shareblue--2020-02-03--GOP senator hits Congress for high drug prices but offers no solutions

Last week , Sen. Martha McSally ( R-AZ ) demanded a quick acquittal in Donald Trump 's impeachment trial so lawmakers could focus on issues like lowering prescription drug costs .
`` I have heard enough .
It is time to vote , '' McSally tweeted on Wednesday .
Days later she voted against hearing from additional witnesses , demanding the chamber `` return its focus to the priorities of the American people like lowering the cost of prescription drugs . ''
But there is no evidence McSally has supported any proposal to address the problem of high prescription drug @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plan to tackle the issue herself .
A search of health care legislation in the the congressional database shows McSally has only sponsored four bills related to health care , and none of them have dealt with prescription drug prices .
A search of the same database turns up 26 health care-related bills that McSally publicly supports , but none of those focus on lowering the cost of prescription drugs either .
McSally has also declined to back bipartisan legislation on the issue .
In August 2019 , McSally refused to publicly support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 , according to the Arizona Republic .
At the time , she claimed she was still `` studying the bill '' and was `` trying to provide some constructive feedback . ''
That bill passed out of the Senate Finance Committee with support from Republicans and Democrats , but has since stalled alongside most other legislation being blocked by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell .
McSally spoke at an Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association conference just months after those comments and lamented that her constituents were `` tired of high out-of-pocket health care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ December , the House of Representatives passed a sweeping prescription drug bill that would lower the costs of hundreds of medications , some by as much as 96 % .
Shortly after that bill passed , Reginald Ballantyne , the former Chairman of the American Hospital Association , wrote an op-ed in the Arizona Capitol Times urging McSally to not only support the House-passed bill , but `` spearhead this bill in the Senate . ''
Thus far , McSally has not done so .
McSally 's office did not respond to three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , specifically questions about what , if any , legislation McSally supports to lower the cost of prescription drugs , and whether or not she supported the House-passed legislation .
Brad Bainum , spokesperson for the Arizona Democratic Party , claimed this week that McSally 's contradictory behavior was `` just another reason why Arizonans ca n't trust [ her ] . ''
`` In refusing to support pricing reforms like letting Medicare negotiate for lower drug prices , Martha McSally is siding with her big pharma backers and corporate donors rather than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said in an email .
McSally 's voting record on health care in general shows a desire to reduce the number of people with health insurance , while also eroding protections for people with preexisting conditions .
When she was in the House of Representatives , McSally voted for a GOP-backed health care bill that would have forced 23 million people to lose their health insurance .
As a senator , McSally backed a health care bill purportedly to protect people with preexisting conditions , but experts told the New York Times that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for discrimination against them .
McSally joins a growing list of Republican senators accusing Democrats of wasting time on impeachment rather than addressing topics important to the American public .
Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-SC ) has also said he wants to end the impeachment trial so he can open investigations into those who accused Trump of wrongdoing .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Last week, Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) demanded a quick acquittal in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial so lawmakers could focus on issues like lowering prescription drug costs.
“I have heard enough. It is time to vote,” McSally tweeted on Wednesday. Days later she voted against hearing from additional witnesses, demanding the chamber “return its focus to the priorities of the American people like lowering the cost of prescription drugs.”
But there is no evidence McSally has supported any proposal to address the problem of high prescription drug costs, nor that she has a plan to tackle the issue herself.
A search of health care legislation in the the congressional database shows McSally has only sponsored four bills related to health care, and none of them have dealt with prescription drug prices. A search of the same database turns up 26 health care-related bills that McSally publicly supports, but none of those focus on lowering the cost of prescription drugs either.
McSally has also declined to back bipartisan legislation on the issue.
In August 2019, McSally refused to publicly support the Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act of 2019, according to the Arizona Republic. At the time, she claimed she was still “studying the bill” and was “trying to provide some constructive feedback.”
That bill passed out of the Senate Finance Committee with support from Republicans and Democrats, but has since stalled alongside most other legislation being blocked by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.
McSally spoke at an Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association conference just months after those comments and lamented that her constituents were “tired of high out-of-pocket health care costs” and needed solutions.
In December, the House of Representatives passed a sweeping prescription drug bill that would lower the costs of hundreds of medications, some by as much as 96%. Shortly after that bill passed, Reginald Ballantyne, the former Chairman of the American Hospital Association, wrote an op-ed in the Arizona Capitol Times urging McSally to not only support the House-passed bill, but “spearhead this bill in the Senate.”
Thus far, McSally has not done so.
McSally’s office did not respond to three separate requests for comments on the matter, specifically questions about what, if any, legislation McSally supports to lower the cost of prescription drugs, and whether or not she supported the House-passed legislation.
Brad Bainum, spokesperson for the Arizona Democratic Party, claimed this week that McSally’s contradictory behavior was “just another reason why Arizonans can’t trust [her].”
“In refusing to support pricing reforms like letting Medicare negotiate for lower drug prices, Martha McSally is siding with her big pharma backers and corporate donors rather than standing up for Arizonans,” Bainum said in an email.
McSally’s voting record on health care in general shows a desire to reduce the number of people with health insurance, while also eroding protections for people with preexisting conditions.
When she was in the House of Representatives, McSally voted for a GOP-backed health care bill that would have forced 23 million people to lose their health insurance.
As a senator, McSally backed a health care bill purportedly to protect people with preexisting conditions, but experts told the New York Times that the bill contained loopholes that would allow for discrimination against them.
McSally joins a growing list of Republican senators accusing Democrats of wasting time on impeachment rather than addressing topics important to the American public. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has also said he wants to end the impeachment trial so he can open investigations into those who accused Trump of wrongdoing.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-02-03--GOP leader forgets Republicans controlled Congress for Trump's first two years

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy complained that House Democrats were providing a check on Donald Trump and suggested that things would be much better if the GOP had total control .
In a Fox News interview on Friday , Rep. McCarthy ( R-CA ) noted that Trump has recently talked about Middle East peace , signed the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement , and agreed to a deal with China , despite being tried in the Senate on two articles of impeachment .
`` What if he had a Congress that would work with him ? ''
McCarthy said .
`` Instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for America first .
That would be a fundamental difference . ''
But the reason the House has a Democratic majority is that Americans saw firsthand what having Trump and a totally Republican Congress looked like , from 2017 to 2018 .
A Pew Research Center examination found that while 442 public laws were enacted over the 115th Congress , just 69 % were substantive .
Pew wrote that the Congress `` notably , ended without funding large chunks of the federal government for the current fiscal year '' which led to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. history .
McCarthy was the House majority leader over that time and helped push two major pieces of legislation through the House .
One was the so-called Tax Cuts and Jobs Act , which cut taxes for the very wealthy and corporations , and raised them for millions of families .
That law has massively increased the annual budget deficit and helped cause the largest national debt in American history .
The other was the American Health Care Act ( commonly known as `` Trumpcare '' ) , which failed in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have repealed Obamacare and replaced it with a system that left an estimated 23 million Americans uninsured .
Trump enthusiastically backed both bills , but the American public did not approve of either .
The American public 's verdict : In the November 2018 midterms , the House Democrats gained 41 seats and regained the majority for the first time since 2010 .
And Trump remains one of the nation 's least popular presidents , with majorities consistently disapproving of his job performance .

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy complained that House Democrats were providing a check on Donald Trump and suggested that things would be much better if the GOP had total control.
In a Fox News interview on Friday, Rep. McCarthy (R-CA) noted that Trump has recently talked about Middle East peace, signed the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement, and agreed to a deal with China, despite being tried in the Senate on two articles of impeachment.
“What if he had a Congress that would work with him?” McCarthy said. “Instead of blaming America first, actually working for America first. That would be a fundamental difference.”
But the reason the House has a Democratic majority is that Americans saw firsthand what having Trump and a totally Republican Congress looked like, from 2017 to 2018.
A Pew Research Center examination found that while 442 public laws were enacted over the 115th Congress, just 69% were substantive. Pew wrote that the Congress “notably, ended without funding large chunks of the federal government for the current fiscal year” which led to a partial government shutdown — the longest in U.S. history.
McCarthy was the House majority leader over that time and helped push two major pieces of legislation through the House.
One was the so-called Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which cut taxes for the very wealthy and corporations, and raised them for millions of families. That law has massively increased the annual budget deficit and helped cause the largest national debt in American history.
The other was the American Health Care Act (commonly known as “Trumpcare”), which failed in the U.S. Senate by one vote. It would have repealed Obamacare and replaced it with a system that left an estimated 23 million Americans uninsured.
Trump enthusiastically backed both bills, but the American public did not approve of either.
The American public’s verdict: In the November 2018 midterms, the House Democrats gained 41 seats and regained the majority for the first time since 2010.
And Trump remains one of the nation’s least popular presidents, with majorities consistently disapproving of his job performance.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-02-03--Trump impeachment defense was filled with major distortions

