politicususa--2020-01-07--McConnell’s Sham Trial Dream Is Dying As Mitt Romney Says He Wants To Hear From Bolton

Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell are trying to make a mockery of a potential impeachment trial by conducting it without witnesses , but some Republican senators might have a different idea in mind .
When asked what he thinks about John Bolton testifying in a potential trial , Utah Sen. Mitt Romney said he ’ d be in favor of the idea – a potential blow to Trump as he tries to skate through a Senate trial without any damning witness testimony .
“ I ’ d love to hear what he has to say , ” Romney said on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firsthand ” witness .
“ I ’ d like to hear what he knows.
” McConnell doesn ’ t have enough votes for a sham trial At the moment , there aren ’ t anywhere near enough votes to reach the threshold needed to remove Donald Trump from office – but that doesn ’ t mean there are enough votes for Trump and McConnell to get away with a sham Senate trial .
Over the past couple of weeks , a handful of Republican senators have publicly signaled that they ’ d like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reaches the Senate .
That list includes Romney , Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Maine Sen. Susan Collins , among others .
PoliticusUSA ’ s Jason Easley pointed out earlier that even GOP leadership in the Senate is admitting that there could be witnesses in the impeachment trial .
While Mitch McConnell does appear to have the votes to prevent Trump ’ s removal from office , it ’ s clear – as I wrote last month – that he is struggling to get the 51 votes it would take for his dream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell are trying to make a mockery of a potential impeachment trial by conducting it without witnesses, but some Republican senators might have a different idea in mind.
When asked what he thinks about John Bolton testifying in a potential trial, Utah Sen. Mitt Romney said he’d be in favor of the idea – a potential blow to Trump as he tries to skate through a Senate trial without any damning witness testimony.
“I’d love to hear what he has to say,” Romney said on Monday, calling Bolton a key “firsthand” witness. “I’d like to hear what he knows.”
Video:
Mitt Romney says he’d “love to hear” from John Bolton in a potential Senate impeachment trial. #ctl #p2 pic.twitter.com/QXF1Rlwq98 — PoliticusUSA (@politicususa) January 7, 2020
Romney said:
I’d love to hear what [John Bolton] has to say. He has firsthand information, and assuming that articles of impeachment do reach the Senate, why I’d like to hear what he knows.
McConnell doesn’t have enough votes for a sham trial
At the moment, there aren’t anywhere near enough votes to reach the threshold needed to remove Donald Trump from office – but that doesn’t mean there are enough votes for Trump and McConnell to get away with a sham Senate trial.
Over the past couple of weeks, a handful of Republican senators have publicly signaled that they’d like to hear from witnesses when a trial reaches the Senate. That list includes Romney, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Maine Sen. Susan Collins, among others.
PoliticusUSA’s Jason Easley pointed out earlier that even GOP leadership in the Senate is admitting that there could be witnesses in the impeachment trial.
While Mitch McConnell does appear to have the votes to prevent Trump’s removal from office, it’s clear – as I wrote last month – that he is struggling to get the 51 votes it would take for his dream of a sham trial to come true.
Follow Sean Colarossi on Facebook and Twitter


politicususa--2020-01-07--Republicans Are Photoshopping Pictures Of Obama To Make The Iran Conflict Look Like His Fault

Republicans in Congress are so desperate to defend Donald Trump ’ s reckless escalation with Iran that they ’ re using photoshopped pictures that show a smiling Barack Obama meeting with the Iranian president .
In a tweet , GOP Rep. Paul Gosar shared the doctored photograph with the caption , “ The world is a better place without these guys in power.
” But as Aaron Blake of The Washington Post pointed out , there are two problems with Rep. Gosar ’ s nonsensical tweet .
First , Barack Obama never met with Iranian leader Hassan Rouhani .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Obama meeting with former Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh , not the president of Iran .
The second problem is that Rouhani is actually still in power , despite Gosar ’ s claim that the “ world is a better place without ” him .
Republican lawmakers already look foolish shielding this unhinged and corrupt president .
They only humiliate themselves further when they defend him in such patently absurd ways .
Trump is opening the doors for a nuclear Iran The president and his Republican defenders in Congress , including Rep. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strike on Iran as evidence that Donald Trump is tough , unlike Barack Obama .
But in reality , Trump ’ s strategy to deal with Iran – to the extent that a strategy exists – has been reckless and weak .
It has only emboldened the Iranians to act more aggressively – and they have .
All of this can be traced directly back to the president ’ s decision to rip up an agreement – crafted by the Obama-Biden administration – between the Iranians and six other world powers that kept @ @ @ @ @ @ @ program .
Even though the Iranians were holding up their end of the deal , Trump – childishly insecure about anything that has Barack Obama ’ s name on it – withdrew and slapped sanctions on Iran .
Now , Iran has resumed its pursuit of a nuclear weapon , the Middle East is becoming even more unstable and Trump is ratcheting up U.S. military engagement in the region , despite his campaign promise to put an end to needless wars .
Donald Trump and Donald Trump alone is to blame for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There has been nothing smart or strong about his Iran strategy .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Republicans in Congress are so desperate to defend Donald Trump’s reckless escalation with Iran that they’re using photoshopped pictures that show a smiling Barack Obama meeting with the Iranian president.
In a tweet, GOP Rep. Paul Gosar shared the doctored photograph with the caption, “The world is a better place without these guys in power.”
The world is a better place without these guys in power. pic.twitter.com/gDoXQu9vO5 — Paul Gosar (@DrPaulGosar) January 6, 2020
But as Aaron Blake of The Washington Post pointed out, there are two problems with Rep. Gosar’s nonsensical tweet.
First, Barack Obama never met with Iranian leader Hassan Rouhani. In fact, the real image is actually of Obama meeting with former Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh, not the president of Iran.
The second problem is that Rouhani is actually still in power, despite Gosar’s claim that the “world is a better place without” him.
Republican lawmakers already look foolish shielding this unhinged and corrupt president. They only humiliate themselves further when they defend him in such patently absurd ways.
Trump is opening the doors for a nuclear Iran
The president and his Republican defenders in Congress, including Rep. Paul Gosar, are pointing to the strike on Iran as evidence that Donald Trump is tough, unlike Barack Obama.
But in reality, Trump’s strategy to deal with Iran – to the extent that a strategy exists – has been reckless and weak. It has only emboldened the Iranians to act more aggressively – and they have.
All of this can be traced directly back to the president’s decision to rip up an agreement – crafted by the Obama-Biden administration – between the Iranians and six other world powers that kept a lid on Iran’s nuclear program.
Even though the Iranians were holding up their end of the deal, Trump – childishly insecure about anything that has Barack Obama’s name on it – withdrew and slapped sanctions on Iran.
Now, Iran has resumed its pursuit of a nuclear weapon, the Middle East is becoming even more unstable and Trump is ratcheting up U.S. military engagement in the region, despite his campaign promise to put an end to needless wars.
Donald Trump and Donald Trump alone is to blame for the unfolding crisis in the Middle East. There has been nothing smart or strong about his Iran strategy.
Follow Sean Colarossi on Facebook and Twitter


politicususa--2020-01-06--John Bolton’s Testimony Said To Be Damning For Trump

If John Bolton is subpoenaed to testify before the Senate , his testimony is expected to be damning for Trump at the impeachment trial .
Mr. Bolton declined to say on Monday precisely what he would be willing to tell Congress .
But his lawyer , Charles J. Cooper , told the House ’ s top lawyer in November that Mr. Bolton knew about “ many relevant meetings and conversations ” connected to the Ukraine matter that had not been shared with House impeachment investigators .
And former White House officials and people close to Mr. Bolton have indicated that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr. Trump and put additional pressure on moderate Republicans to consider convicting him .
That could place Mr. Trump at greater risk in the Senate , where a two-thirds vote — 67 senators — is needed to remove a president .
Democrats , the minority party , effectively control 47 seats .
MSNBC ’ s Nicolle Wallace called it a decent bet that Bolton already knows that he has the four Republican votes needed for the Senate to subpoena him .
There is no evidence that anything that Bolton could testify to will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Republicans to vote not to convict him .
The former Trump administration official could make it even more difficult for moderate Senate Republicans to stand with Trump .
The nightmare scenario for the Republican Party isn ’ t that Trump is convicted and removed , but that a few Republicans in the Senate vote to convict Trump , and impeachment becomes bipartisan .
If Bolton testifies , there won ’ t be a quickie impeachment trial , and it could open the door for a bipartisan political death blow to Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
If John Bolton is subpoenaed to testify before the Senate, his testimony is expected to be damning for Trump at the impeachment trial.
The New York Times reported:
Mr. Bolton declined to say on Monday precisely what he would be willing to tell Congress. But his lawyer, Charles J. Cooper, told the House’s top lawyer in November that Mr. Bolton knew about “many relevant meetings and conversations” connected to the Ukraine matter that had not been shared with House impeachment investigators. And former White House officials and people close to Mr. Bolton have indicated that his testimony would likely be damning to Mr. Trump and put additional pressure on moderate Republicans to consider convicting him.
That could place Mr. Trump at greater risk in the Senate, where a two-thirds vote — 67 senators — is needed to remove a president. Democrats, the minority party, effectively control 47 seats.
MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace called it a decent bet that Bolton already knows that he has the four Republican votes needed for the Senate to subpoena him. There is no evidence that anything that Bolton could testify to will exonerate Trump, or provide political cover for Republicans to vote not to convict him.
The former Trump administration official could make it even more difficult for moderate Senate Republicans to stand with Trump. The nightmare scenario for the Republican Party isn’t that Trump is convicted and removed, but that a few Republicans in the Senate vote to convict Trump, and impeachment becomes bipartisan.
If Bolton testifies, there won’t be a quickie impeachment trial, and it could open the door for a bipartisan political death blow to Donald Trump.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-06--Nicolle Wallace Says Bolton Has The GOP Votes For Subpoena

