washingtonmonthly--2020-09-05--Don’t Forget About the Steve Bannon Indictment

The sheer number of Donald Trump ’ s cronies indicted , convicted , or still under investigation partially explains why this summer ’ s fraud and money laundering indictment of Stephen K. Bannon , Trump ’ s 2016 campaign manager and White House Chief Strategist , didn ’ t get the attention it deserved .
Bannon is , of course , only the latest member of Trump ’ s inner circle to face criminal charges – a group that includes Paul Manafort who Bannon replaced at the campaign ; Manafort ’ s Deputy , Rick Gates ; National Security Advisor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawyer Michael Cohen ; Roger Stone , the Republican trickster .
But there are many reasons that make what Bannon did worth following closely even if his trial is not scheduled until May 2021 .
Bannon was indicted for a terrible crime that we can not let be normalized .
What he did mimics Trump ’ s fraud against students at Trump University and Trump ’ s misuse of donations to his Trump Foundation .
Did Bannon learn from Trump or did Trump hire Bannon because he knew he shared his views of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never know but we do know that Bannon ’ s indictment along with that of all the others working for Trump ’ s campaign and administration is just one more reflection of the ( im ) moral climate the President has set for his administration .
It ’ s a tone that has diminished our position as a world leader and that should influence how each of us votes .
It is also a predictor of more to come , possibly something broad enough to encompass a number of Trump hires and volunteers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Washington Post and other news outlets are reporting that Elliott Broidy , a California venture capitalist who raised millions for Trump ’ s inaugural and served as Finance Chair of the RNC , may be charged soon with violating lobbying laws for his efforts on behalf of China to get the Chinese Guo Wengui , extradited to China .
Prosecutors are also reportedly interested in Broidy ’ s work on behalf of a Malaysian client to end a federal criminal investigation .
Guo links Broidy to Bannon because Bannon was staying aboard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was arrested for fleecing the donors to , We Build The Wall .
The reported case against Broidy may indicate that Bannon ’ s arrest was step one of a larger case .
In addition to Guo giving Bannon use of his yacht , he allowed Bannon to use his private jet to promote Republican congressional candidates in 2018 .
That arrangement could violate campaign finance laws banning foreign donations .
Is there a larger money laundering case that federal prosecutors in the SDNY and Hawaii are putting together ?
Can Bannon and/or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against higher ups .
Rumor is that Broidy may be cooperating , but he and Bannon can wait for a post-election pardon regardless of who wins the election since Trump can hand them out until Jan. 20 .
Even so , flipping seems entirely possible .
Bannon and three co-defendants are charged with enriching themselves at the expense of hundreds of thousands of donors to an alleged not-for-profit , “ We Build The Wall , ” by falsely promising that the founder would receive no compensation and 100 % of all contributions would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ southern border ( a wall that Trump said Mexico would pay for before diverting Pentagon funding to that purpose when Congress refused to fund it when Mexico didn ’ t ) .
The indictment also mentions that they didn ’ t create an actual nonprofit organization until they got caught saying they were one but weren ’ t , and they didn ’ t get legally required building permits until they got caught at that too .
And , The Texas Tribune and ProPublica report that engineers have said that the three-mile wall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fail due to erosion .
We Build the Wall raised $ 25 million and , despite its promises to donors , the indictment alleges WBTW used $ 1 million for other purposes .
They paid its founder hundreds of thousands and diverted even more for the personal benefit of Bannon and the other defendants .
They covered up those expenditures for luxury items including a boat , an SUV , travel , and even cosmetic surgery by laundering the funds through shell companies and a second suspicious nonprofit founded by Bannon , Citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enrichment is odious enough , it may be the flow of money to Bannon ’ s political operations that prove to be more damaging to Trumpworld .
The indictment refers to “ Non-Profit-1 ” which may be Bannon ’ s nonprofit Citizens of the American Republic , created to promote “ economic nationalism.
” The California-based nonprofit serves as a platform for Bannon ’ s films and podcasts that promote Trump ’ s ideology .
Federal prosecutors reveal that they intend to seize the assets of “ non-profit-1 .
If , as suspected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , one can only imagine who else might be ensnared in that web .
The Democrats don ’ t talk about Russia or Ukraine that much anymore .
But it ’ s important to remember that there are still a lot of legal loose ends out there before the election .
In addition to Bannon ’ s indictment and Broidy ’ s possible one , the D.C .
Circuit Court of Appeals kept alive the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn , at least for now .
Flynn , you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his phone call with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. in the days leading up to Trump ’ s inauguration .
He pled guilty to lying to the FBI and obstruction of justice and accepted a plea deal but later unsuccessfully tried to withdraw his guilty plea .
Then , while awaiting sentencing , AG William Barr had the DOJ move to dismiss the case on what I consider flimsy grounds—a move that led to the resignation of at least one career prosecutor .
When the lower court refused to toss it out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeal itand has now lost that appeal in an en banc decision by the DC Circuit ( NOTE : I am a plaintiff in a suit by my fellow Assistant Watergate Special Prosecutors to be amicus in the case . )
Could Bannon who was at the top of the Trump White House at the time of Flynn ’ s crime and a regular National Security Council participant for a time offer any insight on this case or other prosecutions ?
. )
If all this wasn ’ t bad enough , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who oversaw the Mueller investigation , may have constricted it so tightly that the special counsel was prohibited from investigating what might have been the full extent of the Trump campaign ’ s ties to Russia in 2016 .
I ’ ve been a prosecutor going back before Watergate .
I see a legal morass that is still getting larger for the president .
That ’ s true weeks before the election and ever truer afterwards whether he ’ s still in office or not .

The sheer number of Donald Trump’s cronies indicted, convicted, or still under investigation partially explains why this summer’s fraud and money laundering indictment of Stephen K. Bannon, Trump’s 2016 campaign manager, and White House Chief Strategist, didn’t get the attention it deserved. Bannon is, of course, only the latest member of Trump’s inner circle to face criminal charges – a group that includes Paul Manafort who Bannon replaced at the campaign; Manafort’s Deputy, Rick Gates; National Security Advisor Michael Flynn; Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen; Roger Stone, the Republican trickster.
But there are many reasons that make what Bannon did worth following closely even if his trial is not scheduled until May 2021.
Bannon was indicted for a terrible crime that we cannot let be normalized. What he did mimics Trump’s fraud against students at Trump University and Trump’s misuse of donations to his Trump Foundation. Did Bannon learn from Trump or did Trump hire Bannon because he knew he shared his views of what is acceptable? We’ll never know but we do know that Bannon’s indictment along with that of all the others working for Trump’s campaign and administration is just one more reflection of the (im)moral climate the President has set for his administration. It’s a tone that has diminished our position as a world leader and that should influence how each of us votes.
It is also a predictor of more to come, possibly something broad enough to encompass a number of Trump hires and volunteers. Indeed, more seems imminent. The Washington Post and other news outlets are reporting that Elliott Broidy, a California venture capitalist who raised millions for Trump’s inaugural and served as Finance Chair of the RNC, may be charged soon with violating lobbying laws for his efforts on behalf of China to get the Chinese Guo Wengui, extradited to China. Prosecutors are also reportedly interested in Broidy’s work on behalf of a Malaysian client to end a federal criminal investigation. Guo links Broidy to Bannon because Bannon was staying aboard Guo’s luxury yacht when he was arrested for fleecing the donors to, We Build The Wall. The reported case against Broidy may indicate that Bannon’s arrest was step one of a larger case. In addition to Guo giving Bannon use of his yacht, he allowed Bannon to use his private jet to promote Republican congressional candidates in 2018. That arrangement could violate campaign finance laws banning foreign donations.
Is there a larger money laundering case that federal prosecutors in the SDNY and Hawaii are putting together? Can Bannon and/or Broidy be flipped to build a case against higher-ups? Rumor is that Broidy may be cooperating, but he and Bannon can wait for a post-election pardon regardless of who wins the election since Trump can hand them out until Jan. 20. Even so, flipping seems entirely possible. Bannon and three co-defendants are charged with enriching themselves at the expense of hundreds of thousands of donors to an alleged not-for-profit, “We Build The Wall,” by falsely promising that the founder would receive no compensation and 100% of all contributions would go to building a wall on our southern border (a wall that Trump said Mexico would pay for before diverting Pentagon funding to that purpose when Congress refused to fund it when Mexico didn’t). The indictment also mentions that they didn’t create an actual nonprofit organization until they got caught saying they were one but weren’t, and they didn’t get legally required building permits until they got caught at that too. And, The Texas Tribune and ProPublica report that engineers have said that the three-mile wall built by We Build the Wall will fail due to erosion.
We Build the Wall raised $25 million and, despite its promises to donors, the indictment alleges WBTW used $1 million for other purposes. They paid its founder hundreds of thousands and diverted even more for the personal benefit of Bannon and the other defendants. They covered up those expenditures for luxury items including a boat, an SUV, travel, and even cosmetic surgery by laundering the funds through shell companies and a second suspicious nonprofit founded by Bannon, Citizens of the American Republic.
While personal enrichment is odious enough, it may be the flow of money to Bannon’s political operations that prove to be more damaging to Trumpworld. The indictment refers to “Non-Profit-1” which may be Bannon’s nonprofit Citizens of the American Republic, created to promote “economic nationalism.” The California-based nonprofit serves as a platform for Bannon’s films and podcasts that promote Trump’s ideology. Federal prosecutors reveal that they intend to seize the assets of “non-profit-1. If, as suspected, it is Bannon’s CAR, one can only imagine who else might be ensnared in that web.
The Democrats don’t talk about Russia or Ukraine that much anymore. But it’s important to remember that there are still a lot of legal loose ends out there before the election. In addition to Bannon’s indictment and Broidy’s possible one, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals kept alive the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, at least for now. Flynn, you’ll remember was fired for lying about his phone call with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. in the days leading up to Trump’s inauguration. He pled guilty to lying to the FBI and obstruction of justice and accepted a plea deal but later unsuccessfully tried to withdraw his guilty plea. Then, while awaiting sentencing, AG William Barr had the DOJ move to dismiss the case on what I consider flimsy grounds—a move that led to the resignation of at least one career prosecutor. When the lower court refused to toss it out, Barr ordered the Justice Department to appeal it and has now lost that appeal in an en banc decision by the DC Circuit. (NOTE: I am a plaintiff in a suit by my fellow Assistant Watergate Special Prosecutors to be amicus in the case.) Could Bannon who was at the top of the Trump White House at the time of Flynn’s crime and a regular National Security Council participant for a time offer any insight on this case or other prosecutions?
If all this wasn’t bad enough, we learned this week that Rod Rosenstein, who oversaw the Mueller investigation, may have constricted it so tightly that the special counsel was prohibited from investigating what might have been the full extent of the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia in 2016.
I’ve been a prosecutor going back before Watergate. I see a legal morass that is still getting larger for the president. That’s true weeks before the election and ever truer afterward whether he’s still in office or not.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-07--How Police Reform Can Improve the Plight of the Poor