Donald Trump 's impeachment defense appears to have cleared the bar as far as his fellow Republicans are concerned .
But its adherence to the facts is another matter .
Multiple distortions marked Trump 's case for acquittal in recent days as the Senate moved toward that expected verdict in the coming week : TRUMP on impeachment : `` The Democrat controlled House never even asked John Bolton to testify .
It is up to them , not up to the Senate ! ''
— tweet Jan. 27 .
THE FACTS : That 's false in its entirety .
House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he declined .
He did not show up for his deposition .
Trump is also incorrect in suggesting impeachment witnesses are the sole province of the House .
House Democrats decided not to pursue a subpoena compelling Bolton to testify in the House proceedings because he threatened to sue , which could have meant an extended court fight .
Afterward , however , Bolton signaled his willingness to testify at the Senate trial if he were subpoenaed .
The Senate is empowered to summon witnesses if it chooses , contrary to Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to '' the House only .
But Republicans gathered enough votes to stop witnesses from being called in the Senate trial .
Bolton 's behind-the-scenes account is in the manuscript of his coming book .
It intensified calls from Democrats to make him a witness because it contradicted key assertions by Trump and his defense team 's argument that there was no evidence the president conditioned aid to Ukraine on an investigation of his political rivals .
TRUMP LAWYER JAY SEKULOW , referring to Trump 's July 25 phone call with Ukraine 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get to the bottom of issues of corruption is not a violation of an oath . ''
— trial Jan 27 .
THE FACTS : Trump made no such request in the phone call .
And beyond the phone call , there 's scant if any evidence that Trump cared about Ukraine 's history of systemic corruption unless it might involve Hunter Biden , son of former Vice President Joe Biden , a Trump political rival .
Hunter Biden was on the board of a Ukrainian energy company when his father was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to the rough transcript released by the White House , Trump repeatedly pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate the Bidens and a groundless conspiracy theory that Ukrainians tried to help Democrats win the 2016 election .
Trump did n't mention Ukrainian corruption .
Trump delayed military aid to Ukraine despite a Pentagon review that found the country had made sufficient progress in cleaning up its legacy of corruption to merit the aid that Congress had approved .
SEKULOW : `` The president of the United States , before he was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It was called Crossfire Hurricane .
It was an investigation led by the FBI . ''
— trial Tuesday .
THE FACTS : Trump was not under investigation before he took office .
In fact , Trump says he was told that directly and repeatedly by then-FBI Director James Comey .
Comey has said the same publicly .
The FBI counterintelligence investigation dubbed Crossfire Hurricane was underway when Trump took office , but that was into whether his campaign more generally coordinated with Russia to tip the election .
Agents were also looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that 's different from Trump being under investigation .
The situation did change after a matter of months , when Trump fired Comey in May 2017 .
After that happened , the FBI began looking into whether Trump had criminally obstructed justice .
Former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe has said the FBI also began investigating whether Trump might have been acting on behalf of Russia .
SEKULOW : `` It was President Zelenskiy who said no pressure . ''
— trial Jan. 27 .
THE FACTS : True , but the statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the July 25 phone call , Zelenskiy was deferential to Trump as Ukraine , menaced by Russia , tried to keep U.S. military aid flowing .
Even so , Ukrainian officials felt pressure for months to do Trump 's bidding , and Zelenskiy himself eventually complained about Trump 's dealings with him .
The Associated Press reported that in May , even before taking office , Zelenskiy knew that vital military support might depend on whether he agreed to investigate Democrats as Trump was demanding .
After the July 25 call , Zelenskiy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's comments on the call .
But by then , Ukrainian officials were wondering why the aid was being held up .
And in October , while insisting `` there was no pressure or blackmail from the U.S. , '' he criticized Trump for blocking the aid and for casting his country as corrupt .
`` If you 're our strategic partner , then you ca n't go blocking anything for us , '' he told Time .
`` I think that 's just about fairness . ''
TRUMP LAWYER MIKE PURPURA , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ released because Trump 's pressure campaign on Ukraine had been exposed : `` On Sept. 11 , based on the information collected and presented to President Trump , the president lifted the pause on the security assistance .
... Our process gave the president the confidence he needed to approve the release of the security sector assistance .
...
The president 's concerns were addressed in the ordinary course ; the president was n't 'caught ' as the House managers allege . ''
— trial Jan. 27 .
THE FACTS : The `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was hardly routine , according to testimony heard by House investigators .
Moreover , the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office found the aid freeze to be illegal .
House investigators heard about confusion and frustration among senior State Department and Pentagon officials when they learned the congressionally approved aid was being held .
`` I was embarrassed that I could not give ( Ukraine ) any explanation for why it was withheld , '' said William Taylor , who was the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine .
The Defense Department 's Laura Cooper said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tried to get an explanation for the hold and expressed concern about the White House 's legal authority .
The Pentagon had already certified to congressional committees in May that Ukraine had made enough progress on reducing corruption to receive the military assistance .
Catherine Croft , special adviser for Ukraine at the State Department , said national security agencies were unified in support of the aid , and she had never before encountered a time when the White House budget office had injected itself into such a matter .
Top advisers scrambled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through August .
Ultimately , on Sept. 11 , the funds were suddenly released , after Trump learned of the whistleblower 's complaint and a few days after Democrats opened a congressional investigation of the episode .
The GAO later found that the White House budget office `` withheld the funds for an unauthorized reason in violation '' of the law that requires the executive branch to spend money that is appropriated by Congress .

Donald Trump’s impeachment defense appears to have cleared the bar as far as his fellow Republicans are concerned. But its adherence to the facts is another matter.
Multiple distortions marked Trump’s case for acquittal in recent days as the Senate moved toward that expected verdict in the coming week:
TRUMP on impeachment: “The Democrat controlled House never even asked John Bolton to testify. It is up to them, not up to the Senate!” — tweet Jan. 27.
THE FACTS: That’s false in its entirety. House Democrats did ask Bolton to testify, and he declined. He did not show up for his deposition. Trump is also incorrect in suggesting impeachment witnesses are the sole province of the House.
House Democrats decided not to pursue a subpoena compelling Bolton to testify in the House proceedings because he threatened to sue, which could have meant an extended court fight. Afterward, however, Bolton signaled his willingness to testify at the Senate trial if he were subpoenaed.
The Senate is empowered to summon witnesses if it chooses, contrary to Trump’s suggestion that “it is up to” the House only. But Republicans gathered enough votes to stop witnesses from being called in the Senate trial.
Bolton’s behind-the-scenes account is in the manuscript of his coming book. It intensified calls from Democrats to make him a witness because it contradicted key assertions by Trump and his defense team’s argument that there was no evidence the president conditioned aid to Ukraine on an investigation of his political rivals.
___
TRUMP LAWYER JAY SEKULOW, referring to Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine’s leader: “Asking a foreign leader to get to the bottom of issues of corruption is not a violation of an oath.” — trial Jan 27.
THE FACTS: Trump made no such request in the phone call. And beyond the phone call, there’s scant if any evidence that Trump cared about Ukraine’s history of systemic corruption unless it might involve Hunter Biden, son of former Vice President Joe Biden, a Trump political rival. Hunter Biden was on the board of a Ukrainian energy company when his father was vice president.
In the call, according to the rough transcript released by the White House, Trump repeatedly pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate the Bidens and a groundless conspiracy theory that Ukrainians tried to help Democrats win the 2016 election. Trump didn’t mention Ukrainian corruption.
Trump delayed military aid to Ukraine despite a Pentagon review that found the country had made sufficient progress in cleaning up its legacy of corruption to merit the aid that Congress had approved.
___
SEKULOW: “The president of the United States, before he was the president, was under an investigation. It was called Crossfire Hurricane. It was an investigation led by the FBI.” — trial Tuesday.
THE FACTS: Trump was not under investigation before he took office.
In fact, Trump says he was told that directly and repeatedly by then-FBI Director James Comey. Comey has said the same publicly.
The FBI counterintelligence investigation dubbed Crossfire Hurricane was underway when Trump took office, but that was into whether his campaign more generally coordinated with Russia to tip the election. Agents were also looking criminally at several Trump aides, but that’s different from Trump being under investigation.
The situation did change after a matter of months, when Trump fired Comey in May 2017. After that happened, the FBI began looking into whether Trump had criminally obstructed justice. Former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe has said the FBI also began investigating whether Trump might have been acting on behalf of Russia.
___
SEKULOW: “It was President Zelenskiy who said no pressure.” — trial Jan. 27.
THE FACTS: True, but the statement skirts important context.
In and around the July 25 phone call, Zelenskiy was deferential to Trump as Ukraine, menaced by Russia, tried to keep U.S. military aid flowing. Even so, Ukrainian officials felt pressure for months to do Trump’s bidding, and Zelenskiy himself eventually complained about Trump’s dealings with him.
The Associated Press reported that in May, even before taking office, Zelenskiy knew that vital military support might depend on whether he agreed to investigate Democrats as Trump was demanding.
After the July 25 call, Zelenskiy said he had no problem with Trump’s comments on the call. But by then, Ukrainian officials were wondering why the aid was being held up. And in October, while insisting “there was no pressure or blackmail from the U.S.,” he criticized Trump for blocking the aid and for casting his country as corrupt.
“If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us,” he told Time. “I think that’s just about fairness.”
___
TRUMP LAWYER MIKE PURPURA, dismissing the idea that military aid was released because Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukraine had been exposed: “On Sept. 11, based on the information collected and presented to President Trump, the president lifted the pause on the security assistance. … Our process gave the president the confidence he needed to approve the release of the security sector assistance. … The president’s concerns were addressed in the ordinary course; the president wasn’t ‘caught’ as the House managers allege.” — trial Jan. 27.
THE FACTS: The “pause” in Ukraine’s military aid was hardly routine, according to testimony heard by House investigators. Moreover, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office found the aid freeze to be illegal.
House investigators heard about confusion and frustration among senior State Department and Pentagon officials when they learned the congressionally approved aid was being held.
“I was embarrassed that I could not give (Ukraine) any explanation for why it was withheld,” said William Taylor, who was the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine.
The Defense Department’s Laura Cooper said she and other national security aides unsuccessfully tried to get an explanation for the hold and expressed concern about the White House’s legal authority. The Pentagon had already certified to congressional committees in May that Ukraine had made enough progress on reducing corruption to receive the military assistance.
Catherine Croft, special adviser for Ukraine at the State Department, said national security agencies were unified in support of the aid, and she had never before encountered a time when the White House budget office had injected itself into such a matter.
Top advisers scrambled to get Trump to release the aid through August. Ultimately, on Sept. 11, the funds were suddenly released, after Trump learned of the whistleblower’s complaint and a few days after Democrats opened a congressional investigation of the episode. The GAO later found that the White House budget office “withheld the funds for an unauthorized reason in violation” of the law that requires the executive branch to spend money that is appropriated by Congress.


