washingtonmonthly--2020-06-22--Both Parties Should Accept Reality And Hold Their National Conventions Virtually

Donald Trump ’ s failed rally in Tulsa last night had many important implications , but among the most important is the reality that not even die-hard Trump supporters are willing to attend a large indoor gathering as long as COVID-19 is spreading unchecked .
That ’ s not great news for Donald Trump , who would like people to go back to normal to boost the economy , even if it means a massive increase in infections and death .
But it is good news for the country that not even Trump ’ s most desperate attempts at turning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point are pushing even energized conservatives to throw caution totally to the wind .
Both the Democratic and Republican National Committees should take note as they prepare for their summer conventions .
By now it should be abundantly clear by now that given the increasing rates of COVID-19 infection and the rudderless federal response to the crisis , it probably won ’ t be any safer to hold a mass indoor gathering two months from now than it would be today .
In keeping with their different levels of concern about the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grounding for public policy , Republicans are more adamant about holding a traditional convention than Democrats .
Trump himself , of course , has been consistent in his insistence that the RNC convention have the full attendance and regalia–in part to honor himself , and in part to send a signal to America that everyone should go back to normal as quickly as possible so that he can tout a revitalized economy .
Unfortunately for Trump , even Republicans have been considering a scaled-down convention in late August .
The city of Charlotte @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convention the way Trump had demanded , forcing the RNC to decamp to Jacksonville , FL .
But the combined impact of COVID-19 and the requirements of staging a convention on such short notice mean that GOP efforts will by necessity be dampened : When asked about preparations for the convention , Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry told CNBC that the city has secured “ over 10,000 hotel rooms ” and expects the convention “ to bring an economic impact of more than $ 100 million to our city.
” But with just months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must take into account not just the short amount of time they have to get all aspects together , but also how the pandemic and protests will impact the event .
The Republican National Committee has indicated that it has confidence organizers will be able to pull off the convention .
But the failure of Trump ’ s latest rally should be a signal to Republican officials that even if they plan for the full shindig in Jacksonville , they may have a difficult time getting their delegates and associated retinue to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the big hall .
Better to hold a virtual convention than a big party to which no one shows up .
Democrats have been taking a much more responsible and cautious approach .
After initially dragging its heels somewhat , the DNC took action to begin to prepare for a more virtual convention .
On June 11th , DNC members overwhelmingly passed a resolution moving the Convention date to August 17th , and giving both Convention organizers broad authority to make all changes necessary to protect conventioneers and the surrounding community during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from minor alterations to staging part or even all of the convention virtually .
As with the GOP but to an even greater degree , it ’ s unclear how many Democratic delegates would even bother to attend if it were held in person in Milwaukee–even among Wisconsin locals .
Biden ’ s team is already planning for smaller streaming events in and around the convention , no matter what ends up happening–though Biden does plan to accept the nomination in person in any case .
To their credit , Democrats appear to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the local Milwaukee economy and public health as a result of their decision , than about the political optics .
Still , Democratic leadership still hasn ’ t given full indication of its plans–likely in the hope of a rosier circumstances around COVID-19 than currently exist , and in hopes of having to make as few changes to fundamental processes as possible .
Republicans are in much the same boat , with delegates worried about the small-d democratic processes of running a political party ( already difficult and fraught with controversy in person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ videoconference .
For the health of the public and the delegates , both parties need to come to terms with the reality that , in large part due to the Trump administration ’ s incompetent response to the pandemic , whatever economic and optics benefits may come from holding a convention in person would be dramatically overruled by the negative impacts of risking an outbreak for political reasons , taking stage in a hall filled with empty seats , and endangering the health of each party ’ s most committed activists ( most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and more vulnerable populations ) as well as residents and local businesses .
It is unlikely that the RNC , which ultimately answers to Trump , will heed this advice .
Despite his setback in Tulsa , Trump will likely insist on his big event , if for no other reason than to draw contrast with the Democrats ’ more subdued affair .
But the public is not on Trump ’ s side of this issue .
Most Americans favor caution about big public events during this crisis .
And it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ era how much conventions even matter anymore in terms of persuasion .
There is not much to be gained , and a great deal to lose , from insisting on holding an old-school convention .
With modern communications technology as good as it has become , and people all over the world using videoconference platforms to conduct work of all kinds from home , both parties should simply acknowledge our current reality now and make plans to conduct their business accordingly .

Donald Trump’s failed rally in Tulsa last night had many important implications, but among the most important is the reality that not even die-hard Trump supporters are willing to attend a large indoor gathering as long as COVID-19 is spreading unchecked. That’s not great news for Donald Trump, who would like people to go back to normal to boost the economy, even if it means a massive increase in infections and death. But it is good news for the country that not even Trump’s most desperate attempts at turning the pandemic into a culture war flash point are pushing even energized conservatives to throw caution totally to the wind.
Both the Democratic and Republican National Committees should take note as they prepare for their summer conventions. By now it should be abundantly clear by now that given the increasing rates of COVID-19 infection and the rudderless federal response to the crisis, it probably won’t be any safer to hold a mass indoor gathering two months from now than it would be today.
In keeping with their different levels of concern about the virus, electoral incentives and embrace of scientific grounding for public policy, Republicans are more adamant about holding a traditional convention than Democrats. Trump himself, of course, has been consistent in his insistence that the RNC convention have the full attendance and regalia–in part to honor himself, and in part to send a signal to America that everyone should go back to normal as quickly as possible so that he can tout a revitalized economy. Unfortunately for Trump, even Republicans have been considering a scaled-down convention in late August. The city of Charlotte, N.C., refused to host the convention the way Trump had demanded, forcing the RNC to decamp to Jacksonville, FL. But the combined impact of COVID-19 and the requirements of staging a convention on such short notice mean that GOP efforts will by necessity be dampened:
When asked about preparations for the convention, Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry told CNBC that the city has secured “over 10,000 hotel rooms” and expects the convention “to bring an economic impact of more than $100 million to our city.” But with just months to go before the convention, organizers must take into account not just the short amount of time they have to get all aspects together, but also how the pandemic and protests will impact the event. The Republican National Committee has indicated that it has confidence organizers will be able to pull off the convention.
But the failure of Trump’s latest rally should be a signal to Republican officials that even if they plan for the full shindig in Jacksonville, they may have a difficult time getting their delegates and associated retinue to get on planes and buses and show up to the big hall. Better to hold a virtual convention than a big party to which no one shows up.
Democrats have been taking a much more responsible and cautious approach. After initially dragging its heels somewhat, the DNC took action to begin to prepare for a more virtual convention. On June 11th, DNC members overwhelmingly passed a resolution moving the Convention date to August 17th, and giving both Convention organizers broad authority to make all changes necessary to protect conventioneers and the surrounding community during the pandemic. These changes could range from minor alterations to staging part or even all of the convention virtually.
As with the GOP but to an even greater degree, it’s unclear how many Democratic delegates would even bother to attend if it were held in person in Milwaukee—even among Wisconsin locals. Biden’s team is already planning for smaller streaming events in and around the convention, no matter what ends up happening—though Biden does plan to accept the nomination in person in any case. To their credit, Democrats appear to be more concerned with the impact on the local Milwaukee economy and public health as a result of their decision, than about the political optics.
Still, Democratic leadership still hasn’t given full indication of its plans–likely in the hope of a rosier circumstances around COVID-19 than currently exist, and in hopes of having to make as few changes to fundamental processes as possible. Republicans are in much the same boat, with delegates worried about the small-d democratic processes of running a political party (already difficult and fraught with controversy in person) becoming complicated or practically impossible over videoconference.
For the health of the public and the delegates, both parties need to come to terms with the reality that, in large part due to the Trump administration’s incompetent response to the pandemic, whatever economic and optics benefits may come from holding a convention in person would be dramatically overruled by the negative impacts of risking an outbreak for political reasons, taking stage in a hall filled with empty seats, and endangering the health of each party’s most committed activists (most of whom tend to be in older and more vulnerable populations) as well as residents and local businesses.
It is unlikely that the RNC, which ultimately answers to Trump, will heed this advice. Despite his setback in Tulsa, Trump will likely insist on his big event, if for no other reason than to draw contrast with the Democrats’ more subdued affair.
But the public is not on Trump’s side of this issue. Most Americans favor caution about big public events during this crisis. And it’s not even entirely clear in our hyperpartisan era how much conventions even matter anymore in terms of persuasion. There is not much to be gained, and a great deal to lose, from insisting on holding an old-school convention. With modern communications technology as good as it has become, and people all over the world using videoconference platforms to conduct work of all kinds from home, both parties should simply acknowledge our current reality now and make plans to conduct their business accordingly.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-22--Americans Don’t Need to Love Biden to Vote for Him

