thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--This Is The Buzzy Democratic Firm That Botched The Iowa Caucuses

A tech company affiliated with , and funded by , ACRONYM , a Democratic digital nonprofit group that has rapidly expanded in recent years , was responsible for building the Iowa caucus app that contributed to delays in reporting Monday night ’ s results in the first vote in the party ’ s presidential race .
Multiple Democratic sources , including one of the presidential campaigns , confirmed the app ’ s creator .
State campaign finance records indicate the Iowa Democratic Party paid Shadow , a tech company that joined with ACRONYM last year , more than $ 60,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ installments in November and December of last year .
A Democratic source with knowledge of the process said those payments were for the app that caucus site leaders were supposed to use to upload the results at their locales .
Gerard Niemira , a veteran of Hillary Clinton ’ s presidential campaign , is the head of Shadow .
He previously served as chief technology officer and chief operating officer of ACRONYM , according to his LinkedIn page .
In 2019 , David Plouffe , one of the chief architects of President Barack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ board of advisers for ACRONYM .
ACRONYM spokesman Kyle Tharp put out a statement distancing the group from Shadow , saying that ACRONYM is merely an investor in the for-profit company .
In January 2019 , McGowan , the head of ACRONYM , announced that her firm had “ acquired ” Niemira ’ s Groundbase company , adding that he and his team were “ launching Shadow , a new tech company to build smarter infrastructure for campaigns.
” With Shadow , we ’ re building a new model incentivized by adoption over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ building the underlying tech infrastructure that will enable campaigns to use the most effective new tools in smarter ways & better integrate + leverage data across platforms .
— Tara McGowan ( @ taraemcg ) January 17 , 2019 The Iowa Democratic Party had refused to reveal details about the app , including the company behind it and what security measures were being taken to safeguard the results , arguing that it made the technology more vulnerable to hackers .
The app was supposed to make reporting the results easier and quicker .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iowa reported major problems in attempting to download the application and upload results , with many saying they resorted to calling the results into state party headquarters in Des Moines .
As of 12:30 a.m. Tuesday , the party had not released any results from the caucuses , which were seen as a four-way battle between former Vice President Joe Biden , Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg .
The Nevada Democratic Party , scheduled to hold the next Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paid Shadow for website development .
ACRONYM , which McGowan , a digital strategist , launched in the wake of the 2016 election , has become a growing part of the Democratic digital ecosystem .
The group has raised tens of millions of dollars with a buzzy message about how Democrats have fallen behind in digital advertising .
In 2018 , the group funded an onslaught of ads on platforms like Facebook and Google .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A tech company affiliated with and funded by Acronym, a Democratic digital nonprofit group that has rapidly expanded in recent years, was responsible for building the Iowa caucus app that contributed to delays in reporting Monday night’s results in the first vote in the party’s presidential race. Multiple Democratic sources, including one of the presidential campaigns, confirmed the app’s creator.
State campaign finance records indicate the Iowa Democratic Party paid Shadow, a tech company that joined with Acronym last year, more than $60,000 for “website development” over two installments in November and December of last year. A Democratic source with knowledge of the process said those payments were for the app that caucus site leaders were supposed to use to upload the results at their locales.
Advertisement
Des Moines, Iowa, residents enter a caucus site at Hoover High School on Monday. Charlie Neibergall/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Gerard Niemira, a veteran of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, is the head of Shadow. He previously served as chief technology officer and chief operating officer of Acronym, according to his LinkedIn page. In 2019, David Plouffe, one of the chief architects of President Barack Obama’s wins, joined the board of advisers for Acronym.
Acronym spokesman Kyle Tharp put out a statement distancing the group from Shadow, saying that Acronym is merely an investor in the for-profit company.
Just in — a statement from ACRONYM.
"We, like everyone else, are eagerly awaiting more information from the Iowa Democratic Party." pic.twitter.com/cBy2ZNwsPz — Teddy Schleifer (@teddyschleifer) February 4, 2020
Advertisement
In January 2019, Tara McGowan, the head of Acronym, announced that her firm had “acquired” Niemira’s Groundbase company, adding that he and his team were “launching Shadow, a new tech company to build smarter infrastructure for campaigns.”
With Shadow, we’re building a new model incentivized by adoption over growth, with a deep focus on building the underlying tech infrastructure that will enable campaigns to use the most effective new tools in smarter ways & better integrate + leverage data across platforms. — Tara McGowan (@taraemcg) January 17, 2019
The Iowa Democratic Party had refused to reveal details about the app, including the company behind it and what security measures were being taken to safeguard the results, arguing that it made the technology more vulnerable to hackers.
The app was supposed to make reporting the results easier and quicker. But on Monday, numerous Democrats in Iowa reported major problems in attempting to download the application and upload results, with many saying they resorted to calling the results into state party headquarters in Des Moines.
As of 12:30 a.m. Tuesday, the party had not released any results from the caucuses, which were seen as a four-way battle between former Vice President Joe Biden, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
Advertisement
Iowa Democratic Party Chair Troy Price said in a statement Tuesday morning that the results were delayed due to an issue with the app. What’s more, he said, pre-planned backup measures took longer than expected.
“While the app was recording data accurately, it was reporting out only partial data,” Price said. “We have determined that this was due to a coding issue in the reporting system. This issue was identified and fixed.”
The party used paper documentation from the caucuses to verify that the data collected by the app is “valid and accurate,” Price said. He added that the party hoped to release the caucus results “as soon as possible today.”
The Nevada Democratic Party, scheduled to hold the next Democratic caucus on Feb. 22, has also paid Shadow for website development.
Acronym, which McGowan, a digital strategist, launched in the wake of the 2016 election, has become a growing part of the Democratic digital ecosystem. The group has raised tens of millions of dollars with a buzzy message about how Democrats have fallen behind in digital advertising. In 2018, the group funded an onslaught of ads on platforms like Facebook and Google.
Advertisement
The group launched a super PAC, Pacronym, this year to mount a major digital effort attacking President Donald Trump, and won the backing of Plouffe. Pacronym reported raising $7.7 million in 2019.
This article has been updated to include comments from Acronym and the Iowa Democratic Party chair.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Meltdown: Iowa Unable To Deliver Caucus Results