shareblue--2020-02-04--Collins: Trump was 'wrong' and 'improper' but I'm acquitting him anyway

Maine Sen. Susan Collins said Tuesday afternoon that she would vote to acquit Donald Trump in his impeachment trial , falling alongside her fellow Republicans who have maintained Trump 's innocence since the start or concluded he is guilty but will acquit him anyway .
Trump was impeached in December on two counts , one for abuse of power related to his efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rivals , and another for obstruction of Congress for his efforts to block witness testimony in the House impeachment inquiry and to hide evidence from investigators .
The majority of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have stood steadfast with Trump , parroting his claims that his actions were above board and that the impeachment proceedings against him were part of a broader partisan witch hunt .
In a speech on the Senate floor , Collins parted with the vast majority of Republicans somewhat , admitting that it was `` clear '' that the now-infamous July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy , in which Trump asked the leader to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden , was `` improper . ''
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mention former Vice President Biden on that phone call , and it was wrong for him to ask a foreign country to investigate a political rival , '' she said .
However , she argued , House impeachment managers had not proven it necessary to remove Trump from office .
`` I do not believe that the House has met its burden of showing that the president 's conduct , however flawed , warrants the extreme step of immediate removal from office , '' she said .
`` Nor does the record support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president must not remain in office one moment longer . ''
`` I will vote to acquit on Article I , '' she added .
Collins has presented a conflicted front in the Senate impeachment trial , voting early on for a Democratic-proposed rule that would have allowed for `` additional time to file responses to motions . ''
However , she voted with her Republican colleagues on every other Democratic proposal at the time , rejecting 10 separate rules package amendments that would have subpoenaed relevant documents and testimony related to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigate his political rivals early in the trial .
Democrats said the votes were part of a partisan `` cover up '' intended to help Trump .
Last week , Collins was one of two Republican senators who voted with 47 Democrats to allow new witness testimony , but that effort was defeated 51-49 .
The other Republican was Utah Sen. Mitt Romney .
Earlier in the process , Collins rejected the idea of allowing in a slew of new allegations against Trump from Lev Parnas , an associate of Trump lawyer Rudy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violations last October .
Parnas alleged , among other things , that Trump and Giuliani had been deeply involved in the pressure campaign against Ukraine .
When asked whether Parnas ' allegations should be allowed into Trump 's impeachment trial , Collins responded by questioning `` why the House did not put that into the record '' during its earlier inquiry and why `` it 's only now being revealed . ''
Collins is currently one of the Senate 's most vulnerable members and earlier this year surpassed Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to a Morning Consult poll in January , 52 % of Collins ' constituents view her unfavorably .
That number was up significantly from January 2017 , when just 27 % of Maine residents viewed her unfavorably .
Collins faces a tough reelection in 2020 , and recently lost a key endorsement from the League of Conservation Voters .
In recent months , her office has been beset with rallies and protests from constituents urging her to `` stand up to Trump '' in his impeachment proceedings .
`` I 've begged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' Sue Hawes told the Portland Press Herald in November .
`` I 'm still waiting . ''
In her floor speech Tuesday , Collins maintained that her decision to acquit Trump was `` not about whether you like or dislike this president , or agree with or oppose his policies , or approve or disapprove of his conduct in other circumstances . ''
`` Rather , it is about whether the charges meet the very high constitutional standard of treason , bribery , or other high crimes or misdemeanors , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 230 years since George Washington first took the oath of office , and there are good reasons why , during that entire time , the Senate has never removed a president , '' she continued .
`` Such a move would not only affect the sitting president but could have unpredictable and potentially adverse consequences for public confidence in our electoral process . ''
She concluded that it was Congress ' duty to instead `` entrust to the people the most fundamental decision of a democracy — namely , who should lead their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CBS ' Norah O'Donnell explaining her decision to acquit Trump , Collins said she believes Trump has learned `` a pretty big lesson '' from his impeachment .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Maine Sen. Susan Collins said Tuesday afternoon that she would vote to acquit Donald Trump in his impeachment trial, falling alongside her fellow Republicans who have maintained Trump’s innocence since the start or concluded he is guilty but will acquit him anyway.
Trump was impeached in December on two counts, one for abuse of power related to his efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rivals, and another for obstruction of Congress for his efforts to block witness testimony in the House impeachment inquiry and to hide evidence from investigators.
The majority of Republicans in both the House and Senate have stood steadfast with Trump, parroting his claims that his actions were above board and that the impeachment proceedings against him were part of a broader partisan witch hunt.
In a speech on the Senate floor, Collins parted with the vast majority of Republicans somewhat, admitting that it was “clear” that the now-infamous July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in which Trump asked the leader to dig up dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden, was “improper.”
“It was wrong for President Trump to mention former Vice President Biden on that phone call, and it was wrong for him to ask a foreign country to investigate a political rival,” she said.
However, she argued, House impeachment managers had not proven it necessary to remove Trump from office.
“I do not believe that the House has met its burden of showing that the president’s conduct, however flawed, warrants the extreme step of immediate removal from office,” she said. “Nor does the record support the assertion by the House managers that the president must not remain in office one moment longer.”
“I will vote to acquit on Article I,” she added.
Collins has presented a conflicted front in the Senate impeachment trial, voting early on for a Democratic-proposed rule that would have allowed for “additional time to file responses to motions.”
However, she voted with her Republican colleagues on every other Democratic proposal at the time, rejecting 10 separate rules package amendments that would have subpoenaed relevant documents and testimony related to Trump’s efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rivals early in the trial.
Democrats said the votes were part of a partisan “cover up” intended to help Trump.
Last week, Collins was one of two Republican senators who voted with 47 Democrats to allow new witness testimony, but that effort was defeated 51-49. The other Republican was Utah Sen. Mitt Romney.
Earlier in the process, Collins rejected the idea of allowing in a slew of new allegations against Trump from Lev Parnas, an associate of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani who was indicted for campaign finance violations last October. Parnas alleged, among other things, that Trump and Giuliani had been deeply involved in the pressure campaign against Ukraine.
When asked whether Parnas’ allegations should be allowed into Trump’s impeachment trial, Collins responded by questioning “why the House did not put that into the record” during its earlier inquiry and why “it’s only now being revealed.”
Collins is currently one of the Senate’s most vulnerable members and earlier this year surpassed Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as the nation’s most unpopular senators. According to a Morning Consult poll in January, 52% of Collins’ constituents view her unfavorably. That number was up significantly from January 2017, when just 27% of Maine residents viewed her unfavorably.
Collins faces a tough reelection in 2020, and recently lost a key endorsement from the League of Conservation Voters. In recent months, her office has been beset with rallies and protests from constituents urging her to “stand up to Trump” in his impeachment proceedings.
“I’ve begged Susan Collins to stand up to Trump,” Sue Hawes told the Portland Press Herald in November. “I’m still waiting.”
In her floor speech Tuesday, Collins maintained that her decision to acquit Trump was “not about whether you like or dislike this president, or agree with or oppose his policies, or approve or disapprove of his conduct in other circumstances.”
“Rather, it is about whether the charges meet the very high constitutional standard of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors,” she said.
“It has been 230 years since George Washington first took the oath of office, and there are good reasons why, during that entire time, the Senate has never removed a president,” she continued. “Such a move would not only affect the sitting president but could have unpredictable and potentially adverse consequences for public confidence in our electoral process.”
She concluded that it was Congress’ duty to instead “entrust to the people the most fundamental decision of a democracy — namely, who should lead their country.”
In an interview with CBS’ Norah O’Donnell explaining her decision to acquit Trump, Collins said she believes Trump has learned “a pretty big lesson” from his impeachment.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-02-04--GOP leader threatens to investigate colleagues for impeaching Trump