In 2016 , both the Sanders and Trump campaigns promoted the idea that large crowds at their rallies were an indicator of the level of enthusiasm they were receiving from voters .
Of course , Sanders went on to lose the primary and although Trump eked out a victory in the electoral college , he lost the popular vote by three million .
All of that happened in a year when pundits had decided that populist anger was the theme of that election .
On Saturday , Sanders supporter Michael Moore took to Facebook before Trump ’ s rally in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ started lining up on Tues in Tulsa for Trump ’ s rally today .
100,000 are expected !
Trump has lost none of his base and they are more rabid than ever .
Sleeping on the sidewalk for five nights just to get in to see Trump ?
THAT is commitment .
Do not take Trump for granted .
Don ’ t think he can ’ t win…If you are once again not taking my warnings seriously , then I have a question I want you to answer , and I ask you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many people would line up for five days just to hear Joe Biden talk ?
” … Don ’ t think we don ’ t have a problem here .
Don ’ t get all smug laughing at these Bubbas in Tulsa today & snickering over how many of them are going to come down with Covid-19 .
They live , eat and breathe Trump — and none of us do that with Joe Biden .
We now know that , according to official estimates , only about 6,200 people showed up for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Here is why that most likely happened .
Those numbers from a Fox News poll show that only 45 percent of Trump supporters think rallies are a good idea during a pandemic .
Conversely , a majority of them at least have questions about the president ’ s claims that gathering in large groups is nothing to worry about .
In other words , they ’ re not completely buying his lies—at least when their own health is on the line .
Following the rally in Tulsa , Moore had to adjust his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s worth exploring his claim that voter enthusiasm is the critical ingredient in presidential elections .
The first thing to keep in mind is that an enthusiastic vote doesn ’ t count any more than a more complacent vote .
So does it make a difference if Biden ’ s most loyal supporters aren ’ t willing to line up for five days just to hear him talk ?
We now know that Trump was never really a populist and that his message was aimed at inflaming the politics of grievance .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go back to that same well in 2020 .
The challenge he faces is how to play the role of outsider after being in office for four years .
Charles Hurt thinks that ’ s a slam dunk for Trump , given who Democrats chose to be his opponent .
The problem is how long [ Biden ] has been in Washington .
Or , as Mr. Trump described it , “ four decades of betrayal , calamity and failure.
” … So , today , in his 78th year , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have denied him for 30 years .
And off they lead him to slaughter .
It is so ugly .
And so Washington .
But if anybody should know this wicked ritual , it is Joe Biden .
He has been sloshing around in the fetid swamp longer than anybody .
It is true that voters have typically been drawn to candidates who don ’ t have long records of service in Washington .
But while Republicans will attempt to act like Biden is some kind of pariah now that he is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on record to praise him .
But perhaps what is more important than what Republican Senators think of Joe Biden is the question about what voters are looking for in 2020 .
While the most rabid Trump supporters are probably still looking for someone to stoke the fires of their grievances , I would suggest that the majority of the rest of us are simply exhausted from four years of lying and bullying—not to mention incompetence .
This might be the year when voters decide that experience actually matters .
Not only are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capable of empathy and the ability to put the country over his personal interests , Donald Trump ’ s successor is going to have to rebuild the entire federal government from the ground up .
No one in politics is better prepared to do that than Joe Biden .
That ’ s why being ready on day one is perhaps his most powerful campaign theme .
Biden is the antithesis of Trump in ways that matter most .
This isn ’ t likely to be an election dominated by anger or grievance .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chaos and are looking for a president who simply knows how to get the job done .

In 2016, both the Sanders and Trump campaigns promoted the idea that large crowds at their rallies were an indicator of the level of enthusiasm they were receiving from voters. Of course, Sanders went on to lose the primary and although Trump eked out a victory in the electoral college, he lost the popular vote by three million. All of that happened in a year when pundits had decided that populist anger was the theme of that election.
On Saturday, Sanders supporter Michael Moore took to Facebook before Trump’s rally in Tulsa to issue this warning.
They started lining up on Tues in Tulsa for Trump’s rally today. 100,000 are expected! Trump has lost none of his base and they are more rabid than ever. Sleeping on the sidewalk for five nights just to get in to see Trump? THAT is commitment. Do not take Trump for granted. Don’t think he can’t win…If you are once again not taking my warnings seriously, then I have a question I want you to answer, and I ask you to answer me honestly: “How many people would line up for five days just to hear Joe Biden talk?”… Don’t think we don’t have a problem here. Don’t get all smug laughing at these Bubbas in Tulsa today & snickering over how many of them are going to come down with Covid-19. They live, eat and breathe Trump — and none of us do that with Joe Biden.
We now know that, according to official estimates, only about 6,200 people showed up for Trump’s rally in Tulsa. Here is why that most likely happened.
Those numbers from a Fox News poll show that only 45 percent of Trump supporters think rallies are a good idea during a pandemic. Conversely, a majority of them at least have questions about the president’s claims that gathering in large groups is nothing to worry about. In other words, they’re not completely buying his lies—at least when their own health is on the line.
Following the rally in Tulsa, Moore had to adjust his narrative a bit. But it’s worth exploring his claim that voter enthusiasm is the critical ingredient in presidential elections. The first thing to keep in mind is that an enthusiastic vote doesn’t count any more than a more complacent vote. So does it make a difference if Biden’s most loyal supporters aren’t willing to line up for five days just to hear him talk?
We now know that Trump was never really a populist and that his message was aimed at inflaming the politics of grievance. It is also clear that he is attempting to go back to that same well in 2020. The challenge he faces is how to play the role of outsider after being in office for four years. Charles Hurt thinks that’s a slam dunk for Trump, given who Democrats chose to be his opponent.
The problem is how long [Biden] has been in Washington. Or, as Mr. Trump described it, “four decades of betrayal, calamity and failure.”… So, today, in his 78th year, his party finally gives him the shot they have denied him for 30 years. And off they lead him to slaughter. It is so ugly. And so Washington. But if anybody should know this wicked ritual, it is Joe Biden. He has been sloshing around in the fetid swamp longer than anybody.
It is true that voters have typically been drawn to candidates who don’t have long records of service in Washington. But while Republicans will attempt to act like Biden is some kind of pariah now that he is the nominee, they’ve already gone on record to praise him.
But perhaps what is more important than what Republican Senators think of Joe Biden is the question about what voters are looking for in 2020. While the most rabid Trump supporters are probably still looking for someone to stoke the fires of their grievances, I would suggest that the majority of the rest of us are simply exhausted from four years of lying and bullying—not to mention incompetence.
This might be the year when voters decide that experience actually matters. Not only are people ready for a president who is capable of empathy and the ability to put the country over his personal interests, Donald Trump’s successor is going to have to rebuild the entire federal government from the ground up. No one in politics is better prepared to do that than Joe Biden. That’s why being ready on day one is perhaps his most powerful campaign theme.
Biden is the antithesis of Trump in ways that matter most. This isn’t likely to be an election dominated by anger or grievance. I suspect that voters are tired of the chaos and are looking for a president who simply knows how to get the job done.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-22--Trump’s Tulsa Rally Was a Humiliating Debacle

When the president returned to the White House early Sunday morning after his MAGA rally in Tulsa , Oklahoma , he had the appearance of a soldier returning from a disastrous battle .
The New York Times painted the picture : “ His tie hung untied around his neck … he waved to reporters , with a defeated expression on his face , holding a crumpled red campaign hat in one hand.
” The kids are calling it the “ Walk of Shame.
” He was like the child prodigy who blows the state finals Spelling Bee because he can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what happens when you go on national television and admit committing a crime against humanity .
But it probably wasn ’ t his admission that he deliberately ordered the government to slow down testing for COVID-19 that had him feeling C-R-U-S-H-E-D .
He had been in a mood of giddy anticipation for days , thinking that all his problems would begin to melt away once he got back in front of his adoring fans .
But his fans didn ’ t show up .
He and Mike Pence were expecting to make two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inside the arena , and the other would be an overflow parking lot outside .
But the arena was half full and there was no one in the overflow area so that portion of the festivities had to be cancelled .
This was a classic example of overpromising and underdelivering .
In the lead-up to Tulsa , both Trump and his campaign manager Brad Parscale suggested that 300,000 or 800,000 or even a million people had requested tickets to the event .
Yet fewer than 9,000 people actually attended .
Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or an excuse for why this happened .
Some Korean pop music fans had ordered all the tickets with no intention of showing up , or the media scared people away with their health threats , or MAGA fans were scared of all the violence and looting they ’ d seen on their TVs .
Maybe the Chinese were behind it .
But whatever the explanation , no one forced Trump to spend fifteen minutes explaining why he has difficulty walking down slight inclines or drinking water with one hand .
After the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Trump spent his time on Air Force One looking at the social media response , and he immediately realized that he ’ d spawned a couple dozen humiliating memes .
As bad as all of that was , however , it was his realization that he couldn ’ t get his mojo back with MAGA rallies that must have left him most deflated .
The magic is gone .
There is no silver bullet .
Wishing otherwise won ’ t make it so .
Most likely , the first casualty of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But it ’ s Trump who wanted to do a rally in the middle of a pandemic when health officials said it was an unacceptable risk .
He has no one to blame for the result but himself .

