive allegations in that Senate Judiciary report, mainly that the Russians funneled assistance to the Trump campaign through the National Rifle Association.

The Senate Judiciary Committee said Wednesday that the Russian government apparently used the National Rifle Association to help Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016.

Documents suggest the Kremlin used the NRA to offer the campaign a back channel to Moscow—including a potential meeting between Trump and Vladimir Putin—and might have secretly funded Trump’s campaign, the committee said. One of the Russians named in the report even bragged she was part of the Trump campaign’s communications with Russia, The Daily Beast reported last year.

The NRA spent a record $30 million on Trump and the FBI is reportedly investigating whether any of the money came from Russia. U.S. law prohibits foreign money to be spent on elections.

Two Russian nationals figure prominently in the alleged scheme: Alexander Torshin, deputy governor of the Kremlin’s central bank, and his then-deputy Maria Butina.

Torshin met Donald Trump Jr. at the NRA’s 2016 convention in Kentucky and hosted an NRA delegation in Moscow in 2015. Torshin was previously accused by Spanish investigators of laundering money for Russian mobsters, an allegation he denied. (Last month he was sanctioned by the U.S.)

Butina founded a pro-gun group in Russia before coming to the United States in 2015 when she immediately began ingratiating herself in conservative circles. Butina started a business with NRA member and GOP activist Paul Erickson.

In May 2016, the same month Torshin met Trump Jr. at the NRA convention, Erickson emailed a Trump advisor about setting up a meeting between the candidate and Putin.

So two separate Senate committee reports not only found Russian interference on behalf of Trump, but evidence of involvement with the Trump campaign during the operation.

This is all but saying the Russians helped Trump steal the election, folks.  This is massive.

Stay tuned.

StupidiNews!

• The US Senate voted 52-47 to repeal the FCC's changes to net neutrality laws, but the measure is not expected to get a vote in the House, let alone Donald Trump's signature.
• A California judge has overturned the state's assisted suicide law, saying the General Assembly illegally passed the law during a special session on health care last year.
• Russian lawmakers delayed a bill that would make it illegal for Russian companies to comply with US sanctions, while pushing forward a counter-sanctions bill against "unfriendly countries".
• China's top economic adviser Liu He will meet with US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin in Washington on Thursday for four days of talk designed to salvage US/China trade relations.
• Microsoft will introduce the XBox Adaptive Controller later this year to help gamers with limited mobility play, the controller is broadly compatible with a number of peripherals.

Last Call For Russian To Judgment, Con't

A big one tonight for you folks, Ronan Farrow may not have been ready for primetime on MSNBC as a host, but as a reporter for the New Yorker, he's brought down the likes of Harvey Weinstein and Eric Schniederman, and now he's taking a crack at a presidential lawyer and quite possibly a president.

Last week, several news outlets obtained financial records showing that Michael Cohen, President Trump’s personal attorney, had used a shell company to receive payments from various firms with business before the Trump Administration. In the days since, there has been much speculation about who leaked the confidential documents, and the Treasury Department’s inspector general has launched a probe to find the source. That source, a law-enforcement official, is speaking publicly for the first time, to The New Yorker, to explain the motivation: the official had grown alarmed after being unable to find two important reports on Cohen’s financial activity in a government database. The official, worried that the information was being withheld from law enforcement, released the remaining documents.

The payments to Cohen that have emerged in the past week come primarily from a single document, a “suspicious-activity report” filed by First Republic Bank, where Cohen’s shell company, Essential Consultants, L.L.C., maintained an account. The document detailed sums in the hundreds of thousands of dollars paid to Cohen by the pharmaceutical company Novartis, the telecommunications giant A.T. & T., and an investment firm with ties to the Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg.

The general counsel for Novartis, Felix Ehrat, abruptly resigned earlier today.  Now we know why.

The report also refers to two previous suspicious-activity reports, or SARS, that the bank had filed, which documented even larger flows of questionable money into Cohen’s account. Those two reports detail more than three million dollars in additional transactions—triple the amount in the report released last week. Which individuals or corporations were involved remains a mystery. But, according to the official who leaked the report, these SARS were absent from the database maintained by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FINCEN. The official, who has spent a career in law enforcement, told me, “I have never seen something pulled off the system. . . . That system is a safeguard for the bank. It’s a stockpile of information. When something’s not there that should be, I immediately became concerned.” The official added, “That’s why I came forward.”

