hotair--2020-02-03--New plan: If Biden wins, impeach him immediately over Ukraine

This weekend , Joe Biden said that the ongoing impeachment follies “ haven ’ t shaken his faith ” in working with Republicans .
We ’ ll need to check back with him later and see if that includes Joni Ernst .
While Uncle Joe was talking about reaching across the aisle , the Iowa Senator did an interview with Bloomberg News this weekend .
In it , she suggested that if Joe Biden somehow wins the nomination and then replaces Donald Trump in the Oval Office , he could potentially face immediate impeachment over his son Hunter ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senator Joni Ernst warned Sunday that Republicans could immediately push to impeach Joe Biden over his work in Ukraine as vice president if he win the White House .
“ I think this door of impeachable whatever has been opened , ” Ernst said in an interview with Bloomberg News .
“ Joe Biden should be very careful what he ’ s asking for because , you know , we can have a situation where if it should ever be President Biden , that immediately , people , right the day after he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ Well , we ’ re going to impeach him.
’ ” The grounds for impeachment , the first-term Republican said , would be “ for being assigned to take on Ukrainian corruption yet turning a blind eye to Burisma because his son was on the board making over a million dollars a year.
” Burisma is the elephant in the room that most of the media simply hates talking about .
Whether or not anything technically illegal was going on remains an open question and one that deserves scrutiny , but at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of nepotism and favoritism wafting up from it .
How Hunter Biden , a man with zero experience in the energy industry and who didn ’ t even speak Ukranian wound up hauling in more than a million dollars a year to sit on their board while his dad was the White House point man on Ukraine is an obvious target for investigation .
Now , with all that said , do I think that the Burisma deal rises to the level of an impeachable offense ?
Up until the Democrats ’ recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I probably would have said no , unless some more substantial quid pro quo could be documented .
The relatives of highly placed politicians becoming wealthy off the backs of their parents ’ influence isn ’ t exactly a new story in American politics .
But now , as Ernst was pointing out without any attempt at subtlety , the bar has been lowered considerably .
Of course , all of this was going on while Biden was Vice President , so under the new rules , he should have been impeached back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But nobody was talking about this back then the press corps was entirely disinterested in asking rude questions .
( Much as they are today when talking about Democrats . )
There was one exception to that rule that popped up over the weekend .
Savannah Guthrie amazingly summoned up the courage to ask Biden , “ was it wrong for your son to take the board seat knowing that it was really because that company wanted access to you ?
” Biden managed to somehow keep a straight face when he responded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You ’ re saying things you do not know what you ’ re talking about .
No one has said that .
who said that ?
” It appears that this is the Biden campaign ’ s playbook from here on out .
Whenever anyone brings up Burisma , simply deny everything and pretend it ’ s all been “ debunked.
” And most of the MSM is going along with the plan in perfect harmony .

This weekend, Joe Biden said that the ongoing impeachment follies “haven’t shaken his faith” in working with Republicans. We’ll need to check back with him later and see if that includes Joni Ernst. While Uncle Joe was talking about reaching across the aisle, the Iowa Senator did an interview with Bloomberg News this weekend. In it, she suggested that if Joe Biden somehow wins the nomination and then replaces Donald Trump in the Oval Office, he could potentially face immediate impeachment over his son Hunter’s activities at Burisma in Ukraine.
Iowa Senator Joni Ernst warned Sunday that Republicans could immediately push to impeach Joe Biden over his work in Ukraine as vice president if he win the White House. “I think this door of impeachable whatever has been opened,” Ernst said in an interview with Bloomberg News. “Joe Biden should be very careful what he’s asking for because, you know, we can have a situation where if it should ever be President Biden, that immediately, people, right the day after he would be elected would be saying, ‘Well, we’re going to impeach him.’” The grounds for impeachment, the first-term Republican said, would be “for being assigned to take on Ukrainian corruption yet turning a blind eye to Burisma because his son was on the board making over a million dollars a year.”
Burisma is the elephant in the room that most of the media simply hates talking about. Whether or not anything technically illegal was going on remains an open question and one that deserves scrutiny, but at a minimum, it has the stink of nepotism and favoritism wafting up from it. How Hunter Biden, a man with zero experience in the energy industry and who didn’t even speak Ukranian wound up hauling in more than a million dollars a year to sit on their board while his dad was the White House point man on Ukraine is an obvious target for investigation.
Now, with all that said, do I think that the Burisma deal rises to the level of an impeachable offense? Up until the Democrats’ recent antics in Trump’s impeachment, I probably would have said no, unless some more substantial quid pro quo could be documented. The relatives of highly placed politicians becoming wealthy off the backs of their parents’ influence isn’t exactly a new story in American politics.
But now, as Ernst was pointing out without any attempt at subtlety, the bar has been lowered considerably. Of course, all of this was going on while Biden was Vice President, so under the new rules, he should have been impeached back during Obama’s second term. But nobody was talking about this back then the press corps was entirely disinterested in asking rude questions. (Much as they are today when talking about Democrats.)
There was one exception to that rule that popped up over the weekend. Savannah Guthrie amazingly summoned up the courage to ask Biden, “was it wrong for your son to take the board seat knowing that it was really because that company wanted access to you?” Biden managed to somehow keep a straight face when he responded, “That’s not true. You’re saying things you do not know what you’re talking about. No one has said that. who said that?”
It appears that this is the Biden campaign’s playbook from here on out. Whenever anyone brings up Burisma, simply deny everything and pretend it’s all been “debunked.” And most of the MSM is going along with the plan in perfect harmony.


hotair--2020-02-03--NBC: Are you ready for ... John Kerry's save-the-party-from-Bernie 2020 campaign?

The Democratic presidential field may have some missing elements , but the part of Old Life-Long Pol has already been cast — at least twice .
If Democrats need to rescue themselves from one or both of them , however , is John Kerry the Old Life-Long Pol the party needs ?
According to NBC News yesterday , Kerry didn ’ t mind discussing the possibilities on a cell-phone call in a Des Moines hotel lobby : Former Secretary of State John Kerry — one of Joe Biden ’ s highest-profile endorsers — was overheard Sunday on the phone at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have to do to enter the presidential race amid “ the possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole.
” Sitting in the lobby restaurant of the Renaissance Savery hotel , Kerry was overheard by an NBC News analyst saying “ maybe I ’ m f—ing deluding myself here ” and explaining that in order to run , he ’ d have to step down from the board of Bank of America and give up his ability to make paid speeches .
Kerry said donors like venture capitalist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a couple of million , ” adding that such donors “ now have the reality of Bernie.
” Kerry happens to be in Iowa to campaign for his pal Joe Biden , the other Old Life-Long Pol in the top tier of the 2020 field .
This doesn ’ t exactly sound like a vote of confidence in Sheriff Joe , NBC ’ s Jonathan Allen and Allan Smith write : It ’ s not clear how serious Kerry was on the call about jumping into the race .
But that he would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members of the Democratic Party remain deeply unsettled by the current field , Sanders ’ strength in the polls , and the ability of any candidate to defeat President Donald Trump .
It also suggests that Kerry , who has campaigned with Biden in Iowa and New Hampshire , may be nervous about the former vice president ’ s chances ahead of Monday ’ s first-in-the-nation primary caucuses .
At a North Liberty , Iowa , campaign event on Saturday , Kerry spoke both after and for longer than Biden did .
Kerry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the report emerged to issue a profanity-laden denial on Twitter .
After a few minutes , Kerry deleted the first tweet and offered another in its place : That ’ s not quite a denial .
Yes , he ’ s not running for president , but Allen didn ’ t report that he was .
What Allen claimed he overheard was Kerry discussing the potential need for the Democrats to find a late entry into the race and the possibility that he could fill that role .
Kerry ’ s denial — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calculated to distract from the damaging impact of the nature of that discussion , a discussion Kerry never denies having .
On top of that , Kerry ’ s actually correct on two points here .
First , nominating a 78-year-old socialist crank to the top ( or bottom ) of the ticket would be an utter disaster for the Democratic Party .
You don ’ t need today ’ s NBC/WSJ poll to understand just how unpopular Bernie Sanders ’ “ let ’ s put government in charge of everything ” approach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Academia .
It would be an outright electoral disaster for Democrats .
The reverberations of that outcome might echo for several cycles , perhaps even more so after Donald Trump leaves the political stage for good .
Second , Kerry is very clearly “ f*****g deluding myself here ” if he thinks he ’ s the candidate to rescue the party .
Kerry couldn ’ t beat an unpopular George W. Bush in 2004 despite having lots of time to ramp up and organize a campaign , and he only got through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He ’ s precisely the kind of Beltway barnacle that voters love to despise these days ; he ’ s much more establishment than Sanders , and a late entry will be seen as a desperation establishment move as well .
Besides , few politicians are as demonstrably in love with their own voice as Kerry is , and with less justification .
Finally , if you don ’ t want to generate that desperation narrative and attach it to your good buddy on the campaign trail , then maybe follow this advice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top political reporter : Maybe Joe Biden should jump into the race to rescue Democrats from Kerry .