When the president returned to the White House early Sunday morning after his MAGA rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, he had the appearance of a soldier returning from a disastrous battle. The New York Times painted the picture: “His tie hung untied around his neck … he waved to reporters, with a defeated expression on his face, holding a crumpled red campaign hat in one hand.”
The kids are calling it the “Walk of Shame.”
He was like the child prodigy who blows the state finals Spelling Bee because he can’t spell M-O-R-A-L-S.
That’s what happens when you go on national television and admit committing a crime against humanity. But it probably wasn’t his admission that he deliberately ordered the government to slow down testing for COVID-19 that had him feeling C-R-U-S-H-E-D.
He had been in a mood of giddy anticipation for days, thinking that all his problems would begin to melt away once he got back in front of his adoring fans. But his fans didn’t show up. He and Mike Pence were expecting to make two appearances in Tulsa. One would be inside the arena, and the other would be an overflow parking lot outside. But the arena was half full and there was no one in the overflow area so that portion of the festivities had to be cancelled.
This was a classic example of overpromising and underdelivering. In the lead-up to Tulsa, both Trump and his campaign manager Brad Parscale suggested that 300,000 or 800,000 or even a million people had requested tickets to the event. Yet fewer than 9,000 people actually attended. Trump’s supporters and enables all had a theory or an excuse for why this happened. Some Korean pop music fans had ordered all the tickets with no intention of showing up, or the media scared people away with their health threats, or MAGA fans were scared of all the violence and looting they’d seen on their TVs. Maybe the Chinese were behind it.
But whatever the explanation, no one forced Trump to spend fifteen minutes explaining why he has difficulty walking down slight inclines or drinking water with one hand.
After the rally, there’s no doubt that Trump spent his time on Air Force One looking at the social media response, and he immediately realized that he’d spawned a couple dozen humiliating memes.
As bad as all of that was, however, it was his realization that he couldn’t get his mojo back with MAGA rallies that must have left him most deflated. The magic is gone. There is no silver bullet. Wishing otherwise won’t make it so.
Most likely, the first casualty of the fiasco with be campaign manager Brad Parscale. But it’s Trump who wanted to do a rally in the middle of a pandemic when health officials said it was an unacceptable risk. He has no one to blame for the result but himself.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-22--Both Parties Should Accept Reality And Hold Their Conventions Virtually

Donald Trump ’ s failed rally in Tulsa last night had many important implications , but among the most important is the reality that not even die-hard Trump supporters are willing to attend a large indoor gathering as long as COVID-19 is spreading unchecked .
That ’ s not great news for Donald Trump , who would like people to go back to normal to boost the economy , even if it means a massive increase in infections and death .
But it is good news for the country that not even Trump ’ s most desperate attempts at turning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point are pushing even energized conservatives to throw caution totally to the wind .
Both the Democratic and Republican National Committees should take note as they prepare for their summer conventions .
By now it should be abundantly clear by now that given the increasing rates of COVID-19 infection and the rudderless federal response to the crisis , it probably won ’ t be any safer to hold a mass indoor gathering two months from now than it would be today .
In keeping with their different levels of concern about the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grounding for public policy , Republicans are more adamant about holding a traditional convention than Democrats .
Trump himself , of course , has been consistent in his insistence that the RNC convention have the full attendance and regalia–in part to honor himself , and in part to send a signal to America that everyone should go back to normal as quickly as possible so that he can tout a revitalized economy .
Unfortunately for Trump , even Republicans have been considering a scaled-down convention in late August .
The city of Charlotte @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convention the way Trump had demanded , forcing the RNC to decamp to Jacksonville , FL .
But the combined impact of COVID-19 and the requirements of staging a convention on such short notice mean that GOP efforts will by necessity be dampened : When asked about preparations for the convention , Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry told CNBC that the city has secured “ over 10,000 hotel rooms ” and expects the convention “ to bring an economic impact of more than $ 100 million to our city.
” But with just months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must take into account not just the short amount of time they have to get all aspects together , but also how the pandemic and protests will impact the event .
The Republican National Committee has indicated that it has confidence organizers will be able to pull off the convention .
But the failure of Trump ’ s latest rally should be a signal to Republican officials that even if they plan for the full shindig in Jacksonville , they may have a difficult time getting their delegates and associated retinue to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the big hall .
Better to hold a virtual convention than a big party to which no one shows up .
Democrats have been taking a much more responsible and cautious approach .
After initially dragging its heels somewhat , the DNC took action to begin to prepare for a more virtual convention .
On June 11th , DNC members overwhelmingly passed a resolution moving the Convention date to August 17th , and giving both Convention organizers broad authority to make all changes necessary to protect conventioneers and the surrounding community during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from minor alterations to staging part or even all of the convention virtually .
As with the GOP but to an even greater degree , it ’ s unclear how many Democratic delegates would even bother to attend if it were held in person in Milwaukee—even among Wisconsin locals .
Biden ’ s team is already planning for smaller streaming events in and around the convention , no matter what ends up happening—though Biden does plan to accept the nomination in person in any case .
To their credit , Democrats appear to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the local Milwaukee economy and public health as a result of their decision , than about the political optics .
Still , Democratic leadership still hasn ’ t given full indication of its plans–likely in the hope of a rosier circumstances around COVID-19 than currently exist , and in hopes of having to make as few changes to fundamental processes as possible .
Republicans are in much the same boat , with delegates worried about the small-d democratic processes of running a political party ( already difficult and fraught with controversy in person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ videoconference .
For the health of the public and the delegates , both parties need to come to terms with the reality that , in large part due to the Trump administration ’ s incompetent response to the pandemic , whatever economic and optics benefits may come from holding a convention in person would be dramatically overruled by the negative impacts of risking an outbreak for political reasons , taking stage in a hall filled with empty seats , and endangering the health of each party ’ s most committed activists ( most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and more vulnerable populations ) as well as residents and local businesses .
It is unlikely that the RNC , which ultimately answers to Trump , will heed this advice .
Despite his setback in Tulsa , Trump will likely insist on his big event , if for no other reason than to draw contrast with the Democrats ’ more subdued affair .
But the public is not on Trump ’ s side of this issue .
Most Americans favor caution about big public events during this crisis .
And it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ era how much conventions even matter anymore in terms of persuasion .
There is not much to be gained , and a great deal to lose , from insisting on holding an old-school convention .
With modern communications technology as good as it has become , and people all over the world using videoconference platforms to conduct work of all kinds from home , both parties should simply acknowledge our current reality now and make plans to conduct their business accordingly .


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-21--Trump Just Admitted to a Crime Against Humanity. No, He Wasn’t Joking.