Imagine walking into a police station for help as a victim of crime and also getting help as a victim of poverty .
Think how policing would change if , under the same roof , assistance were available for the problems of hunger , housing , health , addiction , and joblessness .
This sounds like pure fantasy , especially as unjustified police shootings continue , the country erupts in protests , and white supremacists threaten Black Lives Matter demonstrators with violence that turns deadly .
In many Black neighborhoods , the police are seen as the enemy—just another gang @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the constructive reform of policing need not be lost in the fog of fury .
It needs to be kept as a focused goal whose achievement will take unprecedented cooperation among community activists and law enforcement , including police leadership and officers in the ranks .
The problem has two parts .
One is the use of force by cops who are scared or bigoted or poorly trained or all of the above .
A great deal of study and thinking has gone into that issue , and lots of sound policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adopted , in scattered jurisdictions among the nation ’ s 18,000 police departments .
The other part has been mostly neglected , however : the clustering of diverse services so that officers can be relieved of onerous tasks for which they have no expertise .
It ’ s a good bet that you won ’ t be able to find a police officer who loves being called to a “ domestic dispute , ” where parachuting into a home without context can mean encountering unpredictable , split-second dangers .
Nor do cops relish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who account for a large number of encounters .
In short , police are confronted by issues they can not address , and need tools and training they do not have .
The solutions can not be reduced to bumper-sticker slogans such as “ Defund the Police.
” If that implies abolishing the police , it ’ s a ridiculous prescription for vigilantism in neighborhoods where lawlessness would reign .
On the other hand , if it means shifting some funds from policing to social services , it makes sense , especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cops can refer people easily .
Police officers interact with many citizens who are in or near poverty , whether to arrest them or protect them .
Poverty , for its part , is a constellation of problems that span a universe of hardships that require holistic measures .
As some police departments have learned , addressing housing and other factors in the lives of those arrested for drugs , for example , can reduce recidivism .
The LEAD ( Law Enforcement Assistance Diversion ) program , which began in Seattle , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prostitution defendants into a web of services , including mental health , housing and drug treatment , instead of the normal criminal justice system .
Participants are 58 percent less likely to be rearrested , according to the LEAD National Support Bureau , which is a project of the Public Defenders Association .
LEAD participants in Seattle improved their lives dramatically from before their enrollment , a 2016 evaluation found .
They were “ 89 percent more likely to obtain permanent housing .
.
.
46 percent more likely to be on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ training , employed in the legitimate market , retired ) , ” and “ 33 percent more likely to have income/benefits.
” Nearly fifty jurisdictions are either operating or launching the program , a good start but a tiny fraction of what ’ s necessary .
Americans in or near poverty who present themselves to an agency for one particular problem—at a food bank , say—invariably struggle under a broad burden of other issues .
The chain reactions among them are much more extensive than popularly understood .
Poor housing , for instance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially childhood asthma , which is higher among families in poverty .
Roaches , mold , and dust mites can trigger asthma attacks , which result in kids missing school and parents missing work to take them for treatment .
Doctors at the pediatrics department of the Boston Medical Center learned years ago that the treatment was practically futile when the children went back to homes full of antigens , so they began to enlist lawyers to press landlords to improve conditions .
The idea has caught on , and now 442 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the District of Columbia .
Some nonprofits have also established one-stop shopping for multiple services .
Bread for the City in Washington , DC , began as a food pantry , established an intake procedure to identify families ’ other problems , then added a medical clinic , job readiness instruction , and legal services to help people with housing , immigration , and access to government benefits .
There is a critical need across the country for such gateways through which people can pass into assistance for a range of their hardships @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be gateways—in normal , Covid-free times .
Schools , for example .
Teachers see problems such as hunger and poor health but don ’ t have the tools to help families address them .
So schools , with proper funding , would be natural places for counselors and others who could give assistance .
Also , public and affordable housing projects , where problems of poverty are legion .
Probation offices , where those convicted of crimes are required to make scheduled appearances .
And , of course , police departments , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for arrays of reasons that can not be ignored without consequences for the entire society .
Windows of opportunity open briefly .
This is one .
It goes without saying that America ought to be great enough to translate the anger , the hurt , the protest into practical reforms .

Imagine walking into a police station for help as a victim of crime and also getting help as a victim of poverty. Think how policing would change if, under the same roof, assistance were available for the problems of hunger, housing, health, addiction, and joblessness.
This sounds like pure fantasy, especially as unjustified police shootings continue, the country erupts in protests, and white supremacists threaten Black Lives Matter demonstrators with violence that turns deadly. In many Black neighborhoods, the police are seen as the enemy—just another gang, as some residents have said.
But the constructive reform of policing need not be lost in the fog of fury. It needs to be kept as a focused goal whose achievement will take unprecedented cooperation among community activists and law enforcement, including police leadership and officers in the ranks.
The problem has two parts. One is the use of force by cops who are scared or bigoted or poorly trained or all of the above. A great deal of study and thinking has gone into that issue, and lots of sound policies have been proposed, though too rarely adopted, in scattered jurisdictions among the nation’s 18,000 police departments.
The other part has been mostly neglected, however: the clustering of diverse services so that officers can be relieved of onerous tasks for which they have no expertise. It’s a good bet that you won’t be able to find a police officer who loves being called to a “domestic dispute,” where parachuting into a home without context can mean encountering unpredictable, split-second dangers. Nor do cops relish dealing with people suffering from mental illness, who account for a large number of encounters. In short, police are confronted by issues they cannot address, and need tools and training they do not have.
The solutions cannot be reduced to bumper-sticker slogans such as “Defund the Police.” If that implies abolishing the police, it’s a ridiculous prescription for vigilantism in neighborhoods where lawlessness would reign. On the other hand, if it means shifting some funds from policing to social services, it makes sense, especially if that assistance is readily available, and cops can refer people easily.
Police officers interact with many citizens who are in or near poverty, whether to arrest them or protect them. Poverty, for its part, is a constellation of problems that span a universe of hardships that require holistic measures. As some police departments have learned, addressing housing and other factors in the lives of those arrested for drugs, for example, can reduce recidivism. The LEAD (Law Enforcement Assistance Diversion) program, which began in Seattle, enables officers to send low-level drug and prostitution defendants into a web of services, including mental health, housing and drug treatment, instead of the normal criminal justice system. Participants are 58 percent less likely to be rearrested, according to the LEAD National Support Bureau, which is a project of the Public Defenders Association.
LEAD participants in Seattle improved their lives dramatically from before their enrollment, a 2016 evaluation found. They were “89 percent more likely to obtain permanent housing . . . 46 percent more likely to be on the employment continuum (i.e., in vocational training, employed in the legitimate market, retired),” and “33 percent more likely to have income/benefits.” Nearly fifty jurisdictions are either operating or launching the program, a good start but a tiny fraction of what’s necessary.
Americans in or near poverty who present themselves to an agency for one particular problem—at a food bank, say—invariably struggle under a broad burden of other issues. The chain reactions among them are much more extensive than popularly understood. Poor housing, for instance, is a key link to illness, especially childhood asthma, which is higher among families in poverty. Roaches, mold, and dust mites can trigger asthma attacks, which result in kids missing school and parents missing work to take them for treatment. Doctors at the pediatrics department of the Boston Medical Center learned years ago that the treatment was practically futile when the children went back to homes full of antigens, so they began to enlist lawyers to press landlords to improve conditions. The idea has caught on, and now 442 medical-legal partnerships exist in 48 states and the District of Columbia.
Some nonprofits have also established one-stop shopping for multiple services. Bread for the City in Washington, DC, began as a food pantry, established an intake procedure to identify families’ other problems, then added a medical clinic, job readiness instruction, and legal services to help people with housing, immigration, and access to government benefits.
There is a critical need across the country for such gateways through which people can pass into assistance for a range of their hardships. We already have institutions that could be gateways—in normal, Covid-free times. Schools, for example. Teachers see problems such as hunger and poor health but don’t have the tools to help families address them. So schools, with proper funding, would be natural places for counselors and others who could give assistance. Also, public and affordable housing projects, where problems of poverty are legion. Probation offices, where those convicted of crimes are required to make scheduled appearances. And, of course, police departments, which see citizens who are down and out for arrays of reasons that cannot be ignored without consequences for the entire society.
Windows of opportunity open briefly. This is one. It goes without saying that America ought to be great enough to translate the anger, the hurt, the protest into practical reforms.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-08--Trump Is Wrong: Affordable Housing Can Help the Suburbs

