Trump Trading Blows, Con't

Yesterday I talked about how Donald Trump was planning to ditch the G-7 summit to go hang out with his new dictator pals in Singapore, and today he made good on that threat, but not before storming out with the ultimatum that all nations wanting to do business with the US must drop tariffs, or else.

President Trump told foreign leaders at the Group of Seven summit that they must dramatically reduce trade barriers with the United States or they would risk losing access to the world’s largest economy, delivering his most defiant trade threat yet to his counterparts from around the globe.

But there were numerous signs here that other leaders stood their ground, having stiffened after months of attacks and insults. Each leader now faces crucial decisions about how to proceed.

Trump, in a news conference before leaving for Singapore, described private conversations he held over two days with the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and Canada. He said he pushed them to consider removing every single tariff or trade barrier on American goods, and in return he would do the same for products from their countries. But if steps aren’t taken, he said, the penalties would be severe.

“We’re like the piggy bank that everybody is robbing,” Trump said. “And that ends.”

The U.S. leader described the meetings with his counterparts as cordial, and he repeatedly blamed past U.S. leaders for what he views as a trade imbalance. He also said other nations had taken advantage of decades of U.S. complacency with regards to trade, something that he planned to end.

The two-day session under crystalline blue skies in Charlevoix, Quebec, put Trump’s transactional view of alliances, economic leverage and trade relationships into sharp focus for other nations often frustrated by Trump’s ad hoc decision-making.

At this second G-7 gathering of Trump’s presidency, the question of whether the U.S. leader would follow through on campaign boasts about punishing international freeloaders has been largely answered.

He did not back away or blunt his critiques, and despite first-name references to “Angela,” and “Justin,” Trump did little to disguise his distrust of the international consensus model of world affairs that the G-7 represents.

The thing is, our allies?  They're going to chose "or else".   They're not putting up with Trump's crap, and they are calling the bluff of a wildly unpopular elected official whose party is about to get crushed at the polls in five months.  When the economic damage of these tariffs starts to show up in jobs reports about September or October or so, you'll know what caused it.

Meanwhile, Trump is more than happy to go meet his actual boss Vladimir Putin in Vienna later this year, all while telling the G-7 allies to go to hell.

He's the best agent Putin could have asked for.

One of Us, One Of Us

The Bernie people aren't going to be happy about this, but it's something the DNC should have done years ago.

The Democratic National Committee’s rules and bylaws committee adopted a new rule on Friday that would prevent outsiders like Bernie Sanders from seeking the party’s nomination in the 2020 presidential race. The move seems to be the latest salvo in the ongoing jockeying over the party’s future that emerged following the at times bitter primary battle between Hillary Clinton and Sanders in 2016.

But while the rule change left some of Sanders’s top allies thinking the party was being driven by “spite,” it likely won’t affect him directly and could pave the way for one of his favorite reforms.

DNC member Randi Weingarten, who is president of the American Federation of Teachers, posted a photo of the rules change shortly after it was added to the proposed draft call for the 2020 Democratic convention. Weingarten, who attended Friday’s DNC meeting in Providence, R.I., wrote that the party “changed the rules to ensure to run for President as a Democrat you need to be A Democrat.”

The new rule would force candidates in Democratic presidential primaries to state that they are Democrats, accept the party’s nomination if they win the 2020 primary and to “run and serve” as a member.

“At the time a presidential candidate announces their candidacy publicly, they must publicly affirm that they are a Democrat,” the rule says. “Each candidate pursuing the Democratic nomination shall affirm, in writing, to the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee that they: A. are a member of the Democratic Party; B. will accept the Democratic nomination; and C. will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party.”

The rule seems like a clear response to Sanders, who caucuses with Democrats in the Senate but has steadfastly maintained his status as an independent. Sanders ran to the left of Clinton and identifies himself as a “democratic socialist.”

Of course, the Bernie people knew this was coming and frankly don't care because they say it doesn't apply to Bernie anyway.

With Sanders’s independent status and push for inclusivity, the new rule change would seem to be a slap in the face and a potential roadblock should the Vermont senator decide to mount another presidential run in 2020. However, Sanders allies do not believe he would be affected by the measure thanks to a unique rule in his home state.

Sanders, who is currently running for reelection, typically runs in the state’s Democratic primary but declines the party’s nomination after winning. The move allows him to fend off Democratic challengers in the state while still running as an independent. Last month, the Vermont Democratic Party passed a resolution supporting this strategy and proclaiming that Sanders would still be considered a member of the party “for all purposes and entitled to all the rights and privileges that come with such membership at the state and federal level.” That membership could inoculate him against the DNC’s rules change.

So we'll be fighting over this rather than Sanders accepting the reality, joining the party, and moving on, because Sanders supporters think they don't need and don't actually want Democrats, they want Bernie, see.

Here we go again.