WEST DES MOINES , Iowa ― The takeaway of the Iowa caucuses Monday night was not who won the first contest in the nation .
It was instead a story of confusion and chaos as the Iowa Democratic Party failed to release the results at all for hours after the caucuses ended .
At 11:30 p.m. , Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-Minn. ) was the first candidate to come out and address her supporters , admitting that she , too , was in the dark about what was taking so long .
The other candidates delivered speeches to their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they had no answers .
“ Let me begin by saying , I imagine ― have a strong feeling , that at some point , the results will be announced .
And when those results will be announced , I have a good feeling that we ’ ll be doing very , very well here in Iowa , ” said Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) .
The Iowa Democratic Party insisted that , in short , the system they put in place to report the results didn ’ t work out .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ led to delays .
The party tried to reassure people that there was no hacking of the system , pointing instead to “ inconsistencies ” in three sets of caucus results .
The confusion took much of the wind out of not only what was supposed to be a shining moment for Iowa , but also for whoever emerged as the winner of the caucuses .
Instead of leaving Iowa with momentum , some of the candidates would be getting on a plane for New Hampshire with uncertainty .
The Iowa Democratic Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the past , it released only the number of state delegates each candidate received .
But this year , in an effort to be more transparent , it was also releasing the number of votes candidates received in the first and second rounds of the caucuses .
But that also made the reporting process more difficult .
The party decided to use an app , allowing precinct chairs to report and transmit caucus results more quickly , at least in theory .
But officials were secretive about the technology , refusing to reveal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security measures were put in place to safeguard the results .
There seemed to be significant confusion from precinct chairs on how to tally results and what to report .
And a call between the campaigns and the Iowa Democratic Party ended abruptly , according to CNN , with party officials unable to give a time for when results would be ready .
“ We want to emphasize that this is a reporting issue , not a hack or an intrusion .
And it ’ s exactly why we have a paper trail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ integrity of our process , ” he said .
“ We are validating every piece of data we have against our paper trail.
“ As the clock approached 10 p.m. CST , some of the most active participants in the latter caucus were still reeling from a dispute over the number of caucus participants , which resulted in Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
failing to cross the viability threshold of at least 15 % .
Janet Bequeaith , 82 , had intended to caucus for Klobuchar , but because less than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her Des Moines precinct supported Klobuchar , Bequeaith had to pick someone else .
With the assistance of a rolling walker , she made her way across the King Elementary School gym floor to the Biden group , which cheered her arrival .
But then the caucus chair announced there had been a problem , and everyone had to go back to their corners .
It wasn ’ t until more than two hours after the event started that the precinct ’ s results were finally tallied , with Sanders getting the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WEST DES MOINES, Iowa ― The takeaway of the Iowa caucuses Monday night was not who won the first contest in the nation. It was instead a story of confusion and chaos as the Iowa Democratic Party failed to release the results at all for hours after the caucuses ended.
At 11:30 p.m., Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) was the first candidate to come out and address her supporters, admitting that she, too, was in the dark about what was taking so long. The other candidates delivered speeches to their own supporters shortly thereafter, all acknowledging that they had no answers.
Advertisement
“Let me begin by saying, I imagine ― have a strong feeling, that at some point, the results will be announced. And when those results will be announced, I have a good feeling that we’ll be doing very, very well here in Iowa,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
The Iowa Democratic Party insisted that, in short, the system they put in place to report the results didn’t work out. It was too slow, overloaded and led to delays. The party tried to reassure people that there was no hacking of the system, pointing instead to “inconsistencies” in three sets of caucus results.
“This is simply a reporting issue, the app did not go down and this is not a hack or an intrusion,” said Mandy McClure, communications director for the party.
But that wasn’t enough for the campaigns. The Joe Biden campaign sent a letter to party officials, demanding “full explanations and relevant information regarding the methods of quality control you are employing.”
Advertisement
The confusion took much of the wind out of not only what was supposed to be a shining moment for Iowa, but also for whoever emerged as the winner of the caucuses. Instead of leaving Iowa with momentum, some of the candidates would be getting on a plane for New Hampshire with uncertainty.
The Iowa Democratic Party tried something new this year. In the past, it released only the number of state delegates each candidate received. But this year, in an effort to be more transparent, it was also releasing the number of votes candidates received in the first and second rounds of the caucuses.
But that also made the reporting process more difficult. The party decided to use an app, allowing precinct chairs to report and transmit caucus results more quickly, at least in theory. But officials were secretive about the technology, refusing to reveal which company designed the app or what security measures were put in place to safeguard the results.
But that app had issues, and the backup system took significantly longer than expected. Shawn Sebastian, a precinct chair in Ames, Iowa, tried to call a hotline number they were given to report results.
After being on hold for more than an hour, the operator hung up on him while he was live on CNN.
Oh my god@shawnsebastian, a Story County precinct captain, had been on hold with the Iowa Democratic Party for over an hour trying to report results.
CNN had him on to talk about the process. While on air, he got off hold.
Before he could get back to the call, IA Dems hung up pic.twitter.com/oIs7dC5buq — jordan (@JordanUhl) February 4, 2020
Advertisement
There seemed to be significant confusion from precinct chairs on how to tally results and what to report. And a call between the campaigns and the Iowa Democratic Party ended abruptly, according to CNN, with party officials unable to give a time for when results would be ready.
In a brief call with reporters at 1 a.m. local time, Iowa Democratic Party Chair Troy Price said he expects IDP will “have numbers to report later” in the day.
“We want to emphasize that this is a reporting issue, not a hack or an intrusion. And it’s exactly why we have a paper trail and systems in place to uphold the integrity of our process,” he said. “We are validating every piece of data we have against our paper trail.“
He ended the the call without taking questions.
Price released a statement several hours later, saying the party found “inconsistencies” in the reports coming from various precincts. An investigation determined there was a problem with the app, he said.
“While the app was recording data accurately, it was reporting out only partial data,” Price said in his statement. “We have determined that this was due to a coding issue in the reporting system. This issue was identified and fixed.”
Advertisement
The party used paper documentation from the caucuses to verify that the data collected by the app is “valid and accurate,” Price added. He repeated that the party hoped to release caucus results “as soon as possible today.”
The absence of verified data left a void that the campaigns rushed to fill. The campaign of former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg declared victory, claiming that its data on the results in 77% of the precincts showed it exceeding pre-caucus projections of a tie by 8 percentage points.
The Sanders campaign followed suit by releasing internal reporting figures allegedly from almost 40% of precincts showing Sanders in the lead.
Stillwell Junior High in the suburb of West Des Moines hosted two Democratic caucus precincts on Monday night.
But about an hour after the end of a mostly tidy caucus that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) narrowly won in the cafeteria area, a much larger caucus in the gymnasium had yet to come to a close.
Advertisement
As the clock approached 10 p.m. CST, some of the most active participants in the latter caucus were still reeling from a dispute over the number of caucus participants, which resulted in Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) failing to cross the viability threshold of at least 15%.
A manual count of all the participants had found that 367 people showed up to participate, but a count of the presidential preference cards each participant was obligated to complete this year showed 378 participants. With just 367 attendees, Warren supporters made up more than 15% of participants needed to achieve viability.
The Iowa Democratic Party’s failure to announce the caucus results capped what had already been a frustrating Monday night for some caucus-goers, who have to physically stand in different parts of a room in order to indicate their support for a candidate.
Janet Bequeaith, 82, had intended to caucus for Klobuchar, but because less than 15% of the 130 people at her Des Moines precinct supported Klobuchar, Bequeaith had to pick someone else. With the assistance of a rolling walker, she made her way across the King Elementary School gym floor to the Biden group, which cheered her arrival.
But then the caucus chair announced there had been a problem, and everyone had to go back to their corners. It wasn’t until more than two hours after the event started that the precinct’s results were finally tallied, with Sanders getting the most support and Biden coming in second.
Advertisement
Bequeaith said she wished the Iowa Democratic Party would let people vote for their favorite candidate instead of making them caucus.
“It’s very difficult for me to be here. I have difficulty walking,” she said. “The caucus system just doesn’t work.”
Back in West Des Moines, the people leading the caucus manually recounted the bodies in the gymnasium three times and verified the 367 figure, according to Warren campaign precinct chair Julie Hale.
But Hale said that the Iowa Democratic Party overruled the caucus chairman, her husband, requiring them to accept the 378 figure.
The whole incident was enough to undermine Hale’s already low confidence in the entire caucus system.
Advertisement
“A primary is the only way to go,” she said.
In an interview with HuffPost on Monday night, J.D. Scholten, a Democrat who is unaligned in the presidential primary and running to unseat Republican Rep. Steve King in northwest Iowa, cautioned against jumping to conclusions about how to respond until there’s more information about what went wrong.
He nonetheless predicted that the messy outcome would ramp up calls to end the caucus, which had also been criticized over its first-in-the-nation advantage in a state that lacks racial diversity.
“We’re already at an uphill battle this cycle,” Scholten said. “There are a lot of folks tired of Iowa being the first. I see it everywhere.”
“I hope this doesn’t reflect on the diligence of Iowa’s Democratic caucus-goers,” he added. “But it’s definitely a stain on the caucus.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-03--Read Live Updates From The 2020 Iowa Caucuses

Democrats who are competitive in Iowa include former Vice President Joe Biden ; former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor @ @ @ @ @ Yang ; billionaire activist Tom Steyer ; and Sens .
Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) @ @ @ @ @ . )
and Amy Klobuchar ( Minn. ) .
But Tuesday morning ― hours after @ @ @ @ @ still were no results .
The Iowa Democratic Party said the system to report results @ @ @ @ @ and officials expected to have “ numbers to report ” later in the day .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Iowa caucuses took place Monday, marking the first major test for 2020 presidential hopefuls.
Democrats who are competitive in Iowa include former Vice President Joe Biden; former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg; entrepreneur Andrew Yang; billionaire activist Tom Steyer; and Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Amy Klobuchar (Minn.).
But Tuesday morning ― hours after the caucuses ended ― there still were no results. The Iowa Democratic Party said the system to report results hadn’t worked, and officials expected to have “numbers to report” later in the day.
Advertisement
President Donald Trump won the Republican caucuses mostly unopposed.
Read more on how the caucuses work here.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-03--Joe Manchin Calls For Senate To Censure Trump

Sen. Joe Manchin ( D-W.V . )
called on the Senate to vote to censure President Donald Trump for his effort to coerce Ukraine into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden since it will not vote to remove the president from office .
“ I must be realistic : I see no path to the 67 votes required to impeach President Trump and haven ’ t since this trial started , ” Manchin said Monday on the Senate floor .
“ However , I do believe a bipartisan majority of this body would vote to censure President Trump for his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go unchecked by the Senate , and censure would allow a bipartisan statement condemning his unacceptable behavior in the strongest terms , ” Manchin added .
As the impeachment trial has wound to its close , a number of Republican senators have said they disapprove of the president ’ s conduct but will not vote to convict and remove him from office .
Manchin ’ s push for a censure resolution would provide them with a way to register their disapproval without removing Trump from office .
Unlike impeachment , censure is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a president caught abusing their power .
Manchin ’ s suggestion would simply act as a nonbinding resolution stating that the Senate senses Trump ’ s behavior was wrong .
Only two presidents ― Andrew Jackson and James Buchanan ― have been named in censure resolutions adopted by either the House or the Senate .
Numerous other censure resolutions targeting presidents have been introduced over the years , including for the last two presidents to face impeachment , Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton .
As of Monday afternoon , when Manchin made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said he was undecided on conviction and “ truly struggling with this decision.
” “ I know this was not a difficult decision for many of my friends and colleagues on both sides of the aisle , but it is one that has weighed heavily on me , ” Manchin said .
“ Voting whether or not to remove a sitting president is no easy decision , and it shouldn ’ t be , as the consequences for our nation are severe.
” While censure may give Republicans a way to wag @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does not resolve the problem created by Trump ’ s efforts to get foreign aid in his reelection campaign .
“ He has done it before , ” House impeachment manager Adam Schiff ( D-Calif. ) said in his final argument on Monday .
“ He will do it again.
” Manchin gave few clues on how he plans to vote .
He called himself a “ moderate , centrist Democrat ” and touted his bipartisan voting record and work across the aisle .
He suggested both sides had made some convincing arguments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ further divide our deeply divided nation ” and “ further poison our already poisonous political atmosphere.
” At the same time , he called out “ the false claim that the president can do no wrong , that he is above the law , and if it ’ s good for the reelection of the president , then it ’ s good for our country ” ― a reference to an argument made by Trump ’ s defense team .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) called on the Senate to vote to censure President Donald Trump for his effort to coerce Ukraine into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden since it will not vote to remove the president from office.
“I must be realistic: I see no path to the 67 votes required to impeach President Trump and haven’t since this trial started,” Manchin said Monday on the Senate floor. “However, I do believe a bipartisan majority of this body would vote to censure President Trump for his actions.”
Advertisement
“His behavior cannot go unchecked by the Senate, and censure would allow a bipartisan statement condemning his unacceptable behavior in the strongest terms,” Manchin added.
As the impeachment trial has wound to its close, a number of Republican senators have said they disapprove of the president’s conduct but will not vote to convict and remove him from office. Manchin’s push for a censure resolution would provide them with a way to register their disapproval without removing Trump from office.
Manchin followed his statement by introducing a resolution to “condemn [Trump’s] wrongful conduct in the strongest terms.”
Unlike impeachment, censure is not mentioned in the Constitution as a remedy for a president caught abusing their power. Manchin’s suggestion would simply act as a nonbinding resolution stating that the Senate senses Trump’s behavior was wrong.
Advertisement
In this image from video, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) speaks on the Senate floor Monday about the impeachment trial against President Donald Trump. Senate Television via AP
Only two presidents ― Andrew Jackson and James Buchanan ― have been named in censure resolutions adopted by either the House or the Senate. Numerous other censure resolutions targeting presidents have been introduced over the years, including for the last two presidents to face impeachment, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.
As of Monday afternoon, when Manchin made a speech on the Senate floor, he said he was undecided on conviction and “truly struggling with this decision.”
“I know this was not a difficult decision for many of my friends and colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but it is one that has weighed heavily on me,” Manchin said. “Voting whether or not to remove a sitting president is no easy decision, and it shouldn’t be, as the consequences for our nation are severe.”
While censure may give Republicans a way to wag their finger at the president, it does not resolve the problem created by Trump’s efforts to get foreign aid in his reelection campaign.
Advertisement
“He has done it before,” House impeachment manager Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said in his final argument on Monday. “He will do it again.”
Manchin gave few clues on how he plans to vote. He called himself a “moderate, centrist Democrat” and touted his bipartisan voting record and work across the aisle. He suggested both sides had made some convincing arguments.
Manchin said removing the president would “further divide our deeply divided nation” and “further poison our already poisonous political atmosphere.” At the same time, he called out “the false claim that the president can do no wrong, that he is above the law, and if it’s good for the reelection of the president, then it’s good for our country” ― a reference to an argument made by Trump’s defense team.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-03--'Merry Christmas' Trends In February Thanks To Eric Trump