MSNBC ’ s Nicolle Wallace , who has known John Bolton for 20 years , says it is a decent bet that Bolton knows where the Republican votes are to subpoena him .
Wallace said on her show Deadline White House , “ There is tectonic plate shifting impeachment news .
John Bolton , who reportedly described the Ukrainian pressure campaign as a drug deal , and Rudy Giuliani , the president ’ s lawyer , who remains in the middle of the effort to push the Ukrainians for investigations into the Bidens as a grenade to blow everybody up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Senate impeachment trial if subpoenaed .
Bolton either playing for US national security issues , the history books or both .
Has in the absence of any ruling forcing his testimony , examining the separation of powers questioned himself and off to testify before the senate .
71 % of Americans would like to hear from Americans like Bolton .
And only takes four Republicans for a vote to subpoena him to pass the senate .
Knowing Bolton for the better part of two decades , it ’ s a decent bet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hiding.
” Nothing in any of the House impeachment testimony concerning John Bolton suggests that his testimony will be anything less than bad for Trump .
Senate Republicans are signaling that they don ’ t have the votes to block the Senate from subpoenaing Bolton ’ s testimony .
After a few days of Trump-induced Iran distraction , impeachment is back front and center in the American national discussion .
It is looking more likely that John Bolton will testify , which will open the door to testimony the administration officials that Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace, who has known John Bolton for 20 years, says it is a decent bet that Bolton knows where the Republican votes are to subpoena him.
Wallace said on her show Deadline White House, “There is tectonic plate shifting impeachment news. John Bolton, who reportedly described the Ukrainian pressure campaign as a drug deal, and Rudy Giuliani, the president’s lawyer, who remains in the middle of the effort to push the Ukrainians for investigations into the Bidens as a grenade to blow everybody up. Announcing today he will testify in a Senate impeachment trial if subpoenaed. Bolton either playing for US national security issues, the history books or both. Has in the absence of any ruling forcing his testimony, examining the separation of powers questioned himself and off to testify before the senate. 71% of Americans would like to hear from Americans like Bolton. And only takes four Republicans for a vote to subpoena him to pass the senate. Knowing Bolton for the better part of two decades, it’s a decent bet he might know where they may be hiding.”
Video:
Nicolle Wallace says it is a decent bet that Bolton knows that there are four Republican Senate votes to subpoena him. pic.twitter.com/EL8v3iZvPV — Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) January 6, 2020
Nothing in any of the House impeachment testimony concerning John Bolton suggests that his testimony will be anything less than bad for Trump. Senate Republicans are signaling that they don’t have the votes to block the Senate from subpoenaing Bolton’s testimony.
After a few days of Trump-induced Iran distraction, impeachment is back front and center in the American national discussion. It is looking more likely that John Bolton will testify, which will open the door to testimony the administration officials that Donald Trump is trying to hide.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-06--The Dam Is Breaking As #2 Senate Republican Signals There Could Be Impeachment Trial Witnesses

The number two Republican in the Senate , Sen. John Cornyn ( R-TX ) sent a strong signal on Monday that McConnell doesn ’ t have the votes to prevent witnesses .
Cornyn didn ’ t say that he would support subpoenaing Bolton : Sen. Cornyn referenced the trapdoor that Bolton has opened by offering to testify .
If Republicans can ’ t stop Bolton from testifying , they also won ’ t be able to stop Democrats from subpoenaing administration witnesses to testify .
The dam is breaking .
Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump ’ s dream of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of collapsing .
Sen. Cornyn ’ s answer is proof that McConnell doesn ’ t have the 51 votes that he needs to prevent witnesses from testifying .
If Cornyn , McConnell , and Trump believed that Bolton ’ s testimony would be good for the president , they would be applauding former ambassador Bolton ’ s statement .
Top Senate Republicans are squirming , because not a single witness has come forward to defend Trump , and that is not expected to change if John Bolton testifies .
For more discussion about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
The number two Republican in the Senate, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) sent a strong signal on Monday that McConnell doesn’t have the votes to prevent witnesses.
Sen. Cornyn told reporters:
Cornyn: “When the time comes, if 51 senators want to hear from Ambassador Bolton, I think that’s fine. It doesn’t have to be live, it could be a deposition…my guess this could help the president” — Igor Bobic (@igorbobic) January 6, 2020
Cornyn didn’t say that he would support subpoenaing Bolton:
BUT Cornyn didn’t say whether he would ultimately support a motion to subpoena Bolton. “I’m not for the Senate turning into a circus like the House. I would worry that would be a beginning and not the end of the other witnesses they would want to drag through here” — Igor Bobic (@igorbobic) January 6, 2020
Sen. Cornyn referenced the trapdoor that Bolton has opened by offering to testify. If Republicans can’t stop Bolton from testifying, they also won’t be able to stop Democrats from subpoenaing administration witnesses to testify.
The dam is breaking. Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump’s dream of a sham impeachment trial is in serious jeopardy of collapsing. Sen. Cornyn’s answer is proof that McConnell doesn’t have the 51 votes that he needs to prevent witnesses from testifying.
If Cornyn, McConnell, and Trump believed that Bolton’s testimony would be good for the president, they would be applauding former ambassador Bolton’s statement. Top Senate Republicans are squirming, because not a single witness has come forward to defend Trump, and that is not expected to change if John Bolton testifies.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-06--John Bolton Kills McConnell’s Sham With Offer To Testify At Trump Trial

John Bolton will no longer wait for the courts to decide , as he has offered to testify at Trump ’ s impeachment trial .
Former Ambassador Bolton said in a statement : During the present impeachment controversy , I have tried to meet my obligations both as a citizen and as former National Security Advisor .
My colleague , Dr. Charles Kupperman , faced with a House committee subpoena on the one hand , and a Presidential directive not to testify on the other , sought final resolution of this Constitutional conflict from the Federal judiciary .
After my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too would seek judicial resolution of these Constitutional issues , the committee chose not to subpoena me .
Nevertheless , I publicly resolved to be guided by the outcome of Dr. Kupperman ’ s case .
But both the President and the House of Representatives opposed his effort on jurisdictional grounds , and each other on the merits .
The House committee went so far as to withdraw its subpoena to Dr. Kupperman in a deliberate attempt to moot the case and deprive the court of jurisdiction .
Judge Richard Leon , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , held Dr. Kupperman ’ s case to be moot , and therefore did not reach the separation-of-powers issues .
The House has concluded its Constitutional responsibility by adopting Articles of Impeachment related to the Ukraine matter .
It now falls to the Senate to fulfill its Constitutional obligation to try impeachments , and it does not appear possible that a final judicial resolution of the still-unanswered Constitutional questions can be obtained before the Senate acts .
Accordingly , since my testimony is once again at issue , I have had to resolve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could , based on careful consideration and study .
I have concluded that , if the Senate issues a subpoena for my testimony , I am prepared to testify .
Bolton ’ s decision only increases the pressure on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to allow witnesses at Trump ’ s impeachment trial .
The pressure will be especially intense on a group of moderate and endangered incumbent Republican Senators who are up for reelection in 2020 .
Democrats needed a credible Republican witness to come forward and offer to testify at Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have the votes to implement his sham impeachment trial before Bolton came forward .
Now , he might not have the votes to prevent witnesses from testifying .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
John Bolton will no longer wait for the courts to decide, as he has offered to testify at Trump’s impeachment trial.
Former Ambassador Bolton said in a statement:
During the present impeachment controversy, I have tried to meet my obligations both as a citizen and as former National Security Advisor. My colleague, Dr. Charles Kupperman, faced with a House committee subpoena on the one hand, and a Presidential directive not to testify on the other, sought final resolution of this Constitutional conflict from the Federal judiciary. After my counsel informed the House committee that I too would seek judicial resolution of these Constitutional issues, the committee chose not to subpoena me. Nevertheless, I publicly resolved to be guided by the outcome of Dr. Kupperman’s case.
But both the President and the House of Representatives opposed his effort on jurisdictional grounds, and each other on the merits. The House committee went so far as to withdraw its subpoena to Dr. Kupperman in a deliberate attempt to moot the case and deprive the court of jurisdiction. Judge Richard Leon, in a carefully reasoned opinion on December 30, held Dr. Kupperman’s case to be moot, and therefore did not reach the separation-of-powers issues.
The House has concluded its Constitutional responsibility by adopting Articles of Impeachment related to the Ukraine matter. It now falls to the Senate to fulfill its Constitutional obligation to try impeachments, and it does not appear possible that a final judicial resolution of the still-unanswered Constitutional questions can be obtained before the Senate acts.
Accordingly, since my testimony is once again at issue, I have had to resolve the serious competing issues as best I could, based on careful consideration and study. I have concluded that, if the Senate issues a subpoena for my testimony, I am prepared to testify.
Bolton’s decision only increases the pressure on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to allow witnesses at Trump’s impeachment trial. The pressure will be especially intense on a group of moderate and endangered incumbent Republican Senators who are up for reelection in 2020.
Democrats needed a credible Republican witness to come forward and offer to testify at Trump’s impeachment trial. McConnell didn’t have the votes to implement his sham impeachment trial before Bolton came forward. Now, he might not have the votes to prevent witnesses from testifying.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-06--Julian Castro Endorses Elizabeth Warren For President