Trump ’ s rally in Tulsa last night was a disaster on so many levels it ’ s difficult to count them .
From the bad optics and public health risks of holding a rally in the first place , to the mistake of originally setting it on Juneteenth in the location of the Tulsa race massacre , to the bizarre game of overinflated expectations the campaign made in promoting a million sign-ups for the rally that were largely generated by trolling Zoomers on Tiktok , to the desultory 6,200 person turnout forcing the overflow stage to speak to an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ placing the blame for the low turnout not on the responsible behavior of even hardcore Trump supporters during the pandemic ( a good and encouraging development ! )
but on fear of “ antifa protesters , ” thereby not only lying but making his own supporters appear weak and intimidated in the bargain–all of it was a disaster of enormous proportions .
And that ’ s before we even talk about what came out of Trump ’ s mouth during the event .
Because among the bizarre statements and absurdist pieces of performance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10-minute riff on his own ability to walk down a gentle ramp , and a strange demonstration that he can actually drink a glass of water–if only slowly and carefully ) came one of the most shocking admissions by a president in all modern history .
Trump boasted that he had asked his officials to slow down COVID-19 testing because the rising number of cases was making him look bad .
He then emphasized the point by implying that many of the positive test results didn ’ t really matter if they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He spoke dismissively of a “ young man , 10 years old ” who “ got the sniffles–he ’ s gon na recover in about 15 minutes.
” And then he waited for applause .
Of course , some young people do die of COVID-19 , and many more may have lifelong health complications that we are only just now beginning to understand .
Most importantly , even that healthy 10-year-old can then become a vector to transmit the disease to an aging or more vulnerable person with potentially fatal consequences .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positive , and Trump ’ s dismissal of the importance of testing him speaks volumes about his lack of understanding of the pandemic and of his callousness in placing his own political interest ahead of public health .
But let ’ s come back to the main shocking statement : “ I said to my people , slow the testing down please.
” It is hard to overstate the sheer evil of it .
The only way to stop a widespread pandemic is through mass , universal testing , aggressive contact tracing and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for any reason virtually guarantees the deaths of thousands , to say nothing of broader damage to the social fabric and to the economy .
To slow down testing for political reasons is particularly abominable .
It constitutes a criminal , negligent abuse of power so unspeakable and so unthinkable that there isn ’ t even a law , federal or international , to adequately cover the case .
It is the sort of high crime that impeachment was explicitly designed for , because the potential for abuses of power by a chief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it would be impossible to write laws for all the potential scenarios .
But to explicitly slow walk testing in a once-in-a-century pandemic , just to reduce the number of publicized cases for purely political purposes , allowing the virus to spread unchecked just to keep the economy humming along a little longer and to make his own response appear somewhat less incompetent , is the essence of a high crime .
Because the consequences are so deadly–potentially killing literally hundreds of thousands of his own fellow citizens and endangering the entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national and global crime against humanity .
Of course , the Trump campaign and administration ( is there even a difference at this point ? )
knew they would have to perform damage control .
White House trade advisor Peter Navarro claimed that Trump was only “ joking ” in a “ light moment.
” But listen to the audio again .
It is very clear that Trump wasn ’ t joking , and that the moment was anything but light .
Trump was blithe , sarcastic and dismissive , but that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump clearly meant every word he said at that moment .
It ’ s also not the first time Trump has intimated as much .
At the very beginning of the pandemic Trump insisted that the virus would not spread and did not need to be taken too seriously , saying “ You have 15 people , and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero.
” Throughout the course of the pandemic he pooh-poohed the need for mass testing because the virus was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ disappear like a miracle.
” The United States did not seek help from the World Health Organization to acquire tests ( the WHO does tend to assist developing countries ) , but then the CDC bungled the creation and implementation of domestic tests while Trump dithered .
He repeatedly lied about the U.S. having the most stringent testing regimen in the world , while also saying that tests weren ’ t that helpful , and while not taking the necessary steps to ramp up testing .
And Trump has repeatedly claimed that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it makes us look bad.
” In other words , the president ’ s admission at his fizzled campaign rally last night that he asked his administration to slow down the testing because healthy 10-year-olds testing positive was made him look bad unfairly wasn ’ t a joke .
It was merely the most direct confirmation of what was already obvious and what he had obliquely already mentioned before .
And yes : it is a crime against humanity .
It is no joke .
The resulting death toll could number in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it constitutes one of the greatest criminal abuses of power in all of American history by a sitting president .

Trump’s rally in Tulsa last night was a disaster on so many levels it’s difficult to count them. From the bad optics and public health risks of holding a rally in the first place, to the mistake of originally setting it on Juneteenth in the location of the Tulsa race massacre, to the bizarre game of overinflated expectations the campaign made in promoting a million sign-ups for the rally that were largely generated by trolling Zoomers on Tiktok, to the desultory 6,200 person turnout forcing the overflow stage to speak to an empty parking lot, to the campaign placing the blame for the low turnout not on the responsible behavior of even hardcore Trump supporters during the pandemic (a good and encouraging development!) but on fear of “antifa protesters,” thereby not only lying but making his own supporters appear weak and intimidated in the bargain–all of it was a disaster of enormous proportions. And that’s before we even talk about what came out of Trump’s mouth during the event.
Because among the bizarre statements and absurdist pieces of performance art Trump displayed onstage (including a 10-minute riff on his own ability to walk down a gentle ramp, and a strange demonstration that he can actually drink a glass of water–if only slowly and carefully) came one of the most shocking admissions by a president in all modern history. Trump boasted that he had asked his officials to slow down COVID-19 testing because the rising number of cases was making him look bad.
“Here’s the bad part: when you do testing to that extent, you’re going to find more people, you’re going to find more cases. So I said to my people, slow the testing down please.”
He then emphasized the point by implying that many of the positive test results didn’t really matter if they were among young people likely to recover. He spoke dismissively of a “young man, 10 years old” who “got the sniffles–he’s gonna recover in about 15 minutes.” And then he waited for applause. Of course, some young people do die of COVID-19, and many more may have lifelong health complications that we are only just now beginning to understand. Most importantly, even that healthy 10-year-old can then become a vector to transmit the disease to an aging or more vulnerable person with potentially fatal consequences. So of course it matters if he tests positive, and Trump’s dismissal of the importance of testing him speaks volumes about his lack of understanding of the pandemic and of his callousness in placing his own political interest ahead of public health.
But let’s come back to the main shocking statement: “I said to my people, slow the testing down please.” It is hard to overstate the sheer evil of it. The only way to stop a widespread pandemic is through mass, universal testing, aggressive contact tracing and isolation measures. To slow down testing for any reason virtually guarantees the deaths of thousands, to say nothing of broader damage to the social fabric and to the economy. To slow down testing for political reasons is particularly abominable.
It constitutes a criminal, negligent abuse of power so unspeakable and so unthinkable that there isn’t even a law, federal or international, to adequately cover the case. It is the sort of high crime that impeachment was explicitly designed for, because the potential for abuses of power by a chief executive potentate is so vast and variegated that it would be impossible to write laws for all the potential scenarios. But to explicitly slow walk testing in a once-in-a-century pandemic, just to reduce the number of publicized cases for purely political purposes, allowing the virus to spread unchecked just to keep the economy humming along a little longer and to make his own response appear somewhat less incompetent, is the essence of a high crime. Because the consequences are so deadly–potentially killing literally hundreds of thousands of his own fellow citizens and endangering the entire interconnected world–it constitutes nothing less than a national and global crime against humanity.
Of course, the Trump campaign and administration (is there even a difference at this point?) knew they would have to perform damage control. White House trade advisor Peter Navarro claimed that Trump was only “joking” in a “light moment.” But listen to the audio again. It is very clear that Trump wasn’t joking, and that the moment was anything but light. Trump was blithe, sarcastic and dismissive, but that’s very different from engaging in pretense. Trump clearly meant every word he said at that moment.
It’s also not the first time Trump has intimated as much. At the very beginning of the pandemic Trump insisted that the virus would not spread and did not need to be taken too seriously, saying “You have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero.” Throughout the course of the pandemic he pooh-poohed the need for mass testing because the virus was either “under control” or would “disappear like a miracle.” The United States did not seek help from the World Health Organization to acquire tests (the WHO does tend to assist developing countries), but then the CDC bungled the creation and implementation of domestic tests while Trump dithered. He repeatedly lied about the U.S. having the most stringent testing regimen in the world, while also saying that tests weren’t that helpful, and while not taking the necessary steps to ramp up testing. And Trump has repeatedly claimed that “testing is overrated” because “it makes us look bad.”
In other words, the president’s admission at his fizzled campaign rally last night that he asked his administration to slow down the testing because healthy 10-year-olds testing positive was made him look bad unfairly wasn’t a joke. It was merely the most direct confirmation of what was already obvious and what he had obliquely already mentioned before.
And yes: it is a crime against humanity. It is no joke. The resulting death toll could number in the hundreds of thousands domestically alone. And it constitutes one of the greatest criminal abuses of power in all of American history by a sitting president.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-23--What Was Behind Barr’s Friday Night Massacre?