The Gunshine State Shines On

For some unfathomable reason, Florida's concealed carry permits are handled by the state's Agriculture department (because I guess gators really don't need to know if you're packing a Glock) but in a scathing new report from the office's inspector general, Ag Commissioner Adam Putnam, the GOP's candidate for Governor, apparently hasn't been checking any concealed carry permit applications against any federal databases because the employee doing it forgot his password for a year.

For more than a year, the state of Florida failed to conduct national background checks on tens of thousands of applications for concealed weapons permits, potentially allowing drug addicts or people with a mental illness to carry firearms in public.

A previously unreported Office of Inspector General investigation found that in February 2016 the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services stopped using a FBI crime database called the National Instant Criminal Background Check System that ensures applicants who want to carry a gun do not have a disqualifying history in other states.

The employee in charge of the background checks could not log into the system, the investigator learned. The problem went unresolved until discovered by another worker in March 2017 — meaning that for more than a year applications got approved without the required background check.

During that time, which coincided with the June 12, 2016 shooting at Pulse nightclub that left 50 dead, the state saw an unprecedented spike in applications for concealed weapons permits. There were 134,000 requests for permits in the fiscal year ending in June 2015. The next 12 months broke a record, 245,000 applications, which was topped again in 2017 when the department received 275,000 applications.

Department employees interviewed for the report called the NICS checks "extremely important." Concealed weapons licenses "may have been issued to potentially ineligible individuals." If it came out they weren't conducted, "this could cause an embarrassment to the agency," the report said.

Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam has made it a priority to speed up the issuing of concealed weapons permits since he was elected in 2010. In 2012, he held a news conference to celebrate the state's one millionth concealed weapons permit, noting the time it took to process an application fell from 12 weeks to 35 days on his watch. There are now 1.8 million concealed weapon permit holders in Florida.

Now running for Florida governor as a Republican, Putnam's campaign touts his expansion of concealed carry permits as one of his top accomplishments.

And it was accomplished in record time for one reason: because the background checks weren't done at all.

Going to be interesting to see how Putnam's campaign defends this, especially in the light of the Pulse nightclub shooting and the Parkland High massacre.  My guess is they'll blame the employee and ignore it.  It'll also be interesting to see how the other Republicans in the primary, particularly Ron DeSantis, responds.  Florida's primary isn't until the end of August however, so there's plenty of time.

We'll see.  Putnam should resign his post and drop out of the race for such massive dereliction of duty, but that won't happen of course. Republicans never do actually give a damn about the job, only the power.

Last Call For Pardon The Interruption, Con't

Huffington Post's Capitol Hill team asked House Republicans if they would vote to impeach Trump should he move to pardon himself for any federal crimes, and a grand total of one Republican said that they would.

Four days before Richard Nixon resigned in 1974, the Justice Department told the 37th president that he couldn’t pardon himself. Three days ago, President Donald Trump tweeted that he knows better.

Because it has the power to impeach the president, Congress might be the final backstop if Trump did pardon himself ― the U.S. Constitution says the president has full power to pardon “except in cases of impeachment.”

So after Trump’s tweet, HuffPost attempted to get comment from the offices of all 235 Republicans in the House, where the impeachment process would start. We asked a simple question: If the president pardoned himself, would they support impeachment?

We didn’t get many yes or no responses to our survey question ― just three, in fact ― so we sought out Republicans in hallways and asked them the question directly. Still, only one Republican said definitively he would support impeachment if the president pardoned himself: the libertarian-minded Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan.

In interviews with more than two dozen Republican members on Capitol Hill, most avoided the question.

“I don’t wanna talk about hypotheticals,” Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) told HuffPost. Conaway helmed the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation into whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government, ultimately asserting that it had not.

“I’m not a constitutional scholar, so I don’t know if he’s got the authority to do it or not,” Conaway said. “That seems to be a red herring to foment unrest, trouble and nonsense.”

Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.) also hid behind his ignorance. “I don’t want to brag, but I’m not a lawyer,” he said, noting he couldn’t answer whether the president had the power to pardon himself, and therefore couldn’t answer whether it was an impeachable offense.

A number of members delivered a variation of this line, saying they hadn’t looked into the matter seriously and therefore didn’t know if the president had that authority.

Three Republicans — Reps. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Walter Jones (R-N.C.) — all said they didn’t think the president had the authority to pardon himself, but all of them avoided the question of impeachment. Lance and Jones said the issue would go to the Supreme Court relatively quickly, and Fitzpatrick just repeated that “he’s not going to pardon himself.”

Although almost all 235 Republicans either declined to answer, or said they couldn’t answer, only one Republican said the president did have the authority to pardon himself: Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.).

Profiles in courage from the Trump party, including from "libertarian" Justin Amash, who of course is really nothing more than a Republican who thinks he's Rand Paul with a fraction of the actual attention-grabbing power.

In other words, nobody really cares to stop Trump.  And nobody in the party that enabled and elevated him will lift a finger to do so.  The real villains in America right now?  Not Trump, as I've said time and again, he's just the metastasized tumor.  The cancer is the Republican party.