The phrase “ Merry Christmas ” was trending on Monday , Feb. 3 after Eric Trump claimed that people were finally saying it again .
President Donald Trump ’ s son announced victory over the supposed “ war on Christmas ” ― something he does every now and then at random times of year ― at a Trump campaign press conference in Des Moines , Iowa , ahead of the Republican caucuses .
While praising his father in a speech , the younger Trump pivoted to Christmas .
“ We ’ re saying Merry Christmas again , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t saying that.
” The Trumps often use this talking point , which has little basis .
No one is preventing people from saying “ Merry Christmas , ” but businesses , including some of Trump ’ s own , have been known to adopt the more inclusive phrase “ Happy holidays ” in their marketing .
Last year , Eric Trump whipped out the “ we ’ re saying ‘ Merry Christmas ’ again ” rhetoric before Halloween .
Later in 2019 , his father claimed that people wanted to stop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even Trump allies on Fox News questioned .
With the holidays about 10 months away , Twitter users were shocked to discover we were saying “ Merry Christmas ” again already : I live in good old Southern Illinois and we always did say Merry Christmas .
What part of the country is this dickwad talking about .
https : //t.co/9XZ4YdGPqh — John W. Owens ( @ JohnWOwens ) February 4 , 2020 When a politician tells you `` We 're saying 'Merry Christmas ' again '' , they 're actually telling you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an idiot . ''
https : //t.co/CzOtwyQrQd — Patrick Chovanec ( @ prchovanec ) February 3 , 2020 I really hated those 8 years when I kept getting arrested for saying Merry Christmas It was such a bummer .
Thanks Trump !
!
!
https : //t.co/tMCFcO7RmU — Matt Jones ( @ MattJonesRadio ) February 3 , 2020 In my entire lifetime , I have never had one person say to me “ don ’ t say Merry Christmas.
” Not one ... and I say it to everyone I meet unless they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a stupid , made-up controversy from people who like being outraged ( while complaining about others ’ outrage ) https : //t.co/HBi1DRKprb — Matt Jones ( @ MattJonesRadio ) February 4 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The phrase “Merry Christmas” was trending on Monday, Feb. 3 after Eric Trump claimed that people were finally saying it again.
President Donald Trump’s son announced victory over the supposed “war on Christmas” ― something he does every now and then at random times of year ― at a Trump campaign press conference in Des Moines, Iowa, ahead of the Republican caucuses.
Advertisement
While praising his father in a speech, the younger Trump pivoted to Christmas.
“We’re saying Merry Christmas again,” he said, to applause. “We weren’t saying that.”
The Trumps often use this talking point, which has little basis. No one is preventing people from saying “Merry Christmas,” but businesses, including some of Trump’s own, have been known to adopt the more inclusive phrase “Happy holidays” in their marketing.
Last year, Eric Trump whipped out the “we’re saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again” rhetoric before Halloween. Later in 2019, his father claimed that people wanted to stop saying “Thanksgiving” — an assertion even Trump allies on Fox News questioned.
With the holidays about 10 months away, Twitter users were shocked to discover we were saying “Merry Christmas” again already:
Advertisement
Narrator: "We were always saying Merry Christmas." https://t.co/EUS19ZnT38 — Simon Thompson (@ShowbizSimon) February 4, 2020
I live in good old Southern Illinois and we always did say Merry Christmas. What part of the country is this dickwad talking about. https://t.co/9XZ4YdGPqh — John W. Owens (@JohnWOwens) February 4, 2020
Why is Merry Christmas trending...in February? pic.twitter.com/qB8c3SBBUx — Ashley Carter (@AshleyLCarter1) February 4, 2020
When a politician tells you "We're saying 'Merry Christmas' again", they're actually telling you "I think I'm talking to an idiot." https://t.co/CzOtwyQrQd — Patrick Chovanec (@prchovanec) February 3, 2020
I really hated those 8 years when I kept getting arrested for saying Merry Christmas
It was such a bummer. Thanks Trump!!! https://t.co/tMCFcO7RmU — Matt Jones (@MattJonesRadio) February 3, 2020
Advertisement
#ForFactsSake - We never stopped saying Merry Christmas https://t.co/pTjs0L94Mn — Stephanie Ruhle (@SRuhle) February 3, 2020
In my entire lifetime, I have never had one person say to me “don’t say Merry Christmas.”
Not one...and I say it to everyone I meet unless they are Jewish or Muslim
It’s a stupid, made-up controversy from people who like being outraged (while complaining about others’ outrage) https://t.co/HBi1DRKprb — Matt Jones (@MattJonesRadio) February 4, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-03--Trump Supporters Upset He Won't Be Acquitted Before State Of The Union Address