The last time Rudy Giuliani ’ s co-conspirator Lev Parnas spoke publicly was January 16 , 2020 , when he sat for interviews with both Rachel Maddow and Anderson Cooper .
Along with providing details about Trump ’ s extortion efforts with the Ukrainian president , he made this rather explosive claim about the role of Attorney General William Barr in the Trump administration .
Parnas actually said that he was more frightened of people in our Justice Department than he was of the mobsters he was turning on in Ukraine .
Parnas ’ s trial was originally scheduled to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the coronavirus , it has been delayed until February 2021 , well after the November election .
The prosecutors that have been investigating this matter work in the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office in the Southern District of New York—where Barr just ousted Geoffrey Berman .
Knowing that he was a target of that investigation , Giuliani went on a bit of a rant about those prosecutors during an interview with Olivia Nuzzi last December .
And then there ’ s the Southern District of New York , the biggest betrayal of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his world , full of his guys ; he ran the office for most of the ’ 80s .
It was unrecognizable now .
“ If they ’ re investigating me , they ’ re assholes .
They ’ re absolutely assholes if they ’ re investigating me , ” he said… “ If they are , they ’ re idiots , ” he went on .
“ Then they really are a Trump-deranged bunch of silly New York liberals.
” It should therefore be no surprise that on Monday , Giuliani sat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread a whole new conspiracy theory about why Barr wanted to get rid of Berman .
He claimed that Berman was ousted because he failed to investigate the “ evidence ” Giuliani had turned up about Hunter Biden .
Right on queue , John Solomon—another Giuliani co-conspirator—weighed in with “ evidence ” to back up the claims .
Could the impeachment scandal have been prevented if the now-fired U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman had followed up on Ukrainian allegations about Joe Biden and his family in 2018 ?
That ’ s the tantalizing question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an American lawyer and the chief federal prosecutor in Manhattan that were obtained by Just the News .
The memos show that well before Ukrainian prosecutors reached out to Rudy Giuliani , President Trump ’ s lawyer , in 2019 to talk about the Bidens and alleged 2016 election interference they first approached Berman ’ s office in New York in October 2018 via another American lawyer .
The lawyer in question is Bud Cummins , who served as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas from 2001 to 2006 .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s campaign in Arkansas .
Then , Iin 2018 , Cummins attempted to set up a meeting between Ukraine ’ s then-prosecutor general , Yuriy Lutsenko , and Berman .
But the U.S. Attorney didn ’ t respond .
Solomon and Giuliani aren ’ t dropping any new bombshells about all of this .
The whole thing was reported by Josh Kovensky back in November 2016 at Talking Points Memo .
There are a couple of problems with this attempt to smear Berman .
The first is that Lutsenko has already admitted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sell were lies .
In other words , Berman made the right call when he ignored them .
But when Barr made his move to get rid of Berman , he undercut any attempt to claim that the decision was based on job performance issues by publicly offering Berman two other positions that actually amounted to promotions .
Here is what the attorney general wrote in his letter to Berman .
If Barr thought that Berman had failed to follow-up on a major case , he wouldn ’ t have offered him two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He simply would have had him fired for cause .
So as speculation mounts about why Barr was so intent on getting rid of the U.S. Attorney in charge of the Southern District of New York , it is worth noting that two of the people who could be implicated in the Trump-Giuliani extortion scheme are trying to preemptively smear Berman .
While it is true that there are a whole host of possible investigations Barr might have been attempting to obstruct , there is an old idiom about how it is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ squealing .
Giuliani and Solomon just gave us our first hint about why Barr might have wanted to get rid of Berman .
It is very possible that prosecutors in the SDNY have been able to corroborate the claims made by Parnas about Trump ’ s extortion scheme .
That could include criminal acts by both the president and his lawyer .

The last time Rudy Giuliani’s co-conspirator Lev Parnas spoke publicly was January 16, 2020, when he sat for interviews with both Rachel Maddow and Anderson Cooper. Along with providing details about Trump’s extortion efforts with the Ukrainian president, he made this rather explosive claim about the role of Attorney General William Barr in the Trump administration.
Parnas actually said that he was more frightened of people in our Justice Department than he was of the mobsters he was turning on in Ukraine.
Parnas’s trial was originally scheduled to begin in early October, but due to the coronavirus, it has been delayed until February 2021, well after the November election. The prosecutors that have been investigating this matter work in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York—where Barr just ousted Geoffrey Berman.
Knowing that he was a target of that investigation, Giuliani went on a bit of a rant about those prosecutors during an interview with Olivia Nuzzi last December.
And then there’s the Southern District of New York, the biggest betrayal of all. That was supposed to be his world, full of his guys; he ran the office for most of the ’80s. It was unrecognizable now. “If they’re investigating me, they’re assholes. They’re absolutely assholes if they’re investigating me,” he said… “If they are, they’re idiots,” he went on. “Then they really are a Trump-deranged bunch of silly New York liberals.”
It should therefore be no surprise that on Monday, Giuliani sat for an interview with Laura Ingraham to spread a whole new conspiracy theory about why Barr wanted to get rid of Berman.
He claimed that Berman was ousted because he failed to investigate the “evidence” Giuliani had turned up about Hunter Biden. Right on queue, John Solomon—another Giuliani co-conspirator—weighed in with “evidence” to back up the claims.
Could the impeachment scandal have been prevented if the now-fired U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman had followed up on Ukrainian allegations about Joe Biden and his family in 2018? That’s the tantalizing question raised by emails from fall 2018 between an American lawyer and the chief federal prosecutor in Manhattan that were obtained by Just the News. The memos show that well before Ukrainian prosecutors reached out to Rudy Giuliani, President Trump’s lawyer, in 2019 to talk about the Bidens and alleged 2016 election interference they first approached Berman’s office in New York in October 2018 via another American lawyer.
The lawyer in question is Bud Cummins, who served as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas from 2001 to 2006. In 2016, he was chair of Trump’s campaign in Arkansas. Then, in 2018, Cummins attempted to set up a meeting between Ukraine’s then-prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, and Berman. But the U.S. Attorney didn’t respond. Solomon and Giuliani aren’t dropping any new bombshells about all of this. The whole thing was reported by Josh Kovensky back in November 2016 at Talking Points Memo.
There are a couple of problems with this attempt to smear Berman. The first is that Lutsenko has already admitted that the allegations he was attempting to sell were lies. In other words, Berman made the right call when he ignored them.
But when Barr made his move to get rid of Berman, he undercut any attempt to claim that the decision was based on job performance issues by publicly offering Berman two other positions that actually amounted to promotions. Here is what the attorney general wrote in his letter to Berman.
When the Department of Justice advised the public of the President’s intent to nominate your successor, I had understood that we were in ongoing discussions concerning the possibility of your remaining in the Department or Administration in one of the other senior positions we discussed, including Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division and Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
If Barr thought that Berman had failed to follow-up on a major case, he wouldn’t have offered him two other plum positions in the administration. He simply would have had him fired for cause.
So as speculation mounts about why Barr was so intent on getting rid of the U.S. Attorney in charge of the Southern District of New York, it is worth noting that two of the people who could be implicated in the Trump-Giuliani extortion scheme are trying to preemptively smear Berman.
While it is true that there are a whole host of possible investigations Barr might have been attempting to obstruct, there is an old idiom about how it is the stuck pig who does all of the squealing. Giuliani and Solomon just gave us our first hint about why Barr might have wanted to get rid of Berman. It is very possible that prosecutors in the SDNY have been able to corroborate the claims made by Parnas about Trump’s extortion scheme. That could include criminal acts by both the president and his lawyer.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-23--Why Young People Are Demanding America Rethink Its Past

Long-term polling by Gallup shows a slow and steady decline in American national pride and confidence in our institutions that predates the COVID-19 crisis .
But as Catherine Rampell notes in the Washington Post , the slide has accelerated in the last several months .
Recent crises — involving health , the economy and police brutality — seem to have caused more Americans to question their country ’ s track record .
So suggests the COVID-19 Social Change Survey , a daily , nationally representative survey about the pandemic run by Northwestern University social scientists since mid-March .
Some survey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better , worse or about the same as other nations across about a dozen topics ( economy , health care , criminal justice system , military , education , etc. )
.
On nearly every metric , the share of Americans rating the United States as “ better ” than other countries has declined since the pandemic began .
Given Americans ’ penchant for hubris , we can probably use a self-correcting dose of humility , although it would have been preferable if it didn ’ t involve over 120,000 casualties and widespread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is correct when she writes , “ Normally , of course , reduced patriotism or institutional trust would not be positive developments .
These declines can be constructive only if they spur the public—and elected officials—to create conditions that would inspire more patriotism and trust.
” For some , patriotism is always suspect , but love of country doesn ’ t have to be synonymous with arrogance and false pride .
It ’ s usually a sign of health rather than dangerous overconfidence .
The same is true of how people feel about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ courts , and their overall safety and well-being .
Rampell is optimistic that we may be reaching a point where we ’ re actually going to do something to address areas like climate and health coverage and gun violence—where we significantly lag behind our peers .
But I think the lack of confidence in our institutions is deeper and in part demographic , which is why we seem to be entering an era of iconoclasm where symbols of America ’ s past are torn down and history is rewritten with new heroes and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the New World , the expansion of our colonial borders , the settling of the West , the rapid industrialization of the country , and our emergence as a superpower were all previously sources of pride and celebration , but every one of those achievements is being reevaluated by a younger generation that is more diverse and hasn ’ t been getting its fair share of the American Dream .
This would be happening to some degree in any circumstances , as the old story of America was told by European settlers rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indigenous people they replaced , or the more recent immigrants from other continents around the world .
But it is more extreme right now because our institutions have been failing all Americans , leading to widespread doubt about our government from every group of citizens .
Congress will not , and most often can not find solutions to any of our most pressing issues , and that ’ s why we ’ re seeing people in the streets who seem more interested in tearing down symbols of our past than in working to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 pandemic seems to have put people under enough stress that long-simmering and often unrelated injustices have reached a boiling point , and perhaps we will get enough fresh blood in government after this fall ’ s election to see more effective governance .
But , whatever happens , we ’ re not going back to the way things were .
The new generation ’ s demand is that we rethink not only how we do things in the future , but how we got here in the first place .