It's Mueller Time, Con't

Earlier this week the story broke that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort was caught pressuring witnesses to lie in his Ukrainian lobbyist money laundering case and that Robert Mueller was recommending charges be filed as a result, as if somehow Manafort wasn't already facing a couple decades in prison.  Today Mueller made those charges official for Manafort and his chief Ukrainian lobbyist sidekick Konstantin Kilimnik.

The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, brought new obstruction charges on Friday against President Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, and added allegations against a close associate, who prosecutors suspect has ties to Russian intelligence.

Prosecutors said the obstruction charge relates to Mr. Manafort’s efforts to coach the stories of witnesses against him. He remains charged with money laundering, illegal foreign lobbying and lying to federal officials.

Mr. Manafort’s longtime associate, Konstantin V. Kilimnik, was added to the case, and was charged with obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice. The charges are related to an effort by him, Mr. Manafort and other associates to have prominent European politicians vouch publicly for Viktor F. Yanukovych, the pro-Russia former president of Ukraine, who was Mr. Manafort’s client.

Prosecutors allege that Mr. Kilimnik and Mr. Manafort tried to convince two associates who worked on the campaign involving the Europeans, whom they referred to as the “Hapsburg group,” to lie about its scope.

The new charges against Manafort are a direct result of his business associates giving up information on him to avoid prosecution.

The special counsel’s accusation this week that Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, tried to tamper with potential witnesses originated with two veteran journalists who turned on Mr. Manafort after working closely with him to prop up the former Russia-aligned president of Ukraine, interviews and documents show.

The two journalists, who helped lead a project to which prosecutors say Mr. Manafort funneled more than $2 million from overseas accounts, are the latest in a series of onetime Manafort business partners who have provided damaging evidence to Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Their cooperation with the government has increasingly isolated Mr. Manafort as he awaits trial on charges of violating financial, tax and federal lobbying disclosure laws.

Mr. Manafort’s associates say he feels betrayed by the former business partners, to whom he collectively steered millions of dollars over the years for consulting, lobbying and legal work intended to bolster the reputation of Viktor F. Yanukovych, the former president of Ukraine. Mr. Manafort has told associates that he believes Mr. Mueller’s team is using the business partners to pressure him to flip on Mr. Trump in a manner similar to the one used to prosecute the energy giant Enron in the early 2000s by a Justice Department task force that included some lawyers now serving on Mr. Mueller’s team.

“Anybody who is a student of the Enron prosecution sees a very close parallel,” said Michael R. Caputo, a former Trump campaign operative, who has known Mr. Manafort for three decades and spoke with him on Wednesday. Another associate said Mr. Manafort and some of his close allies were reading a book by the conservative lawyer and commentator Sidney Powell that claims misconduct in the Enron prosecution. And Mr. Caputo, who was interviewed by Mr. Mueller’s team last month, said that “when Paul decided to fight, he knew the lay of the land.”

Prosecutors assert that Mr. Manafort’s fight included trying to shape the accounts that former business partners offered prosecutors. In court filings this week, they said that starting in late February, Mr. Manafort repeatedly tried to reach the two journalists — with whom he had fallen out of contact until recently — to coordinate their accounts about their work to tamp down international criticism of Mr. Yanukovych for corruption, persecuting rivals and pivoting toward Russia and its president, Vladimir V. Putin. The prosecutors did not name the journalists, but three people familiar with the project identified them as Alan Friedman and Eckart Sager.

Both men fended off the overtures, which included phone calls and encrypted text messages from Mr. Manafort and a longtime associate, whom prosecutors have not named but was identified by people close to Mr. Manafort as Konstantin V. Kilimnik, a former Russian Army linguist who prosecutors claim has ties to Russian intelligence.

Instead of engaging, Mr. Friedman and Mr. Sager informed Mr. Mueller’s team of the efforts to reach them, according to prosecutors. Mr. Friedman accused Mr. Manafort of trying to “suborn perjury” by persuading him to lie to investigators, according to a declaration by an F.B.I. agent on the case. Neither Mr. Friedman nor Mr. Sager could be reached for comment.

The prosecutors are arguing that because of these allegations, a federal judge should revise the terms of Mr. Manafort’s bail or even send him to jail while he awaits trial. Mr. Manafort, who posted a $10 million bond and has been confined to his home since October, has until Friday at midnight to respond to the prosecutors’ accusations. His spokesman brushed aside prosecutors’ allegations of witness tampering, but declined to comment on Mr. Manafort’s relationship with Mr. Friedman and Mr. Sager.

They join a growing list of lobbyists, consultants and lawyers who worked on various contracts related to Mr. Yanukovych’s government, political party or supporters and are now cooperating with the government’s prosecution of Mr. Manafort. His associates say he was most stung by the decision of his longtime business partner, Rick Gates, who served as Mr. Trump’s former deputy presidential campaign manager, to cooperate as part of a deal in which he pleaded guilty to financial fraud and lying to investigators.