The Democratic presidential field may have some missing elements, but the part of Old Life-Long Pol has already been cast — at least twice. If Democrats need to rescue themselves from one or both of them, however, is John Kerry the Old Life-Long Pol the party needs? According to NBC News yesterday, Kerry didn’t mind discussing the possibilities on a cell-phone call in a Des Moines hotel lobby:
Former Secretary of State John Kerry — one of Joe Biden’s highest-profile endorsers — was overheard Sunday on the phone at a Des Moines hotel explaining what he would have to do to enter the presidential race amid “the possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole.” Sitting in the lobby restaurant of the Renaissance Savery hotel, Kerry was overheard by an NBC News analyst saying “maybe I’m f—ing deluding myself here” and explaining that in order to run, he’d have to step down from the board of Bank of America and give up his ability to make paid speeches. Kerry said donors like venture capitalist Doug Hickey would have to “raise a couple of million,” adding that such donors “now have the reality of Bernie.”
Kerry happens to be in Iowa to campaign for his pal Joe Biden, the other Old Life-Long Pol in the top tier of the 2020 field. This doesn’t exactly sound like a vote of confidence in Sheriff Joe, NBC’s Jonathan Allen and Allan Smith write:
It’s not clear how serious Kerry was on the call about jumping into the race. But that he would even discuss the possibility suggests that prominent members of the Democratic Party remain deeply unsettled by the current field, Sanders’ strength in the polls, and the ability of any candidate to defeat President Donald Trump. It also suggests that Kerry, who has campaigned with Biden in Iowa and New Hampshire, may be nervous about the former vice president’s chances ahead of Monday’s first-in-the-nation primary caucuses. At a North Liberty, Iowa, campaign event on Saturday, Kerry spoke both after and for longer than Biden did.
Kerry didn’t waste much time after the report emerged to issue a profanity-laden denial on Twitter. After a few minutes, Kerry deleted the first tweet and offered another in its place:
As I told the reporter, I am absolutely not running for President. Any report otherwise is categorically false. I’ve been proud to campaign with my good friend Joe Biden, who is going to win the nomination, beat Trump, and make an outstanding president. — John Kerry (@JohnKerry) February 2, 2020
That’s not quite a denial. Yes, he’s not running for president, but Allen didn’t report that he was. What Allen claimed he overheard was Kerry discussing the potential need for the Democrats to find a late entry into the race and the possibility that he could fill that role. Kerry’s denial — and likely even the profanity — is calculated to distract from the damaging impact of the nature of that discussion, a discussion Kerry never denies having.
On top of that, Kerry’s actually correct on two points here. First, nominating a 78-year-old socialist crank to the top (or bottom) of the ticket would be an utter disaster for the Democratic Party. You don’t need today’s NBC/WSJ poll to understand just how unpopular Bernie Sanders’ “let’s put government in charge of everything” approach will be outside of the urban cores and Academia. It would be an outright electoral disaster for Democrats. The reverberations of that outcome might echo for several cycles, perhaps even more so after Donald Trump leaves the political stage for good.
Second, Kerry is very clearly “f*****g deluding myself here” if he thinks he’s the candidate to rescue the party. Kerry couldn’t beat an unpopular George W. Bush in 2004 despite having lots of time to ramp up and organize a campaign, and he only got through the primary because Howard Dean imploded. He’s precisely the kind of Beltway barnacle that voters love to despise these days; he’s much more establishment than Sanders, and a late entry will be seen as a desperation establishment move as well. Besides, few politicians are as demonstrably in love with their own voice as Kerry is, and with less justification.
Finally, if you don’t want to generate that desperation narrative and attach it to your good buddy on the campaign trail, then maybe follow this advice from the Des Moines Register’s top political reporter:
I don't know who needs to hear this, but the lobby of the Renaissance Savery in Des Moines the day before the Iowa caucuses is *not* the place to have private conversations. This has been a public service announcement. https://t.co/E0Y7dqSFS0 — Brianne Pfannenstiel (@brianneDMR) February 2, 2020
Maybe Joe Biden should jump into the race to rescue Democrats from Kerry.


hotair--2020-02-03--UK to crack down on Islamic terrorists after latest stabbing attack

For those who may have missed it during all the Super Bowl mania , there was another Islamic terror stabbing attack in London this weekend .
Twenty-year-old Sudesh Amman managed to stab three people before being shot dead by police .
Thankfully , none of the victims were killed and the only one at room temperature is the attacker .
But in the wake of the attack , questions were immediately raised about how this took place .
Amman had already been convicted on charges of terrorist activity and been sent to prison .
But his sentence was only slightly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ released early anyway .
The police were supposedly following him on the day of the attack , and yet he managed to secure a blade on his person and carry out the attack .
This has prompted the Brits to come up with new protocols for how they deal with terrorists and rethink their generous sentencing policies .
( Associated Press ) The British government plans to announce new rules for the imprisonment of convicted terrorists after an Islamic militant who was recently released from prison stabbed two people in south London , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three months .
Home Secretary Priti Patel , who is in charge of the police , said the government would release its plans Monday .
Following Sunday ’ s attack and a Nov. 29 attack in which two people were killed in central London , the government said it would effectively stop the early release of convicted extremists , double terror sentences and overhaul the conditions under which they are released back into the community .
Amman appeared to have a bomb strapped to himself at the time of the attack , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Still , law enforcement apparently saw this coming .
The man had published violent videos online , along with detailed bombmaking instructions .
He clearly wasn ’ t making much of a secret of his intentions .
So the Brits will now double the sentences that such Islamic terrorists receive and put an end to the early release programs that allowed Amman to be back out on the streets so quickly .
They also want to put a larger emphasis on “ deradicalization ” programs .
But does that ever truly work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allegiance to ISIS or any other terror group , it seems as if the story only ends with them in prison or dead , either by their own devices or through law enforcement action .
Perhaps there ’ s another path that could be taken .
Brits don ’ t enjoy the same constitutional rights and privileges that Americans do .
While I ’ m not arguing that this is a good thing , it does give their courts more options than would be possible in the United States .
After serving a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be possible for Great Britain to just ship these ISIS wannabes off to Syria or Iraq and bar them from returning ?
It ’ s something to consider , anyway .
It ’ s not as if Amman was some sort of loyal servant of the crown who deserved to stay in England .
Here ’ s something he wrote to his girlfriend last year : “ If you can ’ t make a bomb because family , friends or spies are watching or suspecting you , take a knife , Molotov , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and attack the tourists ( crusaders ) , police and soldiers of taghut or Western Embassies in every country you are in this planet.
” Does that sound like someone you want wandering around the shopping malls ?
At some point , you have to give up on hopes of redemption and look out for your own citizens .
These new , stiffer penalties are a step in the right direction , but it seems as if Great Britain could be doing more .
Right now there are three people sitting in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ managed to be stabbed by a man that the police were tailing at the time .
They deserve answers .

For those who may have missed it during all the Super Bowl mania, there was another Islamic terror stabbing attack in London this weekend. Twenty-year-old Sudesh Amman managed to stab three people before being shot dead by police. Thankfully, none of the victims were killed and the only one at room temperature is the attacker.
But in the wake of the attack, questions were immediately raised about how this took place. Amman had already been convicted on charges of terrorist activity and been sent to prison. But his sentence was only slightly more than three years and he was released early anyway. The police were supposedly following him on the day of the attack, and yet he managed to secure a blade on his person and carry out the attack. This has prompted the Brits to come up with new protocols for how they deal with terrorists and rethink their generous sentencing policies. (Associated Press)
The British government plans to announce new rules for the imprisonment of convicted terrorists after an Islamic militant who was recently released from prison stabbed two people in south London, the second such attack in less than three months. Home Secretary Priti Patel, who is in charge of the police, said the government would release its plans Monday. Following Sunday’s attack and a Nov. 29 attack in which two people were killed in central London, the government said it would effectively stop the early release of convicted extremists, double terror sentences and overhaul the conditions under which they are released back into the community.
Amman appeared to have a bomb strapped to himself at the time of the attack, but it turned out to be a fake. Still, law enforcement apparently saw this coming. The man had published violent videos online, along with detailed bombmaking instructions. He clearly wasn’t making much of a secret of his intentions.
So the Brits will now double the sentences that such Islamic terrorists receive and put an end to the early release programs that allowed Amman to be back out on the streets so quickly. They also want to put a larger emphasis on “deradicalization” programs. But does that ever truly work? Once these maniacs have sworn their allegiance to ISIS or any other terror group, it seems as if the story only ends with them in prison or dead, either by their own devices or through law enforcement action.
Perhaps there’s another path that could be taken. Brits don’t enjoy the same constitutional rights and privileges that Americans do. While I’m not arguing that this is a good thing, it does give their courts more options than would be possible in the United States. After serving a sentence for terrorist offenses, would it be possible for Great Britain to just ship these ISIS wannabes off to Syria or Iraq and bar them from returning? It’s something to consider, anyway.
It’s not as if Amman was some sort of loyal servant of the crown who deserved to stay in England. Here’s something he wrote to his girlfriend last year: “If you can’t make a bomb because family, friends or spies are watching or suspecting you, take a knife, Molotov, sound bombs or a car at night and attack the tourists (crusaders), police and soldiers of taghut or Western Embassies in every country you are in this planet.”
Does that sound like someone you want wandering around the shopping malls? At some point, you have to give up on hopes of redemption and look out for your own citizens. These new, stiffer penalties are a step in the right direction, but it seems as if Great Britain could be doing more. Right now there are three people sitting in the hospital, no doubt wondering how they managed to be stabbed by a man that the police were tailing at the time. They deserve answers.


hotair--2020-02-03--Live: Iowa caucus results

Live: Iowa caucus results

I ’ m posting in the other thread but here ’ s a handy dandy collection of live results updated @ @ @ @ @ Desk HQ .
Three different numbers !
First : Here are the results from the @ @ @ @ @ far .
( Read the other post if you don ’ t know what that @ @ @ @ @ : The results from the “ first alignment , ” the initial vote at each @ @ @ @ @ < 15 percent candidates switched to viable candidates .
And third : The delegate tracker @ @ @ @ @ s “ really ” ahead in the race for the nomination .