Earlier this summer , Donald Trump tweeted “ I am happy to inform all of the people living their Suburban Lifestyle Dream that you will no longer be bothered or financially hurt by having low-income housing built in your neighborhood.
” Since then he ’ s repeatedly returned to the idea that “ Suburban Housewives ” and the suburbs , in general , are being threatened by affordable housing and those who occupy it .
Trump ’ s language keeps the destructive dynamic between race and housing alive while we are facing a severe affordable housing shortage .
Consider the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has enough affordable housing .
That ’ s not a racial problem .
It ’ s a roof problem .
It applies to Maine as well as Michigan , North Dakota as well as New York .
According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition , there are only 36 affordable rental units available for every 100 extremely low-income households—and that was prior to COVID-19 causing thousands of Americans to struggle to pay rent .
We tend to conflate public housing with race , giving it its own racial code .
Take the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example , who grew up in Cuney Homes , Houston ’ s longest-standing public housing community .
From USA Today to the Los Angeles Times , Cuney has been described as a “ housing project , ” a term that evokes racial stigmas .
It ’ s even been called a “ warren , ” a word to describe a crowded living space used to breed and hunt animals .
Trump use of “ low-income ” is a synonym for burden and is often a code for poor Black and Brown folks .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ then , that Not in My Backyard ( NIMBY ) suburbanites often and wrongly associate those who need affordable housing with increased crime and decreased property values .
Trump is trying to capitalize on this stigma to position himself as the hero of the suburbs .
None of this is new , of course .
When affordable housing programs were developed as part of the New Deal in the 1930s , the majority of developments were whites-only .
As white families increasingly relocated to the suburbs , Black families were able to access @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discriminatory housing practices like redlining further segregated cities and put affordable housing in the category of “ undesirable , ” according to historian Richard Rothstein .
Nearly 100 years later , we still face housing segregation nationwide and attempts to expand affordable housing are often met with NIMBY protests .
It ’ s a problem not only faced in Houston where I serve as the Board Chairman to the Houston Housing Authority , but across the country .
Contrary to what Trump says , adding affordable housing can actually decrease crime rates and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number of studies and analyses that show affordable housing typically has either a positive or neutral impact on surrounding property values .
A 2015 study from Stanford University ’ s business school , for instance , analyzed 129 counties where Low-Income Housing Tax Credit properties were built .
It found a 6.5 percent increase in property values within neighborhoods that had a median income below $ 26,000 .
The study also revealed that affordable housing caused low-income neighborhoods to experience decreased crime and decreased segregation , while high-income neighborhoods experienced no impact on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also found “ no detectable effects on property crime ” as a result of building affordable housing .
Many Americans get their impression of public housing from some of the dreaded giant projects of Post-World War II America like Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis or Stella Wright in Newark , N.J. both of which have been torn down .
Today , affordable housing means smaller units that fit into a neighborhood ’ s aesthetic or rent subsidies where low-income earners can have access to private housing .
Trump talks about affordable housing like it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years later .
This is something we need to do not only for others but also for ourselves .
Those who qualify for federal housing programs are earning 80 % or less of their local area median income .
They include those we have depended during this pandemic , including nurses , grocery store workers , teachers , delivery people , bus drivers , and even police officers and firefighters .
That can ’ t be ignored because of the serious racial inequities at play : Black , Indigenous , and Latinx households @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be low-income renters .
Mobilizing the fear of NIMBY suburbanites to keep the “ low-income people ” is the opposite of what is needed to combat the national housing crisis and the economic impact of COVID-19 .
In reality , research tells us that socioeconomically mixed neighborhoods are more prosperous and benefit all populations .
One 2017 Urban Institute study found that segregation in Chicago cost residents $ 4 billion every year because it is linked to lower incomes and lower educational attainment .
At the same time , the benefits of economically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity , job opportunities , educational attainment , civic resources , and higher levels of civic cohesion , according to City Reports .
These are things that could benefit America ’ s suburbs , too .
To combat our nation ’ s housing shortage and segregation , the way we discuss affordable housing needs to change .
That starts with President Trump , but it should include all of us as well .

Earlier this summer, Donald Trump tweeted “I am happy to inform all of the people living their Suburban Lifestyle Dream that you will no longer be bothered or financially hurt by having low-income housing built in your neighborhood.” Since then he’s repeatedly returned to the idea that “Suburban Housewives” and the suburbs, in general, are being threatened by affordable housing and those who occupy it.
Trump’s language keeps the destructive dynamic between race and housing alive while we are facing a severe affordable housing shortage.
It’s ugly and it’s wrong.
Consider the facts. No state in the union has enough affordable housing. That’s not a racial problem. It’s a roof problem. It applies to Maine as well as Michigan, North Dakota as well as New York. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, there are only 36 affordable rental units available for every 100 extremely low-income households—and that was prior to COVID-19 causing thousands of Americans to struggle to pay rent.
We tend to conflate public housing with race, giving it its own racial code. Take the recent discussion of George Floyd as one example, who grew up in Cuney Homes, Houston’s longest-standing public housing community. From USA Today to the Los Angeles Times, Cuney has been described as a “housing project,” a term that evokes racial stigmas. It’s even been called a “warren,” a word to describe a crowded living space used to breed and hunt animals. Trump use of “low-income” is a synonym for burden and is often a code for poor Black and Brown folks.
It should come as no surprise, then, that Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) suburbanites often and wrongly associate those who need affordable housing with increased crime and decreased property values. Trump is trying to capitalize on this stigma to position himself as the hero of the suburbs.
None of this is new, of course. When affordable housing programs were developed as part of the New Deal in the 1930s, the majority of developments were whites-only. As white families increasingly relocated to the suburbs, Black families were able to access vacant units. This trend along with discriminatory housing practices like redlining further segregated cities and put affordable housing in the category of “undesirable,” according to historian Richard Rothstein.
Nearly 100 years later, we still face housing segregation nationwide and attempts to expand affordable housing are often met with NIMBY protests. It’s a problem not only faced in Houston where I serve as the Board Chairman to the Houston Housing Authority, but across the country.
Contrary to what Trump says, adding affordable housing can actually decrease crime rates and boost property values, according to a number of studies and analyses that show affordable housing typically has either a positive or neutral impact on surrounding property values.
A 2015 study from Stanford University’s business school, for instance, analyzed 129 counties where Low-Income Housing Tax Credit properties were built. It found a 6.5 percent increase in property values within neighborhoods that had a median income below $26,000. The study also revealed that affordable housing caused low-income neighborhoods to experience decreased crime and decreased segregation, while high-income neighborhoods experienced no impact on crime rates. A 2011 Cornell study also found “no detectable effects on property crime” as a result of building affordable housing.
Many Americans get their impression of public housing from some of the dreaded giant projects of Post-World War II America like Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis or Stella Wright in Newark, N.J. both of which have been torn down. Today, affordable housing means smaller units that fit into a neighborhood’s aesthetic or rent subsidies where low-income earners can have access to private housing. Trump talks about affordable housing like it’s the 1970s instead of 50 years later.
This is something we need to do not only for others but also for ourselves. Those who qualify for federal housing programs are earning 80% or less of their local area median income. They include those we have depended during this pandemic, including nurses, grocery store workers, teachers, delivery people, bus drivers, and even police officers and firefighters. That can’t be ignored because of the serious racial inequities at play: Black, Indigenous, and Latinx households are more likely than white households to be low-income renters.
Mobilizing the fear of NIMBY suburbanites to keep the “low-income people” is the opposite of what is needed to combat the national housing crisis and the economic impact of COVID-19.
In reality, research tells us that socioeconomically mixed neighborhoods are more prosperous and benefit all populations. One 2017 Urban Institute study found that segregation in Chicago cost residents $4 billion every year because it is linked to lower incomes and lower educational attainment. At the same time, the benefits of economically diverse neighborhoods include higher access to economic opportunity, job opportunities, educational attainment, civic resources, and higher levels of civic cohesion, according to City Reports. These are things that could benefit America’s suburbs, too.
To combat our nation’s housing shortage and segregation, the way we discuss affordable housing needs to change. That starts with President Trump, but it should include all of us as well.
.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-08--Why No One Should Ever Trust Trump With Their Money

During the 2016 presidential election , Donald Trump reversed a troubling trend in politics .
His campaign raised less money than the previous Republican nominee , Mitt Romney .
According to Open Secrets , Trump raised $ 330 million , compared to Romney ’ s $ 450 million in 2012 .
What isn ’ t accounted for in those numbers , however , is that Trump received an estimated $ 5 billion in free media time due primarily to his explosive rhetoric .
Four years later , the Trump campaign had already out-raised their 2016 haul by the first quarter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million .
But in addition to the constant reporting about how much a campaign has raised , an equally important question is how the money is spent .
That is where a recent report in the New York Times from Shane Goldmacher and Maggie Haberman comes into play .
Of the $ 1.1 billion [ Trump ’ s ] campaign and the [ RNC ] raised from the beginning of 2019 through July , more than $ 800 million has already been spent .
Now some people inside the campaign are forecasting what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with less than 60 days until the election , according to Republican officials briefed on the matter .
There are those who saw this cash crunch coming when the campaign went dark on television advertising during the Republican National Convention .
Then last week it was reported that they had pulled all advertising in Arizona , a must-win state for Trump .
According to Goldmacher and Haberman , “ more than $ 350 million — almost half of the $ 800 million spent — went to fund-raising operations.
” But much of it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ego , including $ 11 million on Super Bowl ads to keep up with Michael Bloomberg and $ 1 million on television advertising in Washington , D.C. so the president could see himself portrayed in his own media market .
Or course , there is also corruption with the major expenditures at Trump ’ s properties , as well as payment of his legal expenses .
It should come as no surprise that the grifter who currently occupies the Oval Office is ripping off his campaign donors .
This is the man whose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to court 3,500 times , primarily over payments to contractors .
As the New York Times documented , Trump blew through over $ 1 billion in business losses during the decade before Russian companies flooded them with cash ( according to his two sons ) .
Even more disturbing is what the president has done with our tax dollars .
Take a look at what was happening to the federal budget deficit by the end of 2019 before the pandemic .
Prior to the pandemic when unemployment was reaching record lows , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to increase the deficit by nearly 50 percent .
When it comes to money , Trump always ripped off customers , contractors , and business associates .
As president , he ’ s doing the same thing to taxpayers and donors .