Remember, these are former Trump campaign employees saying Mueller is trying to flip Manafort, which immediately leads to the question "What did Trump do that Manafort can testify on?"

My guess is we're going to find out.

Trump Trading Blows, Con't

Donald Trump's trip Thursday to the G-7 summit in Quebec -- or as French President Emmanuel Macron called it "the G-6 plus 1" -- was such an unmitigated disaster that Trump is picking up his ball and leaving early.

President Donald Trump continued to criticize Canada early Friday morning after the White House announced he will leave the G-7 summit before its conclusion following a day of back-and-forth with fellow world leaders that foreshadowed confrontations during the meeting of the world's largest advanced economies.

Trump will be depart the summit in Quebec at 10:30 a.m. Saturday and head directly to Singapore, the site of his June 12 meeting with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement. The G-7 summit is scheduled to wrap up later on Saturday.

Before the Thursday night announcement, President Emmanuel Macron of France and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada both promised to confront Trump over his recent decision to impose tariffs on U.S. allies.

Trump, in response, laid into the two leaders on Thursday evening and Friday morning over those plans.

“Please tell Prime Minister Trudeau and President Macron that they are charging the U.S. massive tariffs and create non-monetary barriers,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “The EU trade surplus with the U.S. is $151 Billion, and Canada keeps our farmers and others out. Look forward to seeing them tomorrow.”

On Friday a little after 6 a.m., he tweeted, “Canada charges the U.S. a 270% tariff on Dairy Products! They didn’t tell you that, did they? Not fair to our farmers!” and “Looking forward to straightening out unfair Trade Deals with the G-7 countries. If it doesn’t happen, we come out even better!”

By pulling out early, Trump will skip sessions focused on climate change, the oceans and clean energy. He will also miss the traditional group-photo opportunity among fellow heads of state. The president may also miss the opportunity to host a summit-ending news conference, something world leaders traditionally do. The leader of the host nation, in this case Trudeau, also takes questions and gives closing remarks. Trump chose not to hold a news conference last year, becoming the only G-7 leader not to do so before leaving Italy, according to The Hill. He opted instead for a speech at a nearby naval air station.

The summit traditionally concludes with a joint statement spelling out the areas of agreement on the wide range of policy issues discussed. But before Trump's announcement, Macron urged the other five nations to hold strong and not let potential U.S. opposition water down their communiqué.

The 2017 statement, for example was notable for its explicit mention that the U.S. did not share its allies‘ support of the Paris Climate Accord. Less than a week later, Trump announced in the White House Rose Garden that the U.S. would be exiting the climate agreement.

“Maybe the American president doesn’t care about being isolated today, but we don’t mind being six, if needs be,” Macron said, part of his plea to confront Trump head-on.

Trump is such a petulant child, and his utter failure to even remain on the same continent with the G-7 leaders, our closest economic and military allies, proves beyond a doubt that the North Korean "summit" he's heading to next week in Singapore will be one of the most comical crash-and-burn cockups in US diplomatic history.

Our isolation from the world is proceeding at a brisk pace, and clearly the rest of the planet is willing to and prepared to operate without our "leadership" anymore.  It's probably the best option given the circumstances.

Oh, and Trump's biggest complaint?

Russia wasn't invited.  They haven't been since they, you know, invaded the Ukraine and took the Crimea region.

I wonder when we get kicked out?

Last Call For Plugging The Leaks

The New York Times is crying foul on the Trump regime for taking a reporter's email and phone records in the name of stopping leaks involving the Senate Intelligence Committee's investigation of Trump and Russia.

Federal law enforcement officials secretly seized years’ worth of a New York Times reporter’s phone and email records this year in an investigation of classified information leaks. It was the first known instance of the Justice Department going after a reporter’s data under President Trump.

The seizure — disclosed in a letter to the reporter, Ali Watkins — suggested that prosecutors under the Trump administration will continue the aggressive tactics employed under President Barack Obama.

Mr. Trump has complained bitterly about leaks and demanded that law enforcement officials seek criminal charges against government officials involved in illegal and sometimes embarrassing disclosures of national security secrets.

Investigators sought Ms. Watkins’s information as part of an inquiry into whether James A. Wolfe, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s former director of security, disclosed classified secrets to reporters. F.B.I. agents approached Ms. Watkins about a previous three-year romantic relationship she had with Mr. Wolfe, saying they were investigating unauthorized leaks.

News media advocates consider the idea of mining a journalist’s records for sources to be an intrusion on First Amendment freedoms, and prosecutors acknowledge it is one of the most delicate steps the Justice Department can take. “Freedom of the press is a cornerstone of democracy, and communications between journalists and their sources demand protection,” said Eileen Murphy, a Times spokeswoman.

A prosecutor notified Ms. Watkins on Feb. 13 that the Justice Department had years of customer records and subscriber information from telecommunications companies, including Google and Verizon, for two email accounts and a phone number of hers. Investigators did not obtain the content of the messages themselves. The Times learned on Thursday of the letter, which came from the national security division of the United States attorney’s office in Washington.