I’m posting in the other thread but here’s a handy dandy collection of live results updated moment to moment by Decision Desk HQ. Three different numbers!
First: Here are the results from the “final alignment” thus far. (Read the other post if you don’t know what that term means.)
Second: The results from the “first alignment,” the initial vote at each precinct before supporters of nonviable <15 percent candidates switched to viable candidates.
And third: The delegate tracker, which shows who’s “really” ahead in the race for the nomination.


hotair--2020-02-03--Montana legislator: Constitution says socialists can be shot

A Montana state legislator opened a can of worms with a remark he made on Friday during a gathering of state Republican party members in Helena .
Then he doubled down on it Saturday to a reporter .
The gathering was a standard political one meant to kick off the election season and offer training for party members and candidates .
Former Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke , who served for a term as Montana ’ s representative in the U.S. House , delivered a speech at the event Friday .
After Zinke ’ s speech , State Rep. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about socialists “ entering our government ” and socialists “ everywhere ” in Billings .
Then he took his concern to the next level – he stated that the U.S. Constitution gives permission to shoot socialists or put them in jail .
Um , what ?
Naturally , Zinke did as most politicians do .
He responded with a non-answer .
Garcia explained , “ They ’ re enemies of the free state .
What do we do with our enemies in war ?
In Vietnam , [ Afghanistan ] , all those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zinke gave a non-answer by saying , “ You know , Montana ’ s a great state.
” He pivoted to talk about his work as Interior Secretary to open satellite offices in the western United States .
Garcia was left to say , “ We have to do something.
” Saturday Garcia spoke with a reporter with the Billings Gazette .
He was asked by Holly Michels to clarify his remarks from Friday .
“ So actually in the Constitution of the United States ( if ) they are found guilty of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to prison or are shot , ” Garcia said .
Garcia could not to point to where in the Constitution it says socialists could be shot or jailed .
Asked to clarify if he thought it was fair to shoot or jail a socialist , including those who live in Montana , Garcia said yes .
“ They ’ re enemies of the free state , ” Garcia said .
“ What do we do with our enemies in war ?
In Vietnam , ( Afghanistan ) , all those .
What did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was an appropriate response to his opponent from the last election cycle , Garcia said “ according to the Constitution , I ’ m telling you.
” Garcia ’ s Democrat opponent from the last election cycle , Amelia Marquez is a transgender democratic socialist .
She ’ s a Bernie Sanders supporter .
Marquez said Saturday she is associated with the Montana Democratic Party and is an eastern member-at-large with the party ’ s executive board .
She said she is also a democratic socialist and her political views align with those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being told about Garcia ’ s statements she wished the state legislator would spend more time talking to his constituents about their needs .
“ I wish Rep. Garcia would continue to focus on the issues rather than this constant worry over things that are somewhat ludicrous , ” Marquez said .
The Montana Republican Party put out a statement disassociating themselves with Garcia ’ s remarks .
It should be noted that at the time of Garcia ’ s remarks , many in the audience laughed .
And the Democrats had something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Garcia couldn ’ t cite anywhere in the Constitution that supports his idea of shooting or jailing socialists because , of course , there is no such thing .
Americans enjoy the freedom of speech and the freedom to believe in any political philosophy .
Like it or not , allowing socialists to exist among us is a part of that .
Garcia , though , is correct in being alarmed about the rise in popularity of socialism .
Look no further than the Democrat primary for president this cycle .
Bernie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neck in neck to the more moderate Joe Biden in early voting states .
Bernie is having a moment at just the right time to win in both Iowa and New Hampshire which is scaring the living daylights out of the middle moderates in the party .
Elizabeth Warren isn ’ t quite bold enough to call herself a socialist but she is on board with many of Bernie ’ s policy ideas .
AOC and her sister Squad members proudly align themselves as democratic socialists , an oxymoron I have never understood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in front of the socialist is supposed to soften the description .
Young people , Generation Z , are embracing socialism over capitalism at an alarming rate .
The stigma of the word is fading fast .
While many of us can sympathize with Garcia ’ s concerns , it doesn ’ t help that he uses such outlandish hyperbole to make his point .

A Montana state legislator opened a can of worms with a remark he made on Friday during a gathering of state Republican party members in Helena. Then he doubled down on it Saturday to a reporter.
The gathering was a standard political one meant to kick off the election season and offer training for party members and candidates. Former Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke, who served for a term as Montana’s representative in the U.S. House, delivered a speech at the event Friday. After Zinke’s speech, State Rep. Rodney Garcia of Billings voiced his concern about socialists “entering our government” and socialists “everywhere” in Billings. Then he took his concern to the next level – he stated that the U.S. Constitution gives permission to shoot socialists or put them in jail. Um, what?
Naturally, Zinke did as most politicians do. He responded with a non-answer. Garcia explained, “They’re enemies of the free state. What do we do with our enemies in war? In Vietnam, [Afghanistan], all those. What did we do?” Zinke gave a non-answer by saying, “You know, Montana’s a great state.” He pivoted to talk about his work as Interior Secretary to open satellite offices in the western United States. Garcia was left to say, “We have to do something.”
Saturday Garcia spoke with a reporter with the Billings Gazette. He was asked by Holly Michels to clarify his remarks from Friday.
“So actually in the Constitution of the United States (if) they are found guilty of being a socialist member you either go to prison or are shot,” Garcia said. Garcia could not to point to where in the Constitution it says socialists could be shot or jailed. Asked to clarify if he thought it was fair to shoot or jail a socialist, including those who live in Montana, Garcia said yes. “They’re enemies of the free state,” Garcia said. “What do we do with our enemies in war? In Vietnam, (Afghanistan), all those. What did we do?” Asked if that was an appropriate response to his opponent from the last election cycle, Garcia said “according to the Constitution, I’m telling you.”
Garcia’s Democrat opponent from the last election cycle, Amelia Marquez is a transgender democratic socialist. She’s a Bernie Sanders supporter.
Marquez said Saturday she is associated with the Montana Democratic Party and is an eastern member-at-large with the party’s executive board. She said she is also a democratic socialist and her political views align with those of Sanders. Marquez said Saturday after being told about Garcia’s statements she wished the state legislator would spend more time talking to his constituents about their needs. “I wish Rep. Garcia would continue to focus on the issues rather than this constant worry over things that are somewhat ludicrous,” Marquez said.
The Montana Republican Party put out a statement disassociating themselves with Garcia’s remarks. It should be noted that at the time of Garcia’s remarks, many in the audience laughed.
“The Montana Republican Party wholeheartedly condemns the comment that was made and under no circumstance is violence against someone with opposing political views acceptable,” said Spenser Merwin, the MT GOP executive director. “It’s disappointing that this isolated incident took away from the weekend’s events which showcased the strength of our statewide candidates and the importance of the upcoming election.”
And the Democrats had something to say about it all, too.
“Rodney Garcia has brazenly flaunted his conviction for a domestic dispute, called single moms deadbeats, and was only elected because he created an illegal campaign cash scam. Now he’s publicly calling for people to be shot,” said party chair Robyn Driscoll, adding she thinks candidates who were at the event should condemn Garcia.
Garcia couldn’t cite anywhere in the Constitution that supports his idea of shooting or jailing socialists because, of course, there is no such thing. Americans enjoy the freedom of speech and the freedom to believe in any political philosophy. Like it or not, allowing socialists to exist among us is a part of that. Garcia, though, is correct in being alarmed about the rise in popularity of socialism. Look no further than the Democrat primary for president this cycle. Bernie Sanders is leading the pack or running neck in neck to the more moderate Joe Biden in early voting states. Bernie is having a moment at just the right time to win in both Iowa and New Hampshire which is scaring the living daylights out of the middle moderates in the party.
Elizabeth Warren isn’t quite bold enough to call herself a socialist but she is on board with many of Bernie’s policy ideas. AOC and her sister Squad members proudly align themselves as democratic socialists, an oxymoron I have never understood. I guess the “democratic” in front of the socialist is supposed to soften the description. Young people, Generation Z, are embracing socialism over capitalism at an alarming rate. The stigma of the word is fading fast.
While many of us can sympathize with Garcia’s concerns, it doesn’t help that he uses such outlandish hyperbole to make his point.


hotair--2020-02-03--Live thread: Hawkeye cauci; Update: Technical trouble? Update: "Disaster"