During the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump reversed a troubling trend in politics. His campaign raised less money than the previous Republican nominee, Mitt Romney. According to Open Secrets, Trump raised $330 million, compared to Romney’s $450 million in 2012. What isn’t accounted for in those numbers, however, is that Trump received an estimated $5 billion in free media time due primarily to his explosive rhetoric.
Four years later, the Trump campaign had already out-raised their 2016 haul by the first quarter of 2020, bringing in $414 million. But in addition to the constant reporting about how much a campaign has raised, an equally important question is how the money is spent. That is where a recent report in the New York Times from Shane Goldmacher and Maggie Haberman comes into play.
Of the $1.1 billion [Trump’s] campaign and the [RNC] raised from the beginning of 2019 through July, more than $800 million has already been spent. Now some people inside the campaign are forecasting what was once unthinkable: a cash crunch with less than 60 days until the election, according to Republican officials briefed on the matter.
There are those who saw this cash crunch coming when the campaign went dark on television advertising during the Republican National Convention. Then last week it was reported that they had pulled all advertising in Arizona, a must-win state for Trump.
According to Goldmacher and Haberman, “more than $350 million — almost half of the $800 million spent — went to fund-raising operations.” But much of it also went to stroke Trump’s ego, including $11 million on Super Bowl ads to keep up with Michael Bloomberg and $1 million on television advertising in Washington, D.C. so the president could see himself portrayed in his own media market. Or course, there is also corruption with the major expenditures at Trump’s properties, as well as payment of his legal expenses.
It should come as no surprise that the grifter who currently occupies the Oval Office is ripping off his campaign donors. This is the man whose businesses declared bankruptcy six times and went to court 3,500 times, primarily over payments to contractors. As the New York Times documented, Trump blew through over $1 billion in business losses during the decade before Russian companies flooded them with cash (according to his two sons).
Even more disturbing is what the president has done with our tax dollars. Take a look at what was happening to the federal budget deficit by the end of 2019 before the pandemic.
Here’s the bottom line:
It is unusual for the government to run such a large budget deficit during a period of economic growth, because spending on unemployment and other benefits tends to contract and tax revenue often grows. But the White House and Congress have contributed to the deficit’s surge by enacting large spending increases and passing the 2017 tax cut law.
Prior to the pandemic when unemployment was reaching record lows, Trump and his Republican enablers in Congress managed to increase the deficit by nearly 50 percent.
When it comes to money, Trump always ripped off customers, contractors, and business associates. As president, he’s doing the same thing to taxpayers and donors.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-08--Sheldon Adelson is Buying the U.S. Ambassador’s Residence in Israel

On August 7 , the New York Times reported on a possible rift between Donald Trump and Sheldon Adelson .
The Las Vegas casino magnate had reached out to the president to discuss the importance of a COVID-19 economic relief package only to get harangued by the president about not doing enough to help his reelection .
Adelson was reportedly incensed because he and his wife had each already donated $ 600,000 this year alone .
He abruptly ended the call .
The Trump campaign was already experiencing a cash-crunch and soon Joe Biden would report a record-breaking $ 364.5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most generous Republican donor in the 2016 and 2018 election cycles , but he seemed to be holding back in 2020 .
But there is more to the Trump-Adelson relationship than the exchange of money .
The Israeli news outlet Globes reports that Adelson is purchasing the U.S. ambassador ’ s residence there for an unprecedented price : Last week “ Globes ” exclusively revealed that US billionaire Sheldon Adelson is buying the US Ambassador ’ s residence in Herzliya for NIS 300 million , making it the highest price ever paid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Globes ” can now reveal that although the US Embassy and US Ambassador David Friedman ’ s office moved to Jerusalem in May 2018 , Friedman and his family continue to live in Herzliya .
Ambassador Friedman didn ’ t move to Jerusalem because security arrangements aren ’ t complete and his children attend high school near his current address .
Adelson is helping to solve this problem by buying the residence for the equivalent of more than $ 88 million and then allowing Friedman to remain .
Even though Friedman still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sale of the house on Galei Tachelet Street to Adelson is being rushed through by the US Administration before the November presidential elections .
Adelson has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to the US Republican party and President Donald Trump and is a major supporter of Israel .
The rush to sell the house is political .
The White House wants to demonstrate that moving the Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is irreversible , including the move of the Friedman family .
The Republican party wants to show good intentions to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump loses the election it would make it harder to turn the clock back .
Adelson ’ s interest in solidifying the embassy ’ s relocation from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is obvious , and perhaps that is why he promptly made up with Trump .
Jonathan Swan of Axios reported that on August 10 , Adelson sent a trusted aide to the Four Seasons Hotel in Jackson Hole , Wyo .
for a Trump campaign fundraiser .
The linkage of official acts and political fundraising is called bribery , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Adelson has been referred to the FBI by Democrats : Adelson ’ s support for Trump in 2016 was at least partially the result of his promise to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and to end the Iran nuclear deal .
Adelson is one of the richest people in the United States and is also the owner of the pro-Netanyahu “ Israel Hayom ” newspaper in Israel .
In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray , Democratic lawmakers Ted Lieu and Kathleen Rice asked to investigate the phone call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a criminal act .
The representatives sent a letter to the intelligence agency on Monday alleging that “ a crime may have occurred ” during the conversation , because linking of legislative action to donor funds would be illegal .
It will be difficult to prove an illegal quid pro quo , but it ’ s highly unusual to see a private citizen so enmeshed in a major foreign policy change .
Adelson just made the most expensive real estate purchase in Israeli history just so our ambassador can keep his kids in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump commitment to keeping the American embassy in Jerusalem .
It may not be illegal , but it ’ s certainly not normal .

On August 7, the New York Times reported on a possible rift between Donald Trump and Sheldon Adelson. The Las Vegas casino magnate had reached out to the president to discuss the importance of a COVID-19 economic relief package only to get harangued by the president about not doing enough to help his reelection. Adelson was reportedly incensed because he and his wife had each already donated $600,000 this year alone. He abruptly ended the call.
The Trump campaign was already experiencing a cash-crunch and soon Joe Biden would report a record-breaking $364.5 million raised in August. Adelson was the most generous Republican donor in the 2016 and 2018 election cycles, but he seemed to be holding back in 2020.
But there is more to the Trump-Adelson relationship than the exchange of money. The Israeli news outlet Globes reports that Adelson is purchasing the U.S. ambassador’s residence there for an unprecedented price:
Last week “Globes” exclusively revealed that US billionaire Sheldon Adelson is buying the US Ambassador’s residence in Herzliya for NIS 300 million, making it the highest price ever paid for a house in Israel. But “Globes” can now reveal that although the US Embassy and US Ambassador David Friedman’s office moved to Jerusalem in May 2018, Friedman and his family continue to live in Herzliya.
Ambassador Friedman didn’t move to Jerusalem because security arrangements aren’t complete and his children attend high school near his current address. Adelson is helping to solve this problem by buying the residence for the equivalent of more than $88 million and then allowing Friedman to remain.
Even though Friedman still needs to live in Herzliya, the sale of the house on Galei Tachelet Street to Adelson is being rushed through by the US Administration before the November presidential elections. Adelson has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to the US Republican party and President Donald Trump and is a major supporter of Israel. The rush to sell the house is political. The White House wants to demonstrate that moving the Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is irreversible, including the move of the Friedman family. The Republican party wants to show good intentions to its evangelist support base, while if President Trump loses the election it would make it harder to turn the clock back.
Adelson’s interest in solidifying the embassy’s relocation from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is obvious, and perhaps that is why he promptly made up with Trump. Jonathan Swan of Axios reported that on August 10, Adelson sent a trusted aide to the Four Seasons Hotel in Jackson Hole, Wyo. for a Trump campaign fundraiser.
The linkage of official acts and political fundraising is called bribery, and the August 8 phone call between Trump and Adelson has been referred to the FBI by Democrats:
Adelson’s support for Trump in 2016 was at least partially the result of his promise to move the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and to end the Iran nuclear deal. Adelson is one of the richest people in the United States and is also the owner of the pro-Netanyahu “Israel Hayom” newspaper in Israel. In a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Democratic lawmakers Ted Lieu and Kathleen Rice asked to investigate the phone call, suggesting that it could have been a criminal act. The representatives sent a letter to the intelligence agency on Monday alleging that “a crime may have occurred” during the conversation, because linking of legislative action to donor funds would be illegal.
It will be difficult to prove an illegal quid pro quo, but it’s highly unusual to see a private citizen so enmeshed in a major foreign policy change. Adelson just made the most expensive real estate purchase in Israeli history just so our ambassador can keep his kids in their preferred high school and underscore the Trump commitment to keeping the American embassy in Jerusalem. It may not be illegal, but it’s certainly not normal.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-09--The Trump Vaccine That Actually Works