Four days after dropping out of the Democratic race , Julian Castro has endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren for president .
@ @ @ @ @ known and was missed at the most recent Democratic debate .
His endorsement comes at @ @ @ @ @ Warren as her campaign has sagged in recent months .
Sen. Warren has struggled to @ @ @ @ @ plan and other proposals .
Warren was on the upswing until she was put on @ @ @ @ @ been back on her heels as the Iowa caucuses draw closer .
Pete Buttigieg has @ @ @ @ @ and Sen. Warren sits third in fourth in national polls .
Warren made a rare @ @ @ @ @ shows this past week in what was a clear effort to boost her visibility ahead @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t draw much support as a candidate , but he did develop and @ @ @ @ @ that will only help Elizabeth Warren .
For more discussion about this story join our @ @ @ @ @ .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Four days after dropping out of the Democratic race, Julian Castro has endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren for president.
Castro tweeted:
Today I'm proud to endorse @ewarren for president. Elizabeth and I share a vision of America where everyone counts. An America where people—not the wealthy or well-connected—are put first. I'm proud to join her in the fight for big, structural change. pic.twitter.com/xDvMEKqpF3 — Julián Castro (@JulianCastro) January 6, 2020
Castro made himself more well known and was missed at the most recent Democratic debate. His endorsement comes at a great time for Sen. Warren as her campaign has sagged in recent months. Sen. Warren has struggled to defend her Medicare For All plan and other proposals.
Warren was on the upswing until she was put on the defensive, and has been back on her heels as the Iowa caucuses draw closer. Pete Buttigieg has passed her in Iowa, and Sen. Warren sits third in fourth in national polls. Warren made a rare appearance on the Sunday news shows this past week in what was a clear effort to boost her visibility ahead of Iowa.
Julian Castro didn’t draw much support as a candidate, but he did develop and national name in a platform that will only help Elizabeth Warren.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-06--Calls Grow For Attorney General William Barr To Resign

Lost among impeachment and Trump ’ s threats to Iran is a growing chorus calling for the resignation of Attorney General William Barr .
On December 19th , several Democratic members of Congress felt compelled to call on Barr to resign due to his “ undermining ” of the very department he leads .
Congressman Hank Johnson ( GA-04 ) , a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee , sent a letter to Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham “ demanding they resign for acting as mouthpieces for Donald Trump rather than public servants bound to the rule of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , your course of conduct makes clear your allegiance is to Donald Trump over the Department of Justice and American people that you serve .
You are unfit to hold the position of Attorney General and your dedication to eroding public trust in our legal systems represents the antithesis of what a Justice Department official should be .
Mr. Durham is equally as complicit in this mission and together your actions demonstrate that neither of you possesses the integrity necessary to serve in the Department of Justice .
For these reasons , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that of U.S. Attorney Durham.
” We all know that Trump officials are immune to shame , but a letter like this is highly unusual and could be seen as a warning shot coming from the Democrats as it is .
In October , Democrats called for Barr to recuse himself from anything Ukraine .
Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii tweeted “ Attorney General Barr ’ s name was mentioned several times in @ realDonaldTrump ’ s infamous telephone call with the Ukrainian President .
Since he ’ s been acting as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people ’ s lawyer , Bill Barr must recuse himself from anything regarding Ukraine.
” While the nation is consumed with both impeachment and Trump ’ s wag the dog response to being impeached , there is a growing movement to get rid of an attorney general who has corrupted the Department of Justice and turned into a personal legal firm for Donald Trump .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Lost among impeachment and Trump’s threats to Iran is a growing chorus calling for the resignation of Attorney General William Barr.
Sarah Jones said on Politcus News:
On December 19th, several Democratic members of Congress felt compelled to call on Barr to resign due to his “undermining” of the very department he leads. Congressman Hank Johnson (GA-04), a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham “demanding they resign for acting as mouthpieces for Donald Trump rather than public servants bound to the rule of law. “
“Mr. Barr, your course of conduct makes clear your allegiance is to Donald Trump over the Department of Justice and American people that you serve. You are unfit to hold the position of Attorney General and your dedication to eroding public trust in our legal systems represents the antithesis of what a Justice Department official should be. Mr. Durham is equally as complicit in this mission and together your actions demonstrate that neither of you possesses the integrity necessary to serve in the Department of Justice.
For these reasons, we demand your immediate resignation as Attorney General and that of U.S. Attorney Durham.”
We all know that Trump officials are immune to shame, but a letter like this is highly unusual and could be seen as a warning shot coming from the Democrats as it is.
In October, Democrats called for Barr to recuse himself from anything Ukraine.
Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii tweeted “Attorney General Barr’s name was mentioned several times in @realDonaldTrump’s infamous telephone call with the Ukrainian President. Since he’s been acting as the President’s lawyer, not the people’s lawyer, Bill Barr must recuse himself from anything regarding Ukraine.”
Video:
While the nation is consumed with both impeachment and Trump’s wag the dog response to being impeached, there is a growing movement to get rid of an attorney general who has corrupted the Department of Justice and turned into a personal legal firm for Donald Trump.


politicususa--2020-01-06--Pelosi To Hold Vote To Block Trump Iran War Powers

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced in a letter to House colleagues that the House will vote to limit Trump ’ s war powers toward Iran .
Last week , the Trump Administration conducted a provocative and disproportionate military airstrike targeting high-level Iranian military officials .
This action endangered our service members , diplomats and others by risking a serious escalation of tensions with Iran .
As Members of Congress , our first responsibility is to keep the American people safe .
For this reason , we are concerned that the Administration took this action without the consultation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s war powers granted to it by the Constitution .
This week , the House will introduce and vote on a War Powers Resolution to limit the President ’ s military actions regarding Iran .
This resolution is similar to the resolution introduced by Senator Tim Kaine in the Senate .
It reasserts Congress ’ s long-established oversight responsibilities by mandating that if no further Congressional action is taken , the Administration ’ s military hostilities with regard to Iran cease within 30 days .
The House Resolution will be led by Congresswoman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former CIA and Department of Defense analyst specializing in Shia militias .
She served multiple tours in the region under both Democratic and Republican Administrations .
I greatly appreciate the solemnity with which all of our Members are working to honor our responsibility to protect American lives and values .
The House currently has its largest number of female veterans in history ( 6 ) .
With each election cycle , more veterans of the wars in the Middle East are joining Congress .
The upcoming vote was signaled last week .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to start a war with Iran is why elections matter .
A Republican House would have joined Mitch McConnell in rubber-stamping Trump ’ s escalation with Iran .
There is separate legislation in the House and Senate to block Trump ’ s funding for offensive military action against Iran , which is a direct action that the House could take without the Senate .
Democrats have power , and they are using it to do everything possible to block a Trump war with Iran .
For more discussion about this story join our @ @ @ @ @ @

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announced in a letter to House colleagues that the House will vote to limit Trump’s war powers toward Iran.
Pelosi wrote in a letter provided to PoliticusUSA:
Last week, the Trump Administration conducted a provocative and disproportionate military airstrike targeting high-level Iranian military officials. This action endangered our service members, diplomats and others by risking a serious escalation of tensions with Iran.
As Members of Congress, our first responsibility is to keep the American people safe. For this reason, we are concerned that the Administration took this action without the consultation of Congress and without respect for Congress’s war powers granted to it by the Constitution.
This week, the House will introduce and vote on a War Powers Resolution to limit the President’s military actions regarding Iran. This resolution is similar to the resolution introduced by Senator Tim Kaine in the Senate. It reasserts Congress’s long-established oversight responsibilities by mandating that if no further Congressional action is taken, the Administration’s military hostilities with regard to Iran cease within 30 days.
The House Resolution will be led by Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin. Congresswoman Slotkin is a former CIA and Department of Defense analyst specializing in Shia militias. She served multiple tours in the region under both Democratic and Republican Administrations.
I greatly appreciate the solemnity with which all of our Members are working to honor our responsibility to protect American lives and values.
The House currently has its largest number of female veterans in history (6). With each election cycle, more veterans of the wars in the Middle East are joining Congress. The upcoming vote was signaled last week.
The vote to limit Trump’s power to start a war with Iran is why elections matter. A Republican House would have joined Mitch McConnell in rubber-stamping Trump’s escalation with Iran.
There is separate legislation in the House and Senate to block Trump’s funding for offensive military action against Iran, which is a direct action that the House could take without the Senate.
Democrats have power, and they are using it to do everything possible to block a Trump war with Iran.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-05--Schumer Vows To Do Everything In His Power To Block Trump’s Iran War