Updates will appear at the top of the page .
The original post follows below .
Update ( Ed ) : We ’ ll have a lot more on this debacle tomorrow morning , but one of the biggest issues will be the loss of credibility in whatever numbers the Iowa Democratic Party produces .
Joe Biden ’ s legal team has already fired a shot across their bow : There ’ s a ready-made excuse in the making for what was rumored to be a low Biden turnout .
Update : At 11:35 ET , there ’ s no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anytime soon .
I ’ m going to call it here and get ready for morning blogging .
Hopefully we ’ ll have numbers by dawn .
Hopefully .
Update : CNN just read a statement from the Iowa Democratic Party claiming that there were some “ inconsistencies ” in the three types of results they were receiving tonight — first alignment , final alignment , and delegates awarded .
They need those numbers to match , obviously .
They claim that there ’ s no hack of any sort , and they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make sure everything adds up .
How long that will take , God only knows .
More from NBC : Update : Klobuchar ’ s out now to speak , seizing the opportunity to address a big TV audience that ’ s staring at the screen blankly waiting for news .
Warren and Biden are also set to speak soon as of 11:25 ET .
Update : Comedy gold — a precinct secretary who ’ d been on hold with the Iowa Democratic Party for an hour to report his results decided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was waiting .
As he was talking to Wolf Blitzer on the air , you could hear the IDP receptionist in the background finally come on the phone on the other line .
The precinct secretary tried saying goodbye to Blitzer so he could finally report his results .
But he took too long and the receptionist … hung up .
Update : The Iowa Democratic Party says around 25 percent of precincts have reported — and that turnout is on pace with 2016 levels .
That ’ s surprising , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urgency to beat Trump might drive turnout to the stratospheric levels of 2008 .
Nope .
Not so far .
Update : Lots of chatter on CNN right now about how this clusterfark will affect the candidates ’ plans .
Some of them have overnight flights to New Hampshire scheduled and aren ’ t sure whether to wait , go out and deliver a speech , or what have you .
Others are speculating that the winner tonight will get little to no bounce from Iowa because news of their victory will break @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by impeachment and the State of the Union .
At a moment when public faith in American institutions is declining , what could be more fitting than a colossal screw-up in counting the votes for the very first election of the new presidential election cycle ?
As of 11 p.m .
ET the Iowa Democratic Party has called an emergency meeting with representatives from each campaign .
That ’ s not what you ’ d expect if results are imminent .
Update : The WSJ reported a few days ago that “ Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Concerns.
” There ’ s no evidence of a security breach tonight , but hoo boy .
Update : From the NYT : “ Additionally , many precinct chairs across the state abandoned the new app that was built to help tabulate and report results as users struggled to log in .
They opted instead to use the telephone hotline to report , which can also slow down the reporting of results.
” Some political junkies are already grumbling on Twitter that this might be the final straw in convincing the two major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go first in the presidential primary system .
And of course , unless Sanders wins , some of his fans will insist that the “ quality control ” being done by the Iowa Democratic Party involves tinkering with the numbers to deprive their guy of victory .
Update : Has something gone wrong ?
CNN is also now reporting that a few hours ago the state Democratic Party was “ troubleshooting ” the app designed to transmit precinct voting totals to state HQ .
Uh oh .
Little more from Nate Cohn : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
ET and we still have … no results .
Wolf Blitzer is on CNN reporting that by this time on previous caucus nights we ’ d have 80 percent or so of precincts reporting .
Update : I ’ ve seen more than one report from election-watchers on social media that Buttigieg is gaining between the first and final alignments .
It ’ s probably Klobuchar supporters who are shifting to him .
Bad news for Biden , who was hoping to take most of those Amy voters .
Update : It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have no real results .
CNN is passing the time by goofing on Biden fans .
Update : A possible answer to my last question : The Dem establishment sticks with Biden .
Update : I don ’ t know , man .
If Biden and Klobuchar finish fourth and fifth tonight , what ’ s the Democratic establishment ’ s move tomorrow ?
Back Buttigieg ?
Update : No evidence of any Klomentum thus far either at 9 p.m .
I believe she ’ s been nonviable at every precinct CNN has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ official results as we approach 9 p.m .
ET but I have yet to hear any good news for Biden on the ground : Update : Yet another bad omen for Biden : Update : Jake Tapper ’ s at a precinct in Des Moines and the Yang group is bigger than Biden ’ s group .
Heavy sweating right now at the DNC .
Update : CNN ’ s entrance poll finds Sanders crushing it among young Democrats , as expected .
He ’ s winning 51 percent of the 17-29 group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 16 percent .
Biden is at four percent ( ! )
.
Among older voters , it ’ s the opposite : Biden ahead with 37 percent , Buttigieg at 22 , Bernie at four .
I hope the oldies showed up tonight for Joe ’ s sake .
Update : CNN has reporters at various precincts across Iowa .
Anecdotally , there appears to be a lot of support for Bernie and Warren , not so much for Biden .
Update : Hoo boy .
FiveThirtyEight sniffed around for the results @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got spiked at the last second on Saturday night due to possibly flawed methodology .
Turns out they weren ’ t good for Joe .
A fourth-place finish for Biden , with him not even making the 15 percent cut in many places , is the establishment nightmare scenario .
I get to use the plural of “ caucus ” in my headline because , believe it or not , the Iowa GOP is holding one tonight too .
Why they ’ d bother is unclear ; presumably they ’ re worried about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it ’ s outdated and want to keep as many voters as possible engaged in the process .
But good on ’ em for making Iowans turn out instead of canceling their election like various other states have done in order to genuflect towards Trump .
The Democratic caucus is effectively the only game in town , though .
If you missed Ed ’ s post earlier explaining the rules tonight , here they are again in a nutshell .
There ’ ll be two rounds of voting .
The so-called first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favorite candidate ” contest .
Any candidate who clears 15 percent in that one moves on to round two , the final alignment .
Any candidate who falls short of 15 percent is eliminated .
Supporters of eliminated candidates are free at that point to switch to a different candidate , or to go home .
The whole fun of the caucus is people trying to persuade fans of failed candidates to join them between the first alignment and the final one .
What ’ s intriguing about tonight ’ s slate of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ lanes ” in the primary , moderates and progressives , has an obvious frontrunner and an obvious second choice who may or may not be able to clear 15 percent in many precincts .
Bernie Sanders will have a big night if Elizabeth Warren can ’ t quite make it to 15 percent across the state ; falling short would mean that her lefty fans would be free agents for the final alignment , and we all know whom they ’ d be likely to swing towards .
Similarly , things will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amy Klobuchar flames out short of 15 percent in various precincts .
He ’ s likely to pick up many of her supporters as a second choice .
As for where Pete Buttigieg ’ s supporters would go if he fails to make the cut , it ’ s anyone ’ s guess .
Right now Buttigieg stands at 16.8 percent in the RCP average of Iowa , with Warren right on the bubble at 15.5 percent and Klobuchar trailing at nine percent .
That may mean Biden ’ s likely to pick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bernie is since Klobuchar ’ s more likely to miss the cut across the state , but Bernie may end up picking up more second-choice *votes* than Biden since Warren ’ s support is stronger than Klobuchar ’ s .
There ’ ll be more free agents from Team Liz if she fails to clear the 15 percent threshold in a given precinct than there will be from Team Amy , in all likelihood .
So , who ’ s likely to win ?
Each member of the Democrats ’ big four has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point since mid-November but tonight someone has to prevail — in theory .
In reality , “ winning ” can be defined in many ways .
The final alignment will ( mostly ) decide how many delegates each candidate gets .
And in the end , delegates are to the primary process what runs are to baseball , the only statistic that matters to the outcome .
Whoever wins the most delegates tonight will be declared the “ winner ” — although if a different candidate happens to get a higher percentage of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delegate winner , naturally that candidate will declare him or herself the real “ winner.
” And of course , if a third candidate happens to get the most votes on the first alignment , he or she will also declare themselves the “ winner.
” And yes , believe it or not , it ’ s possible we ’ ll have a different “ winner ” by each of those three metrics .
Nate Cohn ran the numbers .
The reason delegate totals may not be proportional to the outcome of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the fact that rural precincts “ weigh ” a little more heavily than urban ones .
Read Cohn or Nate Silver if you want the nuts and bolts of that .
Suffice it to say , it ’ s strange that a party that depends heavily in national elections on urban and nonwhite voters is holding its first presidential race in an overwhelmingly white state where rural areas are a bit more important than cities .
And not even a state that ’ s a battleground anymore .
Iowa is reliably red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some narratives .
I think either Sanders or Biden could stomach finishing a close second to the other .
Each man has a likely victory ahead of him , with Bernie surging in New Hampshire and Biden seemingly a lock in South Carolina .
Sanders obviously wants to win tonight , though , in order to prove that This Time Is Different and to send his fans over the moon , as they ’ re likely to shower him with even more cash if they ’ re encouraged by the result .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the field ; winning Iowa and New Hampshire might produce a fundraising burst that ’ s decisive .
If he finishes a close second to Biden , eh , then he can look ahead to New Hampshire and get ready for war in Nevada .
But losing a tight race to Biden here would make this election suddenly feel like 2016 , which didn ’ t work out well for Bernie .
Biden could also tolerate losing narrowly to Sanders .
It ’ d be a bad sign , but a rebound in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a win the following week in South Carolina would give him momentum .
He ’ d obviously like a win in Iowa , though , since it would cement the perspective that he ’ s for real and allow him to shrug off a likely Bernie victory in New Hampshire next week .
If he takes three of the first four , he ’ d be heavily favored to be the nominee .
Where things get interesting is the non-negligible possibility that Buttigieg will sneak into the top two or even win the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s unlikely , note that a new poll this morning of Iowa placed him first at 19 percent , with Sanders second at 17 .
Biden finished third in that one at 15 percent , just four points back of the winner , but a third-or-worse finish by either Joe or Bernie would obviously be catastrophic to perceptions of their viability tomorrow .
That ’ s really what tonight ’ s all about : Viability .
Either candidate or both could claim to be viable if they ’ re in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t then the Democratic center or the progressive left will be in panic mode tomorrow .
The nightmare scenario for each of them is not only finishing third but finishing behind the other candidate in their “ lane.
” Klobuchar ’ s rise in the polls appears to have stalled lately but if she were to finish ahead of Joe tonight the narrative tomorrow would be that centrist Dems had given up on him at the moment of truth and opted for a younger alternative .
It ’ d be catastrophic for him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s polling has been .
A surprise in which Elizabeth Warren surges past Bernie would have a similar effect on the lefty side of the field .
Sanders has spent the past two months reestablishing himself as the progressive choice in the race .
If Warren were to outpace him tonight for whatever reason , possibly because undecideds view her as an acceptable middle ground between Sanders and Biden , then all of that would disappear in a flash .
Warren ’ s campaign would be reborn and she ’ d likely be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beyond , hoarding progressive votes from Bernie that he needs to get past Biden .
As such , I think the home-run scenario for each man tonight is a win coupled by a bad defeat by the candidate in their lane and/or a strong showing by the second-place candidate in the other lane .
If Biden wins , Warren and Sanders end up more or less tied for second and Buttigieg and Klobuchar flame out , that leaves Joe to consolidate centrists while the two leftists split progressives going forward .
If Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Buttigieg ? )
more or less tie , and Warren underperforms , then the left will unite and establishmentarians will bicker and panic .
The caucus begins at 8 p.m .
ET .
For what it ’ s worth , Silver ’ s model gives Biden a 43 percent chance to win a majority of Iowa delegates followed by Sanders at 31 percent .
As far as rooting interests go , you ’ re free to pull for whichever candidate you think would make the easiest match-up for the GOP ( probably Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fool ’ s errand and a lesson everyone should have learned after Democrats popped the champagne in 2016 at the prospect of facing Trump .
Philip Klein ’ s wise to pull for Klobuchar , the best combination of sanity , youth , and experience in the bunch , purely on the theory that Democrats always stand a good chance of winning a presidential election and in case that happens we need someone in charge who ’ s neither senile nor radical nor still a few years away from their 40th birthday @ @ @ @ @ @