The Trump Vaccine That Actually Works

If you talked politics over the last few days with Trump supporters , you probably got a good lesson in how they have become inoculated against information that contradicts their assumptions about the president .
Jeffrey Goldberg ’ s article in the Atlantic about how Trump referred to Americans who have died in war as “ losers ” and “ suckers ” was published last Thursday—just in time to ruminate over the three-day weekend .
It included three to four sources per quote and was eventually confirmed by the Associated Press , the Washington Post , Fox News , CNN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As David Frum documented , the reports seemed plausible based on all of the other times Trump attacked members of the military .
The silences are also resounding .
Amid the clamor , it ’ s easy to overlook those who are not yelling , those who are keeping silent .
Where are the senior officers of the United States armed forces , serving and retired—the men and women who worked most closely on military affairs with President Trump ?
Has any one of them stepped forward to say , “ That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
How many wounded warriors have stepped forward to attest to Trump ’ s care and concern for them ?
How many Gold Star families have stepped forward on Trump ’ s behalf ?
How many service families ?
The silence is resounding .
And when such voices do speak , they typically describe a president utterly lacking in empathy to grieving families , wholly uncomprehending of sacrifice and suffering .
It wasn ’ t long before Trump responded with attacks against Goldberg , The Atlantic , and Laurene Powell Jobs , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the president ’ s supporters didn ’ t need the prompt , however .
It quickly became labelled “ fake news.
” Sarah Huckabee Sanders , who had been preparing to launch a book tour this week , defended Trump by describing a president most of us have never seen .
When Sanders Trump is capable of demonstrating respect , she ’ d like us to believe him .
We ’ ve never actually witnessed that happening in public .
But that description of the president is something his supporters desperately want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closure mechanisms Trump has provided for them by calling this kind of report “ fake news , ” which automatically makes the president a victim .
It is exactly the process described by Julian Sanchez in his explanation of the term “ epistemic closure.
” Over the weekend , a chorus demanded John Kelly , who was present during most of the discussions cited by Goldberg , to address what happened .
Underlying that call is the assumption that the former White House Chief of Staff could actually clear things up .
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ staff should do so for the sake of his own conscience , it is absurd to think that Trump supporters would listen to him any more than they did when former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis called the president a threat to our Constitution .
The president ’ s supporters are not going to change their minds about the most dishonest and corrupt man to ever occupy the Oval Office .
While it remains important to document his incompetence and malfeasance , it isn ’ t likely to have any impact politically .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He ’ s inoculated his supporters against anything that might threaten their loyalty to him .

If you talked politics over the last few days with Trump supporters, you probably got a good lesson in how they have become inoculated against information that contradicts their assumptions about the president.
Jeffrey Goldberg’s article in the Atlantic about how Trump referred to Americans who have died in war as “losers” and “suckers” was published last Thursday—just in time to ruminate over the three-day weekend. It included three to four sources per quote and was eventually confirmed by the Associated Press, the Washington Post, Fox News, CNN, and the New York Times. As David Frum documented, the reports seemed plausible based on all of the other times Trump attacked members of the military. The silences are also resounding.
Amid the clamor, it’s easy to overlook those who are not yelling, those who are keeping silent. Where are the senior officers of the United States armed forces, serving and retired—the men and women who worked most closely on military affairs with President Trump? Has any one of them stepped forward to say, “That’s not the man I know”? How many wounded warriors have stepped forward to attest to Trump’s care and concern for them? How many Gold Star families have stepped forward on Trump’s behalf? How many service families? The silence is resounding. And when such voices do speak, they typically describe a president utterly lacking in empathy to grieving families, wholly uncomprehending of sacrifice and suffering.
It wasn’t long before Trump responded with attacks against Goldberg, The Atlantic, and Laurene Powell Jobs, the magazine’s majority owner.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302559362771292160?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1302559362771292160%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnet.com%2Fnews%2Ftrumps-latest-twitter-target-laurene-powell-jobs%2F
Most of the president’s supporters didn’t need the prompt, however. It quickly became labelled “fake news.” Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who had been preparing to launch a book tour this week, defended Trump by describing a president most of us have never seen.
While Sanders says that she has witnessed Trump showing heart and demonstrating respect, we’ve never actually witnessed that kind of behavior from him in public. It makes her denial much less plausible. But her description of the president is something his supporters desperately want to believe. So they utilize the closure mechanisms Trump has provided for them by calling The Atlantic report “fake news,” which automatically makes the president a victim. It is exactly the process described by Julian Sanchez in his explanation of the term “epistemic closure.”
Over the weekend a chorus arose asking for John Kelly, who was present during most of the discussions cited by Goldberg, to address what happened. Underlying that call is the assumption that the former White House Chief of Staff could actually clear things up. While I think that he should do so for the sake of his own conscience, it is absurd to think that Trump supporters would listen to him any more than they did when former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis called the president a threat to our Constitution.
The president’s supporters are not going to change their minds about the most dishonest and corrupt man to ever occupy the Oval Office. While it remains important to document his incompetence and malfeasance, it isn’t likely to have any impact politically. Trump has one vaccine that actually works: He’s inoculated his supporters against anything that might threaten their loyalty to him.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-09--Want Proof the Resistance Will Last? Meet the 33-Year-Old Former Nurse Turned House Democrat

A new documentary , “ Surge , ” released this week follows three Democratic women who were part of the wave of female candidates running for office in 2018 .
Unlike “ Knock Down the House , ” the Netflix doc that followed women taking on the Democratic establishment in 2018 , Wendy Sachs and Hannah Rosenzweig ( who both directed the film ) set out to feature Democratic women out to flip GOP-held seats .
They followed Lauren Underwood in Illinois ’ 14th District , Jana Lynne Sanchez in Texas ’ 6th District , and Liz Watson in Indiana @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Watson lost in districts that Trump won by 12 and 27 points respectively .
Underwood , however , defeated a four-term incumbent Republican in a district Trump won by four points .
She became the first woman to represent her district and the youngest Black woman to serve in Congress , which is significant given that the 14th district covers the western suburbs of Chicago and is 85 percent white .
As a registered nurse , Underwood made health care one of the main themes of her campaign .
In addition to her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Degrees from Johns Hopkins University and focused her career on health care policy .
She served as a senior advisor at the Department of Health and Human Services helping to implement the Affordable Care Act .
Underwood is a force in Congress , part of a wave of women elected in 2018 .
In fact , Underwood produced a video capturing all the Congressional class accomplished in their first 100 days .
She also sat down with Rep. John Lewis ( as the youngest and oldest members of the Black Caucus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ History Month .
Underwood first came to my attention during the inquiry into the Trump administration ’ s family separation policy .
She posed the important questions to former DHS Secretary Kirstjen Neilsen about its physical and mental health effects on children .
Two days after the sixth child died in U.S. custody , Underwood posed those same questions to Neilsen ’ s successor , Kevin McAleenan .
He became even more combative and Underwood ended by saying , “ The evidence is really clear that this is intentional…It ’ s a policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration , and it ’ s cruel and inhumane.
” Republicans erupted and her remarks were removed from the record .
But since then , we ’ ve learned that she was right .
Newly obtained government documents reveal that the underlying intent of the Trump administration ’ s brutal practice of separating migrant families at the border was , in fact , to deter additional immigration and asylum petitions .
This is significant , because Trump administration officials have earlier claimed that the forcible separations were mandated by law ( thus necessitating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or compelled by “ national security ” concerns .
We now know neither of these purported justifications is true—this was nothing short of a deliberate policy choice to brutalize parents and their children in order to stop others from seeking refuge in the United States .
Freshman Democrats like Underwood haven ’ t received as much media attention as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez , but they are just as noteworthy .
First of all , they are the ones whose election gave Democrats control of the House by defeating incumbent Republicans .
Most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That is even more important in 2020 when opposition to the ACA has become a political liability for GOP incumbents .
Finally , as women of all races and classes organized to form the resistance following Trump ’ s election , there was some chatter about whether the movement would have staying power .
The Democratic women who won in 2018 and are now serving in the House ( including Underwood ) suggest that it does .
Forecasts show that the number of women running in 2020 will surpass the record set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does something to remind these women why they can ’ t keep quiet .

A new documentary, “Surge,” released this week follows three Democratic women who were part of the wave of female candidates running for office in 2018.
Unlike “Knock Down the House,” the Netflix doc that followed women taking on the Democratic establishment in 2018, Wendy Sachs and Hannah Rosenzweig (who both directed the film) set out to feature Democratic women out to flip GOP-held seats. They followed Lauren Underwood in Illinois’ 14th District, Jana Lynne Sanchez in Texas’ 6th District, and Liz Watson in Indiana’s 9th.
Both Sanchez and Watson lost in districts that Trump won by 12 and 27 points respectively. Underwood, however, defeated a four-term incumbent Republican in a district Trump won by four points. She became the first woman to represent her district and the youngest Black woman to serve in Congress, which is significant given that the 14th district covers the western suburbs of Chicago and is 85 percent white.
As a registered nurse, Underwood made health care one of the main themes of her campaign. In addition to her nursing degree, Underwood holds two Master’s Degrees from Johns Hopkins University and focused her career on health care policy. She served as a senior advisor at the Department of Health and Human Services helping to implement the Affordable Care Act.
Underwood is a force in Congress, part of a wave of women elected in 2018. In fact, Underwood produced a video capturing all the Congressional class accomplished in their first 100 days. She also sat down with Rep. John Lewis (as the youngest and oldest members of the Black Caucus) to discuss the importance of Black History Month.
Underwood first came to my attention during the inquiry into the Trump administration’s family separation policy. She posed the important questions to former DHS Secretary Kirstjen Neilsen about its physical and mental health effects on children.
Two days after the sixth child died in U.S. custody, Underwood posed those same questions to Neilsen’s successor, Kevin McAleenan. He became even more combative and Underwood ended by saying, “The evidence is really clear that this is intentional…It’s a policy choice being made on purpose by this administration, and it’s cruel and inhumane.” Republicans erupted and her remarks were removed from the record. But since then, we’ve learned that she was right.
Newly obtained government documents reveal that the underlying intent of the Trump administration’s brutal practice of separating migrant families at the border was, in fact, to deter additional immigration and asylum petitions. This is significant, because Trump administration officials have earlier claimed that the forcible separations were mandated by law (thus necessitating congressional action to end the policy) or compelled by “national security” concerns. We now know neither of these purported justifications is true—this was nothing short of a deliberate policy choice to brutalize parents and their children in order to stop others from seeking refuge in the United States.
Freshman Democrats like Underwood haven’t received as much media attention as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, but they are just as noteworthy. First of all, they are the ones whose election gave Democrats control of the House by defeating incumbent Republicans. Most of them did so by defending Obamacare. That is even more important in 2020 when opposition to the ACA has become a political liability for GOP incumbents.
Public sentiment about Obamacare has shifted considerably during the Trump administration after Republicans tried but failed to repeal it. Now, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing economic crisis, and the loss of health insurance for millions of people, health care is a key issue for voters.
Finally, as women of all races and classes organized to form the resistance following Trump’s election, there was some chatter about whether the movement would have staying power. The Democratic women who won in 2018 and are now serving in the House (including Underwood) suggest that it does. Forecasts show that the number of women running in 2020 will surpass the record set in 2018.
Every day Donald Trump does something to remind these women why they can’t keep quiet.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-09--Trump’s Lafayette Square Bible is Reportedly for Sale