Seven former government officials and other experts familiar with the Treasury Department’s FINCEN database expressed varying levels of concern about the missing reports. Some speculated that FINCEN may have restricted access to the reports due to the sensitivity of their content, which they said would be nearly unprecedented. One called the possibility “explosive.” A record-retention policy on FINCEN’s Web site notes that false documents or those “deemed highly sensitive” and “requiring strict limitations on access” may be transferred out of its master file. Nevertheless, a former prosecutor who spent years working with the FINCEN database said that she knew of no mechanism for restricting access to SARS. She speculated that FINCEN may have taken the extraordinary step of restricting access “because of the highly sensitive nature of a potential investigation. It may be that someone reached out to FINCEN to ask to limit disclosure of certain SARS related to an investigation, whether it was the special counsel or the Southern District of New York.” (The special counsel, Robert Mueller, is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election. The Southern District is investigating Cohen, and the F.B.I. raided his office and hotel room last month.)

Whatever the explanation for the missing reports, the appearance that some, but not all, had been removed or restricted troubled the official who released the report last week. “Why just those two missing?” the official, who feared that the contents of those two reports might be permanently withheld, said. “That’s what alarms me the most.”

So we have a whistleblower with accusations of "nitroglycerine factory in an earthquake" level of explosiveness here.  They are facing five years in prison and a quarter-million dollar fine, possibly.  But the fact is that the two missing reports could very well be the details of a massive bribery scandal that reaches the Oval Office.

By January of this year, First Republic had filed the three suspicious-activity reports about Cohen’s account. The most recent report—the only one made public so far—examined Cohen’s transactions from September of 2017 to January of 2018, and included activity totalling almost a million dollars. It alludes to the two previous reports that the official could not find in the FINCEN database. The first report that the official was unable to locate, which covered almost seven months, appears to have listed a little over a million dollars in activity. The second report that the official was unable to locate, which investigated a three-month period between June and September of 2017, found suspect transfers totalling more than two million dollars.

A substantial portion of this money seems to have ended up in Cohen’s personal accounts. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney filed a separate SARS showing that, during that same three-month period, Cohen set up two accounts with the firm, into which he deposited three checks from his Essential Consultants account, two in the amount of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars and one in the amount of five hundred and five thousand dollars. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney marked those transactions, which added up to more than a million dollars, as possible signs of “bribery or gratuity” and “suspicious use of third-party transactors (straw-man).”

This is pretty huge.  Cohen was already in a boatload of trouble from accusations of bribery from earlier today.  Now things just got exponentially worse in a matter of hours.

Holy crap.

Trump Faces The Storm, Con't

Over the weekend, Stormy Daniels's lawyer, Michael Avenatti, made several tweets intimating that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen had been involved in a Trump Tower meeting with a Qatari investor in December 2016. The Qatari, Ahmed Al-Rumaihi, later bragged that he had given Cohen quite a bit of money in order to get access to Donald Trump.

So CNN followed up on the story and it turns out that yes, both Al-Rumaihi and Cohen were at Trump Tower on December 12, 2016.

After the story published, Qatar's media attaché in Washington, Jassim Al-Thani, explained in a statement that the meetings with the incoming administration in December 2016 were to discuss "many critical areas, including: regional security, military cooperation, counterterrorism, and economic partnership." 

Al-Thani said Al-Rumaihi "was present at Trump Tower but did not participate in any meetings" with the government delegation. 

A person familiar with the Qatari delegation's meetings at Trump Tower that day said, "There were several meetings that took place between the delegation and Trump transition officials. During one, Michael Cohen briefly popped in." 

The statement is Al-Rumaihi's first acknowledgment of why he was at Trump Tower on December 12, 2016, since Avenatti, a lawyer for Stormy Daniels, made an issue of it in his tweets. It also sheds new light on Cohen's conduct during the Trump transition as he was pitching to clients on his proximity to the President-elect. 

Avenatti alleged Al-Rumaihi had met with Cohen and Flynn, Trump's longtime attorney and former national security adviser, respectively. Avenatti also claimed Al-Rumaihi boasted about bribing administration officials in a "sworn declaration filed in court" -- a reference to a declaration from Jeff Kwatinetz, an entertainment executive who is currently in a legal battle with Al-Rumaihi. 

"Why was Ahmed Al-Rumaihi meeting with Michael Cohen and Michael Flynn in December 2016 and why did Mr. Al-Rumaihi later brag about bribing administration officials according to a sworn declaration filed in court?" Avenatti tweeted. 

Kwatinetz said in the filing that Al-Rumaihi, after agreeing to invest in Kwatinetz's basketball league, repeatedly showed interest in meeting Steve Bannon, Kwatinetz's friend and President Donald Trump's former chief strategist. Kwatinetz and Al-Rumaihi are engaged in a business dispute over Kwatinetz's basketball league, BIG3. 

In one particular instance in January 2018, Kwatinetz alleged Al-Rumaihi "wanted me to convey a message from the Qatari government to Steve Bannon" and hoped Kwatinetz would set up a meeting between Al-Rumaihi, the Qatari government and Bannon. He was asked to "tell Steve Bannon that Qatar would underwrite all of his political efforts in return for his support." 