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has spent the last several months decrying congressional investigations — but now he 's calling for one of his own .
`` After President Trump is acquitted , let 's get to the bottom of how this nightmare started , '' McCarthy wrote on Twitter Tuesday .
He also shared part of an interview with right-wing radio host Mark Levin , in which McCarthy demanded an investigation to `` get to the bottom of the lies of [ House Intelligence chair ] Adam Schiff that put this country through the nightmare . ''
McCarthy 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fly in the face of his rhetoric over the past several months .
In November , he called the impeachment inquiry a `` sham '' and a `` waste of time and money . ''
Last month , he complained of the `` costly , never-ending investigation '' of Trump and the `` opportunity cost '' of the impeachment .
`` The sad part is that America is so much bigger than this , '' he said .
`` You deserve a Congress that actually focuses on real issues . ''
Last week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for its performance in the Senate impeachment trial .
`` It 's time to move on and get back to the people 's business , '' he urged .
This is not the first time McCarthy has tried to go after Schiff ( D-CA ) .
Last year , he co-sponsored a resolution to censure and condemn his fellow Californian .
The unsuccessful stunt would have called Schiff 's chronicling of the ties between Russia and the Trump 2016 campaign , and his paraphrasing of a partial transcript of Trump 's July 2019 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conduct that misleads the American people in a way that is not befitting of an elected Member of the House of Representatives . ''
In December , as the House prepared to vote for two articles of impeachment against Trump , McCarthy stalled the process briefly with unsuccessful motions to censure both Schiff and House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler .
Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-SC ) , who also pushed for a speedy end to the Trump impeachment saga , said Sunday that the Senate will now investigate the Bidens and the whistleblower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quo to the attention of Congress .
Meanwhile , more than 400 House-passed proposals are currently stalled in the GOP-controlled Senate .

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has spent the last several months decrying congressional investigations — but now he’s calling for one of his own.
“After President Trump is acquitted, let’s get to the bottom of how this nightmare started,” McCarthy wrote on Twitter Tuesday.
He also shared part of an interview with right-wing radio host Mark Levin, in which McCarthy demanded an investigation to “get to the bottom of the lies of [House Intelligence chair] Adam Schiff that put this country through the nightmare.”
McCarthy’s enthusiasm for new House investigations seems to fly in the face of his rhetoric over the past several months.
In November, he called the impeachment inquiry a “sham” and a “waste of time and money.”
Last month, he complained of the “costly, never-ending investigation” of Trump and the “opportunity cost” of the impeachment.
“The sad part is that America is so much bigger than this,” he said. “You deserve a Congress that actually focuses on real issues.”
Last week, he congratulated Trump’s legal team for its performance in the Senate impeachment trial. “It’s time to move on and get back to the people’s business,” he urged.
This is not the first time McCarthy has tried to go after Schiff (D-CA). Last year, he co-sponsored a resolution to censure and condemn his fellow Californian.
The unsuccessful stunt would have called Schiff’s chronicling of the ties between Russia and the Trump 2016 campaign, and his paraphrasing of a partial transcript of Trump’s July 2019 call with Ukraine’s president, “conduct that misleads the American people in a way that is not befitting of an elected Member of the House of Representatives.”
In December, as the House prepared to vote for two articles of impeachment against Trump, McCarthy stalled the process briefly with unsuccessful motions to censure both Schiff and House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who also pushed for a speedy end to the Trump impeachment saga, said Sunday that the Senate will now investigate the Bidens and the whistleblower who brought Trump’s Ukraine quid pro quo to the attention of Congress.
Meanwhile, more than 400 House-passed proposals are currently stalled in the GOP-controlled Senate.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-02-04--Trump to brag of a 'great American comeback' that doesn't actually exist

Donald Trump will deliver the State of a Union address Tuesday night and is expected to tout a `` great American comeback , '' according to a senior administration official who spoke to reporters on Friday .
In that briefing , the White House official said Trump would focus on several topics , including the impact of his trade policies , domestic policies like paid leave , and immigration .
`` The speech will celebrate American economic and military strength and present an optimistic vision of America ’ s future , '' they added .
But Trump 's `` vision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on his own mythology — here 's what 's actually taken place under Trump 's tenure .
Trump 's trade policy , centered around a prolonged trade war with China , has hurt workers , led to a massive spike in farm bankruptcies , and his attempts to end the trade war offer little hope to those already hurting .
Taken together , Michigan , North Carolina , Pennsylvania , and Wisconsin lost 27,000 manufacturing jobs from January through September 2019 , thanks in part to the United States ' trade war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 45 % in some regions since it began , and Wisconsin saw a record number of dairy farms go out of business in 2019 , in large part because of Trump 's policies .
Meanwhile , Americans are stuck paying the full cost of Trump 's tariffs , amounting to the equivalent of a multi-billion dollar tax hike every month .
In October , Trump announced a Phase 1 deal with China to begin deescalating the trade war , but farmers are skeptical of the outcomes , some wondering if it will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will likely tout the U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement , a trade deal to replace the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement , which was approved by the House of Representatives in December after months of negotiations .
In the end , the agreement had the support of unions and Democrats , but left some Republicans unhappy .
Sen. Pat Toomey ( R-PA ) , for instance , called the agreement `` counterproductive '' and a step backwards .
After years of advocating for paid family leave for parents , Democrats in Congress won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of paid parental leave for federal workers .
Yet , according to the Washington Post , Trump plans to take credit for the initiative , even though he opposed the idea during the 2016 campaign , saying `` I think we have to keep our country very competitive , so you have to be careful of it . ''
In a late 2019 poll , 2 in 3 Americans said they were economically worse off or about the same since Trump took office , with only 34 % saying they were better off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the 2017 tax reform law , has also failed to stimulate the economy as promised , and corporations are paying substantially less taxes than before .
Trump 's immigration policies have caused irreparable harm to children and families and wreaked havoc on immigration courts .
Trump 's family separation policy alone was so horrific that a Health and Human Services investigation found `` every single separated kid has been terrified . ''
`` The entire approach of this administration towards immigrant children has been characterized by cruelty , '' Rep. Judy Chu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Trump administration 's decision to place separated children in cages was even referenced in the 2020 Super Bowl halftime show .
After the performance , Jenifer Lopez released a statement criticizing those who `` try to build walls , keep us out , or put us in cages . ''
Additionally , several migrants have died while in U.S. custody on Trump 's watch , and the `` remain in Mexico '' policy for asylum-seekers has led to kidnapping and rape of those turned away at the U.S. border .
Trump has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But rather than forcing Mexico to pay for it , as Trump has repeatedly pledged , the administration has begun siphoning money congressionally allocated for military families to fund construction .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Donald Trump will deliver the State of a Union address Tuesday night and is expected to tout a “great American comeback,” according to a senior administration official who spoke to reporters on Friday.
In that briefing, the White House official said Trump would focus on several topics, including the impact of his trade policies, domestic policies like paid leave, and immigration.
“The speech will celebrate American economic and military strength and present an optimistic vision of America’s future,” they added.
But Trump’s “vision” of an American comeback is mostly based on his own mythology — here’s what’s actually taken place under Trump’s tenure.
Trade war
Trump’s trade policy, centered around a prolonged trade war with China, has hurt workers, led to a massive spike in farm bankruptcies, and his attempts to end the trade war offer little hope to those already hurting.
Taken together, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin lost 27,000 manufacturing jobs from January through September 2019, thanks in part to the United States’ trade war with China. Farm bankruptcies increased by 45% in some regions since it began, and Wisconsin saw a record number of dairy farms go out of business in 2019, in large part because of Trump’s policies.
Meanwhile, Americans are stuck paying the full cost of Trump’s tariffs, amounting to the equivalent of a multi-billion dollar tax hike every month.
In October, Trump announced a Phase 1 deal with China to begin deescalating the trade war, but farmers are skeptical of the outcomes, some wondering if it will be too little, too late.
Trump will likely tout the U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement, a trade deal to replace the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, which was approved by the House of Representatives in December after months of negotiations. In the end, the agreement had the support of unions and Democrats, but left some Republicans unhappy. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), for instance, called the agreement “counterproductive” and a step backwards.
Domestic policies and paid leave
After years of advocating for paid family leave for parents, Democrats in Congress won a key provision to give 12 weeks of paid parental leave for federal workers. Yet, according to the Washington Post, Trump plans to take credit for the initiative, even though he opposed the idea during the 2016 campaign, saying “I think we have to keep our country very competitive, so you have to be careful of it.”
In a late 2019 poll, 2 in 3 Americans said they were economically worse off or about the same since Trump took office, with only 34% saying they were better off. Trump’s signature domestic policy achievement, the 2017 tax reform law, has also failed to stimulate the economy as promised, and corporations are paying substantially less taxes than before.
Immigration
Trump’s immigration policies have caused irreparable harm to children and families and wreaked havoc on immigration courts. Trump’s family separation policy alone was so horrific that a Health and Human Services investigation found “every single separated kid has been terrified.”
“The entire approach of this administration towards immigrant children has been characterized by cruelty,” Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA) said last year.
The Trump administration’s decision to place separated children in cages was even referenced in the 2020 Super Bowl halftime show. After the performance, Jenifer Lopez released a statement criticizing those who “try to build walls, keep us out, or put us in cages.”
Additionally, several migrants have died while in U.S. custody on Trump’s watch, and the “remain in Mexico” policy for asylum-seekers has led to kidnapping and rape of those turned away at the U.S. border.
Trump has begun building his promised border wall. But rather than forcing Mexico to pay for it, as Trump has repeatedly pledged, the administration has begun siphoning money congressionally allocated for military families to fund construction.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-02-04--Rand Paul outs alleged whistleblower despite warning from fellow Republican