If you ’ re a history buff who has a hankering for a piece of the past , you can choose from a wide selection at Gary Zimet ’ s Moments in Time store .
He has autographed photos of Louis Armstrong and Igor Stravinsky .
He ’ s even got one jointly signed by Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler .
The authenticity of all pieces “ is guaranteed without time limitations , for full refund of purchase price.
” That ’ s good because Zimet ’ s offering up a signed copy of the Holy Bible that President Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John ’ s Episcopal Church in Lafayette Square .
His asking price is $ 37,500 .
Contacted by Talking Points Memo , Zimet repeatedly referred to Trump as a “ psychotic insect , ” but insisted that he has the genuine article : In a phone call with TPM , Gary Zimet , an autograph curator at “ Moments In Time ” in Los Angeles , confirmed his remarks to Page Six in which he claimed that he had asked a “ contact ” at the White House to get Trump to sign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in early June .
Zimet said he successfully received the exact Bible that Trump waved in front of the church after he got law enforcement to teargas nearby peaceful protesters to clear his path for the photo-op .
The curator put up the Bible for auction on Tuesday with a starting bid of $ 37,500 .
However , Zimet would not disclose who his White House contact was , telling TPM that the information was “ confidential.
” “ I ’ ve been in business for 40 years , my dear , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said when asked how he could prove to customers that the item was legitimate .
Mr. Zimet is putting his reputation and livelihood on the line by offering this item as the precise Bible used by Trump during the clearing of Lafayette Square , but the White House denies that it ’ s legitimate : Perhaps if I offer to buy the bible from Zimet , he will give me the backstory on his “ confidential ” source .
If he can ’ t do this for a potential buyer , he won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Many people purchase memorabilia like this as an investment , and they need to prove the provenance and authenticity of their items in order to preserve their resale value .
That means the “ St .
Marks ” Bible will come with supporting documentation , and probably some kind of conditional non-disclosure agreement .
Trump recently visited Louisiana to witness the emergency response to Hurricane Laura .
While there , he signed autographs and handed them out to FEMA officials , advising them to put them up for bid on eBay where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So , it ’ s not far-fetched to believe that Mr. Zimet is telling the truth .
Either way , the President signed a King James Bible .
You can have it for $ 37,500 .

If you’re a history buff who has a hankering for a piece of the past, you can choose from a wide selection at Gary Zimet’s Moments in Time store. He has autographed photos of Louis Armstrong and Igor Stravinsky. He’s even got one jointly signed by Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. The authenticity of all pieces “is guaranteed without time limitations, for full refund of purchase price.”
That’s good because Zimet’s offering up a signed copy of the Holy Bible that President Trump infamously used as a prop at St. John’s Episcopal Church in Lafayette Square. His asking price is $37,500. Contacted by Talking Points Memo, Zimet repeatedly referred to Trump as a “psychotic insect,” but insisted that he has the genuine article:
In a phone call with TPM, Gary Zimet, an autograph curator at “Moments In Time” in Los Angeles, confirmed his remarks to Page Six in which he claimed that he had asked a “contact” at the White House to get Trump to sign the Bible shortly after the scandal erupted in early June. Zimet said he successfully received the exact Bible that Trump waved in front of the church after he got law enforcement to teargas nearby peaceful protesters to clear his path for the photo-op. The curator put up the Bible for auction on Tuesday with a starting bid of $37,500. However, Zimet would not disclose who his White House contact was, telling TPM that the information was “confidential.” “I’ve been in business for 40 years, my dear, and I know autographs,” the auctioneer said when asked how he could prove to customers that the item was legitimate.
Mr. Zimet is putting his reputation and livelihood on the line by offering this item as the precise Bible used by Trump during the clearing of Lafayette Square, but the White House denies that it’s legitimate:
“It’s not true,” White House spokesperson Judd Deere told TPM via email, later clarifying that he meant the auctioneer does not possess the Bible and that the tome is not up for auction. Deere did not address TPM’s query on whether Trump had indeed signed the Bible.
Perhaps if I offer to buy the bible from Zimet, he will give me the backstory on his “confidential” source.
[media-credit name=”Moments in Time” align=”alignleft” width=”225″] [/media-credit]
If he can’t do this for a potential buyer, he won’t likely be making a sale. Many people purchase memorabilia like this as an investment, and they need to prove the provenance and authenticity of their items in order to preserve their resale value. That means the “St. Marks” Bible will come with supporting documentation, and probably some kind of conditional non-disclosure agreement.
Trump recently visited Louisiana to witness the emergency response to Hurricane Laura. While there, he signed autographs and handed them out to FEMA officials, advising them to put them up for bid on eBay where they could easily make $10,000.
So, it’s not far-fetched to believe that Mr. Zimet is telling the truth. Either way, the President signed a King James Bible. You can have it for $37,500.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-10--New Whistleblower Outlines How Trump Is Politicizing Intelligence

Another whistleblower has emerged from within the Trump administration .
Brian Murphy , until recently , was in charge of intelligence and analysis at the Department of Homeland Security .
In his complaint filed with the Inspector General at DHS , Murphy claims that he was demoted for refusing to doctor intelligence in a way that aligned with the messages Trump wanted to convey .
Murphy first filed a complaint with the IG in 2018 when Kirstjen Neilsen was DHS Secretary .
In it , he alleged that , following instructions from the White House , he was pressured to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or suspected terrorists ” were illegally coming across our southern border in order to justify the building of Trump ’ s wall .
Murphy refused to comply , telling his supervisor that it was “ an improper administration of an intelligence program , ” and that “ doing what was being requested would constitute a felony.
” The complaint suggests that Neilsen gave perjured testimony to Congress in December 2018 .
The following year , Murphy claims , Deputy DHS Secretary Ken Cuccinelli pressured him to alter an intelligence report regarding conditions in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in order to better align them with Trump ’ s claims about asylum seekers coming from countries with “ high levels of corruption , violence , and poor economic conditions.
” Once again , Murphy contends , he refused to comply and Cuccinelli demanded that the “ deep state intelligence analysts ” be fired , but apparently never followed up .
The most explosive charge Murphy makes in the complaint , however , is that after regularly briefing administration officials about Russian attempts to interfere in the 2020 election , he was told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ cease providing intelligence assessments on the threat of Russian interference in the United States , and instead start reporting on interference activities by China and Iran.
” If any of that sounds familiar its because that is exactly what was included in the statement that was eventually released by William Evanina , director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center .
Furthermore , DNI John Ratcliffe used the same lie to justify his directive that in-person intelligence briefings on election interference would no longer be provided to Congress .
Ratcliffe said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threat than China “ simply isn ’ t true.
” In other words , he wants us to ignore Russia and focus on their narrative of blaming everything on China .
The final episode Murphy relates is the development of a document called a “ Homeland Threat Assessment.
” Wolf and Cuccinelli refused to distribute the document due to their concerns about how it would “ reflect upon President Trump.
” When Murphy refused to comply with that one , he says , it seemed to be the final straw .
In retaliation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important to note that Murphy ’ s complaint is consistent with what we ’ ve seen from members of Trump ’ s cabinet , such as DNI Ratcliffe , AG Barr , and DHS Secretary Wolf .
There is a coordinated effort to alter intelligence in a way that supports Trump ’ s lies , which also happen to align with Moscow ’ s .
In a statement announcing an investigation into Murphy ’ s complaint , Rep. Adam Schiff characterized the situation : The threat is , indeed , grave and actually @ @ @ @ @ @