Some Donald Trump supporters are peeved the president won ’ t be cleared of wrongdoing by the Senate before he walks into the House of Representatives on Tuesday to deliver his annual State of the Union address .
“ It ’ s unacceptable that they ’ re going to have [ the Senate impeachment vote ] the following day after his State of the Union .
And you know what they ’ re going to do ...
They ’ re going to have a counter-narrative to everything the president says , ” disgraced former White House strategist Steve Bannon complained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ If I was the president , I ’ d say , ‘ Hey look .
Let ’ s do it the following Tuesday , let ’ s do it the night of New Hampshire .
I ’ ll address the nation and see how they like that , ’ ” Bannon added in the interview .
Senate Republicans hoped to move to a quick acquittal vote after successfully blocking witnesses and other evidence from his trial on Friday ― the first time in history a presidential impeachment trial will not feature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prolong the proceedings for several days in order to allow time for both the House impeachment managers and Trump ’ s defense team to give closing arguments and to allow all senators an opportunity to speak on the floor before a final vote on removal on Wednesday afternoon .
“ We are in the minority , but we do have some power in the minority and we will use it to prevent things from just being truncated in the dark of night , ” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) that laid out the end of the trial .
U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) and Sen. Chris Coons ( D-Del . )
walk together prior to the resumption of the Senate impeachment trial of U.S. President Donald Trump at the U.S. Capitol in Washington , U.S. , Jan. 31 , 2020 .
The terms of the agreement , which Trump reportedly signed off on , mean that the president will deliver his State of the Union speech on Tuesday before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate the following day .
The schedule has created anxiety among some Republican senators about whether Trump will address his impeachment standing before the assembled Congress and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) , who will be seated directly behind him .
The situation has left some Trump allies grumbling about Senate Republicans who agreed to the schedule , which they view as robbing the president of a golden opportunity to tout his acquittal not only during his State of the Union address , but also during the annual pre-Super Bowl interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidents .
“ Why in the world would the majority leader agree to run this thing through the State of the Union address ?
” Fox News host Lou Dobbs , a favorite of the president , asked last week .
Asked about the schedule on Sunday , Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-S.C. ) acknowledged that Democrats stood in the way of a quick acquittal , attributing part of the reason to the Iowa caucuses on Monday .
“ Well , the Democrats have the ability to drag out the trial .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday at 4 to allow some Democratic candidates to go to Iowa .
I think that had a lot to do with it .
But we ’ re going to turn the page on impeachment at 4 o ’ clock on Wednesday , ” Graham said on Fox News .
“ Once again the GOP let down President Trump .
They could not let him have his VICTORY SPEECH at the State of the Union Address , ” read a Sunday post on the website .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Some Donald Trump supporters are peeved the president won’t be cleared of wrongdoing by the Senate before he walks into the House of Representatives on Tuesday to deliver his annual State of the Union address.
“It’s unacceptable that they’re going to have [the Senate impeachment vote] the following day after his State of the Union. And you know what they’re going to do...They’re going to have a counter-narrative to everything the president says,” disgraced former White House strategist Steve Bannon complained Sunday in an interview on Fox News.
Advertisement
“If I was the president, I’d say, ‘Hey look. Let’s do it the following Tuesday, let’s do it the night of New Hampshire. I’ll address the nation and see how they like that,’” Bannon added in the interview.
Senate Republicans hoped to move to a quick acquittal vote after successfully blocking witnesses and other evidence from his trial on Friday ― the first time in history a presidential impeachment trial will not feature witnesses.
But Democrats successfully pushed to prolong the proceedings for several days in order to allow time for both the House impeachment managers and Trump’s defense team to give closing arguments and to allow all senators an opportunity to speak on the floor before a final vote on removal on Wednesday afternoon.
“We are in the minority, but we do have some power in the minority and we will use it to prevent things from just being truncated in the dark of night,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters on Friday before announcing a deal with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) that laid out the end of the trial.
Advertisement
U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) walk together prior to the resumption of the Senate impeachment trial of U.S. President Donald Trump at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., Jan. 31, 2020. Brendan McDermid / Reuters
The terms of the agreement, which Trump reportedly signed off on, mean that the president will deliver his State of the Union speech on Tuesday before he is almost certainly acquitted by the Senate the following day. The schedule has created anxiety among some Republican senators about whether Trump will address his impeachment standing before the assembled Congress and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who will be seated directly behind him.
The situation has left some Trump allies grumbling about Senate Republicans who agreed to the schedule, which they view as robbing the president of a golden opportunity to tout his acquittal not only during his State of the Union address, but also during the annual pre-Super Bowl interview that has become a tradition for recent presidents.
Bannon agreed in his Fox News interview, saying Trump was “boxed in” by the schedule.
“Why in the world would the majority leader agree to run this thing through the State of the Union address?” Fox News host Lou Dobbs, a favorite of the president, asked last week.
Asked about the schedule on Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) acknowledged that Democrats stood in the way of a quick acquittal, attributing part of the reason to the Iowa caucuses on Monday.
Advertisement
“Well, the Democrats have the ability to drag out the trial. There was an agreement reached to do it Wednesday at 4 to allow some Democratic candidates to go to Iowa. I think that had a lot to do with it. But we’re going to turn the page on impeachment at 4 o’clock on Wednesday,” Graham said on Fox News.
The far-right outlet Gateway Pundit, however, pinned the blame on Senate Republicans for agreeing to the schedule.
“Once again the GOP let down President Trump. They could not let him have his VICTORY SPEECH at the State of the Union Address,” read a Sunday post on the website.
White House official Eric Ueland, meanwhile, attempted to cast the combination of the State of the Union and Trump’s acquittal in the Senate as a “happy coincidence” that will “launch the president into 2020.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Brian Wilson Slams Beach Boys Concert At Hunting Convention Featuring Donald Trump Jr.

Beach Boys icon Brian Wilson is blasting the touring band for its planned performance at a controversial trophy-hunting convention Wednesday that will feature big-game hunter Donald Trump Jr .
The Safari Club International Convention in Reno , Nevada , promotes “ trophy hunting , which both Al and I are emphatically opposed to , ” Wilson tweeted Monday .
“ There ’ s nothing we can do to personally stop ” the performance , Wilson noted , so they ’ re backing the petition to build opposition .
It has been brought to my attention that on Wednesday February 5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Mike Love are headlining at the Safari Club International Convention in Reno , Nevada ... — Brian Wilson ( @ BrianWilsonLive ) February 3 , 2020 This organization supports trophy hunting , which Both Al and I are emphatically opposed to .
There ’ s nothing we can do personally to stop the show , so please join us in signing the petition at https : //t.co/vOUtJDq6t2 — Brian Wilson ( @ BrianWilsonLive ) February 3 , 2020 “ Tell the Beach Boys to say no to trophy hunting , ” says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t it be nice if all the Beach Boys stayed away from those who kill for fun ?
” The convention is the world ’ s biggest “ wildlife killing market ” with a “ staggering 870 companies ” that will be selling trophy hunting holidays and wildlife body parts , including animal heads this year , the petition notes .
The petition was seeking 75,000 signatures and had already gathered nearly 70,000 by Monday night .
Mike Love responded in a statement to Pitchfork : “ We look forward to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as always , support freedom of thought and expression as a fundamental tenet of our rights as Americans.
” Trump Jr. and bother Eric are both trophy hunters and have posted controversial photos on social media of themselves with slain animals ( or parts of animals ) .
Trump Jr. last year got special treatment from the Mongolian government and killed an endangered argali sheep in the country .
The petition against the hunting convention notes that American hunters will shoot an estimated 20,000 animals among protected species .
Victims will include @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parrots , sloths , Hawksbill turtles and chimpanzees .
Petition signers pledge to stop buying or downloading all Beach Boys music , attending concerts and buying any band merchandise until the band withdraws from the convention and publicly states its “ opposition to this sick ‘ sport ’ of killing animals for ‘ fun.
’ ” It also calls on the Beach Boys ’ record label , agent and publicists to “ disown ” the band , and for members of the public to protest at concerts until the band does so .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ very different souls of the Beach Boys .
The New York Times has compared the two to Occupy Wall Street ( Wilson ) vs .
Tea Partiers ( Love ) .

Beach Boys icon Brian Wilson is blasting the touring band for its planned performance at a controversial trophy-hunting convention Wednesday that will feature big-game hunter Donald Trump Jr.
The Safari Club International Convention in Reno, Nevada, promotes “trophy hunting, which both Al and I are emphatically opposed to,” Wilson tweeted Monday.
Advertisement
“There’s nothing we can do to personally stop” the performance, Wilson noted, so they’re backing the petition to build opposition.
It has been brought to my attention that on Wednesday February 5, The Beach Boys touring group licensed by Mike Love are headlining at the Safari Club International Convention in Reno, Nevada... — Brian Wilson (@BrianWilsonLive) February 3, 2020
This organization supports trophy hunting, which Both Al and I are emphatically opposed to. There’s nothing we can do personally to stop the show, so please join us in signing the petition at https://t.co/vOUtJDq6t2 — Brian Wilson (@BrianWilsonLive) February 3, 2020
Donald Trump Jr. shows off a hunting souvenir. Screen Shot/Twitter
Advertisement
“Tell the Beach Boys to say no to trophy hunting,” says the petition on Change.org. “Wouldn’t it be nice if all the Beach Boys stayed away from those who kill for fun?”
The convention is the world’s biggest “wildlife killing market” with a “staggering 870 companies” that will be selling trophy hunting holidays and wildlife body parts, including animal heads this year, the petition notes.
The petition was seeking 75,000 signatures and had already gathered nearly 70,000 by Monday night.
Mike Love responded in a statement to Pitchfork: “We look forward to a night of great music in Reno and, as always, support freedom of thought and expression as a fundamental tenet of our rights as Americans.”
Trump Jr. and bother Eric are both trophy hunters and have posted controversial photos on social media of themselves with slain animals (or parts of animals). Trump Jr. last year got special treatment from the Mongolian government and killed an endangered argali sheep in the country.
The petition against the hunting convention notes that American hunters will shoot an estimated 20,000 animals among protected species. Victims will include right whales, bald eagles, gray parrots, sloths, Hawksbill turtles and chimpanzees.
Advertisement
Petition signers pledge to stop buying or downloading all Beach Boys music, attending concerts and buying any band merchandise until the band withdraws from the convention and publicly states its “opposition to this sick ‘sport’ of killing animals for ‘fun.’”
It also calls on the Beach Boys’ record label, agent and publicists to “disown” the band, and for members of the public to protest at concerts until the band does so.
Wilson and Love have long represented the very different souls of the Beach Boys. The New York Times has compared the two to Occupy Wall Street (Wilson) vs. Tea Partiers (Love).


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Chris Cuomo Nails The Dark Lesson Donald Trump Has Now Learned About The GOP

CNN ’ s Chris Cuomo on Monday suggested President Donald Trump had “ absolutely learned a lesson ” from his impeachment over the Ukraine scandal ― that he now “ owns ” the GOP .
Senate Republicans on Friday voted to block key witnesses , including former White House national security adviser John Bolton , from testifying in Trump ’ s trial .
That all but ensured the president ’ s acquittal later this week .
Trump knows he now has the Republican Party “ in his hand , and when he squeezes his hand , they squeal , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he can do whatever he wants , ” the prime time host continued .
“ He has more power than any president I ’ ve seen in my lifetime within his own party.
“ Cuomo also said Trump was correct to call the impeachment trial a “ hoax.
” “ Because the idea of finding things to be wrong and sitting as a senator on a tribunal where you ’ re supposed to be a trier of the facts and not having witnesses is a hoax , ” he explained .
He later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pact ” with Trump .
Faust made his deal with the devil .
He wanted everything now and he ’ d sell his soul later on .
The crossroads here is the vote on witnesses .
When you went bad on witnesses , you surrendered your dignity as a senator who was doing a job pointed by the Constitution .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
CNN’s Chris Cuomo on Monday suggested President Donald Trump had “absolutely learned a lesson” from his impeachment over the Ukraine scandal ― that he now “owns” the GOP.
Senate Republicans on Friday voted to block key witnesses, including former White House national security adviser John Bolton, from testifying in Trump’s trial. That all but ensured the president’s acquittal later this week.
Advertisement
Trump knows he now has the Republican Party “in his hand, and when he squeezes his hand, they squeal,” Cuomo pointed out.
“He knows he can do whatever he wants,” the prime time host continued. “He has more power than any president I’ve seen in my lifetime within his own party.“
Cuomo also said Trump was correct to call the impeachment trial a “hoax.”
“Because the idea of finding things to be wrong and sitting as a senator on a tribunal where you’re supposed to be a trier of the facts and not having witnesses is a hoax,” he explained. He later accused Republicans of making “a Faustian pact” with Trump.
Added Cuomo:
Faust made his deal with the devil. He wanted everything now and he’d sell his soul later on. The crossroads here is the vote on witnesses. When you went bad on witnesses, you surrendered your dignity as a senator who was doing a job pointed by the Constitution.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-03--Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar And Sanders Campaigns Raised Thousands From Lobbyists