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-NY ) vowed to do everything in his power to get congress to assert the authority of war with Iran .
STEPHANOPOULOS : First , Iran .
You heard Secretary Pompeo say America and the world is safer today .
Do you agree ?
SCHUMER : No , I really worry that the actions the president took will get us into what he calls another “ endless war ” in the Middle East .
He promised we wouldn ’ t have that .
And I think we ’ re closer to that now because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are so many questions that are unanswered that have to be answered .
Among them at the top of the list : What do we know Iran has in its range of retaliations and how are we going to prepare for them ?
And let ’ s face it , this president has made a mess of foreign policy .
North Korea , they ’ re much stronger than they were when he started .
In Syria , he messed up .
Every encounter he has with Putin , he loses .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is why Congress must assert itself .
I don ’ t believe the president has authority to go to war in Iran without congressional OK. STEPHANOPOULOS : You just heard Secretary Pompeo .
He said they do .
SCHUMER : Well , I don ’ t believe that .
And I think Congress and I will do everything I can to assert our authority .
We do not need this president either bumbling or impulsively getting us into a major war .
And the reason the Founding Fathers said Congress had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a check on president who is doing so many wrong things .
His foreign policy has been erratic and unsuccessful thus far .
I worry it still is .
Schumer was correct .
Trump doesn ’ t have the constitutional authority to go to war with Iran .
The president would require the passage of a new authorization to use military force to start a war with Iran .
The Trump administration can ’ t release any evidence justifying their attack because the evidence does not exist .
Blaming Obama is not evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allowed to start a war either because he is mad or to save himself politically .
Congress must step up and say no .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) vowed to do everything in his power to get congress to assert the authority of war with Iran.
Transcript via ABC’s This Week:
STEPHANOPOULOS: First, Iran. You heard Secretary Pompeo say America and the world is safer today. Do you agree?
SCHUMER: No, I really worry that the actions the president took will get us into what he calls another “endless war” in the Middle East. He promised we wouldn’t have that. And I think we’re closer to that now because of his actions. Look, there are so many questions that are unanswered that have to be answered. Among them at the top of the list: What do we know Iran has in its range of retaliations and how are we going to prepare for them? And let’s face it, this president has made a mess of foreign policy. North Korea, they’re much stronger than they were when he started. In Syria, he messed up. Every encounter he has with Putin, he loses. And so, I am really worried and that is why Congress must assert itself. I don’t believe the president has authority to go to war in Iran without congressional OK.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You just heard Secretary Pompeo. He said they do.
SCHUMER: Well, I don’t believe that. And I think Congress and I will do everything I can to assert our authority. We do not need this president either bumbling or impulsively getting us into a major war. And the reason the Founding Fathers said Congress had to OK it is because that’s a check on president who is doing so many wrong things. His foreign policy has been erratic and unsuccessful thus far. I worry it still is.
Video:
Schumer was correct. Trump doesn’t have the constitutional authority to go to war with Iran. The president would require the passage of a new authorization to use military force to start a war with Iran.
The Trump administration can’t release any evidence justifying their attack because the evidence does not exist.
Blaming Obama is not evidence.
Donald Trump can’t be allowed to start a war either because he is mad or to save himself politically.
Congress must step up and say no.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-05--Adam Schiff Exposes Mitch McConnell As A Trump Co-Conspirator

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) said that holding on to the articles of impeachment has flushed out Mitch McConnell .
Rep. Schiff said on CNN ’ s State Of The Union : McConnell , I think , one of the successes that this has already had is flushing out McConnell showing that he is working in cahoots with the president that he has made himself an active participant in the president ’ s cover-up , so the American people needed to see that , and now they do .
You are also seeing the effect of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans who are now having to go to the record saying do we want to see witnesses or see the documents ?
Do we want a real trial or do we want a cover-up ?
It is clear I think from the president and Mitch McConnell , they don ’ t want a trial anymore , they don ’ t want a trial or witnesses .
They don ’ t want documents .
They don ’ t want a verdict .
They want a dismissal .
They want to have the House managers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and then move to dismiss and make it go away before the American people get to see the full extent of the president ’ s misconduct .
But , that ’ s not what the American people want .
It is not what the Founders contemplated .
If you ask a majority of Republicans around the country , they want the evidence to come out .
I think that withholding the articles thus far flush out where Mitch McConnell is coming from .
It is my hope that pressure will go in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and as well as the president .
Rep. Schiff was right .
If Speaker Pelosi had transmitted the articles of impeachment right away , McConnell and Trump would have buried them in a sham trial .
The Senate Majority Leader has been engaged in a campaign to redefine what an impeachment trial is .
The impeachment trial is not a rush to judgment .
It is not an appeal or Trump ’ s “ turn.
” It is a trial , and Democrats have already won by withholding the articles of impeachment and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) said that holding on to the articles of impeachment has flushed out Mitch McConnell.
Rep. Schiff said on CNN’s State Of The Union:
McConnell, I think, one of the successes that this has already had is flushing out McConnell showing that he is working in cahoots with the president that he has made himself an active participant in the president’s cover-up, so the American people needed to see that, and now they do.
….
You are also seeing the effect of this is flushing out senators Democrats and Republicans who are now having to go to the record saying do we want to see witnesses or see the documents? Do we want a real trial or do we want a cover-up? It is clear I think from the president and Mitch McConnell, they don’t want a trial anymore, they don’t want a trial or witnesses. They don’t want documents. They don’t want a verdict. They want a dismissal. They want to have the House managers come in, make a presentation, and then move to dismiss and make it go away before the American people get to see the full extent of the president’s misconduct.
But, that’s not what the American people want. It is not what the Founders contemplated. If you ask a majority of Republicans around the country, they want the evidence to come out. I think that withholding the articles thus far flush out where Mitch McConnell is coming from. It is my hope that pressure will go in a real trial and fair the American people and as well as the president.
Video:
Adam Schiff says holding on to the articles of impeachment has flushed out Mitch McConnell and the plot to bury Trump's misconduct. pic.twitter.com/Qyl5WD5HRD — Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) January 5, 2020
Rep. Schiff was right. If Speaker Pelosi had transmitted the articles of impeachment right away, McConnell and Trump would have buried them in a sham trial. The Senate Majority Leader has been engaged in a campaign to redefine what an impeachment trial is. The impeachment trial is not a rush to judgment. It is not an appeal or Trump’s “turn.”
It is a trial, and Democrats have already won by withholding the articles of impeachment and exposing Mitch McConnell’s cover-up for Trump.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-05--Elizabeth Warren Calls Out Trump For Using Iran Attack As Impeachment Distraction

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren called out Trump for picking this attack on an Iranian top general to distract from impeachment .
Warren said on CNN ’ s State Of The Union : I think it is right question to ask .
We will get more information as we go forward , but look at the timing on this , and look at what Donald Trump has said afterwards and his administration .
They have pointed in multiple directions .
There is a reason that he chose this moment , not a month ago and not a month from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less dangerous response .
He had a whole range of responses that were presented to he didn ’ t pick one of the other ones , he picked the most aggressive and the one that moves us closer to war .
So what does everybody talk about today ?
Are we going to war ?
Are we going to have another five years , ten years of war in the Middle East and dragged in once again .
Are we bringing another generation of young people into war ?
That is every bit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump has taken an extraordinarily reckless step and we have seen it before , he is using the foreign policy and uses whatever he can to advance the interests of Donald Trump .
Trump ’ s Twitter account makes it clear that he used the Iran strike to distract from impeachment .
The administration has offered constantly changing reasons for the strike that killed Iran ’ s top general , but no details or evidence to support their claim that it had to happen right now .
Sen. Warren deserves credit for saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump has used foreign policy to distract in the past , and there is no reason to believe that he has not done so again .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren called out Trump for picking this attack on an Iranian top general to distract from impeachment.
Warren said on CNN’s State Of The Union:
I think it is right question to ask. We will get more information as we go forward, but look at the timing on this, and look at what Donald Trump has said afterwards and his administration. They have pointed in multiple directions. There is a reason that he chose this moment, not a month ago and not a month from now, not a less aggressive and less dangerous response. He had a whole range of responses that were presented to he didn’t pick one of the other ones, he picked the most aggressive and the one that moves us closer to war.
So what does everybody talk about today? Are we going to war? Are we going to have another five years, ten years of war in the Middle East and dragged in once again. Are we bringing another generation of young people into war? That is every bit of the conversation right now. Donald Trump has taken an extraordinarily reckless step and we have seen it before, he is using the foreign policy and uses whatever he can to advance the interests of Donald Trump.
Video:
Elizabeth Warren makes the case that Trump is using his Iran attack to distract from impeachment. pic.twitter.com/E1UjrhNW5S — Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) January 5, 2020
Trump’s Twitter account makes it clear that he used the Iran strike to distract from impeachment. The administration has offered constantly changing reasons for the strike that killed Iran’s top general, but no details or evidence to support their claim that it had to happen right now.
Sen. Warren deserves credit for saying what few others have on television. Donald Trump has used foreign policy to distract in the past, and there is no reason to believe that he has not done so again.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-05--Mike Pompeo Blames Obama For Trump’s Iran Threats