Kwatinetz wrote in the filing he was "offended" and "appalled" by the request. In response, Al-Rumaihi allegedly laughed and responded that Kwatinetz shouldn't be naive. 

"Do you think (Michael) Flynn turned down our money?" Al-Rumaihi responded, according to Kwatinetz, referring to Trump's former campaign adviser and White House national security adviser. 

If this is all true, then yeah, Cohen was basically Trump's shakedown man and Flynn was the gatekeeper in their little pay-to-play scheme.  The Daily Mail makes an even bigger claim: that Cohen asked Al-Rumaihi for cash directly for the Trumps.

Donald Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, is facing claims he asked a Middle Eastern official for millions of dollars to give to 'Trump family members' in a meeting at Trump Tower weeks after the president's election victory, DailyMail.com can reveal.

Cohen is alleged to have asked Ahmed Al-Rumaihi, a former diplomat in charge of a $100bn Qatari investment fund, to send 'millions' through him to Trump family members. A source told DailyMail.com that the Qatari said he refused.

Al-Rumaihi on Tuesday issued a statement agreeing that he was at Trump Tower and a source with knowledge of the daysaid that Cohen had 'popped in' briefly to a meeting. Photographs show that he was part of a group greeted by Cohen, who went up in an elevator with them.

DailyMail.com can disclose that the group also included Qatar's foreign minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani.

The claims of a demand for 'millions' were made by a senior Kuwaiti government source close to Al-Rumaihi.

I have no clue where Avenatti and the Daily Mail are getting this info, but again, if this is true, then Mueller already knows about it and is already looking into it, and if Mueller somehow isn't, the US Attorneys in New York most certainly are.

We'll see how this pans out, but Avenatti seems to know an awful lot of things he shouldn't know, well before other people know them and he sure as hell isn't shy about saying so.

Dems Don't Get No Respect

Washington Post columnist Paul Waldman is 100% correct here: the perpetual right-wing outrage machine will always, always move the goalposts on "respect" and will always portray liberals as snotty elitists who hate Republicans.

In the endless search for the magic key that Democrats can use to unlock the hearts of white people who vote Republican, the hot new candidate is “respect.” If only they cast off their snooty liberal elitism and show respect to people who voted for Donald Trump, Democrats can win them over and take back Congress and the White House.

The assumption is that if Democrats simply choose to deploy this powerful tool of respect, then minds will be changed and votes will follow. This belief, widespread though it may be, is stunningly naive. It ignores decades of history and everything about our current political environment. There’s almost nothing more foolish Democrats could do than follow that advice.

Before we proceed, let me be clear about what I’m not saying. I’m not saying that the desire for respect isn’t real. As a voter says in “The Great Revolt,” a new book by conservative journalist Salena Zito and Republican operative Brad Todd, “One of the things I really don’t get about the Democratic Party or the news media is the lack of respect they give to people who work hard all of their lives to get themselves out of the hole.”

Nor am I saying there aren’t some liberals who express elitist ideas, because there are.

But the mistake is to ignore where the belief in Democratic disrespect actually comes from and to assume that Democrats have it in their power to banish it.

It doesn’t come from the policies advocated by the Democratic Party, and it doesn’t come from the things Democratic politicians say. Where does it come from? An entire industry that’s devoted to convincing white people that liberal elitists look down on them.

It’s more than an industry, actually; it’s an industry, plus a political movement. The right has a gigantic media apparatus that is devoted to convincing people that liberals disrespect them, plus a political party whose leaders all understand that that idea is key to their political project and so join in the chorus at every opportunity.

If you doubt this, I’d encourage you to tune in to Fox News or listen to conservative talk radio for a week. When you do, you’ll find that again and again you’re told stories of some excess of campus political correctness, some obscure liberal professor who said something offensive, some liberal celebrity who said something crude about rednecks or some Democratic politician who displayed a lack of knowledge of a conservative cultural marker. The message is pounded home over and over: They hate you and everything you stand for.

Now, readers know I've been yelling about the right-wing noise machine for years during the Obama presidency, and I'm glad to see that Waldman not only successfully identifies the problem, but the answer as well.

We see this again and again: Democrats bend over backward to show conservative white voters respect, only to see some remark taken out of context and their entire agenda characterized as stealing from hard-working white people to give undeserved benefits to shiftless minorities. And then pundits demand, “Why aren’t you showing those whites more respect?”

So when we say that, what exactly are we asking Democrats to do? It can only be one of two things. Either Democrats are supposed to abandon their values and change their policies, despite the fact that many of those policies provide enormous help to the very people who say Democrats look down on them, or they’re supposed to take symbolic steps to demonstrate their respect, which always fail anyway. How many times have we seen Democrats try to show respect by going to a NASCAR event or on a hunting trip, only to be mocked for their insincerity?