In an election hyper-focused on special interests and their grip on politics , nearly all of the Democratic front-runners for president have pledged to reject campaign donations from lobbyists .
But Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-Minn. ) , former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg all raised thousands of dollars from registered federal lobbyists , according to new campaign finance disclosures the candidates were required to file Friday .
Donors included lobbyists who have represented the fossil fuel industry , for-profit college companies and major pharmaceutical makers .
Sen. Bernie Sanders raised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , recurring donations from registered lobbyists but had not specifically promised not to do so .
Warren , who also pledged to eschew lobbyist fundraising , refunded several donations made by federal lobbyists .
Buttigieg in recent days has sent fundraising emails touting his rejection of special interest cash .
“ At Pete for America , we have kept our promises to voters , ” reads a recent example .
“ We do not accept money from corporate PACs , fossil fuel executives , or lobbyists .
But with four days until the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fall behind on our fundraising efforts.
” But his campaign ’ s disclosures list 13 individuals who were registered as lobbyists in 2019 and 2018 , including Christina Franz , who recently represented the American Chemistry Council , a giant fossil-fuel industry trade group , and Christa Bierma , who lobbied for the National Restaurant Association as Republicans crafted the 2017 tax reform bill .
Biden accepted $ 1,740 from Gregory Hahn , an Indianapolis attorney whose clients have included an Indiana for-profit college test prep company accused of scamming its customers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ longtime attorney and lobbyist for pharmaceutical manufacturers , Robert Kingham , and lobbyists with numerous ties to the natural gas industry and other pharmaceutical companies .
A lobbyist who specializes in advising “ major multinationals and high-net-worth individuals on international tax issues , ” Philip West , donated $ 500 .
According to the Federal Election Commission disclosures , none of these donations was refunded ( which is what campaigns typically mean when they “ reject ” undesirable donations ) before the end of 2019 .
The Biden campaign had either refunded the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process of doing so , a spokesman for the campaign said .
“ We are vigilant in screening donations , ” Sean Savett , a Buttigiege campaign spokesperson , told HuffPost , “ but with more than 730,000 donors , some may slip through , and we want to thank you for bringing these donations to our attention.
” He said the campaign is looking into whether it should refund the donations HuffPost flagged based on Buttigieg ’ s pledge .
All of the Democratic candidates for president have made some promise to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Every single candidate pledged to refuse campaign donations from corporate PACs .
Most of the remaining front-runners — including Klobuchar , Biden , Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
— have promised to reject donations from federal lobbyists , and Sanders has promised to reject donations from pharmaceutical lobbyists .
That promise is not as straightforward as it sounds .
The common understanding of what counts as lobbying is much broader than what the federal law counts as lobbying .
Washington is full of hundreds of people working for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trade associations and law firms who don ’ t have to register as lobbyists even though the bulk of their work involves influencing lawmakers .
And for the relative few who are considered lobbyists under federal law , the law is notoriously easy to evade .
Campaigns get to make their own determination about what counts as a lobbyist , and they tend to like the narrower definition .
In April , Biden held a fundraiser with the executive who oversees Comcast ’ s lobbying arm but is not himself a registered lobbyist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rourke accepted donations from the chief executive of a giant lobbying firm called Subject Matter .
Sanders ’ s campaign , too , accepted roughly $ 1,000 from two federal lobbyists .
The lobbyists who gave to his campaign were Ian Thompson , an American Civil Liberties Union lobbyist who made contributions totaling $ 735.62 , and Marilyn Park , a lobbyist for the American Federation of Government Employees union , who gave a total of $ 377.70 .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
In an election hyper-focused on special interests and their grip on politics, nearly all of the Democratic front-runners for president have pledged to reject campaign donations from lobbyists.
But former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg both raised thousands of dollars from registered federal lobbyists, according to new campaign finance disclosures the candidates were required to file Friday. Donors included lobbyists who have represented the fossil fuel industry, for-profit college companies and major pharmaceutical makers.
Advertisement
Buttigieg raised nearly $6,000, Biden raised nearly $3,000, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) raised $500 from individuals who have worked as federal lobbyists within the past year.
Sen. Bernie Sanders raised just over $1,000 in mostly small, recurring donations from registered lobbyists but had not specifically promised not to do so. Warren, who also pledged to eschew lobbyist fundraising, refunded several donations made by federal lobbyists.
The Biden campaign said it would return the donations HuffPost flagged if it had not already done so, and the Buttigieg campaign said it was looking into whether it should refund the money. After publication, the Klobuchar campaign said it would return the donations as well.
Buttigieg in recent days has sent fundraising emails touting his rejection of special interest cash. “At Pete for America, we have kept our promises to voters,” reads a recent example. “We do not accept money from corporate PACs, fossil fuel executives, or lobbyists. But with four days until the Iowa Caucuses, we can’t fall behind on our fundraising efforts.”
Advertisement
But his campaign’s disclosures list 13 individuals who were registered as lobbyists in 2019 and 2018, including Christina Franz, who recently represented the American Chemistry Council, a giant fossil-fuel industry trade group, and Christa Bierma, who lobbied for the National Restaurant Association as Republicans crafted the 2017 tax reform bill.
Biden accepted $1,740 from Gregory Hahn, an Indianapolis attorney whose clients have included an Indiana for-profit college test prep company accused of scamming its customers. His campaign also took donations from a longtime attorney and lobbyist for pharmaceutical manufacturers, Robert Kingham, and lobbyists with numerous ties to the natural gas industry and other pharmaceutical companies. A lobbyist who specializes in advising “major multinationals and high-net-worth individuals on international tax issues,” Philip West, donated $500.
According to the Federal Election Commission disclosures, none of these donations was refunded (which is what campaigns typically mean when they “reject” undesirable donations) before the end of 2019.
The Biden campaign had either refunded the donations HuffPost flagged or was in the process of doing so, a spokesman for the campaign said.
“We are vigilant in screening donations,” Sean Savett, a Buttigieg campaign spokesperson, told HuffPost, “but with more than 730,000 donors, some may slip through, and we want to thank you for bringing these donations to our attention.”
Advertisement
The Sanders campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
All of the Democratic candidates for president have made some promise to reject campaign cash from powerful special interests. Every single candidate pledged to refuse campaign donations from corporate PACs. Most of the remaining front-runners — including Klobuchar, Biden, Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) — have promised to reject donations from federal lobbyists, and Sanders has promised to reject donations from pharmaceutical lobbyists.
That promise is not as straightforward as it sounds. The common understanding of what counts as lobbying is much broader than what the federal law counts as lobbying. Washington is full of hundreds of people working for issue groups, corporate public relations, trade associations and law firms who don’t have to register as lobbyists even though the bulk of their work involves influencing lawmakers. And for the relative few who are considered lobbyists under federal law, the law is notoriously easy to evade.
Campaigns get to make their own determination about what counts as a lobbyist, and they tend to like the narrower definition. In April, Biden held a fundraiser with the executive who oversees Comcast’s lobbying arm but is not himself a registered lobbyist. And erstwhile candidate Beto O’Rourke accepted donations from the chief executive of a giant lobbying firm called Subject Matter.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Fox News Host Tried To Corner Pete Buttigieg. It Didn't Go Well.

But the conservative network ’ s anchor got an answer that may have surprised him .
Buttigieg , the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , acknowledged that Trump ’ s “ decision to sign the First Step Act when it came to his desk is one of the handful of things I could actually agree with him on.
” “ It doesn ’ t change the incredibly cruel and divisive racial rhetoric that comes out of this White House that is one of the many reasons that I ’ m meeting not only Democrats but Republicans who tell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children in the eye and explain to them how this is the president of the United States , ” Buttigieg explained .
Henry asked Buttigieg if he was “ the right messenger to question the president on race , when as mayor of South Bend , as you know , Black leaders were quite critical of what you did particularly in terms of police-involved shootings and other matters you ’ ve litigated in this campaign.
” “ Because the president is wrong , ” responded Buttigieg who , per the polls , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ He is wrong to attack women of color .
He is wrong to compare people to animals .
He is wrong to assault entire cities in his tweets , ” he continued .
“ And you don ’ t have to be a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat to know that ’ s wrong , just as a lot of Republicans in Congress and the Senate , even if they ’ re providing cover for the president , can ’ t actually bring themselves to say that he ’ s a good leader .
And @ @ @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
But the conservative network’s anchor got an answer that may have surprised him.
Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, acknowledged that Trump’s “decision to sign the First Step Act when it came to his desk is one of the handful of things I could actually agree with him on.”
Advertisement
“It doesn’t change the incredibly cruel and divisive racial rhetoric that comes out of this White House that is one of the many reasons that I’m meeting not only Democrats but Republicans who tell me that they struggle to look their children in the eye and explain to them how this is the president of the United States,” Buttigieg explained.
Henry asked Buttigieg if he was “the right messenger to question the president on race, when as mayor of South Bend, as you know, Black leaders were quite critical of what you did particularly in terms of police-involved shootings and other matters you’ve litigated in this campaign.”
“Because the president is wrong,” responded Buttigieg who, per the polls, is failing to connect with Black voters.
“He is wrong to attack women of color. He is wrong to compare people to animals. He is wrong to assault entire cities in his tweets,” he continued. “And you don’t have to be a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat to know that’s wrong, just as a lot of Republicans in Congress and the Senate, even if they’re providing cover for the president, can’t actually bring themselves to say that he’s a good leader. And it’s revealing.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--In An Historic First, Iowa Mosques Participated In Statewide Caucuses

