(from Lincoln's Last Trial by Dan Abrams and David Fisher)
". . . Twice Lincoln had gone up against him for election. In 1832, in Lincoln's first attempt to win public office, the good Reverend (Peter) Cartwright had defeated him for a seat in the Illinois state legislature. They met a second time in the congressional election of 1846, an especially nasty campaign. Running as a Whig, Lincoln objected strongly to Cartwright's insistence on bringing his religion into the public square. The Democrat Cartwright responded by tarring Lincoln as "an infidel," a man unfit to represent good Christians. Lincoln had won that election, and neither of the men had seen fit to apologize. . . "
". . . In a desperate effort to level the playing field — or a deliberate effort to muddy the waters — this ad accuses [Ohio House candidate Danny O’Connor (D)] O’Connor of a nonexistent “plan” and fails to account for the fact that Republicans in Congress want to reduce Medicare spending even more. . . Notably, the ad avoids all mention of Obamacare. That’s because the $800 billion in Medicare savings over a decade is baked into the federal budget, and the fight is over whether to reduce Medicare spending even more. That might be a worthy debate to have, but all but impossible when ads sling misleading mud like this. . ."
(from http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/paul-ryan-warns-if-dems-win-theyll-hold-trump-accountable)
". . . But it’s use of the word “subpoenas” that jumped out at me. . . What the retiring House Speaker seemed to suggest was that Democrats, if given any meaningful authority in Congress, would take steps to hold the president accountable for his actions. . . Or put another way, Ryan wants voters to back Republican candidates in order to ensure that the pro-Trump cover-up can continue on Capitol Hill. “Vote GOP in 2018,” the slogan effectively goes, “We’re against oversight and accountability for Republican presidents.”. . . '
". . . Article I of the US Constitution vests the power to set tariffs in Congress. The president has the power to impose tariffs at his discretion only because Congress has passed laws granting him that power. If Republicans in Congress think Trump has a bunch of dumb, destructive ideas about trade, they should pass new laws that strip him of that power. . . Trump is expected to justify his proposed metal tariffs by invoking a 1962 law that authorizes the president to impose tariffs unilaterally if doing so is necessary for "national security." Congress could pass new legislation that would require the president to seek a vote of Congress to certify his (bizarre) claim that our dependence on Canadian steel is a national security threat — and that would block his tariffs from going into effect absent such a vote. . ."
. . . something you REALLY want to brag about, Mitch?
(https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-insists-he-very-stable-genius-amid-questions-over-mental-n835191)
. . . "From a right-of-center point of view, 2017 was the most consequential in the many years that I've been here in Congress," McConnell said. . .
". . . there is no question that a president can be removed for, as the US Constitution dictates, any "high crimes and misdemeanors.". . . Unlike a criminal case heard by a judge or jury, impeachment is a political process that comes down to votes: a majority in the US House of Representatives to impeach and a two-thirds vote of the US Senate to convict. Yet both sets of proceedings can follow the kind of special counsel investigation now underway. . . Whether that or any of the President's other actions would offer sufficient grounds for an obstruction-of-justice conviction could rest with a court, or it may turn out, only with the two chambers of Congress. . . "
(from https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2017-11-10/2017-gop-tax-reform-bill-ignores-lessons-of-ronald-reagans-1986-bill By Claudine Schneider)
". . . This Isn't Reagan's Tax Reform . . . I know this firsthand because I voted to do just that when I was a member of the House of Representatives in 1986, the last time Congress passed major tax reform legislation. But my fellow Republicans don't seem to have learned the lessons of President Ronald Reagan's reform efforts. The 1986 reform rested on a bipartisan deal to lower tax rates in exchange for closing loopholes and exemptions. Revenue neutrality was at the core of the deal, and the reform was meant to be broadly distribution neutral as well, meaning that everyone would benefit, not just the richest. The main driver for our bill was clearly to increase the efficiency of our tax system – something no one can argue against – and not to score partisan points. . . In the 30 years since bipartisan tax reform last passed, the global economy has gone through dramatic changes. Technology and trade have made it easier to move goods, ideas and capital across the globe and to locate them wherever the tax laws are most lax or beneficial. Emerging economies have lifted millions of people out of poverty and reshaped the global political order. And policy decisions driven by an increasingly narrow set of powerful interests have driven economic inequality to dangerous heights leaving us with a world where only eight men own as much wealth as half of humanity, according to Oxfam. . . Indeed, adjusting our tax code to fit the times is necessary. But the bill introduced in the House of Representatives with President Donald Trump's support is not good for the average citizen or for our country. . ."