Mike Pompeo couldn ’ t answer how Trump threatening Iran makes America safer , so he blamed Obama and Biden .
Pompeo said on CNN ’ s State Of The Union , “ We are trying to restore deterrence that results directly from the fact that previous administration left us in a terrible place with the respect of the Islamic State of Iran .
Team Obama appeased Iran and led to Shia militias with money Hamas , the PIJ hundreds of thousands of Syrians killed by Soleimani himself .
And this is the place we found ourselves when we came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategy to tell the Iranian regime to behave like a normal regime , and we have every expectation to achieve the goal.
” Pompeo continued , “ We have provided them clear guidance about what it is that we have an expectation .
We have worked with them and had conversations with them and it is important for them to know that we will no longer behave like the Obama and Biden administration , and we will no longer appease .
And people talked about the war and this kicked off when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could establish a crescent into Iraq and Lebanon and into Israel and threatening American lives as well .
We have taken a different approach .
The approach is successful and more work to do.
” The tell that the Trump administration is lying about an imminent attack from Iran is that their story keeps changing .
First , there was the imminent attack excuse , now they have shifted to saying that their hand was forced because of Obama .
The truth is that this attack was carried out to distract from impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Soleimani plan has been kicking around for years .
Blaming Obama does not answer the question of why Trump chose now to carry out the attack .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Mike Pompeo couldn’t answer how Trump threatening Iran makes America safer, so he blamed Obama and Biden.
Pompeo said on CNN’s State Of The Union, “We are trying to restore deterrence that results directly from the fact that previous administration left us in a terrible place with the respect of the Islamic State of Iran. Team Obama appeased Iran and led to Shia militias with money Hamas, the PIJ hundreds of thousands of Syrians killed by Soleimani himself. And this is the place we found ourselves when we came in, and we have developed a strategy to tell the Iranian regime to behave like a normal regime, and we have every expectation to achieve the goal.”
Video:
Mike Pompeo can't answer how America is safer after Trump's Iran attack, so he blames Obama and Biden. pic.twitter.com/iiG31m9Lcy — Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) January 5, 2020
Pompeo continued, “We have provided them clear guidance about what it is that we have an expectation. We have worked with them and had conversations with them and it is important for them to know that we will no longer behave like the Obama and Biden administration, and we will no longer appease. And people talked about the war and this kicked off when the JCPOA was dropped. It said they could establish a crescent into Iraq and Lebanon and into Israel and threatening American lives as well. We have taken a different approach. The approach is successful and more work to do.”
The tell that the Trump administration is lying about an imminent attack from Iran is that their story keeps changing. First, there was the imminent attack excuse, now they have shifted to saying that their hand was forced because of Obama.
The truth is that this attack was carried out to distract from impeachment and help Trump in the 2020 election. The Soleimani plan has been kicking around for years. Blaming Obama does not answer the question of why Trump chose now to carry out the attack.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-05--Opinion: American Lives Depend on Telling True Story of Trump’s Life-Destroying Economy

What is the story of the U.S. economy ?
Not unlike the proverbial elephant subject to scrutiny by a band of blind men , the nation ’ s economy is subject to multiple narrative descriptions depending on which component of the beast , whether our economy or an elephant , the blind man massages .
Some media pundits have argued that the historically low unemployment rates combined with record stock market performances attest to a strong economy that would propel Trump to victory in 2020 if only he were disciplined enough to stay on point about the economy , stupid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is akin to grasping the trunk and the tail of the elephant , missing the bigger and much more accurate picture of an economy that has not just failed but actively assaulted the vast majority of Americans .
MSNBC ’ s Stephanie Ruhle , for example , has been unrelenting in fleshing out this more comprehensive narrative , insisting , among other points , that the stock market and the overall economy are not the same thing .
It may very well be the more compelling storyteller , or the storyteller who gets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who tilts the 2020 election .
Robert Shiller ’ s recent splashy book Narrative Economics underscores this point in a general way , arguing that the popular and viral narratives purveyed about the economy don ’ t so much describe the economy but drive the economic events themselves , regardless of the truth value of the story itself .
As the Yale University professor and Nobel-prize winning economist told CNBC , “ It may not be so logical .
It may be more , as I said , of animal spirits .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a certain time that you sense you see in other people .
So when you see other people feeling confident about the market , you feel more confident yourself.
” He attributes recent market strength , for example , to Trump ’ s storytelling prowess : “ He ’ s a motivational speaker .
We ’ ve never had a motivational speaker president before .
He knows how to create animal spirits.
” What can not be emphasized enough , however , is the importance of a crafting an economic narrative that aligns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality , generating the most effective understanding of the dynamics and performance of the economy–for good decision-making by voters and good policy-making by legislators .
How we tell this story is vital to lives of the American majority , which is why Shiller ’ s applause for Trump ’ s motivational stirring of animal spirits is absolutely misplaced and damaging to American lives .
As we get a hold of the entire elephant of the Trump economy , we find an economy on a sugar high , thriving on taxpayer debt , enriching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heading for a crash .
As we limn this elephant , let ’ s start with the national debt and deficit .
Trump inherited a strong economy , and it is typically during healthy economic times that the government pays down the national debt .
But both the deficit and debt have grown under Trump ’ s administration , largely because of his tax cuts that served largely the wealthy .
Reports indicated that in October the federal government ’ s budget deficit ballooned 34 % from a year earlier to $ 134.5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will top $ 1 trillion for the first time in eight years .
The national debt , meanwhile , has surged beyond $ 22 trillion .
Hmmm .
If the economy is booming , shouldn ’ t the federal government ’ s coffers be filling up and not depleting ?
We can certainly understand how in a time of recession the government would need to provide economic stimulus and thus run a deficit , but when the economy is supposedly experiencing record performance ?
When Trump slashed corporate tax rates from 35 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as usual , that these tax cuts would pay for themselves , create an economy that enriches us all .
Basically , Trump is using the credit of the American worker to enrich corporate America and the wealthiest of Americans .
It ’ s as if , for most Americans , someone maxed out their credit cards and yet they got none of the benefit of the goods and services purchased .
These tax cuts benefited the wealthy and did not trickle down , despite Trump ’ s promises that companies would invest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Companies like AT & T , Wells Fargo , and General Motors lobbied for them , promising to re-invest their tax savings in their workers and companies to the benefit off the nation as a whole .
And yet all of these companies have engaged in massive layoffs or plant closings .
AT & T has eliminated over 23,000 jobs since the tax cuts went into effect , despite receiving a $ 21 billion windfall from the tax cuts with the prospect of cashing in an additional $ 3 billion annually in tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announced it would be closing five plants , eliminating 14,000 jobs in communities across Ohio , Maryland , Michigan , and Ontario , Canada , while buying back $ 10 billion in stock and earning a net profit of $ 8 billion on which the company paid no federal tax .
Other automakers have also slashed thousands of jobs , saving billions of dollars.Wells Fargo did raise the minimum wage of its employees , though the tax savings for the company were 47 times larger than the cost of that pay raise to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its plans in September 2018 to eliminate 26,000 jobs , at the same time that it has raised health insurance costs for its employees .
Meanwhile , homelessness in the U.S. has increased for the third year in a row under Trump/s rule .
Despite low unemployment rates , poverty is increasing .
West Virginia is a telling case study of how the jobs being created , particularly in retail and service industries , do not pay a living wage .
As Sean O ’ Leary , senior budget analyst for the West @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told CBS News , “ It ’ s cashiers , retail sales people , service employees — those are our fastest growing jobs , but those jobs don ’ t pay very well.
” Tara Martinez , executive director of a soup kitchen in West Virginia , elaborated , “ ” The jobs that are available are minimum wage and part time — they don ’ t have benefits.
” Poverty , homelessness , and despair continue , even for those who are working and seek work in this supposedly thriving economy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Our lives depend on it .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
What is the story of the U.S. economy?
Not unlike the proverbial elephant subject to scrutiny by a band of blind men, the nation’s economy is subject to multiple narrative descriptions depending on which component of the beast, whether our economy or an elephant, the blind man massages.
Some media pundits have argued that the historically low unemployment rates combined with record stock market performances attest to a strong economy that would propel Trump to victory in 2020 if only he were disciplined enough to stay on point about the economy, stupid.
Others claim focusing on these numbers is akin to grasping the trunk and the tail of the elephant, missing the bigger and much more accurate picture of an economy that has not just failed but actively assaulted the vast majority of Americans. MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle, for example, has been unrelenting in fleshing out this more comprehensive narrative, insisting, among other points, that the stock market and the overall economy are not the same thing.
It may very well be the more compelling storyteller, or the storyteller who gets access to the most air time, who tilts the 2020 election.
Robert Shiller’s recent splashy book Narrative Economics underscores this point in a general way, arguing that the popular and viral narratives purveyed about the economy don’t so much describe the economy but drive the economic events themselves, regardless of the truth value of the story itself.
As the Yale University professor and Nobel-prize winning economist told CNBC, “It may not be so logical. It may be more, as I said, of animal spirits. This is an emotion that you feel at a certain time that you sense you see in other people. So when you see other people feeling confident about the market, you feel more confident yourself.”
He attributes recent market strength, for example, to Trump’s storytelling prowess: “He’s a motivational speaker. We’ve never had a motivational speaker president before. He knows how to create animal spirits.”
What cannot be emphasized enough, however, is the importance of a crafting an economic narrative that aligns as closely as possible with our economic reality, generating the most effective understanding of the dynamics and performance of the economy–for good decision-making by voters and good policy-making by legislators.
How we tell this story is vital to lives of the American majority, which is why Shiller’s applause for Trump’s motivational stirring of animal spirits is absolutely misplaced and damaging to American lives.
As we get a hold of the entire elephant of the Trump economy, we find an economy on a sugar high, thriving on taxpayer debt, enriching even further the already wealthy, and heading for a crash.
As we limn this elephant, let’s start with the national debt and deficit. Trump inherited a strong economy, and it is typically during healthy economic times that the government pays down the national debt. But both the deficit and debt have grown under Trump’s administration, largely because of his tax cuts that served largely the wealthy.
Reports indicated that in October the federal government’s budget deficit ballooned 34% from a year earlier to $134.5 billion, projecting that the annual deficit will top $1 trillion for the first time in eight years.
The national debt, meanwhile, has surged beyond $22 trillion.
Hmmm. If the economy is booming, shouldn’t the federal government’s coffers be filling up and not depleting?
We can certainly understand how in a time of recession the government would need to provide economic stimulus and thus run a deficit, but when the economy is supposedly experiencing record performance?
When Trump slashed corporate tax rates from 35 to 21 percent, we were told, as usual, that these tax cuts would pay for themselves, create an economy that enriches us all.
Basically, Trump is using the credit of the American worker to enrich corporate America and the wealthiest of Americans. It’s as if, for most Americans, someone maxed out their credit cards and yet they got none of the benefit of the goods and services purchased.
These tax cuts benefited the wealthy and did not trickle down, despite Trump’s promises that companies would invest in workers and not cut jobs. Companies like AT&T, Wells Fargo, and General Motors lobbied for them, promising to re-invest their tax savings in their workers and companies to the benefit off the nation as a whole. And yet all of these companies have engaged in massive layoffs or plant closings. AT&T has eliminated over 23,000 jobs since the tax cuts went into effect, despite receiving a $21 billion windfall from the tax cuts with the prospect of cashing in an additional $3 billion annually in tax savings. In November 2018, GM announced it would be closing five plants, eliminating 14,000 jobs in communities across Ohio, Maryland, Michigan, and Ontario, Canada, while buying back $10 billion in stock and earning a net profit of $8 billion on which the company paid no federal tax. Other automakers have also slashed thousands of jobs, saving billions of dollars.Wells Fargo did raise the minimum wage of its employees, though the tax savings for the company were 47 times larger than the cost of that pay raise to the company; and the company announced its plans in September 2018 to eliminate 26,000 jobs, at the same time that it has raised health insurance costs for its employees.
Meanwhile, homelessness in the U.S. has increased for the third year in a row under Trump/s rule.
Despite low unemployment rates, poverty is increasing. West Virginia is a telling case study of how the jobs being created, particularly in retail and service industries, do not pay a living wage.
As Sean O’Leary, senior budget analyst for the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, told CBS News, “It’s cashiers, retail sales people, service employees — those are our fastest growing jobs, but those jobs don’t pay very well.”
Tara Martinez, executive director of a soup kitchen in West Virginia, elaborated, “”The jobs that are available are minimum wage and part time — they don’t have benefits.”
Poverty, homelessness, and despair continue, even for those who are working and seek work in this supposedly thriving economy.
Let’s get the story straight. Our lives depend on it.