Sen. Rand Paul ( R-KY ) attempted to expose the alleged name of the whistleblower who triggered Donald Trump 's impeachment by putting his name on a sign on the Senate floor Tuesday .
As Paul argued against removing Trump from office , he included the name as part of an attempt to allege a `` plot '' targeting Trump .
Paul 's outing attempt comes just a day after fellow Republican , Sen. Chuck Grassley ( R-IA ) , warned against such attacks .
`` Attempts by anyone to oust a whistleblower just to sell an article or score @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all .
It 's not the treatment any whistleblower deserves , '' Grassley said .
Mark Zaid , the lawyer for the person named by Republicans as the whistleblower , has previously warned that attempts to expose his client could expose him to harm .
`` Identifying any name for the whistleblower will simply place that individual and their family at risk of serious harm , '' Zaid told CNN in November , after Donald Trump Jr. tweeted out a story from a pro-Trump site that published the alleged name .
Despite the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the individual as part of their efforts to defend Trump and oppose his removal from office .
In November , Paul called on the media to expose the whistleblower .
`` I say tonight to the media : do your job and print his name , '' he said before a Republican campaign rally .
The demand was described as `` very responsible '' by Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-SC ) , one of Trump 's most prominent and ardent defenders .
During the Senate impeachment trial in January , Paul made other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a warning from Chief Justice John Roberts that he would not read questions with the name , Paul submitted a question with the name .
Roberts declined to read it out loud .
At a press conference right after his question was blocked , Paul again used the name .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) attempted to expose the alleged name of the whistleblower who triggered Donald Trump’s impeachment by putting his name on a sign on the Senate floor Tuesday.
As Paul argued against removing Trump from office, he included the name as part of an attempt to allege a “plot” targeting Trump.
Paul’s outing attempt comes just a day after fellow Republican, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), warned against such attacks.
“Attempts by anyone to oust a whistleblower just to sell an article or score a political point—those are not helpful at all. It’s not the treatment any whistleblower deserves,” Grassley said.
Mark Zaid, the lawyer for the person named by Republicans as the whistleblower, has previously warned that attempts to expose his client could expose him to harm.
“Identifying any name for the whistleblower will simply place that individual and their family at risk of serious harm,” Zaid told CNN in November, after Donald Trump Jr. tweeted out a story from a pro-Trump site that published the alleged name.
Despite the warning, Republicans have tried to expose the individual as part of their efforts to defend Trump and oppose his removal from office.
In November, Paul called on the media to expose the whistleblower. “I say tonight to the media: do your job and print his name,” he said before a Republican campaign rally.
The demand was described as “very responsible” by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), one of Trump’s most prominent and ardent defenders.
During the Senate impeachment trial in January, Paul made other attempts to publicize the name. Despite a warning from Chief Justice John Roberts that he would not read questions with the name, Paul submitted a question with the name. Roberts declined to read it out loud.
At a press conference right after his question was blocked, Paul again used the name.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-02-04--Only half of Iowa results expected to be released day after caucus

Clouded by doubts on a chaotic day-after , Democratic Party officials planned to release a majority of Iowa 's delayed presidential caucus results by late Tuesday , according to details shared with campaigns on a private conference call .
The news did little to stem rising confusion and concern more than 12 hours after voting ended without the release of a single result in the opening contest of the Democrats 2020 primary season .
State party chairman Troy Price informed campaigns that he would release at least 50 % of all caucus results at 5 p.m. EST , but he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign representatives about when the party would release the full results or how it could ensure their integrity — even whether it would be a matter of days or weeks .
`` We will continue to work through the process , '' Price said on the call , which was monitored by The Associated Press .
`` We want to get some results out there . ''
At the same time , the leading candidates tried to spin the uncertainty to their advantage , claiming momentum as they pivoted their campaigns to next-up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good , '' Sen. Elizabeth Warren told a capacity crowd at theater in Keene , New Hampshire , Tuesday morning .
`` It 's a tight , three-way race at the top .
We know that the three of us will be dividing up most of the delegates coming out of Iowa . ''
In a sign of the murkiness in the race , it was clear which three candidates Warren was referring to .
The party 's caucus crisis was an embarrassing twist after months of promoting the contest as a chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a jumbled field with no clear front-runner .
Instead , caucus day ended with no winner , no official results and many fresh questions about whether Iowa can retain its coveted `` first '' status .
The party told campaigns earlier Tuesday that the delay was a result of a `` coding issue in the reporting system '' that it said has since been fixed .
The state party said the plan was to release results `` as soon as possible '' later Tuesday .
It said it had verified the accuracy of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not a result of `` a hack or an intrusion . ''
Still , there were signs that the process was ongoing and laborious .
Price confirmed that party official were sending volunteers and staffers across the state to retrieve hard-copy results so they could check them against numbers reported from precincts via a mobile app that proved problematic for many users , according to multiple sources working for the state party and granted anonymity to discuss sensitive party information .
Many precinct organizers were forced to call-in results , experiencing long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some 1,600 sites manually .
Like Warren , former Vice President Joe Biden also said he was `` feeling good '' and predicted that the results would be close .
Meanwhile , his campaign raised questions about the integrity of the results if and when they are released .
Before leaving Iowa , an attorney for Biden 's campaign issued a letter to the state party raising concerns about `` acute failures ... occurring statewide '' and insisting on `` full explanations and relevant information regarding the methods of quality control you are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , before any official results are released . ''
Other candidates turned to New Hampshire , which holds its primary in seven days .
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders said he had `` a good feeling we 're going to be doing very , very well here in Iowa '' once results were posted .
`` Today marks the beginning of the end for Donald Trump , '' he predicted .
Pete Buttigieg , the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , essentially declared victory .
`` So we do n't know all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the time it 's all said and done , Iowa , you have shocked the nation , '' he said before leaving Iowa .
`` By all indications , we are going on to New Hampshire victorious . ''
Beyond 2020 , the debacle invited fresh criticism about Iowa caucuses , a complicated set of political meetings staged in a state that is whiter and older than the Democratic Party .
Many used the moment to question whether it was a quaint political tradition whose time had passed .
The party has tried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by promising to report three different data points about voters ' preferences , presumably improving transparency .
But the new system created new headaches .
State party spokeswoman Mandy McClure said it had `` found inconsistencies in the reporting of three sets of results , '' forcing officials to try to verify results with `` underlying data '' and the paper trail .
Some of the trouble stemmed from the buggy app .
Organizers at caucuses site reported trouble downloading the app and other glitches .
Many turned to a back-up phone system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the party said the data collected by the app was `` sound , '' but data it was reported was incomplete .
`` While the app was recording data accurately , it was reporting out only partial data , '' Iowa Democratic Party chairman Troy Price told campaigns in a somewhat delayed effort to explain the issue .
`` This issue was identified and fixed .
The application 's reporting issue did not impact the ability of precinct chairs to report data accurately . ''
Earlier in the night , Iowa Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balancing a strong preference for fundamental change with an overwhelming desire to defeat Trump .
At least four high-profile candidates vied for the lead in a contest that offered the opening test of who and what the party stands for in the turbulent age of Trump .
It 's just the first in a primary season that will span all 50 states and several U.S. territories , ending at the party 's national convention in mid-July .
For Democrats , the moment was thick with promise for a party that has seized major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House in 2016 .
But instead of clear optimism , a growing cloud of uncertainty and intraparty resentment hung over the election as the prospect of an unclear result raised fears of a long and divisive primary fight in the months ahead .
One unsurprising development : Trump won the Republican caucus , a largely symbolic victory given that he faced no significant opposition .
The president eagerly seized on the Democrats ' problems .
`` The Democrat Caucus is an unmitigated disaster , '' Trump tweeted early Tuesday .
`` Nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Country . ''
He added : `` The only person that can claim a very big victory in Iowa last night is 'Trump . '
'' Pre-caucus polls suggested Sanders entered the night with a narrow lead , but any of the top four candidates — Sanders , Biden , Warren and Buttigieg — was positioned to score a victory .
Sen. Amy Klobuchar , who represents neighboring Minnesota , was also claiming momentum , while outsider candidates including entrepreneur Andrew Yang , billionaire activist Tom Steyer , and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one thing : We are punching above our weight , '' Klobuchar said late Monday , promising to keep fighting in New Hampshire .
About one-quarter of all voters reported that they were caucusing for the first time , according to AP VoteCast , a survey of voters who said they planned to take part in Monday 's Democratic caucuses .
The first-timers were slightly more likely to support Sanders , Warren or Buttigieg , compared with other candidates .
The 2020 fight has already played out over myriad distractions , particularly congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which has often overshadowed the primary and effectively pinned several leading candidates to Washington at the pinnacle of the early campaign season .
Meanwhile , ultrabillionaire Mike Bloomberg , the former mayor of New York City , is running a parallel campaign that ignored Iowa as he prepares to pounce on any perceived weaknesses in the field come March .