(https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/why-i-boycotted-congress-moment-silence-after-texas-shooting-ncna819161)
". . . I did pray for the victims and their families that day. But as a federal legislator, I know our thoughts and prayers are simply not enough. . . When tragedy strikes, feeling helpless is understandable. There is little you can do to stop a tornado, a hurricane, or a cancer diagnosis from changing your life in an instant. But gun violence is not an unavoidable fact of life. . . We cannot treat Sunday’s events as a natural disaster — this tragedy is man-made. . . Offering thoughts and prayers are a valuable way to let loved ones know you care, but no one should offer them at the expense of action. . . That’s why when Speaker Paul Ryan asked for yet another moment of silence in the U.S. Capitol on Monday, I chose to leave. . . I respect my colleagues who participate in moments of silence. I have participated in all of them until now. But based on the increasing number of mass shootings and the inaction of Congress, I have concluded that the best way to honor victims of mass shootings is to try to prevent future mass shootings, not stand and be silent for 60 seconds. . . Since I became a member of Congress in 2015, there have been over 1,000 mass shootings in the United States according to the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive, including three of the most deadly in U.S. history. . . Since I became a member of Congress in 2015, more than 60,000 people have died from firearms-related deaths in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control. . . Since I became a member of Congress in 2015, Congress has not taken a single vote on gun safety legislation. . . But since 2015 we did hold a number of 60-second moments of silence — more than 20, actually. And what have those 60 second acts resulted in? Nothing. . . "
(https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/will-25th-amendment-save-america-trump-not-written-ncna815851)
". . . the 25th Amendment . . . is vague and broad. . . .It doesn’t have to be this way, however: This is the moment to give the 25th Amendment teeth. . . Briefly, the 25th Amendment allows the Vice President and a majority of the Cabinet to tell the President pro tempore of the Senate (Orrin Hatch) and the Speaker of the House (Paul Ryan) in writing that the President is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” If the President doesn’t agree, he has the option of telling the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House, “not so fast, I’m fine.” . . . At that point, Congress acts as a tie-breaker and determines within 21 days whether or not the President is indeed unfit. . . the legal standard in question is vague and has never been tested. Scholars and politicians have little guidance at the exact moment that they need it most. . . . In the absence of such guidance, some have worried that if we invoke the 25th Amendment based on mental illness, we could be setting a dangerous precedent. Put another way, people fear the 25th Amendment will become a partisan sword. Luckily, these fears are overblown. Let us remember who invokes the 25th Amendment — the Vice President and the Cabinet, both individuals hand-picked by the President. This is unlikely to be a group eager to usher the President out the door. And if, despite historical evidence to the contrary, the President's Cabinet does go rogue, Congress can still act as a safety valve. . . "
. . . this from a man with whom I have little in common politically, but who would at the very least, debate issues intelligently, I am certain . . . (had to share the complete article)
"What's the end game for these preening, posturing doofuses who call themselves Republicans, but who can't pass a CNN camera without slamming their party’s president? There is a lot of blue falconry going on in the GOP right now, and while it's pretty clear why, what's not so clear is what these fair weather frauds believe they're accomplishing.
We know why they do it. Some of them are truly shocked and upset by Trump's rough edges. He's not your grandfather’s Republican. He's more like your grandfather's buddy who got Pops drunk and took him to a brothel long before he ever met grandma. Trump’s rude and crude, and that rubs a lot of Republicans the wrong way. His cheerful vulgarity and vindictiveness, which many find his most attractive qualities, offends some people because they're decent people of moral character who just can’t go there. It rubs others the wrong way because they're hopeless wusses who would rather be loved by the WaPo than kick liberals in their Harry Reids.
Others undermine our party’s leader because Trump dropped a deuce in their profitable punch bowl. They used to have power, and now they’re on the sidelines, and it gnaws at them. For so long they had control of the Republican Party, and they could shamelessly lie to our faces at election time back home in the sticks, then return to Washington, D.C., take off their sensible shoes, slip on their Gucci loafers, and proceed to do the bidding of their donor masters. Ka-ching!
Oh yeah, we’ll repeal Obamacare. Oh yeah, we’ll defend the border. Oh yeah, we’ll defund the baby-butchering cartel. Oh yeah, blah blah blah blah blah. All lies, but they didn't care. They had their power and prestige and the promise of a fat paycheck down the road when they moved from Congress to K Street. Actual conservative ideology? Well, that was for the rubes. And we were the rubes. We in the base, who are suffering from the establishment’s incompetent mismanagement of the society it had been foolish to try to micromanage in the first place, tried to warn them. But the Fredocons wouldn't listen, because they're smart, not like everyone says, like dumb…
That warning was called ‘the Tea Party,” and the GOP establishment didn't like it either. Remember how all those activated Republican voters helped recapture Congress, yet most of the establishment types looked at them like they were something nasty that was smeared on their shoes? See, the base isn’t supposed to be activated. It's supposed to be obedient. It's supposed to turn out on election day to do volunteer work and write checks. It's not supposed to try to have input. That's for our betters, not for us.
But the thing is, now we're woke, and we’ve realized that our establishment sucks, and that we’re tired of being the suckees. They didn't listen to us when we gave them the Tea Party, so now we gave them Trump. And they're very, very upset with us. That's a key reason they want to undercut Trump. Some people are just always going to want to trash the guy getting the attention and wielding the influence they think rightfully belongs to them. That's true whether they are some donkey–looking senator from Arizona or Nebraska pimping a book about his agonizing moral struggles, or some tiresome op-ed scribbler serving as the domesticated house conservative on a failing liberal rag, or the invasion-happy beneficiary of his parents' success who finds he can't fill the cabins on his brochure’s cruises anymore.