The records covered years’ worth of Ms. Watkins’s communications before she joined The Times in late 2017 to cover federal law enforcement. During a seven-month period last year for which prosecutors sought additional phone records, she worked for Buzzfeed News and then Politico reporting on national security.

Shortly before she began working at The Times, Ms. Watkins was approached by the F.B.I. agents, who asserted that Mr. Wolfe had helped her with articles while they were dating. She did not answer their questions. Mr. Wolfe was not a source of classified information for Ms. Watkins during their relationship, she said.

Mr. Wolfe stopped performing committee work in December and retired in May.

Ms. Watkins said she told editors at Buzzfeed News and Politico about it and continued to cover national security, including the committee’s work. Ben Smith, the editor in chief of Buzzfeed News, said in a statement, “We’re deeply troubled by what looks like a case of law enforcement interfering with a reporter’s constitutional right to gather information about her own government.”

Observations:

1) Couldn't resist that dig on Obama, could you, NY Times?  Even after you know Trump and Jeff Sessions was demonstrably worse and far more sinister towards the media, you just have to continue to blame the black guy, huh?  Bet you wish he was back, assholes.

2)  A reporter should never, ever, ever, get romantically involved with a goddamn source, or somebody later used as a source.  That's journalism ethics 101, guys.

3) You do know that Watkins and Wolfe are being served up as a warning now that Mueller is closing in, right?  Keep you eyes on who the bad guy really is here.  (Hint: it's not Barack Obama.)

4)

Conservatives: If you were pissed when Obama wiretapped a reporter, you should be furious now https://t.co/MyJQ3TiYG8

— Evan Siegfried (@evansiegfried) June 8, 2018

5)  Wolfe is going to prison.  Watkins probably isn't.  Probably.  I guess it's going to take Trump tossing reporters in jail before they understand the problem here isn't Obama, but whatever.

We'll see.

Virginia Is For (Healthcare) Lovers

Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam today signed into law Virginia's Medicaid expansion, after a long a brutal battle under the state's Republican austerity scolds of the previous general assembly, but the fight with the Trump regime is just starting, and there's every reason to believe that the expansion will be rejected by the White House.

After five years of fierce, partisan battles, amid chants of “Yes we did” from the crowd of spectators, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam signed a bill Thursday afternoon that will expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act to cover up to 400,000 more low-income people in the state. 

“It has been a long road to get here,” Northam said. “It took longer than we would have liked. But I couldn’t be happier to sign this and give Virginians access to the care they need to live healthy and successful lives.”

Citing the Founding Father who designed the capitol building behind him, Northam thanked the lawmakers and advocates who made the passage of Medicaid expansion possible: “As Thomas Jefferson said, ‘Without health there is no happiness.'” 

But the triumphant bill signing on the capitol’s steps in Richmond will not be the culmination of the state’s Medicaid wars, but rather the beginning of a new chapter. The bumpy road ahead includes requesting permission from the Trump administration to implement work requirements and to require that Medicaid beneficiaries pay premiums. Those conservative policies won the GOP votes necessary to get the bill over the finish line, and, if approved, are likely to be the stuff of political and legal battles for years to come.

Under the new Virginia law, starting next January, state residents with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty line will be able to enroll in Medicaid, massively boosting coverage among the currently uninsured. 

Some time later, depending on when the Trump administration approves the state’s waiver, Virginia will require those who depend on Medicaid to prove they are employed, studying or volunteering and to pay premiums for their health care. The work requirement will start at 20 hours per months and slowly ramp up to 80 hours, and will have a “three strikes and you’re out” enforcement approach — anyone who fails to certify for three months that they’ve met the work requirement will be booted from Medicaid and barred from reenrolling until the following year.

“That’s about as strict as you can get,” said Jill Hanken, a health law attorney and leader of the Health Care for All Virginians Coalition that campaigned for Medicaid expansion. 

“There are elements that are extremely punitive. Since most Medicaid enrollees are already working, we think setting up a whole new program for a very small slice of population isn’t the best use of those dollars, and we are quite concerned that people will lose benefits that they are entitled to because they get caught up in the red tape or make a small error.” 

As this process moves slowly forward, expansion advocates tell TPM they plan to make their voices heard on every step — lobbying the governor as he drafts the waiver, submitting comments to Trump’s health department as they weigh its approval, pressuring the state as it decides how to implement and enforce the rules, potentially challenging the measures in court, and launching education campaigns to help Virginians navigate the process. 

“If it’s approved, we’ll do our very best to make sure people eligible for coverage don’t lose coverage,” said Hanken. She added that should the balance of power shift in the state legislature, where Democrats came within one vote of controlling the lower chamber last year, groups will be calling on lawmakers to amend or scrap the restrictions. 

“Even if the federal government approves the waiver, the state can come back later and request any amendments they believe are necessary,” Hanken said. “Virginia has done that many times before with existing waivers.”