politicususa--2020-01-04--Mike Pence Goes Full WMD and Falsely Links Suleimani To 9/11

Mike Pence pulled a page out of the Bush WMD playbook by falsely linking Suleimani and Iran to the 9/11 attacks .
According to a New York Times fact check : Mr. Pence said on Twitter that General Soleimani “ assisted in the clandestine travel to Afghanistan of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States.
” This lacks evidence .
How Mr. Pence arrived at this number and this account is unclear .
From what is commonly known about General Suleimani and the group of men who carried out the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not cross .
By 2001 , General Suleimani had already been named the head of the Quds Force , the powerful security branch that often coordinates with other terrorist groups worldwide .
Yet General Suleimani was not named at any point in the “ 9/11 Commission Report.
” In fact , the report states in no uncertain terms that neither the Iranian government nor Hezbollah , a group that General Suleimani worked closely with , ever knew anything about the attacks or helped facilitate them .
The Trump administration is pulling a page @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bush administration tried to falsely link Iraq to 9/11 , but when that lie didn ’ t work , the administration settled on the WMD lie as their justification for invading Iraq .
The current administration is following a similar course .
The Trump administration ’ s claim that an attack from Iran was imminent has been proven false , so Trump and Pence are linking Iran to 9/11 , as they are seeking a defensive justification for their actions in a bid to thwart the House from blocking funding for military action @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to distract from impeachment and put themselves on stable 2020 footing as a wartime administration .
Pence ’ s comments are proof that Suleimani ’ s killing wasn ’ t about national security , but 2020 election politics .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Mike Pence pulled a page out of the Bush WMD playbook by falsely linking Suleimani and Iran to the 9/11 attacks.
According to a New York Times fact check:
Mr. Pence said on Twitter that General Soleimani “assisted in the clandestine travel to Afghanistan of 10 of the 12 terrorists who carried out the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States.”
This lacks evidence. How Mr. Pence arrived at this number and this account is unclear. From what is commonly known about General Suleimani and the group of men who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks, their paths did not cross.
…
By 2001, General Suleimani had already been named the head of the Quds Force, the powerful security branch that often coordinates with other terrorist groups worldwide. Yet General Suleimani was not named at any point in the “9/11 Commission Report.”
In fact, the report states in no uncertain terms that neither the Iranian government nor Hezbollah, a group that General Suleimani worked closely with, ever knew anything about the attacks or helped facilitate them.
The Trump administration is pulling a page out of the Bush playbook. The Bush administration tried to falsely link Iraq to 9/11, but when that lie didn’t work, the administration settled on the WMD lie as their justification for invading Iraq.
The current administration is following a similar course. The Trump administration’s claim that an attack from Iran was imminent has been proven false, so Trump and Pence are linking Iran to 9/11, as they are seeking a defensive justification for their actions in a bid to thwart the House from blocking funding for military action in Iran.
Trump and Pence are trying to distract from impeachment and put themselves on stable 2020 footing as a wartime administration.
Pence’s comments are proof that Suleimani’s killing wasn’t about national security, but 2020 election politics.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-04--Former Federal Prosecutor Warns Trump: New Batch Of Emails Will Sink His Corrupt White House

Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner said on Saturday that a batch of emails that Donald Trump is currently withholding will eventually see the light of day .
When that happens , Kirschner said that it could potentially be the final nail in the president ’ s impeachment coffin .
“ They ’ re digging their own grave , ” the former federal prosecutor said during a discussion on MSNBC ’ s AM Joy .
“ The walls are going to come tumbling down with … these emails that ultimately are going to see the light of day.
” This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reason to decline to turn over the emails .
They said among other things , “ Disclosure of this material would inhibit the frank and candid exchange of views necessary for effective – ” Why don ’ t they just say , “ Oh , heck , it ’ s got a whole rack of crime in there so we ’ re not turning them over.
” You know , they ’ re digging their own grave .
And I don ’ t care what anybody says , the walls are going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these emails that ultimately are going to see the light of day and they ’ re going to continue to show this is a corrupt administration .
Batch of OMB emails could be the final straw As PoliticusUSA ’ s Jason Easley wrote on Saturday , Donald Trump is currently withholding dozens of emails that likely prove his guilt surrounding the freeze on military aid for Ukraine .
After all , if the president did nothing wrong , he would have no problem releasing emails that are directly related to the hold on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by refusing to turn over key documents , the administration is demonstrating that it knows that providing more information to investigators will only bolster the case for Trump ’ s removal from office .
There is already a mountain of evidence proving Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors in his extortion scheme with Ukraine .
The dozens of emails currently being withheld by the administration could be the straw the breaks the camel ’ s back .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner said on Saturday that a batch of emails that Donald Trump is currently withholding will eventually see the light of day.
When that happens, Kirschner said that it could potentially be the final nail in the president’s impeachment coffin.
“They’re digging their own grave,” the former federal prosecutor said during a discussion on MSNBC’s AM Joy. “The walls are going to come tumbling down with … these emails that ultimately are going to see the light of day.”
Video:
‘They’re digging their own grave’: @glennkirschner2 says a batch of emails Trump is currently withholding will ultimately come out and show “a whole rack of crime.” #ctl #p2 #amjoy pic.twitter.com/n3hKcGPl5z — PoliticusUSA (@politicususa) January 4, 2020
Kirschner said:
This is the statement they put out as their reason to decline to turn over the emails. They said among other things, “Disclosure of this material would inhibit the frank and candid exchange of views necessary for effective –” Why don’t they just say, “Oh, heck, it’s got a whole rack of crime in there so we’re not turning them over.” You know, they’re digging their own grave. And I don’t care what anybody says, the walls are going to come tumbling down with the Parnases and these emails that ultimately are going to see the light of day and they’re going to continue to show this is a corrupt administration.
Batch of OMB emails could be the final straw
As PoliticusUSA’s Jason Easley wrote on Saturday, Donald Trump is currently withholding dozens of emails that likely prove his guilt surrounding the freeze on military aid for Ukraine.
After all, if the president did nothing wrong, he would have no problem releasing emails that are directly related to the hold on military assistance.
But once again, by refusing to turn over key documents, the administration is demonstrating that it knows that providing more information to investigators will only bolster the case for Trump’s removal from office.
There is already a mountain of evidence proving Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors in his extortion scheme with Ukraine. The dozens of emails currently being withheld by the administration could be the straw the breaks the camel’s back.
Follow Sean Colarossi on Facebook and Twitter


politicususa--2020-01-04--Trump Was Roaming Around Mar-a-Lago And Bragging About Iran Strike Days Before It Happened