But what's the end game? What are they thinking is going to happen? Do they think that one morning Trump is going to wake up and think “Gosh, all these people telling me I'm wrong and mean and crude and tweet too darn much must be right. I'll change, because I always take the advice of people who I've already broken and humiliated.”
Unlikely, because Trump doesn't respect you. And he doesn't respect you because he's already beaten you. He's not a gracious winner, but to be fair, you've hardly been gracious losers. Oh, how it must gall you to be so utterly defeated by someone you consider your moral and intellectual inferior.
So if you're not going to change Trump, what do you think you're going to do? Do you think you're going to somehow drive Trump out of office? Let’s run down that scenario. Now we have President Pence, and about 75% of your party’s base infuriated at your backstabbing betrayal. That seems disastrous even if you buy the idea that President Pence would somehow preside over a return to something like business as usual. He might, at least until the next election. Then you're all toast. Let's just say that in addition to your treachery, your past track record of total failure to achieve the conservative goals you promised won’t particularly inspire Trump supporters to lend you their support.
Or maybe you think our voters would just be so disgusted that they would let the Democrats grab a majority on Capitol Hill and the White House too. Maybe you figure you could live with that. Maybe you think you can wait out the base’s fury by crawling back into the comfortable gimp box of submissive GOP congressional opposition.
Except it won’t work that way. Through all this Tea Partying and Trumping, we normals got a taste for power, and we like it. We're not just going to just shrug our shoulders when the guy we picked gets deposed in a coup. We’re going to get mad. Really mad. And you're going to get primaried. Just ask Jeff Flake (Dork-AZ). Have you seen his approval numbers? There are strains of the herpes virus that poll higher.
No, there's no going back to the old days. This is the new normal, and there are new rules, rules you better learn to play by. The most important of these is, “Take your own voters’ side in a fight.” You should try it, because if you didn't like the Tea Party, and you hate Donald Trump, you are going to be really, really, really unhappy with what we normals will do next."
* John McCain: "I have long called for a special congressional committee to investigate Russia's interference in the 2016 election. The president's decision to remove the FBI Director only confirms the need and the urgency of such a committee."
* Jeff Flake: "I've spent the last several hours trying to find an acceptable rationale for the timing of Comey's firing. I just can't do it."
* Ben Sasse: "Regardless of how you think Director Comey handled the unprecedented complexities of the 2016 election cycle, the timing of this firing is very troubling."
* Richard Burr: "I am troubled by the timing and reasoning of Director Comey's termination."
* Bob Corker: "While the case for removal of Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey laid out by Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein was thorough, his removal at this particular time will raise questions."
(https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/14/us/politics/democrats-donald-trump.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FTrump%2C%20Donald%20J.&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=collection&_r=0)
'. . . “I think it’s a dangerous game to chase every new outrage,” said Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii, a new member of his party’s leadership. “We’re going to have to make the case that voters were sold a bill of goods and this is a hard-right president and hard-right Congress.” . . . The party cannot, Mr. Schatz added, “get distracted by the latest shiny object.”. . . '
(http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-david-horsey-message-to-red-state-trump-voters-i-want-my-country-back-20161114-story.html)
". . . Yes, congratulations. At the same moment you elected a billionaire who claimed he would drain the special interest "swamp" in Washington, D.C., you kept in power insiders like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, one of the biggest snakes in the swamp, plus all the other Republicans in Congress who have fought to keep the mighty flow of corporate dollars streaming in. . . You think you have struck a blow against the "elites" on the coasts who look down on "real Americans" in the heartland. . ."
. . . (this one, unfortunately, not so great) . . . in history . . .
(from No One Left To Lie To; The Values of the Worst Family by Christopher Hitchens)
". . . (from an address by David Schippers) The President, then, has lied under oath in a civil deposition, lied under oath in a criminal grand jury. He lied to the people, he lied to his Cabinet, he lied to his top aides, and now he's lied under oath to the Congress of the United States. There's no one left to lie to. . ."
My latest solo offering, No Frills, is now available at - No Frills
(To Access all Ray Jozwiak - Gonzo Piano music you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/RayJozwiak)
(from wikipedia.com)
"Thomas Jeffery "Tom" Cole is the U.S. Representative for Oklahoma's 4th congressional district, serving since 2003. He is a member of the Republican Party. He is a Deputy Majority Whip"
. . . believes Clinton to be unfit to be President, due to among other things . . .
(http://www.npr.org/2016/07/06/484987301/gop-leaders-criticize-fbi-recommendation-not-to-charge-hillary-clinton)
". . . The stuff I heard yesterday was sort of hard to think how did you come to all these conclusions and yet come to a decision not to file an indictment? . . .This would have been a career-ender for anybody else in the State Department in terms of what they had done. And so you can't have one standard for the average American and something different because somebody is on the eve of being a major party nominee. . ."
. . . and he may be right! . . . but does that REALLY mean there is only ONE alternative???
My latest solo offering, No Frills, is now available at - No Frills
(To Access all Ray Jozwiak - Gonzo Piano music you can copy-and-paste this URL directly to
your browser: http://http://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/RayJozwiak)