It's an ugly mess of an expansion, but it's better than no coverage at all for thousands.  However, the race will now be to throw as many of those 400,000 off the state's rolls as possible, and as quickly as possible, and the work requirements will unfortunately pare a big chunk of people from that group.

But it's a partial win, at least.

The Blue Wave Rises, Con't

In the two states where Donald Trump is the most popular (Alabama and West Virginia, where Morning Consult has Trump at 62-26%), Democratic senators are running for re-election, in this case Doug Jones and Joe Manchin.  In order to survive, they both believe that they have to acknowledge Trump's popularity among their constituents.  Manchin has been walking this tightrope for a lot longer than Jones, and at this point he's not shy about fully embracing Trump.

Joe Manchin wants you to know he really likes Donald Trump.

The West Virginia senator doesn’t put it quite that way. But more than any other Democrat in Congress, he's positioned himself as a vocal Trump ally. In fact, the senator, up for reelection in a state Trump won by more than 40 points, told POLITICO he isn’t ruling out endorsing Trump for reelection in 2020 — a position practically unheard of for a politician with a “D” next to his name.

“I’m open to supporting the person who I think is best for my country and my state,” Manchin said this week from the driver’s seat of his Grand Cherokee, insisting he’s game to work with any president of either party. “If his policies are best, I’ll be right there.”

Trump’s popularity in West Virginia has Republicans salivating over the prospect of knocking off the legendary 70-year-old senator and former governor this fall. In response, Manchin is sidling up to the president — his policies, his nominees, at times even Trump himself — as the independent-minded Democrat prepares for the toughest race of his career against GOP state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey.

The president recently mocked Manchin in front of the Senate GOP caucus as trying to hug him all the time — only a slight exaggeration, by Manchin’s telling.

“We just kind of do the man-bump type thing. That’s it. And I think he’s pulling me as much as I’m pulling him,” Manchin said in describing his physical embraces with the president.

Despite Trump’s recent criticisms of him, Manchin maintains a line with Trump. They last talked two weeks ago — after Trump teased him in front of GOP senators — and the Democratic senator is hopeful that Trump will treat him with kid gloves this fall. In Manchin’s estimation, he is often the “only thing” keeping the president from becoming a down-the-line partisan.

At times, Manchin was the only Democrat who clapped during Trump’s State of the Union address. This spring, Manchin killed liberals’ hopes of blocking Gina Haspel for CIA director by getting behind her early. Manchin supported Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, voted for now-embattled EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and even backed the president’s hard-line immigration proposal.

“I’m with him sometimes more than other Republican senators are with him,” Manchin said.

But Manchin has been frustrated that every time he thinks he's got the president in a moderate place on immigration or background checks for guns, Trump goes to the right. And he hasn’t always been there for Trump, most conspicuously on the GOP’s tax reform bill, which attracted no Democratic votes. He also voted against Betsy DeVos to be education secretary, Tom Price to lead the Health and Human Services Department and Obamacare repeal.

And that gives the GOP enough of a lane to attack the centrist Democrat as someone who will never be a reliable ally of the president compared to a Republican.

“Joe Manchin is not fully supportive of the Trump agenda. If Joe Manchin says that he votes with the president 50-60 percent of the time? In my book that’s a failure,” Morrisey said in a telephone interview.

Technically, Manchin is a Democrat. In reality, he’s a man without a party. His discomfort is apparent all around: He needs to appeal to Trump voters in a historically Democratic state that’s turned blood red. He had an infamously chilly relationship with President Barack Obama — he still refuses to talk about who he voted for in 2012 — and now has regrets about supporting Hillary Clinton in 2016.

At this point, Joe Manchin is the guy behind the adage "If you walk down the center of the road, eventually you're going to get run over."  I'm pretty sure Manchin is going to get run over in November, but if he survives, I can't say he'd even stick with Chuck Schumer.

In the eternal battle between "more Democrats" vs "better Democrats", Manchin just might be neither.

Meanwhile, things are looking a bit better for Dems nationally as June polling starts coming in.

So far, however, the president's party has been unable to effectively link positive news to its effort to preserve control of Congress. Democrats hold a 10 percentage point edge over Republicans, 50 percent to 40 percent, when voters are asked which party they want to win midterm elections in November. 

More than that, Democrats hold a significant advantage in voter enthusiasm. Fully 63 percent of Democrats express the highest levels of interests in the fall election, compared to 47 percent of Republicans. 

"Democrats' enthusiasm matches Republicans' in 2014 and 2010," said Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducts the Journal/NBC poll with his Democratic counterpart Peter Hart. In 2010, Republicans captured control of the House; in 2014, they took over the Senate. 

Democrats have built that edge on their leads among independents (7 percentage points), voters under 35 (20 points), white college graduates (24 points), Latinos (24 points), and African-Americans (81 points). Republicans retain a narrow edge among whites (3 points) and a large one among white men who have not graduated from college (37 points).