A large Bernie Sanders poster hung outside the mosque gate where individuals entered .
Once participants reached the door , they removed their shoes before entering the prayer space where an imam melodiously made the call to prayer .
A student at Iowa State University , Saeed prayed shoulder to shoulder with the group .
But once the caucus began , he was quickly found himself separated from most of the congregation .
He sat on a blue and gold rug nestled in a small corner of this two-story mosque along with three other Yang supporters ― a rarity among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Saeed still sported a huge grin .
Regardless of the outcome , he said he was thrilled to be at his local mosque , representing his political views as an Iowan — and an American Muslim .
For decades , Iowans have gathered in small groups to set the tone through their caucuses for the rest of the presidential election .
On Monday , that included 1,678 locations ― school gyms , churches , and libraries that had been transformed into caucus locations .
For the first time , it also included @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For American Muslims , the 2020 elections have been a breakthrough year .
Several of the candidates in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination have finally recognized this faith group as a vital community whose support is worth recruiting .
Just a few days before the caucuses , the national board of the Muslim Caucus of America , as well Iowa state Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad , the sole Muslim in the state Legislature , announced their endorsements of Sanders , the senator from Vermont .
Five mosques were approved as satellite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Muslim Americans in the greater Des Moines area attended them .
The satellite sites were set up to allow caucusgoers to participate at times and locations more convenient for them .
Any campaign , organization or constituent group could apply to have the party authorize satellite sites .
Ghazala Salam , the president and founder of the Muslim Caucus , a civic advocacy group that promotes voter engagement within Iowa ’ s American Muslim community , Salam called the mosque designations unprecedented and said that this inclusion would soon “ lay the ground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Iowa Muslim community , which makes up about 1 % of the state ’ s roughly 3.1 million residents , has only been sporadically involved with the caucuses in the past , said Mohamad Khan , the president of MCO since it was founded in 2009 .
More than 100 Muslim Americans participated in the caucus at the MCO mosque .
At least four staffers and volunteers from the Sanders campaign were at the caucus site .
Sanders campaign staffers were in attendance at all of the five mosques that served as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign confirmed to HuffPost .
At the MCO , Saeed was courted by Sanders supporters who passionately made a case for him to come to the other side .
Saeed looked back at the other two Yang supporters who did not want to budge .
He grinned sheepishly then began to walk over to the other side of the room .
The Sanders backers broke into applause and cheers .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
DES MOINES, Iowa –– Aws Saeed, 21, was among a handful of Andrew Yang supporters at the Muslim Community Organization (MCO) in a northwest Des Moines suburb that served as a satellite caucus site for Monday’s voting in the Democratic presidential race.
A large Bernie Sanders poster hung outside the mosque gate where individuals entered. Once participants reached the door, they removed their shoes before entering the prayer space, where an imam melodiously made the call to prayer.
Advertisement
Saeed, a student at Iowa State University, prayed shoulder to shoulder with the group. But once the caucus began, he quickly found himself separated from most of the congregation. He sat on a blue-and-gold rug, nestled in a small corner of this two-story mosque along with three other Yang supporters ― a rarity among at least 100 Sanders backers.
Saeed attempted to persuade the other caucus-goers to join his corner by touting Yang’s universal basic income plan. Ultimately, he was unsuccessful.
Nonetheless, Saeed still sported a huge grin. Regardless of the outcome, he said, he was thrilled to be at his mosque, representing his political views as an Iowan and an American Muslim.
For decades, Iowans have gathered in small groups to set the tone through their caucuses for the rest of the presidential primary. On Monday, that included 1,678 locations ― school gyms, churches and libraries that had been transformed into caucus locations. For the first time, it also included mosques as part of the democratic process.
Advertisement
For American Muslims, the 2020 elections have been a breakthrough year. Several of the candidates in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination have finally recognized this faith group as a vital community whose support is worth recruiting.
Just a few days before the caucuses, the national board of the Muslim Caucus of America, as well Iowa state Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad, the sole Muslim in the state Legislature, announced their endorsements of Sanders, the senator from Vermont.
Five mosques were approved as satellite caucus locations, and many of the Muslim Americans in the greater Des Moines area attended them. The satellite sites were set up to allow caucusgoers to participate at times and locations more convenient for them. Any campaign, organization or constituent group could apply to have the party authorize satellite sites.
Ghazala Salam, the president and founder of the Muslim Caucus, a civic advocacy group that promotes voter engagement within Iowa’s American Muslim community, called the mosque designations unprecedented and said that this inclusion would soon “lay the ground for the rest of the country.”
“To me, it shows we’re being included in the political process and that our voice and vote matters,” Salam said
Advertisement
First stop: Muslim Community Organization also known as the 42nd street mosque. The president of the mosque begins with the housekeeping rules. Lots of Bernie signs and stickers. pic.twitter.com/CuwWQAd3oC — Rowaida Abdelaziz (@Rowaida_Abdel) February 4, 2020
The Iowa Muslim community, which makes up about 1% of the state’s roughly 3.1 million residents, has only been sporadically involved with the caucuses in the past, said Mohamad Khan, the president of MCO since it was founded in 2009.
“We could hardly get them to register to vote,” he told HuffPost.
More than 100 Muslim Americans participated in the caucus at the MCO mosque. At least four staffers and volunteers from the Sanders campaign were at the caucus site.
Ten miles away, about 40 people participated at another caucus at the Al Najah Islamic Center. Sanders won the majority of its participants.
Sanders campaign staffers were in attendance at all of the five mosques that served as caucus sites, the candidate’s campaign confirmed to HuffPost.
Advertisement
Khan said several Democratic presidential candidates reached out to MCO’s leadership, but the Sanders campaign helped it and the other mosques register as satellite sites.
The 3 Yang Gang members. They say they could sway to anyone at this point. Biden, Sanders and Klobuchar are all viable options for collectively. pic.twitter.com/7iFDoSzhZf — Rowaida Abdelaziz (@Rowaida_Abdel) February 4, 2020
Nationally, Sanders enjoys strong support among Muslim and Arab Americans, many of whom say he has consistently visited and acknowledged their communities when other presidential candidates largely overlooked them.
On Capitol Hill, Sanders has received endorsements from Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Muslims who both campaigned for him in Iowa within the last week, alongside Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a Hindu.
“He’s made [Muslims and other religious minorities] a priority and shown up,” Khanna said. “He’s listened to them and asked them their input and had them join his campaign. He’s targeted them. It’s been very intentional.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Devin Nunes' Hometown Newspaper Slams His Donald Trump 'Obsession,' Endorses Rival

Rep. Devin Nunes ( R-Calif. ) has lost the reelection support of his hometown newspaper .
Again .
The Fresno Bee editorial board announced its endorsement of Nunes ’ Democratic rival Phil Arballo in the 2020 election in a searing editorial published Monday .
The newspaper noted it had recommended Nunes “ in every campaign since he was first elected in 2002 , ” but withdrew its support in 2018 , when Nunes “ became obsessed ” with defending President Donald Trump during special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s Russia investigation .
Little has changed with Nunes since then , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Devin Nunes cares more for Trump than his district .
Vote for Phil Arballo for Congress.
” “ Nunes would rather appear on Fox News shows than ensure people in Tulare and Fresno counties have clean water , affordable health insurance , and job prospects , ” the editorial board wrote , adding that he “ has proven time and again that supporting the president is his priority , so it is mystifying that he doesn ’ t just go to work for the Trump team.
” “ Keeping Nunes in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overall Republican strategy .
His constituents are the collateral damage in that equation , ” the editorial concluded .
“ If the voters in the 22nd District want a representative who will focus on good governance for them , versus winning political battles , then The Bee recommends voters support Phil Arballo .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) has lost the reelection support of his hometown newspaper. Again.
The Fresno Bee editorial board announced its endorsement of Nunes’ Democratic rival Phil Arballo in the 2020 election in a searing editorial published Monday.
The newspaper noted it had recommended Nunes “in every campaign since he was first elected in 2002,” but withdrew its support in 2018, when Nunes “became obsessed” with defending President Donald Trump during special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
Advertisement
Little has changed with Nunes since then, the paper suggested in the editorial headlined “Devin Nunes cares more for Trump than his district. Vote for Phil Arballo for Congress.”
Devin Nunes cares more for Trump than his district. Vote for Phil Arballo for Congress https://t.co/Bm32Jy8eyZ — Fresno Bee (@FresnoBee) February 3, 2020
“Nunes would rather appear on Fox News shows than ensure people in Tulare and Fresno counties have clean water, affordable health insurance, and job prospects,” the editorial board wrote, adding that he “has proven time and again that supporting the president is his priority, so it is mystifying that he doesn’t just go to work for the Trump team.”
“Keeping Nunes in the House is probably more useful to the overall Republican strategy. His constituents are the collateral damage in that equation,” the editorial concluded. “If the voters in the 22nd District want a representative who will focus on good governance for them, versus winning political battles, then The Bee recommends voters support Phil Arballo.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-03--Democrats’ Fracking War Heats Up As 2020 Voting Begins