Long-term polling by Gallup shows a slow and steady decline in American national pride and confidence in our institutions that predates the COVID-19 crisis. But as Catherine Rampell notes in the Washington Post, the slide has accelerated in the last several months.
Recent crises — involving health, the economy and police brutality — seem to have caused more Americans to question their country’s track record. So suggests the COVID-19 Social Change Survey, a daily, nationally representative survey about the pandemic run by Northwestern University social scientists since mid-March. Some survey questions asked whether the United States is better, worse or about the same as other nations across about a dozen topics (economy, health care, criminal justice system, military, education, etc.). On nearly every metric, the share of Americans rating the United States as “better” than other countries has declined since the pandemic began.
Given Americans’ penchant for hubris, we can probably use a self-correcting dose of humility, although it would have been preferable if it didn’t involve over 120,000 casualties and widespread property damage.
More importantly, Rampell is correct when she writes, “Normally, of course, reduced patriotism or institutional trust would not be positive developments. These declines can be constructive only if they spur the public—and elected officials—to create conditions that would inspire more patriotism and trust.”
For some, patriotism is always suspect, but love of country doesn’t have to be synonymous with arrogance and false pride. It’s usually a sign of health rather than dangerous overconfidence. The same is true of how people feel about their representatives, their police, their courts, and their overall safety and well-being.
Rampell is optimistic that we may be reaching a point where we’re actually going to do something to address areas like climate and health coverage and gun violence—where we significantly lag behind our peers. But I think the lack of confidence in our institutions is deeper and in part demographic, which is why we seem to be entering an era of iconoclasm where symbols of America’s past are torn down and history is rewritten with new heroes and new villains.
The European discovery of the New World, the expansion of our colonial borders, the settling of the West, the rapid industrialization of the country, and our emergence as a superpower were all previously sources of pride and celebration, but every one of those achievements is being reevaluated by a younger generation that is more diverse and hasn’t been getting its fair share of the American Dream.
This would be happening to some degree in any circumstances, as the old story of America was told by European settlers rather than the people they enslaved, the indigenous people they replaced, or the more recent immigrants from other continents around the world. But it is more extreme right now because our institutions have been failing all Americans, leading to widespread doubt about our government from every group of citizens. Congress will not, and most often cannot find solutions to any of our most pressing issues, and that’s why we’re seeing people in the streets who seem more interested in tearing down symbols of our past than in working to elect new leadership in November.
The COVID-19 pandemic seems to have put people under enough stress that long-simmering and often unrelated injustices have reached a boiling point, and perhaps we will get enough fresh blood in government after this fall’s election to see more effective governance. But, whatever happens, we’re not going back to the way things were. The new generation’s demand is that we rethink not only how we do things in the future, but how we got here in the first place.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-23--Before Congress Subpoenas Barr, DOJ Whistleblowers Should Speak Out

The Trump administration is so thoroughly corrupt that Attorney General Barr ’ s attempt to get rid of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York , Geoffrey Berman , and replace him with loyalist Jay Clayton has spawned massive speculation about why .
Quinta Jurecic and Benjamin Wittes offer three possible scenarios .
• Simple patronage .
Clayton recently played golf with Trump and told the president he wanted the job .
• Retaliation against the U.S. Attorney for prosecuting Michael Cohen .
• To stop an investigation that is currently underway .
Berman ’ s initial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he had voluntarily resigned tells us which one of those three he assumed was the reason ( emphasis mine ) .
I learned in a press release from the Attorney General tonight that I was ‘ stepping down ’ as United States Attorney .
I have not resigned , and have no intention of resigning , my position , to which I was appointed by the Judges of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York .
I will step down when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigations will move forward without delay or interruption .
I cherish every day that I work with the men and women of this Office to pursue justice without fear or favor — and intend to ensure that this Office ’ s important cases continue unimpeded .
Berman was able to make good on his commitment to ensure that important cases continue unimpeded by refusing to resign until his deputy , Audrey Strauss , was named acting U.S. Attorney .
But in suggesting that his ouster was an attempt to intervene with investigations that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the list of possibilities .
In order to understand this whole fiasco , we need to know the attorney general ’ s intentions .
That has led some people to demand that Barr should be subpoenaed to testify before a congressional committee .
But there are two things we ’ ve learned about this attorney general : ( 1 ) He will go to any lengths to protect Trump and his cronies , and ( 2 ) He lies .
Even federal judges have made it clear that Barr ’ s word can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s true that he would commit a crime if he lied before congress , that has never stopped him before .
At this point I wouldn ’ t trust a thing that came out of his mouth .
That is why I agree wholeheartedly with former DOJ spokesman Matthew Miller .
Former DOJ employee Julie Zebrak called for the same thing back in February .
To put it bluntly , Trump ’ s corruption of the Justice Department hides in plain sight .
Equally obvious is the complicity of the attorney general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he ’ s perfectly willing to subvert the national interest to advance the president ’ s political interest… While government attorneys may , by nature , be risk-averse and media-shy , the silence from those who are witnesses to Barr ’ s corruption is deafening .
Career attorneys have been in the rooms where this has happened ; they ’ ve been on the email chains .
They are witnesses .
It ’ s time for them to tell us what they know… So , as the guardrails fall off our democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Where are the Justice Department ’ s whistleblowers ?
Where are the people who have spent decades proudly serving the American public and have been sitting in on meetings with Trump appointees for the last three years ?
Trial lawyers have an old saying : “ Never ask a question you don ’ t know the answer to.
” While it is imperative for the American public to get answers about why Barr was so intent on getting rid of a U.S. Attorney whose office has been involved in multiple investigations of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ futile to bring the suspect before congress until we have some answers .
So I ’ m not interested in hearing from the Attorney General .
He would simply use the time to spread his own brand of propaganda and lies .
I ’ d rather hear from some courageous people who know the truth and are willing to risk the president ’ s ire in order to tell it .

The Trump administration is so thoroughly corrupt that Attorney General Barr’s attempt to get rid of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Geoffrey Berman, and replace him with loyalist Jay Clayton has spawned massive speculation about why. Quinta Jurecic and Benjamin Wittes offer three possible scenarios.
Simple patronage. Clayton recently played golf with Trump and told the president he wanted the job. Retaliation against the U.S. Attorney for prosecuting Michael Cohen. To stop an investigation that is currently underway.
Berman’s initial response to Barr’s lie that he had voluntarily resigned tells us which one of those three he assumed was the reason (emphasis mine).
I learned in a press release from the Attorney General tonight that I was ‘stepping down’ as United States Attorney. I have not resigned, and have no intention of resigning, my position, to which I was appointed by the Judges of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. I will step down when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by the Senate. Until then, our investigations will move forward without delay or interruption. I cherish every day that I work with the men and women of this Office to pursue justice without fear or favor — and intend to ensure that this Office’s important cases continue unimpeded.
Berman was able to make good on his commitment to ensure that important cases continue unimpeded by refusing to resign until his deputy, Audrey Strauss, was named acting U.S. Attorney. But in suggesting that his ouster was an attempt to intervene with investigations that are currently underway, he only lengthened the list of possibilities.
In order to understand this whole fiasco, we need to know the attorney general’s intentions. That has led some people to demand that Barr should be subpoenaed to testify before a congressional committee. But there are two things we’ve learned about this attorney general: (1) He will go to any lengths to protect Trump and his cronies, and (2) He lies. Even federal judges have made it clear that Barr’s word can’t be trusted. While it’s true that he would commit a crime if he lied before congress, that has never stopped him before. At this point I wouldn’t trust a thing that came out of his mouth. That is why I agree wholeheartedly with former DOJ spokesman Matthew Miller.
Former DOJ employee Julie Zebrak called for the same thing back in February.
To put it bluntly, Trump’s corruption of the Justice Department hides in plain sight. Equally obvious is the complicity of the attorney general who has made clear time and again that he’s perfectly willing to subvert the national interest to advance the president’s political interest… While government attorneys may, by nature, be risk-averse and media-shy, the silence from those who are witnesses to Barr’s corruption is deafening. Career attorneys have been in the rooms where this has happened; they’ve been on the email chains. They are witnesses. It’s time for them to tell us what they know… So, as the guardrails fall off our democracy each day, I keep wondering: Where are the Justice Department’s whistleblowers? Where are the people who have spent decades proudly serving the American public and have been sitting in on meetings with Trump appointees for the last three years?
Trial lawyers have an old saying: “Never ask a question you don’t know the answer to.” While it is imperative for the American public to get answers about why Barr was so intent on getting rid of a U.S. Attorney whose office has been involved in multiple investigations of the president and his cronies, it is futile to bring the suspect before congress until we have some answers. So I’m not interested in hearing from the Attorney General. He would simply use the time to spread his own brand of propaganda and lies. I’d rather hear from some courageous people who know the truth and are willing to risk the president’s ire in order to tell it.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-23--Who Are America’s Best Nonfiction Book Reviewers?