It's worth noting that if the Republican edge among white voters overall is down to just 3 points, they are in serious trouble, but again, the key is going to be white college graduates.  Clinton won them, but not by enough.  a 24-point margin however is definitely a problem for the GOP.

We'll see.

StupidiNews!

• The Justice Department will allow bipartisan leaders in Congress to view classified documents on the FBI's source during the 2016 campaign in a major departure from procedure.
• Texas says it has met the conditions of a 2017 US Supreme Court ruling on capital punishment and will reinstate a death sentence for a convicted criminal spared by the ruling.
• The Trump regime's tariffs on imported solar panels last week has already scrapped billions of dollars in new solar projects and thousands of jobs, according to one industry group.
• Continuing lava activity in Hawaii has now buried two entire subdivisions and hundreds of homes near Kapoho Beach on the Big Island, thousands have been evacuated.
• New observations at the Atacama Large Millimeter Array radio telescope show the universe is still growing and producing large stars, upending current theories about galaxy formation.

Last Call For Comey Chameleon, Con't

Washington has been eagerly awaiting the report from the the DoJ's Office of Inspector General as to the Clinton investigation, and amazingly enough, it hammers former FBI Director James Comey for his little October Surprise.

The Justice Department's internal watchdog has concluded that James Comey defied authority at times during his tenure as FBI director, according to sources familiar with a draft report on the matter.

One source told ABC News that the draft report explicitly used the word "insubordinate" to describe Comey's behavior. Another source agreed with that characterization but could not confirm the use of the term. 

In the draft report, Inspector General Michael Horowitz also rebuked former Attorney General Loretta Lynch for her handling of the federal investigation into Hillary Clinton's personal email server, the sources said. 

On Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump complained of "numerous delays" in the release of Horowitz's final report, which is expected to run several hundred pages long and be released in the coming days. The sources who spoke to ABC News were willing or able to address only a portion of the draft report's complete findings. 

"What is taking so long with the Inspector General's Report on Crooked Hillary and Slippery James Comey," Trump said on Twitter. "Hope report is not being changed and made weaker!" 

There is no indication the president has seen – or will see – a draft of the report before its release. Horowitz, however, could revise the draft report now that current and former officials mentioned in it have offered their responses to the inspector general's conclusions, according to the sources. 

Almost from the start, the long-awaited report was expected to chastise Comey for his handling of the Clinton-related probe. But in apparently describing Comey's defiance of authority, the draft report was criticizing a man who prided himself on his leadership style at the FBI and has since dedicated his post-government life to promoting a new generation of effective leaders. 

The draft of Horowitz's wide-ranging report specifically called out Comey for ignoring objections from the Justice Department when he disclosed in a letter to Congress just days before the 2016 presidential election that FBI agents had reopened the Clinton probe, according to sources. Clinton has said that letter doomed her campaign. 

Before Comey sent the letter to Congress, at least one senior Justice Department official told the FBI that publicizing the bombshell move so close to an election would violate longstanding department policy, and it would ignore federal guidelines prohibiting the disclosure of information related to an ongoing investigation, ABC News was told.

A not-so-gentle reminder then that James Comey was largely responsible for Clinton's close loss, but I'm sure Republicans will ignore than part and just concentrate on Loretta Lynch.

We'll see where this goes, and who knows how much of the IG report we'll get to actually see, but if anything, this will be used for cover by Trump that he didn't fire Comey over loyalty reasons, and instead he just waited five months to fire him over "the Clinton thing".

I don't buy it, and Mueller knows the truth.

Pardon The Interruption

Looks like Donald Trump is moving on dozens of pardons, and soon.

The White House has assembled the paperwork to pardon dozens of people, two sources with knowledge of the developments tell CNN, signaling that President Donald Trump is poised to exert his constitutional power and intervene, in some instances, where he believes the Justice Department has overstepped. 

The administration has prepared the pardoning paperwork for at least 30 people, the sources tell CNN. One of those is Alice Johnson, the 63-year-old Tennessee woman who was sentenced to life in prison in 1996 on charges related to cocaine possession and money laundering. 

Kim Kardashian West met with Trump and his son-in-law Jared Kushner in the Oval Office last week in an attempt to convince him to pardon her. Trump has not yet decided whether he will move forward with either a pardon or commutation for Johnson. 

While Trump has expressed interest in recent days in doing so, his chief of staff, John Kelly, has advocated against it, according to someone familiar with the negotiations. 

The Washington Post first reported that the White House had prepared the paperwork to pardon Johnson. 

Last week, the President pardoned conservative author and filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza and told reporters he was considering pardoning Martha Stewart and commuting the sentence of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. He raised eyebrows on Monday when he stated his belief that he had the "absolute right" to pardon himself, but said he wouldn't do so because he had "done nothing wrong." 

In light of his recent pardoning spree, several of the President's outside friends and allies have begun advocating for people they believe should also be forgiven.