As Iowa caucusgoers cast the first votes of the 2020 primary contest on Monday , Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) , who an aggregation of polls showed leading in the state in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination , unveiled the first-ever federal bill to phase out fracking nationwide .
It calls for instituting a complete ban on the drilling technique by 2025 .
Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) and Darren Soto ( D-Fla. ) joined Sen. Jeff Merkley ( D-Ore. ) to co-sponsor the legislation .
In December , former Vice President Joe Biden , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Democratic race , told activists in Iowa that “ you can ’ t ban fracking right now ” and , if that ’ s what they wanted , they “ ought to vote for someone else.
” On Sunday , Rep. Conor Lamb ( D-Penn . )
published a letter to the editor in The Wall Street Journal praising the centrist favorite for his opposition to banning fracking .
But frackers ’ own thirst for water has only grown .
A 2018 study in the journal Science Advances found fracking companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2016 than in 2011 .
It also produced up to 1,440 % more toxic wastewater .
Meanwhile , a Rolling Stone investigation published last month found the drilling byproduct to contain dangerous amounts of radioactive rock unearthed during extraction that appears to be creating an environmental crisis unto itself .
Emissions from fracking are coming under increasing scrutiny , too .
In a report published in January 2019 , scientists at more than a dozen environmental groups projected new U.S. oil and gas drilling ― 90 % of which depends on fracking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plants ’ worth of planet-heating gases .
New satellites equipped to monitor output from gas wells ― primarily spewing methane , a shorter-lasting but more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide ― detected the largest leak in U.S. history at a little-known fracking site in Ohio .
Those pollution concerns have driven efforts to ban fracking on county and state levels .
Now nearly every major Democrat vying to take on Trump later this year supports ending fracking on federal lands .
Such a ban , which could be enacted by a president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % of total production , according to an RBC Capital Markets report last October .
“ Men and women need to eat and put a roof over their head , and I am willing to die on the union way of life hill , ” Pennsylvania Lt. Gov .
John Fetterman ( D ) , a populist progressive from the state ’ s economically devastated western half , said in a recent episode of The New York Times podcast The Daily .
“ There needs to be the most stringent , rigorous environmental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continually transition towards cleaner energy sources .
But ( fracking ) is still a necessary part of our economy.
” Trump , a fossil fuel hardliner who rejects the basic science underpinning climate change , has made the “ energy revolution ” and “ American energy dominance ” central planks of his public messaging .
Rolling back environmental regulations , particularly those aimed at curbing emissions from the oil and gas sector , has been and remains a top priority for his administration , which took some of its most brazen steps yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Local elections in Pennsylvania undercut the national narrative about fracking ’ s strength as an electoral issue in the state .
In 2018 , two democratic socialists calling either for a moratorium or new restrictions on fracking ― Sara Innamorato and Summer Lee ― defeated old-guard incumbent Democrats and won seats in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives .
Last November , three out of four Democrats who ran for city council in the deep-red Pittsburgh suburb of Franklin Park won after campaigning on their opposition to new fracking in the town ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must realize that workers in the fracking fields are not the enemy , coal miners are not the enemy , and oil rig workers are not the enemy .
Climate change is the enemy , ” Sanders said in a statement .
“ If we are serious about clean air and drinking water , if we are serious about combating climate change , the only safe and sane way to move forward is to ban fracking nationwide.
” Ironically , it ’ s the oil and gas industry that could see benefits from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global supply of fuel .
For years , oil and gas prices have plunged lower and lower as production roared , creating a glut in the market .
The oversupply had the effect of running coal-fired power plants out of business as cheaper gas remained the preferred option for policymakers who also touted its generally lower emissions .
Five years of low prices put the industry in a bind .
At prices cheaper than coal , fracked gas became the nation ’ s main fuel for electricity , providing market dominance even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the ever-falling price of solar and wind energy now threatens to gobble up that market if , or when , gas prices climb .
It ’ s already cheaper to increase energy efficiency and build renewables than to construct new gas plants and pipelines , according to a 2019 report from the nonprofit Rocky Mountain Institute .
By the mid-2030s , it ’ ll cost less to deploy clean energy than to continue operating existing gas plants ― and that ’ s without a major federal intervention to phase out fracking .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Democrats are drilling down on opposite sides of the fracking divide, widening a schism between the party’s climate-concerned progressive wing and centrists who fear a hard-line stance against fossil fuels risks ceding critical swing states to President Donald Trump.
As Iowa caucusgoers cast the first votes of the 2020 primary contest on Monday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who an aggregation of polls showed leading in the state in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, unveiled the first-ever federal bill to phase out fracking nationwide. It calls for instituting a complete ban on the drilling technique by 2025. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Darren Soto (D-Fla.) joined Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) to co-sponsor the legislation.
Advertisement
In December, former Vice President Joe Biden, the leader in an aggregation of national polls in the Democratic race, told activists in Iowa that “you can’t ban fracking right now” and, if that’s what they wanted, they “ought to vote for someone else.” On Sunday, Rep. Conor Lamb (D-Penn.) published a letter to the editor in The Wall Street Journal praising the centrist favorite for his opposition to banning fracking.
The opposing positions illustrate on one hand how quickly the global warming crisis has reshaped Democratic politics and on the other the strength of the industry’s grip on the party that, under President Barack Obama, helped spur the drilling boom.
The debate comes at a vulnerable moment for the industry as low gas prices, falling costs of renewable energy sources and mounting worries about climate change are starting to spook investors ― a once-unthinkable reality that came to a head last week when CNBC commentator Jim Cramer declared: “I’m done with fossil fuels. They’re done. They’re just done.”
Pollution Woes Incite Fracking Foes
The fracking industry, by its own account, has come a long way since 2008, when the watchdog site ProPublica started publishing a series of exposés on the threat posed by the cancer-causing chemicals the drilling practice releases into drinking water across the U.S.
Advertisement
But frackers’ own thirst for water has only grown. A 2018 study in the journal Science Advances found fracking companies used 770% more water per well in 2016 than in 2011. It also produced up to 1,440% more toxic wastewater. Meanwhile, a Rolling Stone investigation published last month found the drilling byproduct to contain dangerous amounts of radioactive rock unearthed during extraction that appears to be creating an environmental crisis unto itself.
President Donald Trump spoke last August at the then-under-construction Shell Pennsylvania Petrochemical Complex in Monaca, Pennsylvania, which will convert natural gas into plastics. Jeff Swensen via Getty Images
Emissions from fracking are coming under increasing scrutiny, too. In a report published in January 2019, scientists at more than a dozen environmental groups projected new U.S. oil and gas drilling ― 90% of which depends on fracking ― would produce upward of 1,000 coal plants’ worth of planet-heating gases. New satellites equipped to monitor output from gas wells ― primarily spewing methane, a shorter-lasting but more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide ― detected the largest leak in U.S. history at a little-known fracking site in Ohio.
Those pollution concerns have driven efforts to ban fracking on county and state levels. Now nearly every major Democrat vying to take on Trump later this year supports ending fracking on federal lands. Such a ban, which could be enacted by a president through executive order, could affect 14% of total production, according to an RBC Capital Markets report last October.
Some, such as Sanders, have embraced a more aggressive approach, calling for an end to fracking altogether.
Advertisement
“A nationwide fracking ban would be invaluable for human health,” Barbara Gottlieb, environment and health program director at the nonprofit Physicians for Social Responsibility, said in a statement. “Fracking harms human health, contaminates huge amounts of water, and pollutes the air. It exposes local communities to chemicals known to be toxic to humans and animals.”
Fueling Swing State Anxieties
Calls to completely ban fracking are generating some excitement nationally. In a September poll commissioned by the left-leaning think tank Data for Progress, nearly 46% of registered voters said they support prohibiting fracking, including 32% who “strongly” favored a ban. But such proposals aren’t sitting well in critical battleground states like Pennsylvania.
In a November 2019 poll by Kaiser Family Foundation and the Cook Political Report, 69%, swing voters in the Keystone Stone overwhelmingly supported the Green New Deal framework for a progressive, ambitious climate policy. But just 39% backed a ban on fracking.
“Men and women need to eat and put a roof over their head, and I am willing to die on the union way of life hill,” Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman (D), a populist progressive from the state’s economically devastated western half, said in a recent episode of The New York Times podcast The Daily. “There needs to be the most stringent, rigorous environmental controls and oversights, and plans to continually transition towards cleaner energy sources. But (fracking) is still a necessary part of our economy.”
The podcast featured leaders from traditionally Democratic unions who work on fossil fuel projects saying they’d recommend rank-and-file workers vote for Trump if Democrats nominated a candidate who supported a fracking ban. It’s a message the industry’s biggest lobby is eager to amplify.
Advertisement
“Banning a safe, successful method of developing energy would erase a generation of American energy progress and in the process destroy millions of U.S. jobs, spike household energy costs and hurt farmers and manufacturers,” Bethany Aronhalt, a spokeswoman for the American Petroleum Institute, said by email Monday.
Trump, a fossil fuel hardliner who rejects the basic science underpinning climate change, has made the “energy revolution” and “American energy dominance” central planks of his public messaging. Rolling back environmental regulations, particularly those aimed at curbing emissions from the oil and gas sector, has been and remains a top priority for his administration, which took some of its most brazen steps yet to unwind such public safeguards last month.
Others say fears that targeting fracking will deliver Pennsylvania and its 20 electoral votes to Trump are overblown. Less than 1% of Pennsylvania’s population works in gas drilling, and union membership is only about 12% of those employed in the industry.
Local elections in Pennsylvania undercut the national narrative about fracking’s strength as an electoral issue in the state. In 2018, two democratic socialists calling either for a moratorium or new restrictions on fracking ― Sara Innamorato and Summer Lee ― defeated old-guard incumbent Democrats and won seats in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. Last November, three out of four Democrats who ran for city council in the deep-red Pittsburgh suburb of Franklin Park won after campaigning on their opposition to new fracking in the town’s 80-acre public park.
Sanders, who pitched a $16.3 trillion Green New Deal last fall, said Monday he’d ensure “a just transition for all fossil fuel workers.”
Advertisement
A fracking site on the outskirts of town in the Permian Basin oil field in Midland, Texas. Spencer Platt via Getty Images
“We must realize that workers in the fracking fields are not the enemy, coal miners are not the enemy, and oil rig workers are not the enemy. Climate change is the enemy,” Sanders said in a statement. “If we are serious about clean air and drinking water, if we are serious about combating climate change, the only safe and sane way to move forward is to ban fracking nationwide.”
‘Goldilocks Zone’
Ironically, it’s the oil and gas industry that could see benefits from federal policies that cut back on the global supply of fuel. For years, oil and gas prices have plunged lower and lower as production roared, creating a glut in the market. The oversupply had the effect of running coal-fired power plants out of business as cheaper gas remained the preferred option for policymakers who also touted its generally lower emissions.
But it also made the costly business of fracking new wells and transporting that product to market largely unprofitable. A telling headline from the financial site Investopedia last summer wondered: “Can fracking survive at $50 a barrel” for oil?
The answer, the site concluded, was yes, but production would likely decrease. That’s bad news for the U.S. industry giants Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp., which last year laid plans to dramatically ramp up production in the Permian Basin, the teeming oil and gas formation that spans from West Texas to New Mexico. Both companies reported slumping fourth-quarter earnings last Friday. Goldman Sachs analysts downgraded Exxon stock to “sell” on Monday.
Advertisement
Five years of low prices put the industry in a bind. At prices cheaper than coal, fracked gas became the nation’s main fuel for electricity, providing market dominance even if it failed to generate substantial profits. But the ever-falling price of solar and wind energy now threatens to gobble up that market if, or when, gas prices climb. It’s already cheaper to increase energy efficiency and build renewables than to construct new gas plants and pipelines, according to a 2019 report from the nonprofit Rocky Mountain Institute. By the mid-2030s, it’ll cost less to deploy clean energy than to continue operating existing gas plants ― and that’s without a major federal intervention to phase out fracking.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Chris Hayes Highlights The Irony Of DNC's Desire For 'Radical Transparency'