The Washington Monthly magazine is pleased to announce the finalists for the inaugural Kukula Award for Excellence in Nonfiction Book Reviewing—the only journalism prize dedicated to highlighting and encouraging high-quality reviews of serious , public affairs–focused books .
The award honors the memory of the late Kukula Kapoor Glastris , the magazine ’ s longtime and beloved books editor .
“ Nonfiction book reviewing plays a key role in transmitting hard-won reporting , research , and ideas on major issues of the day , like racial injustice and the rise of illiberalism , to policymakers and citizens who can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the important books being published each year , ” said Washington Monthly editor in chief Paul Glastris , Kukula ’ s husband of 31 years .
“ The aim of the award is to highlight the work of the talented individuals who practice this undervalued craft—work Kukula devoted herself to editing and publishing.
” Selected from more than 100 outstanding submissions published across a wide range of print and online media in 2019 , the finalists were honored for their clear and artful exposition ; original and persuasive thesis ; and ability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information .
Judges gave priority to works of politics , public affairs , history , and biography .
Finalists were chosen in two categories based on size of the publication .
In the larger category , : • Sophie Pinkham in the New York Review of Books , for her review of a trio of books on the lessons of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster by Kate Brown , Adam Higginbotham , and Serhii Plokhy • Casey Cep in the New Yorker , for her review of “ Black Radical : The Life and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kerri Greenidge • Adam Gopnik in the New Yorker , for his review of “ How to Be a Dictator : The Cult of Personality in the Twentieth Century ” by Frank Dikötter • Laura Miller in Slate , for her review of “ You Had to Be There : Rape Jokes ” by Vanessa Place • Carlos Lozada in the Washington Post , for his review of “ The Case for Nationalism : How It Made Us Powerful , United , and Free ” by Rich Lowry • Morten Høi Jensen in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ On the End of the World ” by Joseph Roth • Jordan Michael Smith in Longreads , for his review of “ Seeking the Fabled City ” by Allan Levine and “ A Specter Haunting Europe ” by Paul Hanebrink • Boris Dralyuk in the Los Angeles Review of Books , for his review of “ Stalin ’ s Scribe : Literature , Ambition , and Survival : The Life of Mikhail Sholokhov ” by Brian Boeck • Paul W. Gleason in the Los Angeles Review of Books , for his review @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Heather Mac Donald • John Siman in Naked Capitalism , for his review of “ Crisis of Conscience : Whistleblowing in an Age of Fraud ” by Tom Mueller The top winner in each category will be announced on Monday , June 29 .
Each winner will receive a $ 1,000 honorarium .
Six judges selected this year ’ s best book reviewers .
They are : Debra Dickerson , essayist , Washington Monthly editorial advisory board member , and author most recently of The End of Blackness : Returning the Souls of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gregg Easterbrook , a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences , a Washington Monthly contributing editor , and author of Better Than It Looks : Reasons for Optimism in an Age of Fear and 11 other books .
Haley Sweetland Edwards , a senior editor at Time magazine , a Washington Monthly contributing editor , and author of Shadow Courts : The Tribunals That Rule Global Trade .
Paul Glastris , editor in chief at the Washington Monthly , co-author of The Other College Guide : A Roadmap to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , policy director at the Open Markets Program , senior editor at the Washington Monthly , and author of The Empty Cradle : How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity and What to Do About It and numerous other books .
Stephanie Mencimer , senior reporter at Mother Jones , contributing editor at the Washington Monthly , and author of Blocking the Courthouse Door .
The beloved and brilliant books editor of the Washington Monthly , Kukula ( “ Kuku ” to her legions of friends and fans ) made the book review section @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s best thinking and writing .
A keen editor and diplomatic manager of writers , she served as den mother and provisioner of delicious late-night home-cooked meals to a generation of young Washington Monthly journalists .
“ I ’ ve never met anyone whose combination of personal goodness , plus intellectual and professional abilities , exceeded Kukula ’ s , ” the journalist James Fallows wrote in The Atlantic .
To learn more about Kukula ’ s life , please read Kuku : A Love Story .
For more on the Kukula @ @ @ @ @

The Washington Monthly magazine is pleased to announce the finalists for the inaugural Kukula Award for Excellence in Nonfiction Book Reviewing—the only journalism prize dedicated to highlighting and encouraging high-quality reviews of serious, public affairs–focused books. The award honors the memory of the late Kukula Kapoor Glastris, the magazine’s longtime and beloved books editor.
“Nonfiction book reviewing plays a key role in transmitting hard-won reporting, research, and ideas on major issues of the day, like racial injustice and the rise of illiberalism, to policymakers and citizens who can’t possibly read more than a fraction of the important books being published each year,” said Washington Monthly editor in chief Paul Glastris, Kukula’s husband of 31 years. “The aim of the award is to highlight the work of the talented individuals who practice this undervalued craft—work Kukula devoted herself to editing and publishing.”
Selected from more than 100 outstanding submissions published across a wide range of print and online media in 2019, the finalists were honored for their clear and artful exposition; original and persuasive thesis; and ability to enlighten readers with new and valuable information. Judges gave priority to works of politics, public affairs, history, and biography.
Finalists were chosen in two categories based on size of the publication. In the larger category, finalists are :
Sophie Pinkham in the New York Review of Books, for her review of a trio of books on the lessons of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster by Kate Brown, Adam Higginbotham, and Serhii Plokhy
Casey Cep in the New Yorker, for her review of “Black Radical: The Life and Times of William Monroe Trotter” by Kerri Greenidge
Adam Gopnik in the New Yorker, for his review of “How to Be a Dictator: The Cult of Personality in the Twentieth Century” by Frank Dikötter
Laura Miller in Slate, for her review of “You Had to Be There: Rape Jokes” by Vanessa Place
Carlos Lozada in the Washington Post, for his review of “The Case for Nationalism: How It Made Us Powerful, United, and Free” by Rich Lowry
Among smaller publications, finalists are :
Morten Høi Jensen in Literary Hub, for his review of “On the End of the World” by Joseph Roth
Jordan Michael Smith in Longreads, for his review of “Seeking the Fabled City” by Allan Levine and “A Specter Haunting Europe” by Paul Hanebrink
Boris Dralyuk in the Los Angeles Review of Books, for his review of “Stalin’s Scribe: Literature, Ambition, and Survival: The Life of Mikhail Sholokhov” by Brian Boeck
Paul W. Gleason in the Los Angeles Review of Books, for his review of “The Diversity Delusion” by Heather Mac Donald
John Siman in Naked Capitalism, for his review of “Crisis of Conscience: Whistleblowing in an Age of Fraud” by Tom Mueller
The top winner in each category will be announced on Monday, June 29. Each winner will receive a $1,000 honorarium.
Six judges selected this year’s best book reviewers. They are:
Debra Dickerson, essayist, Washington Monthly editorial advisory board member, and author most recently of The End of Blackness: Returning the Souls of Black Folk to Their Rightful Owners.
Gregg Easterbrook, a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, a Washington Monthly contributing editor, and author of Better Than It Looks: Reasons for Optimism in an Age of Fear and 11 other books.
Haley Sweetland Edwards, a senior editor at Time magazine, a Washington Monthly contributing editor, and author of Shadow Courts: The Tribunals That Rule Global Trade.
Paul Glastris, editor in chief at the Washington Monthly, co-author of The Other College Guide: A Roadmap to the Right School for You.
Phillip Longman, policy director at the Open Markets Program, senior editor at the Washington Monthly, and author of The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity and What to Do About It and numerous other books.
Stephanie Mencimer, senior reporter at Mother Jones, contributing editor at the Washington Monthly, and author of Blocking the Courthouse Door.
About Kukula Kapoor Glastris
The beloved and brilliant books editor of the Washington Monthly, Kukula (“Kuku” to her legions of friends and fans) made the book review section the home of some of the magazine’s best thinking and writing. A keen editor and diplomatic manager of writers, she served as den mother and provisioner of delicious late-night home-cooked meals to a generation of young Washington Monthly journalists. “I’ve never met anyone whose combination of personal goodness, plus intellectual and professional abilities, exceeded Kukula’s,” the journalist James Fallows wrote in The Atlantic.
To learn more about Kukula’s life, please read Kuku: A Love Story. For more on the Kukula Award, go here.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-24--How Trump Will Try to Steal the Election