Clouded by doubts on a chaotic day-after, Democratic Party officials planned to release a majority of Iowa’s delayed presidential caucus results by late Tuesday, according to details shared with campaigns on a private conference call.
The news did little to stem rising confusion and concern more than 12 hours after voting ended without the release of a single result in the opening contest of the Democrats 2020 primary season.
State party chairman Troy Price informed campaigns that he would release at least 50% of all caucus results at 5 p.m. EST, but he declined to answer pointed questions from frustrated campaign representatives about when the party would release the full results or how it could ensure their integrity — even whether it would be a matter of days or weeks.
“We will continue to work through the process,” Price said on the call, which was monitored by The Associated Press. “We want to get some results out there.”
At the same time, the leading candidates tried to spin the uncertainty to their advantage, claiming momentum as they pivoted their campaigns to next-up New Hampshire.
“I’m feeling good,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren told a capacity crowd at theater in Keene, New Hampshire, Tuesday morning. “It’s a tight, three-way race at the top. We know that the three of us will be dividing up most of the delegates coming out of Iowa.”
In a sign of the murkiness in the race, it was clear which three candidates Warren was referring to.
The party’s caucus crisis was an embarrassing twist after months of promoting the contest as a chance for Democrats to find some clarity in a jumbled field with no clear front-runner.
Instead, caucus day ended with no winner, no official results and many fresh questions about whether Iowa can retain its coveted “first” status.
The party told campaigns earlier Tuesday that the delay was a result of a “coding issue in the reporting system” that it said has since been fixed. The state party said the plan was to release results “as soon as possible” later Tuesday. It said it had verified the accuracy of the collected data and said the problem was not a result of “a hack or an intrusion.”
Still, there were signs that the process was ongoing and laborious.
Price confirmed that party official were sending volunteers and staffers across the state to retrieve hard-copy results so they could check them against numbers reported from precincts via a mobile app that proved problematic for many users, according to multiple sources working for the state party and granted anonymity to discuss sensitive party information. Many precinct organizers were forced to call-in results, experiencing long delays, while aides entered results from some 1,600 sites manually.
Like Warren, former Vice President Joe Biden also said he was “feeling good” and predicted that the results would be close. Meanwhile, his campaign raised questions about the integrity of the results if and when they are released.
Before leaving Iowa, an attorney for Biden’s campaign issued a letter to the state party raising concerns about “acute failures … occurring statewide” and insisting on “full explanations and relevant information regarding the methods of quality control you are employing, and an opportunity to respond, before any official results are released.”
Other candidates turned to New Hampshire, which holds its primary in seven days.
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders said he had “a good feeling we’re going to be doing very, very well here in Iowa” once results were posted. “Today marks the beginning of the end for Donald Trump,” he predicted.
Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, essentially declared victory.
“So we don’t know all the results, but we know by the time it’s all said and done, Iowa, you have shocked the nation,” he said before leaving Iowa. “By all indications, we are going on to New Hampshire victorious.”
Beyond 2020, the debacle invited fresh criticism about Iowa caucuses, a complicated set of political meetings staged in a state that is whiter and older than the Democratic Party. Many used the moment to question whether it was a quaint political tradition whose time had passed.
The party has tried to accommodate critics before, this year by promising to report three different data points about voters’ preferences, presumably improving transparency. But the new system created new headaches.
State party spokeswoman Mandy McClure said it had “found inconsistencies in the reporting of three sets of results,” forcing officials to try to verify results with “underlying data” and the paper trail.
Some of the trouble stemmed from the buggy app. Organizers at caucuses site reported trouble downloading the app and other glitches. Many turned to a back-up phone system.
In a letter to campaigns Tuesday, the party said the data collected by the app was “sound,” but data it was reported was incomplete.
“While the app was recording data accurately, it was reporting out only partial data,” Iowa Democratic Party chairman Troy Price told campaigns in a somewhat delayed effort to explain the issue. “This issue was identified and fixed. The application’s reporting issue did not impact the ability of precinct chairs to report data accurately.”
Earlier in the night, Iowa Democrats across the state cast their votes, balancing a strong preference for fundamental change with an overwhelming desire to defeat Trump. At least four high-profile candidates vied for the lead in a contest that offered the opening test of who and what the party stands for in the turbulent age of Trump.
It’s just the first in a primary season that will span all 50 states and several U.S. territories, ending at the party’s national convention in mid-July.
For Democrats, the moment was thick with promise for a party that has seized major gains in states since Trump won the White House in 2016. But instead of clear optimism, a growing cloud of uncertainty and intraparty resentment hung over the election as the prospect of an unclear result raised fears of a long and divisive primary fight in the months ahead.
One unsurprising development: Trump won the Republican caucus, a largely symbolic victory given that he faced no significant opposition.
The president eagerly seized on the Democrats’ problems.
“The Democrat Caucus is an unmitigated disaster,” Trump tweeted early Tuesday. “Nothing works, just like they ran the Country.” He added: “The only person that can claim a very big victory in Iowa last night is ‘Trump.'”
Pre-caucus polls suggested Sanders entered the night with a narrow lead, but any of the top four candidates — Sanders, Biden, Warren and Buttigieg — was positioned to score a victory. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who represents neighboring Minnesota, was also claiming momentum, while outsider candidates including entrepreneur Andrew Yang, billionaire activist Tom Steyer, and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard could be factors.
“We know one thing: We are punching above our weight,” Klobuchar said late Monday, promising to keep fighting in New Hampshire.
New voters played a significant role in shaping Iowa’s election.
About one-quarter of all voters reported that they were caucusing for the first time, according to AP VoteCast, a survey of voters who said they planned to take part in Monday’s Democratic caucuses. The first-timers were slightly more likely to support Sanders, Warren or Buttigieg, compared with other candidates.
The 2020 fight has already played out over myriad distractions, particularly congressional Democrats’ push to impeach Trump, which has often overshadowed the primary and effectively pinned several leading candidates to Washington at the pinnacle of the early campaign season.
Meanwhile, ultrabillionaire Mike Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City, is running a parallel campaign that ignored Iowa as he prepares to pounce on any perceived weaknesses in the field come March.


shareblue--2020-02-04--The 2020 election is already drowning in online disinformation