So you get a much more complicated process to report .
I also think it ’ s possible that like @ @ @ @ @ math didn ’ t work and tonight was the first time it was being flagged @ @ @ @ @ being reported .
It seems to be possible that the transparency itself probably surfaced errors @ @ @ @ @ past that are now popping up tonight .

So you get a much more complicated process to report. I also think it’s possible that like a lot of these sheets math didn’t work and tonight was the first time it was being flagged because all the numbers are being reported. It seems to be possible that the transparency itself probably surfaced errors that were there in the past that are now popping up tonight.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Who Really Won The Iowa Democratic Caucuses? Twitter Users Share Weird Theories

As of early Tuesday , no one knew for sure .
But that didn ’ t stop some people from @ @ @ @ @ South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg said “ all indications ” showed he @ @ @ @ @ of the 2020 presidential campaign .
Shortly afterward , the campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders @ @ @ @ @ thought he had won .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren ’ s ( D-Mass . )
campaign @ @ @ @ @ in the running .
Early indications suggested former Vice President Joe Biden did not have @ @ @ @

As of early Tuesday, no one knew for sure. But that didn’t stop some people from pretending they did.
Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg said “all indications” showed he had won the first contest of the 2020 presidential campaign. Shortly afterward, the campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said it thought he had won. Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) campaign also believed she was still in the running. Early indications suggested former Vice President Joe Biden did not have a good night.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-02-04--Steve Bannon Was 'Not Happy' About Story Of Kushner's Back Channel To Russia: Records

Former White House strategist Steve Bannon was “ not happy ” when the media reported in 2017 that Jared Kushner had tried to establish a secret “ back channel ” for communication with the Kremlin during Donald Trump ’ s transition into the White House , according to a new trove of documents obtained by BuzzFeed .
“ Neither Kushner nor [ Michael ] Flynn ” — then the national security adviser — “ mentioned the meeting , ” apparently referring to their sit-down with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak to discuss the plan , according to a summary of an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former special counsel Robert Mueller .
Bannon , however , did not talk to Flynn nor Kushner about the issue , according to the summary .
They were “ not exactly speaking at the time , ” the summary noted , apparently referring to both men .
.
@ LoopEmma @ a_cormier_ & I have gone through the latest batch of the # MuellerMemos ( FBI 302s ) we obtained via our # FOIA lawsuit and despite all the redactions there are A LOT of new details that were not included in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ //t.co/RHc22ZGgZm pic.twitter.com/wYE9HzzID1 — Jason Leopold ( @ JasonLeopold ) February 4 , 2020 The information is buried in hundreds of pages of interview summaries obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by BuzzFeed reporter Jason Leopold .
Despite his concerns about the “ back channel , ” Bannon told investigators he didn ’ t think the “ stuff ” regarding Russian President Vladimir Putin and his links to the White House were “ a big deal , ” according to the summary .
Russia ’ s “ reach outs ” after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any other country ’ s , ” Bannon told investigators .
“ For example , the Japanese prime minister wanted to fly over and have a cup of coffee , ” he said , BuzzFeed reported .
Bannon also noted that the White House transition was chaotic because few people had expected Trump to win .
“ People in the campaign thought it was not necessary to have a strong transition team going into the election , in part because they were so far down in the polls , ” Bannon explained in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to another summary .
“ Trump was also superstitious about things like that .
Bill Hagerty , the director of the transition , had scheduled a trip to the Bahamas for after the election , assuming they would not win.
” At some point , Flynn went to see Obama ’ s national security adviser , Susan Rice , and her deputy , Ben Rhodes , for advice about “ how to do things.
” NEW : Steve Bannon told the FBI and prosecutors during a meeting at Mueller 's office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sought out Obama 's national security adviser Susan Rice and her deputy , Ben Rhodes , for advice “ about how to do things.
” https : //t.co/RHc22ZGgZm pic.twitter.com/ZXHOWZzlfM — Jason Leopold ( @ JasonLeopold ) February 4 , 2020 Kushner ’ s name came up in Bannon ’ s interview — but no details were released in his own interview .
Nearly every single word was redacted in the five-page summary of Kushner ’ s November 2017 interview with FBI agents and federal prosecutors , BuzzFeed noted .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former White House strategist Steve Bannon was “not happy” when the media reported in 2017 that Jared Kushner had tried to establish a secret “back channel” for communication with the Kremlin during Donald Trump’s transition into the White House, according to a new trove of documents obtained by BuzzFeed.
“Neither Kushner nor [Michael] Flynn” — then the national security adviser — “mentioned the meeting,” apparently referring to their sit-down with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak to discuss the plan, according to a summary of an interview with Bannon by investigators working with former special counsel Robert Mueller.
Advertisement
Bannon, however, did not talk to Flynn nor Kushner about the issue, according to the summary. They were “not exactly speaking at the time,” the summary noted, apparently referring to both men.
.@LoopEmma @a_cormier_ & I have gone through the latest batch of the #MuellerMemos (FBI 302s) we obtained via our #FOIA lawsuit and despite all the redactions there are A LOT of new details that were not included in the Mueller report.
STORY: https://t.co/RHc22ZGgZm pic.twitter.com/wYE9HzzID1 — Jason Leopold (@JasonLeopold) February 4, 2020
The information is buried in hundreds of pages of interview summaries obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by BuzzFeed reporter Jason Leopold.
Despite his concerns about the “back channel,” Bannon told investigators he didn’t think the “stuff” regarding Russian President Vladimir Putin and his links to the White House were “a big deal,” according to the summary.
Advertisement
Russia’s “reach outs” after the election were not “any different than any other country’s,” Bannon told investigators.
“For example, the Japanese prime minister wanted to fly over and have a cup of coffee,” he said, BuzzFeed reported.
Bannon also noted that the White House transition was chaotic because few people had expected Trump to win.
“People in the campaign thought it was not necessary to have a strong transition team going into the election, in part because they were so far down in the polls,” Bannon explained in Miller’s office in early 2018, according to another summary. “Trump was also superstitious about things like that. Bill Hagerty, the director of the transition, had scheduled a trip to the Bahamas for after the election, assuming they would not win.”
At some point, Flynn went to see Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, and her deputy, Ben Rhodes, for advice about “how to do things.”
Advertisement
NEW: Steve Bannon told the FBI and prosecutors during a meeting at Mueller's office that after the election, Michael Flynn sought out Obama's national security adviser Susan Rice and her deputy, Ben Rhodes, for advice “about how to do things.” https://t.co/RHc22ZGgZm pic.twitter.com/ZXHOWZzlfM — Jason Leopold (@JasonLeopold) February 4, 2020
Kushner’s name came up in Bannon’s interview — but no details were released in his own interview. Nearly every single word was redacted in the five-page summary of Kushner’s November 2017 interview with FBI agents and federal prosecutors, BuzzFeed noted.