It would be foolish to try to predict the outcome of the 2020 presidential race with over four months to go before the ballots are counted .
But let ’ s be very clear : if the election were held today , Joe Biden would win .
Along with all of the other chaos going on across the country right now , that is what has Donald Trump in a tailspin .
At this point , the president is doing two things in preparation for November .
• Employ grievance politics to motivate his base , and • Do everything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On number two , there are three primary strategies the president is counting on .
This has been a Republican strategy for some time now , with Trump egging things on to an unprecedented level .
Since voter suppression efforts are launched by states , a good example is what happened in Kentucky in preparation for the Tuesday primary .
Fewer than 200 polling places will be open for voters in Kentucky ’ s primary Tuesday , down from 3,700 in a typical election year .
Amid a huge influx in requests for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not received theirs days before they must be turned in .
And turnout is expected to be higher than in past primaries because of a suddenly competitive fight for the Democratic Senate nomination .
The scenario has voting rights advocates and some local elections officials worried that the state is careening toward a messy day marked by long lines and frustrated voters — similar to the scenes that have played out repeatedly this spring as the novel coronavirus pandemic has disrupted the 2020 primaries .
Because of a shortage of workers willing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , each of the commonwealth ’ s 120 counties is opening a very limited number of polling locations .
The two largest counties will have just one in-person location each .
The other voter suppression effort coming from Trump is to try to bully states into rejecting an expansion of vote-by-mail—even in the midst of a pandemic .
He says that the process leads to massive fraud , even though there is no evidence for the claim .
Five states—Colorado , Hawaii , Oregon , Utah and Washington—have conducted their elections using a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In addition to the fact that members of the military who are stationed overseas have always voted by mail , Aaron Blake documents that 16 Trump officials , including the president , vice-president , and attorney general have voted by mail recently .
We all know that Trump welcomed Russian interference in the 2016 election and will do so again .
But according to John Bolton , Trump asked China ’ s President Xi Jingping to help him out .
Bolton writes that while meeting with Xi at last year ’ s G-20 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turned the conversation to the upcoming 2020 election.
” The president “ stressed the importance of farmers and increased Chinese purchases of soybeans and wheat in the electoral outcome.
” The most telling thing about that report is that Trump assumed Xi would want to help him win reelection and would therefore agree to purchase more products from American farmers .
Here is what Bolton told Martha Raddatz during their interview on Sunday .
Referring to his book , he said : Other than Russia , Ukraine , and China , it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requests or attempted to extort other countries into doing things that would help him win re-election .
If He Loses , Challenge the Results The president is already setting the stage to claim that the election was “ rigged ” if he loses .
This is where claiming that vote-by-mail is inherently fraudulent plays a dual role .
Not only does Trump use it to suppress votes during a pandemic , he will use it to challenge the results if he loses .
Recently we learned that Attorney General Barr will back him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr said during an interview with Maria Bartiromo .
Barr : But when government , state governments start adopting these practices like mail-in ballots that open the floodgates of potential fraud , then people ’ s confidence in the outcome of the election is going to be undermined .
And that could take the country to a very dark place , if we lose confidence in the outcomes of our elections… Bartiromo : Well , there ’ s a big discussion right now about mail-in voting… Barr : Well , it absolutely opens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are delivered into mailboxes .
They can be taken out .
There ’ s questions about whether or not it even denies a secret ballot , because a lot of the states have you signing the outside of the envelope .
So , the person who opens — person who opens the envelope will know how people voted .
There ’ s no — right now , a foreign country could print up tens of thousands of counterfeit ballots , and be very hard for us to detect which was the right and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the chief law enforcement officer in this country throwing out a claim without a shred of evidence that is disputed by every election official that has been involved with mail-in ballots .
So Chief Justice John Roberts should dust off his referee uniform and be prepared to call out the attorney general when he makes such a claim if Trump loses .
While not a direct attempt to steal the election , we can expect that Trump will attempt to deceive the public with big announcements prior to the election .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Attorney General Barr will make some sort of announcement about the probe John Durham is conducting into the Trump-Russia investigation .
Just this week the president accused his predecessor of treason , referring to what Durham will uncover .
Prior to hearing Durham ’ s conclusions , Barr referred to the Trump-Russia investigation as the closest thing to a coup we ’ ve seen in this country since the Lincoln assassination .
Since this president is willing to do or say anything in service of his own political interests , there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lies he ’ ll tell over the next four months .
But we can rest assured that there will be some whoppers in the mix .
So the one thing we can know for sure is that there will be some major political fireworks over the next few months .

It would be foolish to try to predict the outcome of the 2020 presidential race with over four months to go before the ballots are counted. But let’s be very clear: if the election were held today, Joe Biden would win. Along with all of the other chaos going on across the country right now, that is what has Donald Trump in a tailspin.
At this point, the president is doing two things in preparation for November.
Employ grievance politics to motivate his base, and Do everything he can to steal the election.
On number two, there are three primary strategies the president is counting on.
Voter Suppression
This has been a Republican strategy for some time now, with Trump egging things on to an unprecedented level. Since voter suppression efforts are launched by states, a good example is what happened in Kentucky in preparation for the Tuesday primary.
Fewer than 200 polling places will be open for voters in Kentucky’s primary Tuesday, down from 3,700 in a typical election year. Amid a huge influx in requests for mail-in ballots, some voters still had not received theirs days before they must be turned in. And turnout is expected to be higher than in past primaries because of a suddenly competitive fight for the Democratic Senate nomination. The scenario has voting rights advocates and some local elections officials worried that the state is careening toward a messy day marked by long lines and frustrated voters — similar to the scenes that have played out repeatedly this spring as the novel coronavirus pandemic has disrupted the 2020 primaries. Because of a shortage of workers willing to staff voting sites during the health crisis, each of the commonwealth’s 120 counties is opening a very limited number of polling locations. The two largest counties will have just one in-person location each.
The other voter suppression effort coming from Trump is to try to bully states into rejecting an expansion of vote-by-mail—even in the midst of a pandemic. He says that the process leads to massive fraud, even though there is no evidence for the claim. Five states—Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah and Washington—have conducted their elections using a vote-by-mail system with practically no issues. In addition to the fact that members of the military who are stationed overseas have always voted by mail, Aaron Blake documents that 16 Trump officials, including the president, vice-president, and attorney general have voted by mail recently.
Foreign Interference
We all know that Trump welcomed Russian interference in the 2016 election and will do so again. But according to John Bolton, Trump asked China’s President Xi Jingping to help him out. Bolton writes that while meeting with Xi at last year’s G-20 meeting, “Trump ‘stunningly’ turned the conversation to the upcoming 2020 election.” The president “stressed the importance of farmers and increased Chinese purchases of soybeans and wheat in the electoral outcome.” The most telling thing about that report is that Trump assumed Xi would want to help him win reelection and would therefore agree to purchase more products from American farmers.
Here is what Bolton told Martha Raddatz during their interview on Sunday. Referring to his book, he said:
[I]t shows a pattern quite contrary to the image [Trump] would like to convey, of a decisive president who knows something about what he’s doing. There really isn’t any guiding principle — that I was able to discern other than– what’s good for Donald Trump’s reelection.
Other than Russia, Ukraine, and China, it is very possible that Trump has either made requests or attempted to extort other countries into doing things that would help him win re-election.
If He Loses, Challenge the Results
The president is already setting the stage to claim that the election was “rigged” if he loses.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1275024974579982336
This is where claiming that vote-by-mail is inherently fraudulent plays a dual role. Not only does Trump use it to suppress votes during a pandemic, he will use it to challenge the results if he loses. Recently we learned that Attorney General Barr will back him in those efforts. Here is what Barr said during an interview with Maria Bartiromo.
Barr: But when government, state governments start adopting these practices like mail-in ballots that open the floodgates of potential fraud, then people’s confidence in the outcome of the election is going to be undermined. And that could take the country to a very dark place, if we lose confidence in the outcomes of our elections… Bartiromo: Well, there’s a big discussion right now about mail-in voting… Barr: Well, it absolutely opens the floodgates to fraud. Those things are delivered into mailboxes. They can be taken out. There’s questions about whether or not it even denies a secret ballot, because a lot of the states have you signing the outside of the envelope. So, the person who opens — person who opens the envelope will know how people voted. There’s no — right now, a foreign country could print up tens of thousands of counterfeit ballots, and be very hard for us to detect which was the right and which was the wrong ballot.
That is the chief law enforcement officer in this country throwing out a claim without a shred of evidence that is disputed by every election official that has been involved with mail-in ballots. So Chief Justice John Roberts should dust off his referee uniform and be prepared to call out the attorney general when he makes such a claim if Trump loses.
October Surprise(s)
While not a direct attempt to steal the election, we can expect that Trump will attempt to deceive the public with big announcements prior to the election. It is pretty certain, for example, that Attorney General Barr will make some sort of announcement about the probe John Durham is conducting into the Trump-Russia investigation. Just this week the president accused his predecessor of treason, referring to what Durham will uncover. Prior to hearing Durham’s conclusions, Barr referred to the Trump-Russia investigation as the closest thing to a coup we’ve seen in this country since the Lincoln assassination.
Since this president is willing to do or say anything in service of his own political interests, there’s no way of predicting what other lies he’ll tell over the next four months. But we can rest assured that there will be some whoppers in the mix. So the one thing we can know for sure is that there will be some major political fireworks over the next few months.