Well before Iowans cast the first ballots of the 2020 presidential race , an insidious campaign to seed distrust in the election process was already underway .
Conservative and liberal activists took to social media to push outright false or unproven claims to their online followers .
Donald Trump also spread suspicions , questioning the Democratic primary 's fairness to his tens of millions of Twitter followers .
Misleading social media complaints — some go as far as alleging a vast conspiracy will determine the next president — were likely to intensify over the course of the presidential race .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election that a losing candidate 's supporters may refuse to accept the results , either for the nomination or the White House , warned David Becker , founder and director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research .
`` The thing that keeps me up at night , '' Becker said , is that even if the 2020 election is fair and well-managed , `` the losing party 's supporters wo n't accept that democracy worked . ''
On the eve of Monday 's Iowa caucuses , conservative pundits used Twitter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the vote is ripe for fraud because there are more adults registered to vote in eight Iowa counties than actually living there .
Not true , according to the state 's own publicly available voting information .
Secretary of State Paul Pate debunked the claim Monday on Twitter , where the erroneous assertion had been liked and retweeted by thousands of social media users .
The claim was initially planted on a YouTube video put out by the conservative group Judicial Watch .
`` It 's unfortunate this organization continues to put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and it 's especially disconcerting they chose the day of the Iowa Caucus to do this , '' Pate said .
His office released and tweeted data that showed the number of voters registered in those eight counties did not actually exceed the adult population .
But the claim grew online — liked , retweeted and viewed thousands of times .
Some even accused Pate of lying about official voter registration numbers , showing how difficult it can be to correct online misinformation once it 's shared widely .
`` Stop lying and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem , '' one woman tweeted to Pate .
Tom Fitton , who leads Judicial Watch , acknowledged in an interview with The Associated Press that he used older statistics and census numbers to argue that the number of registered voters outnumbered the entire adult population in eight Iowa counties .
Fitton maintained voter fraud is `` a big issue '' and said he released the findings in order to coincide with the Iowa caucuses .
Other social media users seized on campaign developments over the weekend to suggest the presidential election process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Des Moines Register and CNN announced that it would withhold the results of a final presidential poll because Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg 's name was omitted from at least one interview .
Social media users who identify as supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders quickly turned to Twitter where , using # ReleaseThePoll , they alleged that the media outlets intentionally suppressed the results only to hide how well Sanders was doing in the state .
`` We know Bernie Sanders is winning Iowa and we the people deserve to see the results @ @ @ @ @ @ @ user wrote in a tweet shared hundreds of times .
The claims hark back to the 2016 election , when Sanders ' supporters griped that the Democratic Party had `` rigged '' the primary process in favor of Hillary Clinton .
Trump , who could see Sanders as his Democratic challenger in his reelection bid , has also repeatedly floated the idea that Democratic establishment treated Sanders unfairly in 2016 .
And hours before Monday 's caucus began , Trump used Twitter to capitalize on that lingering frustration among Sanders ' supporters and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` The DNC on Bernie Sanders , 'Looks like they 're going to do it to him again , does n't it ? '
'' Trump 's tweet , sent Monday morning , said in part .
Trump is hoping to propagate uncertainty about the election process among Sanders ' supporters , said Jennifer Mercieca , a historian of political rhetoric at Texas A & M University .
It 's a strategy that worked in Trump 's favor during the last presidential election — and Trump hopes it will help him again this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's either wanting them to distrust the process and stay home , or distrust the process and vote for him , '' Mercieca said .
`` He 's a strong believer in circulating conspiracy theory when he thinks its to his advantage . ''

Well before Iowans cast the first ballots of the 2020 presidential race, an insidious campaign to seed distrust in the election process was already underway.
Conservative and liberal activists took to social media to push outright false or unproven claims to their online followers. Donald Trump also spread suspicions, questioning the Democratic primary’s fairness to his tens of millions of Twitter followers.
Misleading social media complaints — some go as far as alleging a vast conspiracy will determine the next president — were likely to intensify over the course of the presidential race.
The falsehoods could so erode faith in the election that a losing candidate’s supporters may refuse to accept the results, either for the nomination or the White House, warned David Becker, founder and director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research.
“The thing that keeps me up at night,” Becker said, is that even if the 2020 election is fair and well-managed, “the losing party’s supporters won’t accept that democracy worked.”
On the eve of Monday’s Iowa caucuses, conservative pundits used Twitter posts and YouTube videos to wrongly allege that the vote is ripe for fraud because there are more adults registered to vote in eight Iowa counties than actually living there.
Not true, according to the state’s own publicly available voting information. Secretary of State Paul Pate debunked the claim Monday on Twitter, where the erroneous assertion had been liked and retweeted by thousands of social media users. The claim was initially planted on a YouTube video put out by the conservative group Judicial Watch.
“It’s unfortunate this organization continues to put out inaccurate data regarding voter registration, and it’s especially disconcerting they chose the day of the Iowa Caucus to do this,” Pate said. His office released and tweeted data that showed the number of voters registered in those eight counties did not actually exceed the adult population.
But the claim grew online — liked, retweeted and viewed thousands of times. Some even accused Pate of lying about official voter registration numbers, showing how difficult it can be to correct online misinformation once it’s shared widely.
“Stop lying and fix the problem otherwise you’re the problem,” one woman tweeted to Pate.
Tom Fitton, who leads Judicial Watch, acknowledged in an interview with The Associated Press that he used older statistics and census numbers to argue that the number of registered voters outnumbered the entire adult population in eight Iowa counties. Fitton maintained voter fraud is “a big issue” and said he released the findings in order to coincide with the Iowa caucuses.
Other social media users seized on campaign developments over the weekend to suggest the presidential election process was rigged.
On Saturday, The Des Moines Register and CNN announced that it would withhold the results of a final presidential poll because Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg’s name was omitted from at least one interview.
Social media users who identify as supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders quickly turned to Twitter where, using #ReleaseThePoll, they alleged that the media outlets intentionally suppressed the results only to hide how well Sanders was doing in the state.
“We know Bernie Sanders is winning Iowa and we the people deserve to see the results of the poll!” one Twitter user wrote in a tweet shared hundreds of times.
The claims hark back to the 2016 election, when Sanders’ supporters griped that the Democratic Party had “rigged” the primary process in favor of Hillary Clinton. Trump, who could see Sanders as his Democratic challenger in his reelection bid, has also repeatedly floated the idea that Democratic establishment treated Sanders unfairly in 2016.
And hours before Monday’s caucus began, Trump used Twitter to capitalize on that lingering frustration among Sanders’ supporters and again fuel suspicion about that process.
“The DNC on Bernie Sanders, ‘Looks like they’re going to do it to him again, doesn’t it?'” Trump’s tweet, sent Monday morning, said in part.
Trump is hoping to propagate uncertainty about the election process among Sanders’ supporters, said Jennifer Mercieca, a historian of political rhetoric at Texas A&M University. It’s a strategy that worked in Trump’s favor during the last presidential election — and Trump hopes it will help him again this year, she said.
“He’s either wanting them to distrust the process and stay home, or distrust the process and vote for him,” Mercieca said. “He’s a strong believer in circulating conspiracy theory when he thinks its to his advantage.”


shareblue--2020-02-04--Iowa's first-in-the-nation status 'on life support' following chaotic caucus

Iowa 's coveted position as the first-in-the-nation nominating contest faces its most daunting challenge in decades in light of problems that kept the state Democratic Party from reporting results .
The caucuses were already facing plenty of headwinds amid criticism that the overwhelmingly white state is n't representative of the country 's diversity .
And the final weeks of the campaign were complicated by Donald Trump 's impeachment trial , which sidelined several candidates and left Iowa eerily quiet at a pivotal moment .
But the Iowa Democratic Party 's failure to release results left the contest , long criticized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closer to losing its status .
`` With this reporting debacle , it may be the end , '' said Joe Trippi , a longtime Democratic presidential campaign operative and veteran of multiple Iowa campaigns .
`` And that 's from someone who loves the state and the process there . ''
The Iowa Democratic Party said Monday night that results were indefinitely delayed due to `` quality checks '' and `` inconsistencies '' in some reporting , an embarrassing complication that added a new layer of doubt in the process that has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said the problem was not a result of a `` hack or an intrusion . ''
But the statement came after Iowa voters packed sites for these in-person political meetings aimed at measuring early presidential support across the state with at least four leading candidates battling to win the opening contest .
Democratic Party county chairmen had problems using an app intended to convey precinct-level data to the state party headquarters .
In addition , the party found inconsistencies in the reporting of three sets of results which were the outgrowth of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the process in 2016 .
A party spokeswoman insisted the paper record of the count was intact and `` will simply take time to further report the results . ''
If that paper trail does n't add up upon review , Iowa can likely say goodbye to hosting the leadoff presidential contest in 2024 , veteran Iowa Democratic consultant Jeff Link said .
But if they remedy the problem quickly and have results Tuesday , `` it looks really bad , but they can survive . ''
`` We have to name @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It was another blow to a party-run process few Americans understand for its differences from a primary election , including antiquated rules and a mathematical threshold for candidate viability in the Democratic contests .
Those criticisms were in light of mounting pressure over the past several campaigns for Democrats to begin the march to the nomination in a place more demographically representative of the increasingly racially and ethnically diverse party .
Iowa 's population is 85 % white , while the Democratic Party is much more racially and ethnically diverse .
That sentiment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ became the first African American candidate to win the caucuses in 2008 , en route to the presidential nomination and the White House .
But former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro gave renewed , prominent voice to the sentiment even as he was running for president in Iowa last year , saying the contest `` does not reflect demographically either the United States or , certainly not , the Democratic Party . ''
Even some veteran Obama advisers said the reporting fiasco could be a permanent blow to their lead-off status @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best , '' said Jeremy Bird , a former Obama campaign adviser .
`` It has most likely taken its last breath as first-in-the-nation . ''
And despite a national narrative that often suggests otherwise , there are plenty of Iowans who also find them confusing and frustrating anyway .
Lone Tree Democrat Jonathan Greene may get what he has sought , just not the way he expected .
Green , who chaired a Democratic precinct Monday , said `` I personally have advocated for moving to a primary , but , my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I want to get to a primary . ''