Updates will appear at the top of the page. The original post follows below.
Update (Ed): We’ll have a lot more on this debacle tomorrow morning, but one of the biggest issues will be the loss of credibility in whatever numbers the Iowa Democratic Party produces. Joe Biden’s legal team has already fired a shot across their bow:
There’s a ready-made excuse in the making for what was rumored to be a low Biden turnout.
Update: At 11:35 ET, there’s no sign that we’re getting results anytime soon. I’m going to call it here and get ready for morning blogging. Hopefully we’ll have numbers by dawn. Hopefully.
Update: CNN just read a statement from the Iowa Democratic Party claiming that there were some “inconsistencies” in the three types of results they were receiving tonight — first alignment, final alignment, and delegates awarded. They need those numbers to match, obviously. They claim that there’s no hack of any sort, and they do have paper ballots from each precinct to make sure everything adds up. How long that will take, God only knows. More from NBC:
The IDP results app was not working and the backup phone line is likewise “a disaster,” a source familiar with the process said, adding that the campaign were all participating in a briefing about the situation. “The app is the issue and the hotline is smoked,” said Joe Galasso, a volunteer in charge of new registrations for Waukee precinct 2. He had just gotten off the phone with precinct chairman Matt Chapman. They have not been able to report their results, even though they wrapped up more than an hour ago.
Update: Klobuchar’s out now to speak, seizing the opportunity to address a big TV audience that’s staring at the screen blankly waiting for news. Warren and Biden are also set to speak soon as of 11:25 ET.
Update: This sounds promising.
MORE: Polk County precinct chairs are being advised to take pictures of the results and text them over to the Polk County executive director, who is driving them to the HQ, according to a Democratic operative familiar with the situation — Elena Schneider (@ec_schneider) February 4, 2020
Update: Comedy gold — a precinct secretary who’d been on hold with the Iowa Democratic Party for an hour to report his results decided to call into CNN to complain while he was waiting. As he was talking to Wolf Blitzer on the air, you could hear the IDP receptionist in the background finally come on the phone on the other line. The precinct secretary tried saying goodbye to Blitzer so he could finally report his results. But he took too long and the receptionist … hung up.
Unreal. A precinct secretary was on hold on the hotline for an hour and they took him off hold as he was talking to CNN. He didn't respond fast enough and they hung up on him. pic.twitter.com/hPgKhDge7i — Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) February 4, 2020
Update: The Iowa Democratic Party says around 25 percent of precincts have reported — and that turnout is on pace with 2016 levels. That’s surprising, as Dems thought the big field and the urgency to beat Trump might drive turnout to the stratospheric levels of 2008. Nope. Not so far.
Update: Lots of chatter on CNN right now about how this clusterfark will affect the candidates’ plans. Some of them have overnight flights to New Hampshire scheduled and aren’t sure whether to wait, go out and deliver a speech, or what have you. Others are speculating that the winner tonight will get little to no bounce from Iowa because news of their victory will break overnight and then immediately be crowded out by impeachment and the State of the Union.
At a moment when public faith in American institutions is declining, what could be more fitting than a colossal screw-up in counting the votes for the very first election of the new presidential election cycle?
All whiny-reporter grumbling aside….In the context of a country facing questions about the security of its elections and their potential vulnerability to manipulation, the clumsiness and confusion around these Iowa results is a serious debacle. — John F. Harris (@harrispolitico) February 4, 2020
As of 11 p.m. ET the Iowa Democratic Party has called an emergency meeting with representatives from each campaign. That’s not what you’d expect if results are imminent.
Update: “Technical issue.”
There is technical issue with Iowa results reporting. Hearing from multiple campaigns that the Iowa Democratic Party is sending a tech staffer to the shared boiler room in Des Moines, where the campaigns have staff headquartered, to brief them momentarily on what’s going on. — Ruby Cramer (@rubycramer) February 4, 2020
Update: The WSJ reported a few days ago that “Democrats’ Iowa Caucus Voting App Stirs Security Concerns.” There’s no evidence of a security breach tonight, but hoo boy.
Update: From the NYT: “Additionally, many precinct chairs across the state abandoned the new app that was built to help tabulate and report results as users struggled to log in. They opted instead to use the telephone hotline to report, which can also slow down the reporting of results.” Some political junkies are already grumbling on Twitter that this might be the final straw in convincing the two major parties to find a new state to go first in the presidential primary system. And of course, unless Sanders wins, some of his fans will insist that the “quality control” being done by the Iowa Democratic Party involves tinkering with the numbers to deprive their guy of victory.
Update: Has something gone wrong?
The Iowa Democratic Party says #IowaCaucuses results are coming in slowly because of "quality control." @MauraBarrettNBC reports: There were some issues with downloading the reporting app in the lead-up to the caucuses. pic.twitter.com/Y4VIxXrdxF — Evan Rosenfeld (@Evan_Rosenfeld) February 4, 2020
CNN is also now reporting that a few hours ago the state Democratic Party was “troubleshooting” the app designed to transmit precinct voting totals to state HQ. Uh oh. Little more from Nate Cohn:
With that in mind, the Iowa Democratic Party saying "quality control" definitely raises my eyebrows. This year, they're getting all the results for the first time.
And I wonder whether they're finding out that people just aren't doing this right a lot more often than they thought — Nate Cohn (@Nate_Cohn) February 4, 2020
Update: It’s 10:20 p.m. ET and we still have … no results. Wolf Blitzer is on CNN reporting that by this time on previous caucus nights we’d have 80 percent or so of precincts reporting.
Update: I’ve seen more than one report from election-watchers on social media that Buttigieg is gaining between the first and final alignments. It’s probably Klobuchar supporters who are shifting to him. Bad news for Biden, who was hoping to take most of those Amy voters.
Update: It’s 9:37 ET and we still have no real results. CNN is passing the time by goofing on Biden fans.
Tapper's out in Iowa body bagging the Biden campaign. Brutal. pic.twitter.com/GGcsCg25y4 — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) February 4, 2020
Update: A possible answer to my last question: The Dem establishment sticks with Biden.
Reality check for those calling IA a “Biden implosion:” this caucus is totally unrepresentative of larger Dem primary electorate. Why? 1. It’s a caucus (unlike 90% of contests), rewarding passion on left
2. 90%+ white
3. Really young (21% under 35) All of Biden’s worst things. — Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) February 4, 2020
Update: I don’t know, man. If Biden and Klobuchar finish fourth and fifth tonight, what’s the Democratic establishment’s move tomorrow? Back Buttigieg?
Getting reports that Biden not viable at some bigger caucus sites. For example, 650 at Iowa City-1 at City High (below), and Biden not viable with 51 supporters. Sanders, Klobuchar, Buttigieg Warren viable.#iacaucus2020 pic.twitter.com/NgdGiZ4mS6 — Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) February 4, 2020
Update: No evidence of any Klomentum thus far either at 9 p.m. I believe she’s been nonviable at every precinct CNN has visited. However…
Sanders 76, Klobuchar 75, Buttigieg 70, Warren 59. Biden not viable at 37. Amy K hitting her mark in an educated suburb, Biden not so much. https://t.co/oYMhgzMFrG — Patrick Ruffini (@PatrickRuffini) February 4, 2020
Update: Still no official results as we approach 9 p.m. ET but I have yet to hear any good news for Biden on the ground:
Biden on verge of not being viable at this Johnston precinct 2 caucus in round one. His supporters seem crushed. — Michael Barbaro (@mikiebarb) February 4, 2020
Update: Yet another bad omen for Biden:
Widespread reports of Joe Biden barely/not viable in types of precincts he should be to have any type of chance. Having a hard time seeing him in top three…long way to go. — Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) February 4, 2020
Just to empty my notebook, common refrain around Iowa over the past few days was that Joe Biden had a very weak operation on the ground. Folks expressed confidence about Buttigieg/Sanders/Warren's field programs but there was concern about Klobuchar and her ability to scale — Ben Jacobs (@Bencjacobs) February 4, 2020
Update: Jake Tapper’s at a precinct in Des Moines and the Yang group is bigger than Biden’s group. Heavy sweating right now at the DNC.
Update: CNN’s entrance poll finds Sanders crushing it among young Democrats, as expected. He’s winning 51 percent of the 17-29 group. Buttigieg is second at, er, 16 percent. Biden is at four percent(!). Among older voters, it’s the opposite: Biden ahead with 37 percent, Buttigieg at 22, Bernie at four. I hope the oldies showed up tonight for Joe’s sake.
Update: CNN has reporters at various precincts across Iowa. Anecdotally, there appears to be a lot of support for Bernie and Warren, not so much for Biden.
Update: Hoo boy. FiveThirtyEight sniffed around for the results of that Des Moines Register poll that got spiked at the last second on Saturday night due to possibly flawed methodology. Turns out they weren’t good for Joe.
Nevertheless, a tweet made the rounds that night purporting to give the poll’s results, and after doing some reporting around this, FiveThirtyEight can confirm that it contains the correct final findings of the unreleased Iowa poll: Sanders 22 percent, Warren 18 percent, Buttigieg 16 percent, Biden 13 percent. Imagine the news cycle that would have been, with national front-runner Biden making such a poor showing in the last, highest-profile poll before the caucuses.
A fourth-place finish for Biden, with him not even making the 15 percent cut in many places, is the establishment nightmare scenario.
*****
I get to use the plural of “caucus” in my headline because, believe it or not, the Iowa GOP is holding one tonight too. Why they’d bother is unclear; presumably they’re worried about Iowa’s first-in-the-nation status amid criticism that it’s outdated and want to keep as many voters as possible engaged in the process. But good on ’em for making Iowans turn out instead of canceling their election like various other states have done in order to genuflect towards Trump.
The Democratic caucus is effectively the only game in town, though. If you missed Ed’s post earlier explaining the rules tonight, here they are again in a nutshell. There’ll be two rounds of voting. The so-called first alignment is an old-fashioned “choose your favorite candidate” contest. Any candidate who clears 15 percent in that one moves on to round two, the final alignment. Any candidate who falls short of 15 percent is eliminated. Supporters of eliminated candidates are free at that point to switch to a different candidate, or to go home.
The whole fun of the caucus is people trying to persuade fans of failed candidates to join them between the first alignment and the final one. What’s intriguing about tonight’s slate of candidates is that each of the two “lanes” in the primary, moderates and progressives, has an obvious frontrunner and an obvious second choice who may or may not be able to clear 15 percent in many precincts. Bernie Sanders will have a big night if Elizabeth Warren can’t quite make it to 15 percent across the state; falling short would mean that her lefty fans would be free agents for the final alignment, and we all know whom they’d be likely to swing towards. Similarly, things will look good for Joe Biden if centrist-y Amy Klobuchar flames out short of 15 percent in various precincts. He’s likely to pick up many of her supporters as a second choice. As for where Pete Buttigieg’s supporters would go if he fails to make the cut, it’s anyone’s guess.
Right now Buttigieg stands at 16.8 percent in the RCP average of Iowa, with Warren right on the bubble at 15.5 percent and Klobuchar trailing at nine percent. That may mean Biden’s likely to pick up second-choice votes in more *precincts* than Bernie is since Klobuchar’s more likely to miss the cut across the state, but Bernie may end up picking up more second-choice *votes* than Biden since Warren’s support is stronger than Klobuchar’s. There’ll be more free agents from Team Liz if she fails to clear the 15 percent threshold in a given precinct than there will be from Team Amy, in all likelihood.
So, who’s likely to win? Each member of the Democrats’ big four has led in the RCP average at some point since mid-November but tonight someone has to prevail — in theory. In reality, “winning” can be defined in many ways. The final alignment will (mostly) decide how many delegates each candidate gets. And in the end, delegates are to the primary process what runs are to baseball, the only statistic that matters to the outcome. Whoever wins the most delegates tonight will be declared the “winner” — although if a different candidate happens to get a higher percentage of votes on the final alignment than the delegate winner, naturally that candidate will declare him or herself the real “winner.” And of course, if a third candidate happens to get the most votes on the first alignment, he or she will also declare themselves the “winner.” And yes, believe it or not, it’s possible we’ll have a different “winner” by each of those three metrics. Nate Cohn ran the numbers.
The reason delegate totals may not be proportional to the outcome of the final alignment is complicated and comes down to the fact that rural precincts “weigh” a little more heavily than urban ones. Read Cohn or Nate Silver if you want the nuts and bolts of that. Suffice it to say, it’s strange that a party that depends heavily in national elections on urban and nonwhite voters is holding its first presidential race in an overwhelmingly white state where rural areas are a bit more important than cities. And not even a state that’s a battleground anymore. Iowa is reliably red under Trump.
Let’s pre-game some narratives. I think either Sanders or Biden could stomach finishing a close second to the other. Each man has a likely victory ahead of him, with Bernie surging in New Hampshire and Biden seemingly a lock in South Carolina. Sanders obviously wants to win tonight, though, in order to prove that This Time Is Different and to send his fans over the moon, as they’re likely to shower him with even more cash if they’re encouraged by the result. He already enjoys a considerable financial advantage over the field; winning Iowa and New Hampshire might produce a fundraising burst that’s decisive. If he finishes a close second to Biden, eh, then he can look ahead to New Hampshire and get ready for war in Nevada. But losing a tight race to Biden here would make this election suddenly feel like 2016, which didn’t work out well for Bernie.
Biden could also tolerate losing narrowly to Sanders. It’d be a bad sign, but a rebound in Nevada would steady the ship and then a win the following week in South Carolina would give him momentum. He’d obviously like a win in Iowa, though, since it would cement the perspective that he’s for real and allow him to shrug off a likely Bernie victory in New Hampshire next week. If he takes three of the first four, he’d be heavily favored to be the nominee. Where things get interesting is the non-negligible possibility that Buttigieg will sneak into the top two or even win the caucus outright — and if you think that’s unlikely, note that a new poll this morning of Iowa placed him first at 19 percent, with Sanders second at 17. Biden finished third in that one at 15 percent, just four points back of the winner, but a third-or-worse finish by either Joe or Bernie would obviously be catastrophic to perceptions of their viability tomorrow. That’s really what tonight’s all about: Viability. Either candidate or both could claim to be viable if they’re in the top two. If one isn’t then the Democratic center or the progressive left will be in panic mode tomorrow.
The nightmare scenario for each of them is not only finishing third but finishing behind the other candidate in their “lane.” Klobuchar’s rise in the polls appears to have stalled lately but if she were to finish ahead of Joe tonight the narrative tomorrow would be that centrist Dems had given up on him at the moment of truth and opted for a younger alternative. It’d be catastrophic for him, particularly given how lackluster Klobuchar’s polling has been. A surprise in which Elizabeth Warren surges past Bernie would have a similar effect on the lefty side of the field. Sanders has spent the past two months reestablishing himself as the progressive choice in the race. If Warren were to outpace him tonight for whatever reason, possibly because undecideds view her as an acceptable middle ground between Sanders and Biden, then all of that would disappear in a flash. Warren’s campaign would be reborn and she’d likely be in the race through Super Tuesday and beyond, hoarding progressive votes from Bernie that he needs to get past Biden.
As such, I think the home-run scenario for each man tonight is a win coupled by a bad defeat by the candidate in their lane and/or a strong showing by the second-place candidate in the other lane. If Biden wins, Warren and Sanders end up more or less tied for second and Buttigieg and Klobuchar flame out, that leaves Joe to consolidate centrists while the two leftists split progressives going forward. If Sanders wins, Biden and Klobuchar (and Buttigieg?) more or less tie, and Warren underperforms, then the left will unite and establishmentarians will bicker and panic.
The caucus begins at 8 p.m. ET. For what it’s worth, Silver’s model gives Biden a 43 percent chance to win a majority of Iowa delegates followed by Sanders at 31 percent. As far as rooting interests go, you’re free to pull for whichever candidate you think would make the easiest match-up for the GOP (probably Warren) but I think that’s a fool’s errand and a lesson everyone should have learned after Democrats popped the champagne in 2016 at the prospect of facing Trump. Philip Klein’s wise to pull for Klobuchar, the best combination of sanity, youth, and experience in the bunch, purely on the theory that Democrats always stand a good chance of winning a presidential election and in case that happens we need someone in charge who’s neither senile nor radical nor still a few years away from their 40th birthday. Stay tuned for updates.