To a responsible commander-in-chief , decisions about war and peace aren ’ t made lightly .
After all , a single military action from the United States could put thousands – if not millions – of lives at risk .
But Donald Trump is no responsible commander-in-chief .
According to The Daily Beast , the president was giddy about his decision to plunge America into another war as he walked the halls of Mar-a-Lago in the days before the strike that took out Iranian military official Qasem Soleimani .
The report notes , “ Donald Trump roamed the halls of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and started dropping hints to close associates and club-goers that something huge was coming.
” More from The Daily Beast : According to three people who ’ ve been at the president ’ s Palm Beach club over the past several days , Trump began telling friends and allies hanging at his perennial vacation getaway that he was working on a “ big ” response to the Iranian regime that they would be hearing or reading about very “ soon.
” His comments went beyond the New Year ’ s Eve tweet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ big price ” Iran would pay for damage to U.S. facilities .
Two of these sources tell The Daily Beast that the president specifically mentioned he ’ d been in close contact with his top national security and military advisers on gaming out options for an aggressive action that could quickly materialize .
“ He kept saying , ‘ You ’ ll see , ’ ” one of the sources recalled , describing a conversation with Trump days before Thursday ’ s strike .
Trump ’ s club members had more knowledge of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s bad enough that Donald Trump clearly doesn ’ t understand the gravity of his role as commander-in-chief .
Worse is that members of his club seemed to have had more advance knowledge of this major military escalation in the Middle East than congressional leaders .
As The Daily Beast also noted , “ Those Mar-a-Lago guests received more warning about Thursday ’ s attack than Senate staff did , and about as much clarity.
” Bragging about serious military action in the buffet line at Mar-a-Lago might be funny if it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is now actual U.S. foreign policy under Donald Trump .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
To a responsible commander-in-chief, decisions about war and peace aren’t made lightly. After all, a single military action from the United States could put thousands – if not millions – of lives at risk.
But Donald Trump is no responsible commander-in-chief.
According to The Daily Beast, the president was giddy about his decision to plunge America into another war as he walked the halls of Mar-a-Lago in the days before the strike that took out Iranian military official Qasem Soleimani.
The report notes, “Donald Trump roamed the halls of Mar-a-Lago, his private resort in Florida, and started dropping hints to close associates and club-goers that something huge was coming.”
More from The Daily Beast:
According to three people who’ve been at the president’s Palm Beach club over the past several days, Trump began telling friends and allies hanging at his perennial vacation getaway that he was working on a “big” response to the Iranian regime that they would be hearing or reading about very “soon.” His comments went beyond the New Year’s Eve tweet he sent out warning of the “big price” Iran would pay for damage to U.S. facilities. Two of these sources tell The Daily Beast that the president specifically mentioned he’d been in close contact with his top national security and military advisers on gaming out options for an aggressive action that could quickly materialize. “He kept saying, ‘You’ll see,’” one of the sources recalled, describing a conversation with Trump days before Thursday’s strike.
Trump’s club members had more knowledge of the strike than congressional leaders
It’s bad enough that Donald Trump clearly doesn’t understand the gravity of his role as commander-in-chief.
Worse is that members of his club seemed to have had more advance knowledge of this major military escalation in the Middle East than congressional leaders.
As The Daily Beast also noted, “Those Mar-a-Lago guests received more warning about Thursday’s attack than Senate staff did, and about as much clarity.”
Bragging about serious military action in the buffet line at Mar-a-Lago might be funny if it was part of a sitcom plot, but this is now actual U.S. foreign policy under Donald Trump.
Follow Sean Colarossi on Facebook and Twitter


politicususa--2020-01-04--Trump’s Entire Rationale For Striking Iran Collapses In Less Than 24 Hours

Donald Trump claims that his unexpected strike on Iran that killed top military official Qasem Soleimani came on the heels of an imminent threat against the United States – but less than 24 hours after the president officially announced the assassination , his entire rationale for the military action has collapsed .
As NBC News chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel said on Saturday , there is “ no direct evidence ” that there was a specific threat against the United States that would justify the strike .
“ There has been no direct evidence presented by the administration and nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Engel said on MSNBC ’ s AM Joy .
“ When you listen to officials at the U.S. State Department , and they described yesterday in a call to reporters what this imminent attack was all about , it was quite vague in their explanation .
” The NBC News correspondent said the administration is presenting “ a very , very broad picture that doesn ’ t necessarily explain the kind of pinpoint specific attack that would necessarily justify this kind of imminent threat logic.
” There has been no direct evidence presented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve seen .
But frankly speaking , the — that is what Qasem Soleimani did .
We don ’ t know if he was organizing what kind of attack , we don ’ t know if he was organizing something imminent in the future , where , when or how but the fact that Qasem Soleimani would have been meeting with Shiite militia leaders – and he was meeting with Shiite militia leaders – because they were in the same convoy that was killed for him , that ’ s not that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meet to do would be to carry out attacks against the U.S. That is something they ’ ve done in the past .
That is something that is in their strategic interest .
They generally both want the United States out of this country .
That is what they have been set up to do .
But , no , we don ’ t have any specific information but you can draw a logical conclusion that that ’ s the kind of thing they would be talking about .
And frankly when you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department , and they described yesterday in a call to reporters what this imminent attack was all about , it was quite vague in their explanation .
They said that it was going to be attack on U.S. personnel or U.S. bases in Iraq or Syria or the region or Lebanon , a very , very broad picture that doesn ’ t necessarily explain the kind of pinpoint specific attack that would necessarily justify this kind of imminent threat logic .
This is about Trump boosting his reelection bid – full stop Engel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even Defense Department officials have said : that there was nothing new about Iran ’ s behavior before Trump ordered the strike .
Of course , nobody truly believes Trump knows the first thing about what ’ s happening on the ground in the Middle East .
In fact , four years ago , Trump didn ’ t even know who Qasem Soleimani was .
The idea that he suddenly found a deep interest in taking him out – especially given the fact that he doesn ’ t even read intelligence briefings – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ driving this escalation with Iran is the same thing that has fueled Trump ’ s decision-making since day one : personal political survival .
With an impeachment trial looming and a tough campaign season ahead of him , Trump believes that attacking Iran will – as even he said in 2011 and 2012 – help him win reelection .
It remains to be seen whether this will work as a political strategy , but it ’ s a deeply dangerous way to conduct foreign policy .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Donald Trump claims that his unexpected strike on Iran that killed top military official Qasem Soleimani came on the heels of an imminent threat against the United States – but less than 24 hours after the president officially announced the assassination, his entire rationale for the military action has collapsed.
As NBC News chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel said on Saturday, there is “no direct evidence” that there was a specific threat against the United States that would justify the strike.
“There has been no direct evidence presented by the administration and nothing that we’ve seen,” Engel said on MSNBC’s AM Joy. “When you listen to officials at the U.S. State Department, and they described yesterday in a call to reporters what this imminent attack was all about, it was quite vague in their explanation. ”
The NBC News correspondent said the administration is presenting “a very, very broad picture that doesn’t necessarily explain the kind of pinpoint specific attack that would necessarily justify this kind of imminent threat logic.”
Video:
Engel reported:
There has been no direct evidence presented by the administration and nothing that we’ve seen. But frankly speaking, the — that is what Qasem Soleimani did. We don’t know if he was organizing what kind of attack, we don’t know if he was organizing something imminent in the future, where, when or how but the fact that Qasem Soleimani would have been meeting with Shiite militia leaders – and he was meeting with Shiite militia leaders – because they were in the same convoy that was killed for him, that’s not that unusual and the things that they would meet to do would be to carry out attacks against the U.S. That is something they’ve done in the past. That is something that is in their strategic interest. They generally both want the United States out of this country. That is what they have been set up to do. But, no, we don’t have any specific information but you can draw a logical conclusion that that’s the kind of thing they would be talking about. And frankly when you listen to officials at the U.S. State Department, and they described yesterday in a call to reporters what this imminent attack was all about, it was quite vague in their explanation. They said that it was going to be attack on U.S. personnel or U.S. bases in Iraq or Syria or the region or Lebanon, a very, very broad picture that doesn’t necessarily explain the kind of pinpoint specific attack that would necessarily justify this kind of imminent threat logic.
This is about Trump boosting his reelection bid – full stop
Engel’s reporting Saturday aligns with what even Defense Department officials have said: that there was nothing new about Iran’s behavior before Trump ordered the strike.
Of course, nobody truly believes Trump knows the first thing about what’s happening on the ground in the Middle East. In fact, four years ago, Trump didn’t even know who Qasem Soleimani was. The idea that he suddenly found a deep interest in taking him out – especially given the fact that he doesn’t even read intelligence briefings – is laughable.
Instead, what is driving this escalation with Iran is the same thing that has fueled Trump’s decision-making since day one: personal political survival.
With an impeachment trial looming and a tough campaign season ahead of him, Trump believes that attacking Iran will – as even he said in 2011 and 2012 – help him win reelection.
It remains to be seen whether this will work as a political strategy, but it’s a deeply dangerous way to conduct foreign policy.
Follow Sean Colarossi on Facebook and Twitter


politicususa--2020-01-04--Trump Is Withholding Dozens Of Emails That Prove His Impeachment Guilt

Donald Trump is refusing to turn over 20 emails between two of his top aides that discuss the freezing of aid to Ukraine .
The New York Times sought the emails in an FOIA request , and reported : In response to a court order that it swiftly process those pages in response to a Freedom of Information Act , or FOIA , lawsuit filed by The New York Times , the Office of Management and Budget delivered a terse letter saying it would not turn over any of the 40 pages of emails — not even with redactions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in full , ” wrote Dionne Hardy , the office ’ s Freedom of Information Act officer .
The Times ’ s information act request sought email messages between Robert Blair , a top aide to Mr. Trump ’ s acting chief of staff , Mick Mulvaney , and Michael Duffey , an official in the White House ’ s Office of Management and Budget who was in charge of handling the process for releasing $ 391 million in weapons and security assistance Congress had appropriated to help Ukraine resist Russian aggression .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ turn over the emails was reported to be that the communications reference a direct order from Trump to withhold the aid .
Just Security reported on emails between the Pentagon and White House that blew up Mitch McConnell ’ s nothing to see here sham impeachment trial plan .
Trump is refusing to turn over the emails for a simple reason .
He is guilty .
The Trump administration was directed by the President Of The United States to withhold congressionally appropriated aid to a foreign country unless they investigated the president ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to bury the impeachment trial for the same reason .
Trump is guilty .
An innocent president would welcome an impeachment trial , not try to rig it .
The evidence to convict and remove Trump is one court decision away from being in the hands of The New York Times and the American people .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Donald Trump is refusing to turn over 20 emails between two of his top aides that discuss the freezing of aid to Ukraine.
The New York Times sought the emails in an FOIA request, and reported:
In response to a court order that it swiftly process those pages in response to a Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, lawsuit filed by The New York Times, the Office of Management and Budget delivered a terse letter saying it would not turn over any of the 40 pages of emails — not even with redactions.
“All 20 documents are being withheld in full,” wrote Dionne Hardy, the office’s Freedom of Information Act officer.
The Times’s information act request sought email messages between Robert Blair, a top aide to Mr. Trump’s acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, and Michael Duffey, an official in the White House’s Office of Management and Budget who was in charge of handling the process for releasing $391 million in weapons and security assistance Congress had appropriated to help Ukraine resist Russian aggression.
The reason why Trump is refusing to turn over the emails was reported to be that the communications reference a direct order from Trump to withhold the aid. Just Security reported on emails between the Pentagon and White House that blew up Mitch McConnell’s nothing to see here sham impeachment trial plan.
Trump is refusing to turn over the emails for a simple reason. He is guilty. The Trump administration was directed by the President Of The United States to withhold congressionally appropriated aid to a foreign country unless they investigated the president’s political rival.
Mitch McConnell is trying to bury the impeachment trial for the same reason. Trump is guilty. An innocent president would welcome an impeachment trial, not try to rig it.
The evidence to convict and remove Trump is one court decision away from being in the hands of The New York Times and the American people.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-04--Defense Officials Say Trump Is Lying About Iran Threat