Now, this could be Trump moving on the request made by Kim Kardashian in her meeting with Trump last week, but if any of these pardons involve players in the Mueller probe, our current Constitutional crisis shifts into overdrive. And indeed, Trump did commute Johnson's sentence earlier today.

Trump could just be trying to get his name in the history books here.  Lord knows there are a bunch of posthumous and current figures he could grant clemency to or pardon in full.  But the real tell here may be the sudden urge to involve the WH Pardon Attorney's office.  So far Trump's pardons have been Trump being Trump and going around the office, but these possible pardons he wants to make very official.

That makes me think it could involve Mueller investigation targets.

We'll see.

Tired Of All The News

A new Pew Research poll finds more than two-thirds of Americans are "worn out" by efforts to keep up with the sheer amount of news in 2018, but it's Republicans who report feeling the most overwhelmed.

If you feel like there is too much news and you can’t keep up, you are not alone. A sizable portion of Americans are feeling overwhelmed by the amount of news there is, though the sentiment is more common on the right side of the political spectrum, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted from Feb. 22 to March 4, 2018.

Almost seven-in-ten Americans (68%) feel worn out by the amount of news there is these days, compared with only three-in-ten who say they like the amount of news they get. The portion expressing feelings of information overload is in line with how Americans felt during the 2016 presidential election, when a majority expressed feelings of exhaustion from election coverage.

While majorities of both Republicans and Democrats express news fatigue, Republicans are feeling it more. Roughly three-quarters (77%) of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents feel worn out over how much news there is, compared with about six-in-ten Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (61%). This elevated fatigue among Republicans tracks with them having less enthusiasm than Democrats for the 2018 elections.

Feeling overwhelmed by the news is more common among those who follow the news less closely than among those who are avid consumers. While a majority of those who follow the news most of the time (62%) are feeling worn out by the news, a substantially higher portion (78%) of those who less frequently get news say they are fatigued by the amount of it that they see. (Most Americans – 65% – say they follow the news most of time, whereas 34% say they follow only when something important is happening.)

Those less favorable toward the news media are also the most “worn out.” Eight-in-ten of those who think national news organizations do “not too” or “not at all well” in informing the public are feeling this exhaustion. This is somewhat higher than among those who say the news media do “fairly well” (69%), and much higher than for those who think news organizations do “very well” – of whom 48% say they are worn out by the news and 51% say they like the amount they see. This relationship between attitudes toward the news media and fatigue holds even after accounting for Americans’ political party affiliation.

Americans don't like hearing news that bursts their news bubbles, and the more they think everything is "fake news" the worse that gets.  Republicans aren't ignoring news about the comically inept Trump regime, they're internalizing the disconnect and producing outrage and victimization from it and instead channeling that anger towards the messenger.

If there's a model frustrated news consumer in this poll, it's college-educated white women in their 30's and 40's.  Some 44% of white college women graduates voted for Trump but they had the least loyalty to his brand...and the most regret for doing so.

So yeah, I bet they are feeling pretty frustrated right now and don't want to hear about the news...especially the ones who voted for Trump.  The rest of us are pretty frustrated too...but we voted for the non-orange person.

StupidiNews!

• Package carrier UPS, which employs more than a quarter-million Teamsters, could be the largest US strikes in decades as 90% of employees have voted to authorize striking if necessary.
• In California Dem Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom will take on GOP businessman John Cox, but candidate and former LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa says thousands of Latinos were left off rolls in LA County.
• The EU is set to move ahead on punitive tariffs on US goods starting in July as a global trade war between Donald Trump and US allies threatens to spiral out of control.
• More than three dozen women won primaries for House, Senate, and governor's races in eight states last night, the vast majority are Democrats, including 17 in California alone.
• A federal judge has ordered the EPA to disclose all science relating to climate skepticism to back up claims made by Trump EPA chief Scott Pruitt.

Last Call For Trump Cards, Con't

Here in Kentucky a high school valedictorian made national news when he quoted the president and got massive applause.  Then he revealed to the audience that the president who actually said those words was Barack Obama.

Bell County high school student and valedictorian Ben Bowling wanted to share some words of wisdom with his graduating class, but there was a twist that no one saw coming.

"This is the part of my speech where I share some inspirational quotes I found on Google," Bowling said in his speech. "'Don't just get involved. Fight for your seat at the table. Better yet, fight for a seat at the head of the table.' - Donald J. Trump."

The crowd burst into applause.

"Just kidding," Bowling said. "That was Barack Obama."

The 18-year-old valedictorian said the crowd quickly went silent.

"The crowd erupted in applause and before they could even finish clapping I said I was kidding and the applause quickly died," Bowling said.

Bowling, who graduated on Saturday morning, told Courier Journal that he "didn't mean anything bad by it" and thought the moment was lighthearted and funny.

“I just thought it was a really good quote,” Bowling said. “Most people wouldn’t like it if I used it, so I thought I’d use Donald Trump’s name. It is southeastern Kentucky after all.”

Young Ben here is going to go far, I think.  And yes, he's headed for UK pre-med.  Good luck, kid.