In the world Republicans have constructed, a Democrat who wants to give you health care and a higher wage is disrespectful, while a Republican who opposes those things but engages in a vigorous round of campaign race-baiting is respectful. The person who’s holding you back isn’t the politician who just voted to give a trillion-dollar tax break to the wealthy and corporations, it’s an East Coast college professor who said something condescending on Twitter.

So what are Democrats to do? The answer is simple: This is a game they cannot win, so they have to stop playing. Know at the outset that no matter what you say or do, Republicans will cry that you’re disrespecting good heartland voters. There is no bit of PR razzle-dazzle that will stop them. Remember that white Republicans are not going to vote for you anyway, and their votes are no more valuable or virtuous than the votes of any other American. Don’t try to come up with photo ops showing you genuflecting before the totems of the white working class, because that won’t work. Advocate for what you believe in, and explain why it actually helps people.

Finally — and this is critical — never stop telling voters how Republicans are screwing them over. The two successful Democratic presidents of recent years were both called liberal elitists, and they countered by relentlessly hammering the GOP over its advocacy for the wealthy. And it worked.

This.

One million times this.  Quit getting bogged down trying to win over white voters who have spent the last ten years hearing how Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are the antichrists.  Show them how the GOP has rigged the game and tell them how you're going to fix it.  And in primaries last night, we'll get to test this theory as FiveThirtyEight's Nathaniel Rakich explains.

The Democratic Party woke up this morning with a clear signal from Tuesday’s primary elections: The #Resistance means business. The more progressive candidate won in Democratic primaries around the country. The question, however, is whether those more liberal candidates will hurt the party’s chances in November. 

The biggest — and most surprising — news of the night was nonprofit executive Kara Eastman’s nomination in Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District. Although former U.S. Rep. Brad Ashford had both the money and the backing of national Democrats, Eastman defeated him 51 percent to 49 percent. Like many of yesterday’s victorious Democrats, Eastman won by throwing red (blue?) meat to the liberal base: Where Ashford touted his ability to build consensus in Congress, Eastman promised confrontation and, well, resistance to President Trump.

Can a true blue anti-Trump unashamed liberal win in a state like Nebraska?  We'll find out.

And Eastman wasn’t alone. In Idaho, state Rep. Paulette Jordan surprisingly cruised to the Democratic nomination for governor, 59 percent to 40 percent, over a more moderate, wealthier and better-known (he was the party’s nominee in 2014) rival. Jordan, who would become the first Native American governor in U.S. history if she pulls off the upset win, was endorsed by Democracy for America, Indivisible and Cher — three entities not usually known for their influence with Idaho voters.

I've talked about Paulette Jordan before in Idaho.  She just won her primary by nearly 20 points. It wasn't even close.

Two Pennsylvania congressional primaries also pitted progressivism against pragmatism, and the progressives went two for two. In the 1st District, philanthropist Scott Wallace, the grandson of the Progressive Party’s 1948 presidential nominee, defeated former Navy prosecutor Rachel Reddick 56 percent to 35 percent. Reddick had made her conversion from the GOP a centerpiece of her campaign. In the 7th District, a split in the progressive vote nearly caused Democrats to nominate Northampton County District Attorney John Morganelli, who has made comments friendly to Trump and not so friendly to undocumented immigrants. However, Allentown City Solicitor Susan Wild defeated him 33 to 30 percent, with Bernie Sanders-endorsed pastor Greg Edwards in third with 26 percent. More than Nebraska’s 2nd District, both the 1st and 7th Districts in Pennsylvania are true swing districts, with a partisan lean of R+1 and D+0.04, respectively — in other words, they’re almost perfect bellwethers for the nation as a whole. So Democrats have a little more margin for error there in such a Democratic-leaning political environment. (Of course, if that environment changes … ) 

Eastman’s, Jordan’s and Wild’s victories were part of another trend on Tuesday night: Women dominated. They won 11 out of the 16 contested Democratic primaries for Senate, House or governor that featured at least one female candidate and no incumbent. In Pennsylvania alone — currently the largest state with no women in its congressional delegation — three women won Democratic primaries in seats likely to elect them in November: Madeleine Dean in the 4th District, Mary Gay Scanlon in the 5th District and Chrissy Houlahan (though it was uncontested) in the 6th District. Tuesday also represented the continuation of a strong election cycle for Emily’s List, the progressive political action committee that works to elect pro-choice women. Three of the five candidates they endorsed triumphed on Tuesday, as did one (Scanlon) that they spoke highly of.

Rakich's lazy "tea party" headline aside, it's time to stop playing the GOP's game and win like Democrats.

Let's do this.