hotair--2020-02-04--Only a quarter of Iowa precinct chairs were able to install the Shadow app

The NY Times has a follow up report on the disaster created by the app intended to streamline reporting of the Iowa caucus results .
Earlier today the Democratic Party had released a statement saying the app had accurately recorded data but had a glitch when it came to reporting that data .
But according to the NY Times , the majority of the 1700 precinct chairs couldn ’ t even get the app to install on their phones , in part because it had never been approved for use by the Apple store : Two people who work for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anonymity because they did not want to risk their jobs , acknowledged that the app had problems .
It was so rushed , they said , that there was no time to get it approved by the Apple store .
Had it been , it might have proved far easier for users to install .
Instead , the app had to be downloaded by bypassing a phone ’ s security settings , a complicated process for anyone unfamiliar with the intricacies of mobile operating systems , and especially hard for many of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iowa .
The app also had to be installed using two-factor authentication and PIN passcodes .
The information was included on worksheets given to volunteers at the Iowa precincts tallying the votes , but it added another layer of complication that appeared to hinder people .
In the end , only one-quarter of the 1,700 precinct chairs successfully downloaded and installed the app , according to a Democratic consultant who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid losing work .
Many who resorted to calling in the results found that there were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Times reported that many of the precinct chairs simply didn ’ t try : According to more than a dozen Iowa Democratic Party officials , county chairmen and volunteers involved in running precincts , many precinct leaders ignored the party ’ s request that they download the app before caucus night or found the process of installing it too cumbersome .
Instead , as they had always done , they planned to call their precinct results in .
But some found it took hours for any of the dozens of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pick up the phone to receive the results .
People associated with Shadow are now reportedly removing those connections from their Linked In accounts and as Ed noted earlier , ACRONYM , the progressive fundraising group behind Shadow has been disavowing its connections to the group .
But it appears that the failure of this project wasn ’ t solely the fault of the engineers .
The main problem was that Shadow was given less than two months to build and test this .
That ’ s a ridiculously short time frame for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but be useable by a bunch of people not very familiar with technology .
Obviously , Shadow didn ’ t pull off a miracle here but the real culprits responsible for the disaster are the people within the Iowa Democratic Party who committed to this plan with so little time and then failed to have a working backup plan .
I don ’ t suppose we ’ ll be seeing any of them on television this week .