Another whistleblower has emerged from within the Trump administration. Brian Murphy, until recently, was in charge of intelligence and analysis at the Department of Homeland Security. In his complaint filed with the Inspector General at DHS, Murphy claims that he was demoted for refusing to doctor intelligence in a way that aligned with the messages Trump wanted to convey.
Murphy first filed a complaint with the IG in 2018 when Kirstjen Neilsen was DHS Secretary. In it, he alleged that, following instructions from the White House, he was pressured to suggest that large numbers of “known or suspected terrorists” were illegally coming across our southern border in order to justify the building of Trump’s wall. Murphy refused to comply, telling his supervisor that it was “an improper administration of an intelligence program,” and that “doing what was being requested would constitute a felony.” The complaint suggests that Neilsen gave perjured testimony to Congress in December 2018.
The following year, Murphy claims, Deputy DHS Secretary Ken Cuccinelli pressured him to alter an intelligence report regarding conditions in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador in order to better align them with Trump’s claims about asylum seekers coming from countries with “high levels of corruption, violence, and poor economic conditions.”
Mr. Cuccinelli expressed frustration with the intelligence reports, and he accused unknown “deep state intelligence analysts” of compiling the intelligence information to undermine President Donald J. Trump’s (“President Trump”) policy objectives with respect to asylum.
Once again, Murphy contends, he refused to comply and Cuccinelli demanded that the “deep state intelligence analysts” be fired, but apparently never followed up.
The most explosive charge Murphy makes in the complaint, however, is that after regularly briefing administration officials about Russian attempts to interfere in the 2020 election, he was told by Acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf to “cease providing intelligence assessments on the threat of Russian interference in the United States, and instead start reporting on interference activities by China and Iran.”
If any of that sounds familiar its because that is exactly what was included in the statement that was eventually released by William Evanina, director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center. Furthermore, DNI John Ratcliffe used the same lie to justify his directive that in-person intelligence briefings on election interference would no longer be provided to Congress.
Ratcliffe said that the suggestion that Russia poses a greater threat than China “simply isn’t true.” In other words, he wants us to ignore Russia and focus on their narrative of blaming everything on China.
The final episode Murphy relates is the development of a document called a “Homeland Threat Assessment.” Wolf and Cuccinelli refused to distribute the document due to their concerns about how it would “reflect upon President Trump.”
Two sections were specifically labeled as concerns: White Supremacy and Russian influence in the United States…Mr. Cuccinelli stated that Mr. Murphy needed to specifically modify the section on White Supremacy in a manner that made the threat appear less severe, as well as include information on the prominence of violent “left-wing” groups.
When Murphy refused to comply with that one, he says, it seemed to be the final straw. In retaliation, he was demoted.
It is important to note that Murphy’s complaint is consistent with what we’ve seen from members of Trump’s cabinet, such as DNI Ratcliffe, AG Barr, and DHS Secretary Wolf. There is a coordinated effort to alter intelligence in a way that supports Trump’s lies, which also happen to align with Moscow’s. In a statement announcing an investigation into Murphy’s complaint, Rep. Adam Schiff characterized the situation:
The whistleblower retaliation complaint filed by former Acting Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis Brian Murphy outlines grave and disturbing allegations that senior White House and Department of Homeland Security officials improperly sought to politicize, manipulate, and censor intelligence in order to benefit President Trump politically. This puts our nation and its security at grave risk.
The threat is, indeed, grave and actually resides in the White House.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-10--Is Trump Scaring Democrats Away from Vote by Mail?

With the election just a few weeks away , Democrats are increasingly afraid to mail in their ballots—for understandable reasons .
Donald Trump ’ s handpicked postmaster general enacted a raft of policy changes that have slowed mail delivery .
( Under intense pressure , Louis DeJoy , a major Republican donor , announced that he would pause more scheduled measures until after the election , but also said he would not reverse many of the changes he already made . )
Trump himself has openly admitted to hampering the Postal Service ’ s ability to handle a surge in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country have taken myriad actions to make it harder for people to vote from home , including by restricting the use of ballot drop boxes—a highly popular option in universal vote-by-mail states like Colorado , Oregon , and Utah .
These actions have sent a message to voters that the Postal Service will screw up their ability to vote by mail , either by not getting their ballots to them on time , delivering them to elections officials too late to be counted , or maybe even losing them altogether .
Unfortunately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a catastrophic problem .
There ’ s evidence to show that if Democratic voters are worried about the USPS and decline to vote by mail , they won ’ t necessarily march to the polling place instead .
Many of them just won ’ t vote at all .
Given that Trump won key states by minuscule margins in 2016 , such a drop-off could secure his reelection .
That fact has not yet fully sunk in with many prominent Democrats , who have responded to Trump ’ s manipulation of the mail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting options .
“ We ’ ve got to vote early , in person if we can , ” Michelle Obama said in her convention speech .
“ We ’ ve got to request our mail-in ballots right now , tonight , and send them back immediately and follow up to make sure they ’ re received , and then make sure our friends and families do the same.
” Other influential voices have been more alarmist .
New York Times columnist Tom Friedman wrote that he would “ damn well get to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scared of Trump ’ s “ deliberate sabotaging of the U.S .
Postal Service.
” These fears are now showing up in polling .
In July , Emerson Polling found that 61 percent of Florida Democrats planned to vote via absentee ballot .
In August , after Trump and DeJoy ’ s USPS interference made headlines , Emerson found that the number shrank almost in half .
Just 32 percent of Florida Democrats said they planned to vote by mail .
( Fewer Florida Republicans also said they planned to vote from home—27 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ August—but the decline was nowhere near as dramatic . )
That drop wouldn ’ t be so worrisome if the mail-skittish Democrats were sure to vote in person .
The problem is , they ’ re not .
There ’ s a huge class of voters who , despite telling pollsters that they ’ ll schlep to the voting booth , actually won ’ t .
And the best evidence from studies suggests that vote by mail is the most effective way to increase voter turnout , especially among younger and lower-propensity voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats .
In 2014 , for instance , Colorado voters in the 18-to-24-years-old bracket turned out 12 percentage points higher than was forecast by a generally accurate turnout model ; at the same time , 25-to-34-year-olds outperformed expectations by 7 points .
( And that was in a midterm election that had the lowest voting rates for an American election cycle in 70 years . )
More broadly , in 2018 , every vote-at-home state had a turnout rate of at least 10 percentage points higher among eligible voters than the national average @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dire consequences in crucial swing states—like Florida , where a new NBC/Marist Poll shows Trump and Biden essentially tied in a dead heat , and where presidential elections over the last 20 years have been decided by hanging chads and endless recounts .
In Pennsylvania , Quinnipiac found a full 47 percent of Democrats plan to vote by mail , compared to 13 percent of Republicans and 29 percent of independents .
That ’ s great for Democrats , but if even a small percentage of those mail-friendly voters get skittish , Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pivotal state disappear .
Clinton lost there by less than two percentage points four years ago .
In the early months of the coronavirus outbreak , before the USPS sabotage , the states and municipalities that shifted to mostly mail-in voting saw substantial surges in voter participation .
In a special congressional election in Baltimore and the nearby suburbs last April , turnout increased 10 points from a February primary that was held the old-fashioned way .
It also had a much higher turnout the last time a special election was held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Back then , in 1996 , only 8 percent of registered voters cast ballots .
The boosted turnout was consistent with other vote-at-home experiments nationwide .
In 2016 , for example , 21 of Utah ’ s 29 counties had switched over to the system .
The rest were still relying on polling places .
One hilltop community just outside of Salt Lake City , however , was split into two counties , one that used vote by mail ( Salt Lake County ) and one that didn ’ t ( Utah County @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rate nearly 18 percentage points higher than Utah .
That ’ s because vote by mail does what no other election reform does anywhere near as well : It turns non-voters into voters .
( Automatic voter registration and early voting certainly help , but they tend to make it easier for people who already plan to vote . )
That could make the difference in 2020 .
Hillary Clinton lost , in part , because of non-voters .
According to the Pew Research Center , roughly 30 percent of eligible voting Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nearly half of those voters were non-white and nearly two-thirds were under the age of 50 , precisely the demographics in which the effects of vote at home are most pronounced .
If Democrats want to avoid another 2016 , they can ’ t be afraid of voting by mail , even in the face of unprecedented obstacles created by Republicans .
Otherwise , they likely won ’ t convince their supporters to vote by other means .
They may scare them out of voting , period .

