Last Call For Scrooged At Christmas

As a shutdown looms tonight after House Republicans adjourned without a deal, the Trump regime has decided that if Republicans won't take food out of the mouths of families and continue turning America into a Dickensian workhouse nightmare, than by God they will.  Work for your supper, peasant!

The Trump administration unveiled a plan Thursday to force hundreds of thousands more Americans to hold jobs if they want to keep receiving food stamps, pursuing through executive powers what it could not achieve in Congress.

The country’s food assistance program, which is run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, already requires most adults without dependents to work if they collect food stamps for more than three months in a three-year period. But USDA regulations allow states to waive the requirement in areas with unemployment rates that are at least 20 percent greater than the national rate.

The USDA is now proposing that states could waive the requirement only in areas where unemployment is above 7 percent. The current national unemployment rate stands at 3.7 percent.

Approximately 2.8 million able-bodied recipients without children or an ailing person in their care were not working in 2016, according to the USDA’s latest numbers. Roughly 755,000 live in areas that stand to lose the waivers.

The Trump administration unveiled a plan Thursday to force hundreds of thousands more Americans to hold jobs if they want to keep receiving food stamps, pursuing through executive powers what it could not achieve in Congress.

The country’s food assistance program, which is run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, already requires most adults without dependents to work if they collect food stamps for more than three months in a three-year period. But USDA regulations allow states to waive the requirement in areas with unemployment rates that are at least 20 percent greater than the national rate.

The USDA is now proposing that states could waive the requirement only in areas where unemployment is above 7 percent. The current national unemployment rate stands at 3.7 percent.

Approximately 2.8 million able-bodied recipients without children or an ailing person in their care were not working in 2016, according to the USDA’s latest numbers. Roughly 755,000 live in areas that stand to lose the waivers.

You can either starve and be unemployed, or work and make too much money to be on SNAP, but either way it's not the Trump regime's problem.  Dead Americans don't consumer resources, you know.  We're already to the point where tens of millions of Americans are buying food at dollar stores because there are no grocery stores where they live, canned foods that are less healthy and actually more expensive than grocery stores, because that's all they can afford on a $7.25 an hour job.

But remember, Republicans refuse to raise the minimum wage, they want to throw millions off food stamps and Obamacare and everything else so you can experience the dignity of poverty.

Merry Christmas.  Work or starve.

The Green New Deal Goes Blue On Blue

Vox climate reporter David Roberts does an outstanding job of explaining the Green New Deal to folks in this piece and frankly it's ambitious, necessary, if not vital to put America back together again after Donald Trump.

But it'll never happen, mainly because Green New Deal proponents are too worried about making conservative purple and red state Dems extinct rather than removing the real impediment to fixing climate, the GOP, dooming the Dems to permanent minority party status, particularly in the US Senate.

Earlier this month, a revealing spat broke out on Twitter. David Sirota, a left-leaning journalist who once worked for Bernie Sanders, announcedthat he had uncovered something while mining campaign-finance data: “Beto O’Rourke is the #2 recipient of oil/gas industry campaign cash in the entire Congress.” Neera Tanden, the president of the Center for American Progress and a former domestic-policy adviser to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, pushed back. “Oh look,” she tweeted, “A supporter of Bernie Sanders attacking a Democrat. This is seriously dangerous.”

The dispute escalated three days later when The Washington Post’s Elizabeth Bruenig wrote a column declaring that she “can’t get excited about Beto O’Rourke” as a presidential candidate, because, among other things, he lacks a “well-attested antipathy toward Wall Street, oil and gas.” To which Tanden replied, “Bruenig’s piece in the Post on Beto is just the latest attack by a supporter of Senator Sanders.” Then, on December 10, the journal Sludge, which investigates money in politics, defended Sirota’s charge and noted that the Center for American Progress itself “has in the past accepted donations from multiple fossil fuel companies.”

On one level, the fight over O’Rourke is a fight over the legacy of Obama. The Obama veterans championing O’Rourke compare his “inspiration, aspiration, and authenticity” (in the words of Obama’s former campaign manager Jim Messina) to the 44th president’s. In a recent essay titled “The Case for Beto O’Rourke,” the former Obama aide Dan Pfeiffer declared that “the whole conversation around Beto has been eerily familiar to me, because these are the exact arguments people made to me when I told them I was considering working for Barack Obama 10 years ago.”