The NY Times has a follow up report on the disaster created by the app intended to streamline reporting of the Iowa caucus results. Earlier today the Democratic Party had released a statement saying the app had accurately recorded data but had a glitch when it came to reporting that data. But according to the NY Times, the majority of the 1700 precinct chairs couldn’t even get the app to install on their phones, in part because it had never been approved for use by the Apple store:
Two people who work for Acronym, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to risk their jobs, acknowledged that the app had problems. It was so rushed, they said, that there was no time to get it approved by the Apple store. Had it been, it might have proved far easier for users to install. Instead, the app had to be downloaded by bypassing a phone’s security settings, a complicated process for anyone unfamiliar with the intricacies of mobile operating systems, and especially hard for many of the older, less tech-savvy caucus chairs in Iowa. The app also had to be installed using two-factor authentication and PIN passcodes. The information was included on worksheets given to volunteers at the Iowa precincts tallying the votes, but it added another layer of complication that appeared to hinder people. In the end, only one-quarter of the 1,700 precinct chairs successfully downloaded and installed the app, according to a Democratic consultant who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid losing work. Many who resorted to calling in the results found that there were too few operators to handle the calls.
The Times reported that many of the precinct chairs simply didn’t try:
According to more than a dozen Iowa Democratic Party officials, county chairmen and volunteers involved in running precincts, many precinct leaders ignored the party’s request that they download the app before caucus night or found the process of installing it too cumbersome. Instead, as they had always done, they planned to call their precinct results in. But some found it took hours for any of the dozens of people at party headquarters in Des Moines to pick up the phone to receive the results.
People associated with Shadow are now reportedly removing those connections from their Linked In accounts and as Ed noted earlier, ACRONYM, the progressive fundraising group behind Shadow has been disavowing its connections to the group. But it appears that the failure of this project wasn’t solely the fault of the engineers. The main problem was that Shadow was given less than two months to build and test this. That’s a ridiculously short time frame for something that has to not only work but be useable by a bunch of people not very familiar with technology.
Obviously, Shadow didn’t pull off a miracle here but the real culprits responsible for the disaster are the people within the Iowa Democratic Party who committed to this plan with so little time and then failed to have a working backup plan. I don’t suppose we’ll be seeing any of them on television this week.


hotair--2020-02-04--Collins makes it official: Yes, I'll acquit Trump on both charges

Did we really need this floor speech ?
Since the start of this process her final vote has been as assured as Lindsey Graham ’ s or Ted Cruz ’ s .
Her electoral position in Maine this fall leaves her no choice but to stay on the right side of her base .
I guess “ we ” didn ’ t need the speech but the poor Mainers who don ’ t follow politics closely were probably misled at some point into believing there was a scintilla of doubt about how she might vote .
She ’ s “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them a formal accounting .
She did a reasonably smart job of it .
Watch , then read on : It was shrewd of her to use this opportunity to remind Democrats back home that she voted to acquit Clinton in 1999 too .
It ’ s not that she ’ s pro-Trump , in other words , it ’ s that she ’ s anti-removal .
That ’ ll be a useful rejoinder to her critics on the stump this year .
It was also clever of her to note that Pelosi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sending over the articles of impeachment last month undercut the Democratic argument that removing Trump from office was an “ urgent ” matter needed to protect the integrity of the coming election .
House Dems deserve to suffer some political pain for that stupid gambit .
And they know it .
While Ms. Pelosi gets generally good marks from her rank and file , some centrist members now grumble privately that she made some tactical missteps .
Her refusal to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate for several weeks after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delay in the Senate trial , generated blowback in swing districts , said Democratic lawmakers who insisted on anonymity to speak candidly .
They cringed when Ms. Pelosi made a spectacle out of the eventual signing of the articles in January , when she distributed commemorative pens to colleagues .
Critics said it undermined her own oft-stated message that this was a “ somber ” and “ prayerful moment ” for the country… Other Democrats have questioned the decision to impeach Mr. Trump without exhausting the House ’ s legal remedies to compel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Those fights could have taken months , potentially pushing a vote to charge him up against the presidential election , or even beyond .
Collins flags that last idea in her speech too .
If Bolton was so important , she asks Democrats , why didn ’ t you even try to subpoena him ?
It ’ s an effective point but one that deliberately overlooks the fact that Trump has been blocking his staffers from testifying for months under the dubious doctrine of “ absolute immunity.
” And it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Collins and fought a long legal battle to compel Bolton ’ s testimony , pushing impeachment to the summer or whatever , Collins unquestionably would have turned around then and said we ’ re waaaaaaaaay too close to an election now to justify removing the president .
House Dems were in a Catch-22 : Either they could plow ahead and apply pressure on Senate Republicans to call Bolton themselves or they could hang back , duke it out in court , and then wait for Senate Republicans to tell them “ Too late.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ point for Collins to make in the context of explaining her vote to acquit considering that she thought the Senate should call witnesses whom the House didn ’ t call .
In the end her obstacle in getting to hear Bolton wasn ’ t Pelosi , it was every Republican in the Senate not named “ Mitt Romney.
” Where she went off the rails is in a separate interview she did today with CBS , insisting that “ I believe that the president has learned from this case… The president has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ big lesson.
” Pure nonsense , correctly identified as such last night by Schiff in his closing argument , and a claim that may come back to haunt the Republicans like Collins and Joni Ernst and Lamar Alexander who ’ ve been making it this weak believing that it ’ s a sop to Democrats .
We don ’ t need to remove him to prevent him from doing this again , they ’ re saying , because he ’ s been shamed .
Trump has never felt shame in his life , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he did a single thing wrong here : PERFECT CALL , NO QUID PRO QUO , READ THE TRANSCRIPT .
His fans don ’ t seem to think so either .
Anti-Trumper Joe Walsh was in Iowa last night running against Trump on the Republican side and came away with a hard lesson about where party loyalties lie at a moment when the president is on trial in the Senate for misconduct .
Impeachment appears to have done the president nothing but good .
He ’ s at 94 percent job approval among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overall in Gallup ’ s latest .
Senate Republicans were afraid to cross him even on the narrow issue of calling witnesses , even with assurances that Hunter Biden would also be called if Democratic witnesses were called .
He misidentified Kansas as the home state of the Kansas City Chiefs on Sunday night and had bootlickers in the party and on Fox News feeling obliged to spin the comment for him somehow .
If he pulled the same move with a different foreign leader tomorrow that he pulled with Zelensky , Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news ” or insist that we ’ re close enough to the election to let voters decide and not give it a further thought .
Even if Democrats wanted to impeach him again , they know they had only one chance at it and they ’ ve blown it .
They can ’ t do it again , at least not before the election .
The only “ lesson ” Trump will learn from this is that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not only would he not lose a single @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who witnessed the shooting would either claim that they didn ’ t see anything or insist that the sonofabitch had it coming .
Including Susan Collins .
She wouldn ’ t even censure him for it .
Exit question : Is Romney going to speak today or is he going to keep us in suspense until tomorrow ?