With the election just a few weeks away, Democrats are increasingly afraid to mail in their ballots—for understandable reasons. Donald Trump’s handpicked postmaster general enacted a raft of policy changes that have slowed mail delivery. (Under intense pressure, Louis DeJoy, a major Republican donor, announced that he would pause more scheduled measures until after the election, but also said he would not reverse many of the changes he already made.) Trump himself has openly admitted to hampering the Postal Service’s ability to handle a surge in mail ballots. And GOP officials around the country have taken myriad actions to make it harder for people to vote from home, including by restricting the use of ballot drop boxes—a highly popular option in universal vote-by-mail states like Colorado, Oregon, and Utah.
These actions have sent a message to voters that the Postal Service will screw up their ability to vote by mail, either by not getting their ballots to them on time, delivering them to elections officials too late to be counted, or maybe even losing them altogether. Unfortunately for Democrats, this anxiety could become a catastrophic problem. There’s evidence to show that if Democratic voters are worried about the USPS and decline to vote by mail, they won’t necessarily march to the polling place instead. Many of them just won’t vote at all. Given that Trump won key states by minuscule margins in 2016, such a drop-off could secure his reelection.
That fact has not yet fully sunk in with many prominent Democrats, who have responded to Trump’s manipulation of the mail system by encouraging voters to embrace multiple voting options. “We’ve got to vote early, in person if we can,” Michelle Obama said in her convention speech. “We’ve got to request our mail-in ballots right now, tonight, and send them back immediately and follow up to make sure they’re received, and then make sure our friends and families do the same.” Other influential voices have been more alarmist. New York Times columnist Tom Friedman wrote that he would “damn well get to my neighborhood polling station” because was scared of Trump’s “deliberate sabotaging of the U.S. Postal Service.”
These fears are now showing up in polling. In July, Emerson Polling found that 61 percent of Florida Democrats planned to vote via absentee ballot. In August, after Trump and DeJoy’s USPS interference made headlines, Emerson found that the number shrank almost in half. Just 32 percent of Florida Democrats said they planned to vote by mail. (Fewer Florida Republicans also said they planned to vote from home—27 percent in July to 19 percent in August—but the decline was nowhere near as dramatic.)
That drop wouldn’t be so worrisome if the mail-skittish Democrats were sure to vote in person. The problem is, they’re not. There’s a huge class of voters who, despite telling pollsters that they’ll schlep to the voting booth, actually won’t. And the best evidence from studies suggests that vote by mail is the most effective way to increase voter turnout, especially among younger and lower-propensity voters who tend to pull the lever for Democrats.
In 2014, for instance, Colorado voters in the 18-to-24-years-old bracket turned out 12 percentage points higher than was forecast by a generally accurate turnout model; at the same time, 25-to-34-year-olds outperformed expectations by 7 points. (And that was in a midterm election that had the lowest voting rates for an American election cycle in 70 years.) More broadly, in 2018, every vote-at-home state had a turnout rate of at least 10 percentage points higher among eligible voters than the national average.
Losing these marginal voters could have dire consequences in crucial swing states—like Florida, where a new NBC/Marist Poll shows Trump and Biden essentially tied in a dead heat, and where presidential elections over the last 20 years have been decided by hanging chads and endless recounts. In Pennsylvania, Quinnipiac found a full 47 percent of Democrats plan to vote by mail, compared to 13 percent of Republicans and 29 percent of independents. That’s great for Democrats, but if even a small percentage of those mail-friendly voters get skittish, Biden could see his margin of victory in the pivotal state disappear. Clinton lost there by less than two percentage points four years ago.
In the early months of the coronavirus outbreak, before the USPS sabotage, the states and municipalities that shifted to mostly mail-in voting saw substantial surges in voter participation. In a special congressional election in Baltimore and the nearby suburbs last April, turnout increased 10 points from a February primary that was held the old-fashioned way. It also had a much higher turnout the last time a special election was held in the district 24 years ago. Back then, in 1996, only 8 percent of registered voters cast ballots.
The boosted turnout was consistent with other vote-at-home experiments nationwide. In 2016, for example, 21 of Utah’s 29 counties had switched over to the system. The rest were still relying on polling places. One hilltop community just outside of Salt Lake City, however, was split into two counties, one that used vote by mail (Salt Lake County) and one that didn’t (Utah County). Salt Lake had a turnout rate nearly 18 percentage points higher than Utah.
That’s because vote by mail does what no other election reform does anywhere near as well: It turns non-voters into voters. (Automatic voter registration and early voting certainly help, but they tend to make it easier for people who already plan to vote.)
That could make the difference in 2020. Hillary Clinton lost, in part, because of non-voters. According to the Pew Research Center, roughly 30 percent of eligible voting Americans didn’t cast ballots in 2016. Nearly half of those voters were non-white and nearly two-thirds were under the age of 50, precisely the demographics in which the effects of vote at home are most pronounced.
If Democrats want to avoid another 2016, they can’t be afraid of voting by mail, even in the face of unprecedented obstacles created by Republicans. Otherwise, they likely won’t convince their supporters to vote by other means. They may scare them out of voting, period.


washingtonmonthly--2020-09-10--Why This is the Steadiest Presidential Race on Record

The most poignant response to revelations about Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus , as cataloged in Bob Woodward ’ s Rage , came from a Twitter user named Charles Murphy .
But as Martin Longman suggested , we already know what ’ s going to happen .
Trump ’ s supporters will buy into the idea that the president downplayed the threat to avoid a panic , even though , as Glenn Kessler points out , his presidency is devoted to inducing panic .
If the revelations we ’ ve heard recently aren ’ t penetrating the denial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is likely nothing will .
So perhaps it ’ s time to take a look at a presidential race that isn ’ t likely to change much over the next two months .
When it comes to national polls , the three prominent aggregators are pretty much aligned , with FiveThirtyEight showing a 7.6 lead for Biden , RealClearPolitics is at 7.5 and the Economist has it at 8 points .
But as we all know , the real story is in the state polls .
Geoffrey Skelly has provided this helpful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the conventions .
Other than Florida , the changes have either come in states where Biden holds a substantial lead , been minimal , or shifted in Biden ’ s favor .
So what happened in Florida ?
As Skelly points out , the move towards Trump has come primarily from Cuban Americans .
For example , “ a Miami Herald/Bendixen & Amandi survey of just Miami-Dade County , home to two-thirds of Florida ’ s Cuban population , found them breaking for Trump 68 percent to 30 percent.
” This solidification @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be less of a harbinger about the national election and a rather localized event .
At the Republican gathering , Cuban American Maximo Alvarez , who also happens to be a businessman from Miami , gave an emotional speech in which he made a thinly veiled comparison between the Democrats and Fidel Castro .
Alvarez ended by saying that the 2020 presidential election would be a choice between freedom ( Trump ) and oppression ( Biden ) .
That is the kind of message that would appeal to older Cuban Americans who certainly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was featured .
What we have then , is a race that has tightened a bit in Florida , but Biden still holds a lead that is larger than the one Trump has in Iowa , Ohio , Georgia , and Texas .
So if the election were held today , this is what the Electoral College would look like .
I know that a lot of Democrats don ’ t want to hear that because , as Alex Seitz-Walz wrote , the liberal party has a tendency “ to see only the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Markos Moulitsas made a great counter-argument to that tendency .
None of this means we take our feet off the pedal , of course .
But really , is anyone going to do that anyway ?
We didn ’ t in 2018 , despite all the great signs of impending victory .
Heck , the sweet taste of big success is a motivator .
So none of that silly “ act like we ’ re 10 points down !
” crap .
That shit demotivates .
No one likes to be losing .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ alternate reality where all news is fake and the polls are fake and all bad news is fake .
Because if they looked at reality and saw how f ’ d they were , they ’ d call it a day and head home to do whatever it is conservatives do… Anyway , don ’ t panic because things are going well .
And don ’ t panic that we know that things are going well .
No one is breathing easy .
It ’ s all shaping up to be a great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just how big an anvil we ’ ll throw to drowning Republicans .
In a presidential race that ’ s stabilized , mobilizing voters could make the difference between a narrow win ( which Trump and Republicans would surely exploit ) and a landslide .
If the latter doesn ’ t motivate Democrats , they haven ’ t been paying attention .
Because none of the recent revelations about Trump tell us anything new , while his supporters have been inoculated against the truth , this is the steadiest presidential race on record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The only way Trump can win is by cheating…big time .

The most poignant response to revelations about Trump’s handling of the coronavirus, as cataloged in Bob Woodward’s Rage, came from a Twitter user named Charles Murphy.
But as Martin Longman suggested, we already know what’s going to happen. Trump’s supporters will buy into the idea that the president downplayed the threat to avoid a panic, even though, as Glenn Kessler points out, his presidency is devoted to inducing panic.
If the revelations we’ve heard recently aren’t penetrating the denial reflexes of Trump’s supporters, it is likely nothing will. So perhaps it’s time to take a look at a presidential race that isn’t likely to change much over the next two months.
When it comes to national polls, the three prominent aggregators are pretty much aligned, with FiveThirtyEight showing a 7.6 lead for Biden, RealClearPolitics is at 7.5 and the Economist has it at 8 points. But as we all know, the real story is in the state polls. Geoffrey Skelly has provided this helpful graph on how things have changed since before the conventions.
Other than Florida, the changes have either come in states where Biden holds a substantial lead, been minimal, or shifted in Biden’s favor. So what happened in Florida? As Skelly points out, the move towards Trump has come primarily from Cuban Americans. For example, “a Miami Herald/Bendixen & Amandi survey of just Miami-Dade County, home to two-thirds of Florida’s Cuban population, found them breaking for Trump 68 percent to 30 percent.”
This solidification of the Cuban-American vote behind Trump might be less of a harbinger about the national election and a rather localized event. At the Republican gathering, Cuban American Maximo Alvarez, who also happens to be a businessman from Miami, gave an emotional speech in which he made a thinly veiled comparison between the Democrats and Fidel Castro. Alvarez ended by saying that the 2020 presidential election would be a choice between freedom (Trump) and oppression (Biden). That is the kind of message that would appeal to older Cuban Americans who certainly tuned in when one of their own was featured.
What we have then, is a race that has tightened a bit in Florida, but Biden still holds a lead that is larger than the one Trump has in Iowa, Ohio, Georgia, and Texas. So if the election were held today, this is what the Electoral College would look like.
Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com
I know that a lot of Democrats don’t want to hear that because, as Alex Seitz-Walz wrote, the liberal party has a tendency “to see only the dark linings of silver clouds.” But Markos Moulitsas made a great counter-argument to that tendency.
None of this means we take our feet off the pedal, of course. But really, is anyone going to do that anyway? We didn’t in 2018, despite all the great signs of impending victory. Heck, the sweet taste of big success is a motivator. So none of that silly “act like we’re 10 points down!” crap. That shit demotivates. No one likes to be losing. That’s why Republicans create an alternate reality where all news is fake and the polls are fake and all bad news is fake. Because if they looked at reality and saw how f’d they were, they’d call it a day and head home to do whatever it is conservatives do… Anyway, don’t panic because things are going well. And don’t panic that we know that things are going well. No one is breathing easy. It’s all shaping up to be a great election, and our participation will decide just how big an anvil we’ll throw to drowning Republicans.
In a presidential race that’s stabilized, mobilizing voters could make the difference between a narrow win (which Trump and Republicans would surely exploit) and a landslide. If the latter doesn’t motivate Democrats, they haven’t been paying attention.
Because none of the recent revelations about Trump tell us anything new, while his supporters have been inoculated against the truth, this is the steadiest presidential race on record, as Harry Enten recently pointed out. The only way Trump can win is by cheating…big time.