Iowa’s coveted position as the first-in-the-nation nominating contest faces its most daunting challenge in decades in light of problems that kept the state Democratic Party from reporting results.
The caucuses were already facing plenty of headwinds amid criticism that the overwhelmingly white state isn’t representative of the country’s diversity. And the final weeks of the campaign were complicated by Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, which sidelined several candidates and left Iowa eerily quiet at a pivotal moment. But the Iowa Democratic Party’s failure to release results left the contest, long criticized for its complicated rules, one step closer to losing its status.
“With this reporting debacle, it may be the end,” said Joe Trippi, a longtime Democratic presidential campaign operative and veteran of multiple Iowa campaigns. “And that’s from someone who loves the state and the process there.”
The Iowa Democratic Party said Monday night that results were indefinitely delayed due to “quality checks” and “inconsistencies” in some reporting, an embarrassing complication that added a new layer of doubt in the process that has come under increasing criticism.
The party said the problem was not a result of a “hack or an intrusion.” But the statement came after Iowa voters packed sites for these in-person political meetings aimed at measuring early presidential support across the state with at least four leading candidates battling to win the opening contest.
Democratic Party county chairmen had problems using an app intended to convey precinct-level data to the state party headquarters. In addition, the party found inconsistencies in the reporting of three sets of results which were the outgrowth of a process to streamline the process after criticisms of the process in 2016.
A party spokeswoman insisted the paper record of the count was intact and “will simply take time to further report the results.”
If that paper trail doesn’t add up upon review, Iowa can likely say goodbye to hosting the leadoff presidential contest in 2024, veteran Iowa Democratic consultant Jeff Link said. But if they remedy the problem quickly and have results Tuesday, “it looks really bad, but they can survive.”
“We have to name a winner,” Link said.
It was another blow to a party-run process few Americans understand for its differences from a primary election, including antiquated rules and a mathematical threshold for candidate viability in the Democratic contests.
Those criticisms were in light of mounting pressure over the past several campaigns for Democrats to begin the march to the nomination in a place more demographically representative of the increasingly racially and ethnically diverse party. Iowa’s population is 85% white, while the Democratic Party is much more racially and ethnically diverse.
That sentiment took a short breather after Barack Obama became the first African American candidate to win the caucuses in 2008, en route to the presidential nomination and the White House.
But former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro gave renewed, prominent voice to the sentiment even as he was running for president in Iowa last year, saying the contest “does not reflect demographically either the United States or, certainly not, the Democratic Party.”
Even some veteran Obama advisers said the reporting fiasco could be a permanent blow to their lead-off status.
“It is on life-support at best,” said Jeremy Bird, a former Obama campaign adviser. “It has most likely taken its last breath as first-in-the-nation.”
And despite a national narrative that often suggests otherwise, there are plenty of Iowans who also find them confusing and frustrating anyway.
Lone Tree Democrat Jonathan Greene may get what he has sought, just not the way he expected.
Green, who chaired a Democratic precinct Monday, said “I personally have advocated for moving to a primary, but, my God, this is not the way I want to get to a primary.”


shareblue--2020-02-04--Trump team uses Iowa caucus to spread lies about election 'rigging'

Donald Trump 's campaign manager and many of his surrogates were quick to claim after Monday 's Iowa caucuses that a delay in announcing results is proof the entire nomination process is `` rigged . ''
This is the latest in a long history of Team Trump promoting conspiracy theories about election rigging .
Iowa 's state Democratic Party told reporters Monday night it was reviewing the numbers `` out of an abundance of caution '' and would release results from the first-in-the-nation voting on Tuesday .
With no evidence whatsoever , Trump 's 2020 campaign manager Brad Parscale quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` Quality control = rigged ? ''
Parscale tweeted .
He told a Washington Post reporter , `` It would be natural for people to doubt the fairness of the process . ''
Trump 's oldest son stated the `` rigging '' theory as a fact .
`` The fix is in ... AGAIN '' Donald Trump Jr. claimed .
He also suggested Democratic Party operatives were inventing fake votes for their preferred candidate .
`` Tens of thousands of ballots all for Joe Biden being shipped to Iowa from Broward County @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worry folks we got this covered ' DNC operatives . ''
Trump 's younger son , Eric Trump , made similar unfounded allegations .
`` Mark my words , '' he said , `` they are rigging this thing ... what a mess .
This is why people do n't want the # Dems running our country . ''
Kayleigh McEnany , national press secretary for Trump 's reelection campaign , shared her conspiracy theories in a poem .
`` Dems rigging it in Iowa ?
Such a peculiar vote delay .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their say ! ''
Rep. Matt Gaetz ( R-FL ) , a prominent Trump defender , claimed that if Joe Biden had won , `` we probably would have some results right now . ''
Right-wing personality Mike Cernovich repeated the word `` RIGGED ! ''
35 times in a row in one tweet .
Iowa 's complicated caucus system — especially its more-complex Democratic process — can mean slow results .
Indeed , back in 2012 , it took weeks before Rick Santorum was announced as the narrow winner of the Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claimed that the 2016 Iowa GOP caucus was invalid and needed to be `` nullified , '' or done over , after Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-TX ) defeated him .
In the 2016 campaign and this one , Donald Trump has often asserted the Democratic party has rigged the system against Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) .
Trump again alleged over the weekend that the Democratic National Committee was trying to `` rig the election '' against Sanders .
The Sanders campaign rejected Trump 's claims , saying Monday the primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Trump 's strategy may be aimed at convincing Sanders supporters not to back the eventual Democratic nominee if it is not the Vermont senator .
Some reports suggest Trump hopes to help make Sanders the nominee , believing him an easier general election opponent to beat .
Trump also asserted throughout the 2016 general election that the race was `` rigged at polling places '' for Hillary Clinton — a claim that was seemingly disproved by the election results .
Troy Price , chair of the Iowa Democratic Party , said Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the underlying data collected via the [ results collection ] app was sound , '' but due to a bug was `` reporting out only partial data . ''
The party is checking results against paper documentation , he said , and plans to release results `` as soon as possible today . ''

Donald Trump’s campaign manager and many of his surrogates were quick to claim after Monday’s Iowa caucuses that a delay in announcing results is proof the entire nomination process is “rigged.” This is the latest in a long history of Team Trump promoting conspiracy theories about election rigging.
Iowa’s state Democratic Party told reporters Monday night it was reviewing the numbers “out of an abundance of caution” and would release results from the first-in-the-nation voting on Tuesday. With no evidence whatsoever, Trump’s 2020 campaign manager Brad Parscale quickly suggested something nefarious might be going on.
“Quality control = rigged?” Parscale tweeted. He told a Washington Post reporter, “It would be natural for people to doubt the fairness of the process.”
Trump’s oldest son stated the “rigging” theory as a fact. “The fix is in… AGAIN” Donald Trump Jr. claimed. He also suggested Democratic Party operatives were inventing fake votes for their preferred candidate. “Tens of thousands of ballots all for Joe Biden being shipped to Iowa from Broward County Florida as we speak. ‘Don’t worry folks we got this covered’ DNC operatives.”
Trump’s younger son, Eric Trump, made similar unfounded allegations. “Mark my words,” he said, “they are rigging this thing… what a mess. This is why people don’t want the #Dems running our country.”
Kayleigh McEnany, national press secretary for Trump’s reelection campaign, shared her conspiracy theories in a poem. “Dems rigging it in Iowa? Such a peculiar vote delay. They just can’t let the People have their say!”
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), a prominent Trump defender, claimed that if Joe Biden had won, “we probably would have some results right now.”
Right-wing personality Mike Cernovich repeated the word “RIGGED!” 35 times in a row in one tweet.
Iowa’s complicated caucus system — especially its more-complex Democratic process — can mean slow results. Indeed, back in 2012, it took weeks before Rick Santorum was announced as the narrow winner of the Republican caucuses in the state.
Trump also claimed that the 2016 Iowa GOP caucus was invalid and needed to be “nullified,” or done over, after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) defeated him.
In the 2016 campaign and this one, Donald Trump has often asserted the Democratic party has rigged the system against Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
Trump again alleged over the weekend that the Democratic National Committee was trying to “rig the election” against Sanders. The Sanders campaign rejected Trump’s claims, saying Monday the primary process was “not currently rigged.”
Trump’s strategy may be aimed at convincing Sanders supporters not to back the eventual Democratic nominee if it is not the Vermont senator. Some reports suggest Trump hopes to help make Sanders the nominee, believing him an easier general election opponent to beat.
Trump also asserted throughout the 2016 general election that the race was “rigged at polling places” for Hillary Clinton — a claim that was seemingly disproved by the election results.
Troy Price, chair of the Iowa Democratic Party, said Tuesday that they had “determined with certainty that the underlying data collected via the [results collection] app was sound,” but due to a bug was “reporting out only partial data.” The party is checking results against paper documentation, he said, and plans to release results “as soon as possible today.”
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.