Did we really need this floor speech? Since the start of this process her final vote has been as assured as Lindsey Graham’s or Ted Cruz’s. Her electoral position in Maine this fall leaves her no choice but to stay on the right side of her base.
I guess “we” didn’t need the speech but the poor Mainers who don’t follow politics closely were probably misled at some point into believing there was a scintilla of doubt about how she might vote. She’s “independent,” right? She owed them a formal accounting.
She did a reasonably smart job of it. Watch, then read on:
.@SenatorCollins says she will vote to acquit President Trump on both articles of impeachment. pic.twitter.com/ktksBuTMuh — CSPAN (@cspan) February 4, 2020
It was shrewd of her to use this opportunity to remind Democrats back home that she voted to acquit Clinton in 1999 too. It’s not that she’s pro-Trump, in other words, it’s that she’s anti-removal. That’ll be a useful rejoinder to her critics on the stump this year. It was also clever of her to note that Pelosi’s long, pointless delay in sending over the articles of impeachment last month undercut the Democratic argument that removing Trump from office was an “urgent” matter needed to protect the integrity of the coming election. House Dems deserve to suffer some political pain for that stupid gambit.
And they know it.
While Ms. Pelosi gets generally good marks from her rank and file, some centrist members now grumble privately that she made some tactical missteps. Her refusal to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate for several weeks after the House adopted them, which forced a delay in the Senate trial, generated blowback in swing districts, said Democratic lawmakers who insisted on anonymity to speak candidly. They cringed when Ms. Pelosi made a spectacle out of the eventual signing of the articles in January, when she distributed commemorative pens to colleagues. Critics said it undermined her own oft-stated message that this was a “somber” and “prayerful moment” for the country… Other Democrats have questioned the decision to impeach Mr. Trump without exhausting the House’s legal remedies to compel the testimony of key White House witnesses. Those fights could have taken months, potentially pushing a vote to charge him up against the presidential election, or even beyond.
Collins flags that last idea in her speech too. If Bolton was so important, she asks Democrats, why didn’t you even try to subpoena him? It’s an effective point but one that deliberately overlooks the fact that Trump has been blocking his staffers from testifying for months under the dubious doctrine of “absolute immunity.” And it’s cynical inasmuch as if Pelosi had obeyed Collins and fought a long legal battle to compel Bolton’s testimony, pushing impeachment to the summer or whatever, Collins unquestionably would have turned around then and said we’re waaaaaaaaay too close to an election now to justify removing the president. House Dems were in a Catch-22: Either they could plow ahead and apply pressure on Senate Republicans to call Bolton themselves or they could hang back, duke it out in court, and then wait for Senate Republicans to tell them “Too late.”
It’s also an odd point for Collins to make in the context of explaining her vote to acquit considering that she thought the Senate should call witnesses whom the House didn’t call. In the end her obstacle in getting to hear Bolton wasn’t Pelosi, it was every Republican in the Senate not named “Mitt Romney.”
Where she went off the rails is in a separate interview she did today with CBS, insisting that “I believe that the president has learned from this case… The president has been impeached. That’s a pretty big lesson.” Pure nonsense, correctly identified as such last night by Schiff in his closing argument, and a claim that may come back to haunt the Republicans like Collins and Joni Ernst and Lamar Alexander who’ve been making it this weak believing that it’s a sop to Democrats. We don’t need to remove him to prevent him from doing this again, they’re saying, because he’s been shamed. Trump has never felt shame in his life, nor to all appearances does he thinks he did a single thing wrong here: PERFECT CALL, NO QUID PRO QUO, READ THE TRANSCRIPT. His fans don’t seem to think so either. Anti-Trumper Joe Walsh was in Iowa last night running against Trump on the Republican side and came away with a hard lesson about where party loyalties lie at a moment when the president is on trial in the Senate for misconduct.
The crowd booed me. I got booed, yelled at, jeered, and given the middle finger for the 3-4 minutes I spoke to these 3,000 people. Afterwards, I realized again that 99.9% of these folks don’t support me. They don’t care that Trump lies, they don’t care that he’s cruel, 4/ — Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) February 4, 2020
Afterwards, I realized again that my Republican Party isn’t a Party, it’s a cult. I realized again that nobody can beat Trump in a Republican Primary. And most importantly and most sadly, I realized again that I don’t belong in this party. I have no home in this party. 6/ — Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) February 4, 2020
Impeachment appears to have done the president nothing but good. He’s at 94 percent job approval among Republicans and a personal-best 49 percent approval overall in Gallup’s latest. Senate Republicans were afraid to cross him even on the narrow issue of calling witnesses, even with assurances that Hunter Biden would also be called if Democratic witnesses were called. He misidentified Kansas as the home state of the Kansas City Chiefs on Sunday night and had bootlickers in the party and on Fox News feeling obliged to spin the comment for him somehow. If he pulled the same move with a different foreign leader tomorrow that he pulled with Zelensky, Senate Republicans would either call it “fake news” or insist that we’re close enough to the election to let voters decide and not give it a further thought. Even if Democrats wanted to impeach him again, they know they had only one chance at it and they’ve blown it. They can’t do it again, at least not before the election.
The only “lesson” Trump will learn from this is that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not only would he not lose a single vote, all of the Senate Republicans who witnessed the shooting would either claim that they didn’t see anything or insist that the sonofabitch had it coming. Including Susan Collins. She wouldn’t even censure him for it.
Exit question: Is Romney going to speak today or is he going to keep us in suspense until tomorrow?


hotair--2020-02-04--AOC: I refuse to normalize Trump's behavior by attending the State of the Union

Any member of Congress boycotting any SOTU for any reason has my support .
If enough of them start staying home , some president might finally be persuaded to cancel this tedious , obnoxious , unwatchable spectacle .
Although in light of what ’ s happening in the Senate right now and Trump ’ s habit of going off-script , tonight ’ s spectacle might be a little less tedious and unwatchable than most , no ?
Realistically the worst that might happen over time is that attendance at the SOTU becomes a partisan affair .
Most of the out-party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s in charge while all of the president ’ s party will show up and seal-clap throughout .
Everything else in American politics is poisoned by partisanship .
Eventually , as the parties sink further into total war and an endless spiral of recriminations , this will be too .
Ocasio-Cortez is ahead of the curve : That ’ s her all over inasmuch as she ’ s setting up a purity test for the rest of her caucus by doing this .
“ Sure , other Dems say they object to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ object so much that they ’ d refuse to show up and listen to him for an hour .
If only they had AOC ’ s courage.
” She ’ s not the only member of the “ Squad ” going this route .
Ayanna Pressley issued this shortly before Ocasio-Cortez : “ The occupant of the White House incessantly stokes fear in people of color , women , healthcare providers , LGBTQ+ communities , low-income families , and many more .
He does not embody the principles , the responsibility , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ required of the President of the United States .
“ The State of the Union is hurting because of the occupant of the White House , who consistently demonstrates contempt for the American people , contempt for Congress , and contempt for our constitution – strong-arming a sham impeachment trial in the Senate .
This presidency is not legitimate .
“ On the eve of Senate Republicans covering up transgressions and spreading misinformation , I can not in good conscience attend a sham State of the Union when I have seen firsthand the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and policies have inflicted on those I love and those I represent.
” It ’ s noteworthy that both Pressley and Ocasio-Cortez are prominent supporters of , and surrogates for , the two top progressive Democrats in the presidential race , Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders , respectively .
I believe Warren and Sanders are both campaigning in New Hampshire this evening .
Maybe Pressley and AOC were deputized to extend a rhetorical middle finger to Trump just to add a little extra polish to their candidates ’ progressive cred in New Hampshire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bernie possibly need ?
Either way , it turns out this is *not* a coordinated “ Squad ” effort : Funnily enough , Ocasio-Cortez came up at today ’ s traditional off-the-record lunch between Trump and the anchors from various news networks .
Two on-the-record comments were made and she was the subject of one .
You can watch Bret Baier reveal that below .
Interestingly , CNN wasn ’ t invited to the lunch even though they have been in years past and even though normally the networks show solidarity by refusing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which one of their colleagues has been singled out and excluded .
That didn ’ t happen today ; other anchors , including Baier , attended the lunch .
How come ?
Did they not know about the snub in advance or do they agree that CNN has crossed some sort of line in its anti-Trump advocacy ?

Any member of Congress boycotting any SOTU for any reason has my support. If enough of them start staying home, some president might finally be persuaded to cancel this tedious, obnoxious, unwatchable spectacle.
Although in light of what’s happening in the Senate right now and Trump’s habit of going off-script, tonight’s spectacle might be a little less tedious and unwatchable than most, no?
Realistically the worst that might happen over time is that attendance at the SOTU becomes a partisan affair. Most of the out-party will stay home in protest of whoever’s in charge while all of the president’s party will show up and seal-clap throughout. Everything else in American politics is poisoned by partisanship. Eventually, as the parties sink further into total war and an endless spiral of recriminations, this will be too.
Ocasio-Cortez is ahead of the curve:
This is a deeply personal decision for each member to make, and a choice I did not take lightly. I will be hopping on Instagram Live later this evening to connect with my constituents and follow up with their questions about #SOTU. — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 4, 2020
That’s her all over inasmuch as she’s setting up a purity test for the rest of her caucus by doing this. “Sure, other Dems say they object to Trump. But they don’t object so much that they’d refuse to show up and listen to him for an hour. If only they had AOC’s courage.”
She’s not the only member of the “Squad” going this route. Ayanna Pressley issued this shortly before Ocasio-Cortez:
“The occupant of the White House incessantly stokes fear in people of color, women, healthcare providers, LGBTQ+ communities, low-income families, and many more. He does not embody the principles, the responsibility, the grace, nor the integrity that is required of the President of the United States. “The State of the Union is hurting because of the occupant of the White House, who consistently demonstrates contempt for the American people, contempt for Congress, and contempt for our constitution – strong-arming a sham impeachment trial in the Senate. This presidency is not legitimate. “On the eve of Senate Republicans covering up transgressions and spreading misinformation, I cannot in good conscience attend a sham State of the Union when I have seen firsthand the damage Donald J. Trump’s rhetoric and policies have inflicted on those I love and those I represent.”
It’s noteworthy that both Pressley and Ocasio-Cortez are prominent supporters of, and surrogates for, the two top progressive Democrats in the presidential race, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, respectively. I believe Warren and Sanders are both campaigning in New Hampshire this evening. Maybe Pressley and AOC were deputized to extend a rhetorical middle finger to Trump just to add a little extra polish to their candidates’ progressive cred in New Hampshire.
Although how much more cred could Bernie possibly need?
Either way, it turns out this is *not* a coordinated “Squad” effort:
I am attending tonight’s address not to confer any legitimacy on his actions, his statements, or his presidency. I am attending on behalf of all of those targeted by this President to say, ‘We are greater than hate.’ My presence tonight is resistance. — Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) February 4, 2020
Funnily enough, Ocasio-Cortez came up at today’s traditional off-the-record lunch between Trump and the anchors from various news networks. Two on-the-record comments were made and she was the subject of one. You can watch Bret Baier reveal that below. Interestingly, CNN wasn’t invited to the lunch even though they have been in years past and even though normally the networks show solidarity by refusing to participate in a government event from which one of their colleagues has been singled out and excluded. That didn’t happen today; other anchors, including Baier, attended the lunch. How come? Did they not know about the snub in advance or do they agree that CNN has crossed some sort of line in its anti-Trump advocacy?