Pentagon officials say that nothing had changed with Iran before Trump and the White House launched an attack and then claimed an imminent threat .
Still , officials offered scant details and only general explanations for why these reported threats were any different than the rocket attacks , roadside bombings and other assaults carried out by General Suleimani ’ s Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps over the years .
“ Size , scale and scope , ” General Milley said without elaboration .
National security experts and even other officials at the Pentagon said they were unaware @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in recent weeks ; General Suleimani has been accused of prodding Shiite militias into attacking Americans for more than a decade .
Trump claims to have evidence of an Iran attack threat , but he won ’ t let Congress or the American people see it .
A president who has lied tens of thousands of times about things both big and small while in office is now expecting the American people to take his word for it on Iran .
The truth is that there was no imminent threat .
Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because he was criticized after the US embassy in Baghdad was attacked and he went golfing .
Trump always favors the splashy gesture that he thinks will make him look like a tough guy without ever considering the consequences of his actions .
The Pentagon is essentially saying that Trump is lying about the Iran threat .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Pentagon officials say that nothing had changed with Iran before Trump and the White House launched an attack and then claimed an imminent threat.
The New York Times reported:
Still, officials offered scant details and only general explanations for why these reported threats were any different than the rocket attacks, roadside bombings and other assaults carried out by General Suleimani’s Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps over the years. “Size, scale and scope,” General Milley said without elaboration.
National security experts and even other officials at the Pentagon said they were unaware of anything drastically new about Iranian behavior in recent weeks; General Suleimani has been accused of prodding Shiite militias into attacking Americans for more than a decade.
Trump claims to have evidence of an Iran attack threat, but he won’t let Congress or the American people see it. A president who has lied tens of thousands of times about things both big and small while in office is now expecting the American people to take his word for it on Iran.
The truth is that there was no imminent threat. Trump is angry about impeachment. He is angry because he was criticized after the US embassy in Baghdad was attacked and he went golfing. Trump always favors the splashy gesture that he thinks will make him look like a tough guy without ever considering the consequences of his actions.
The Pentagon is essentially saying that Trump is lying about the Iran threat.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-04--The House To Act To Block Funding For War With Iran

Rep. Ro Khanna said that he expects the House to act on his legislation to block any funding for a Trump war with Iran .
Rep. Ro Khanna ( D-CA ) said on MSNBC ’ s All In with Chris Hayes , “ Senator Sanders and I have introduced a bill that would cut off any funding for any offensive action against Iran or Iranian officials .
It ’ s important to note , Chris , that this bill was in the national defense authorization .
Senator Sanders and I supported it .
It passed the house .
The majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That was a mistake , we need to correct that mistake and assert very clearly that Congress is simply not going to fund a war against Iran.
” Rep. Khanna replied when asked what is the next step for Congress , “ I think we take up this legislation in the house that says there will be no funding for the president to conduct offensive action against Iran or Iranian officials .
And we should realize congress is not a bystander here .
We have the power of the purse .
The question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
We could in the appropriations process say very clearly we ’ re not going to give funds for this kind of action .
The challenge is that there are people who get scared .
They say we don ’ t want to be seen weak on national security and so congress has punted traditionally to the executive branch .
It ’ s time for Congress to act with the powers the founders gave us.
” Speaker Pelosi has already made her displeasure with Trump ’ s not consulting or briefing Congress before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely that Rep. Khanna is correct .
The House is going to act on his legislation to block Trump from any funding for an offensive war with Iran .
The White House ’ s excuse of an imminent attack is their way of getting around any blockade of for offensive funding by the House .
The House of Representatives controls the purse strings .
Mitch McConnell and the Senate can ’ t stop them from blocking the funding .
If Trump tries to start a war with Iran , it is a certainty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prevent him from getting the US into what is estimated to be the deadliest war for American troops since Vietnam .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group .

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Rep. Ro Khanna said that he expects the House to act on his legislation to block any funding for a Trump war with Iran.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) said on MSNBC’s All In with Chris Hayes, “Senator Sanders and I have introduced a bill that would cut off any funding for any offensive action against Iran or Iranian officials. It’s important to note, Chris, that this bill was in the national defense authorization. Senator Sanders and I supported it. It passed the house. The majority of the senate was for it. That was a mistake, we need to correct that mistake and assert very clearly that Congress is simply not going to fund a war against Iran.”
Video:
Rep. Ro Khanna expects the House to act on his bill to block funding for any Trump war with Iran. pic.twitter.com/JGJP0n9n9q — Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) January 4, 2020
Rep. Khanna replied when asked what is the next step for Congress, “I think we take up this legislation in the house that says there will be no funding for the president to conduct offensive action against Iran or Iranian officials. And we should realize congress is not a bystander here. We have the power of the purse. The question is are we willing to use it? We could in the appropriations process say very clearly we’re not going to give funds for this kind of action. The challenge is that there are people who get scared. They say we don’t want to be seen weak on national security and so congress has punted traditionally to the executive branch. It’s time for Congress to act with the powers the founders gave us.”
Speaker Pelosi has already made her displeasure with Trump’s not consulting or briefing Congress before the attack known. It is very likely that Rep. Khanna is correct. The House is going to act on his legislation to block Trump from any funding for an offensive war with Iran.
The White House’s excuse of an imminent attack is their way of getting around any blockade of for offensive funding by the House.
The House of Representatives controls the purse strings. Mitch McConnell and the Senate can’t stop them from blocking the funding. If Trump tries to start a war with Iran, it is a certainty that the House will take action to prevent him from getting the US into what is estimated to be the deadliest war for American troops since Vietnam.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook


politicususa--2020-01-07--Trump Humiliates Himself In Front Of The World And Gets Corrected By Greek PM

Trump guessed that Greece has ISIS prisoners and was immediately corrected by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis .
Trump said , “ They have to be able to defend themselves and take care of themselves , and it ’ s something ultimately that I want to see , we don ’ t want to be there forever .
I didn ’ t want to be there in the first place , to be honest .
That ’ s when I was a civilian they said it , we were there , and they made a decision .
We ’ re there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great job , we ’ ve gotten rid of the califate .
100 % of the califate is gone .
Which is ISIS .
We have thousands of ISIS prisoners that we ’ re keeping right now under lock and key , and we want Europe to take many of these prisoners because they came from Germany , France , and other places .
Probably a few from Greece in all fairness.
” Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis replied , “ None .
None from Greece so far.
” The clip above is why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world .
Donald Trump doesn ’ t have facts .
He constantly embarrasses himself with assumptions .
No , Greece does not have any ISIS prisoners .
A president who read the prepared briefings and was knowledgeable about who he or she was meeting with would know that , but Trump is completely clueless and making it up as he goes along .
Every time that Trump opens his mouth , he embarrasses himself and his country in front of the world .
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow @ @ @ @

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Print
Trump guessed that Greece has ISIS prisoners and was immediately corrected by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis.
Trump said, “They have to be able to defend themselves and take care of themselves, and it’s something ultimately that I want to see, we don’t want to be there forever. I didn’t want to be there in the first place, to be honest. That’s when I was a civilian they said it, we were there, and they made a decision. We’re there now, we’ve done a great job, we’ve gotten rid of the califate. 100% of the califate is gone. Which is ISIS. We have thousands of ISIS prisoners that we’re keeping right now under lock and key, and we want Europe to take many of these prisoners because they came from Germany, France, and other places. Probably a few from Greece in all fairness.”
Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis replied, “None. None from Greece so far.”
Trump replied, “You’re lucky.”
Video:
Just another day of Trump humiliating himself in front of a world leader as he incorrectly assumes that Greece has ISIS prisoners. pic.twitter.com/SgIBrftmLQ — Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) January 7, 2020
The clip above is why the US has no credibility around the world. Donald Trump doesn’t have facts. He constantly embarrasses himself with assumptions. No, Greece does not have any ISIS prisoners. A president who read the prepared briefings and was knowledgeable about who he or she was meeting with would know that, but Trump is completely clueless and making it up as he goes along.
Every time that Trump opens his mouth, he embarrasses himself and his country in front of the world.
For more discussion about this story join our Rachel Maddow and MSNBC group.
Follow Jason Easley on Facebook