O’Rourke’s critics turn the analogy on its head. “Beto is a lot like Obama, true,” Bruenig acknowledges, but “it’s perhaps time for left-leaning Democrats to realize that may not be a good thing.” A recent Jacobin article called O’Rourke “Obama redux: an attractive, progressive-sounding, comforting figure” before declaring that Obama redux “would be disastrous,” given the former president’s policies on immigration, Wall Street, and war.

But the argument is about more than Obama. The people criticizing O’Rourke for taking fossil-fuel money don’t want to just prevent the Democratic Party from modeling its next presidential candidate on its last president. They want to overturn a model that has long dominated the party. Since the mid-20th century, Democrats have generally treated corporations as legitimate participants in the political process. Today, for the first time since the dawn of the Cold War, a powerful faction within the party wants to treat them as ideological adversaries instead.

In other words, we're having the same exact party-splitting argument that we had in 2016, one that gave us Donald Trump due to enough third-party rodent coitus to allow him to win the electoral college while losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million.

Worse, we're once again seeing a party-wide purity test that would not only eliminate 95% of 2020 candidates for President, but eliminate the vast majority of sitting Democrats in Congress.

I don't know where we're headed, but so far any positive outcome from the Green New Deal has already been hijacked by the Purity Police and is already being used against Democrats.

That Whole Saturday Night Massacre Thing, Con't

In a move that shouldn't surprise anyone at this point, Trump regime Attorney General pick William Barr basically auditioned for the job last summer with a secret 20-page memo justifying the firing of Robert Mueller.

William Barr, President Trump’s choice for attorney general, sent an unsolicited memo earlier this year to the Justice Department that excoriated special counsel Robert Mueller’s inquiry into potential obstruction of justice by Mr. Trump, saying it is based on a “fatally misconceived” theory that would cause lasting damage to the presidency and the executive branch.

The 20-page document, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, provides the first in-depth look at Mr. Barr’s views on the special counsel’s Russia investigation, which he would likely oversee if confirmed.

In the memo, Mr. Barr wrote he sent it as a “former official” who hoped his “views may be useful.” He wrote he was concerned about the part of Mr. Mueller’s probe that, according to news reports in the Journal and elsewhere, has explored whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice in asking then-FBI director James Comey to drop an investigation into former national security adviser Mike Flynn’s contacts with Russia, and by later firing Mr. Comey.

Mr. Barr’s memo, dated June 8 and sent to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, argues that, based on the facts as he understands them, the president was acting well within his executive-branch authority.

In other words, the nominee for Attorney General is on the record as saying that firing Comey was not obstruction of justice.  It gets worse though.

Mr. Barr argued in the memo that a president can be accused of obstructing justice under the relevant legal provision if he knowingly destroyed evidence or encouraged a witness to lie. But Mr. Trump was lawfully exercising his authority in firing Mr. Comey, he wrote. If prosecutors pursue Mr. Trump over his comments to Mr. Comey about Mr. Flynn, according to the memo, it opens the door for every decision that is alleged to be improperly motivated to be investigated as “potential criminal obstruction.”

“I know you will agree that, if a DOJ investigation is going to take down a democratically-elected President, it is imperative to the health of our system and to our national cohesion that any claim of wrongdoing is solidly based on evidence of a real crime—not a debatable one,” Mr. Barr wrote in the memo. “It is time to travel well-worn paths; not to veer into novel, unsettled or contested areas of the law; and not to indulge the fancies by overly-zealous prosecutors.”

There's no doubt anymore that Barr would not only not recuse himself from oversight of the Mueller probe, but that he would choose to interfere with and limit its scope from day one on the job.

He cannot be confirmed without an ironclad promise to recuse, and that will never happen.

StupidiNews!

• The US government faces a partial shutdown tonight if Republicans and Donald Trump cannot get legislation passed to keep the lights on by midnight.
• British police and even military troops were called in to London's Gatwick Airport after several unmanned commercial drones appeared over runways, canceling hundreds of flights.
• Donald Trump is expected to announce the withdrawal of about half of the remaining 14,000 US troops in Afghanistan, just one day after a complete withdrawal from Syria was announced.
• A US appeals court has reversed a lower court decision barring the Trump regime from deporting Iraqis from the Detroit area, the ACLU is considering what further steps to take.
• Nine months after a lethal crash, ride-share giant Uber is once again testing autonomous drivers in the US, but the test program will be significantly scaled back.