motherjones--2020-02-03--How Pete Buttigieg Found Support in Iowa’s Formerly Anti-LGBT Communities

Pete Buttigieg doesn ’ t often remind people that he ’ s running a historic presidential campaign .
The 38-year-old former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , has emphasized an easy-to-like persona : a nice–guy Midwesterner with middle of the road policies and a bit of Obama-style hope and change rhetoric .
As he campaigns across Iowa ahead of Monday ’ s caucuses , he doesn ’ t make much of the fact that he ’ s the first openly gay candidate with a serious chance of being the nominee of a major political party .
That Mayor Pete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary point of conversation in the 2020 race is a remarkable testament to how much LGBTQ rights have progressed over the past decade .
And it ’ s even more striking in Iowa , where Buttigieg has centered his campaign on winning smaller , rural counties , places that just a decade ago were the epicenter of anti-gay sentiment in the state .
In April 2009 , six years before same-sex marriage was legalized nationwide , the Iowa Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in favor of it .
The case , Varnum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state outside the liberal coastal enclaves to legalize gay marriage .
Only Massachusetts and Connecticut had marriage equality at that time ( California had briefly legalized gay marriage thanks to a court ruling , before voters approved a constitutional amendment in 2008 banning it . )
While it might have seemed out of step for Iowa to be at the forefront of the issue , as I wrote for the American Prospect in 2011 : “ The state also has a history of extending civil rights earlier than the federal government .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s first opinion granted citizenship to a slave when he entered the territory from Illinois .
Iowa had desegregated its schools by 1868 ; a year later , it became the first state to admit women to the bar.
” Beyond checking off another state for activists , Iowa represented something different from the previous victories , a test case for how marriage equality might be accepted in the more rural parts of the country .
It didn ’ t go well at first .
In Iowa , state Supreme Court judges are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a yes or no vote on whether a judge should keep their seat on the bench .
Prior to Varnum , these had been staid elections .
Judges didn ’ t run any sort of political campaigns to keep their jobs , and in the five decades the system had been in place only four judges , each accused of malfeasance at work , had lost a vote .
But three months before Election Day 2010 , Bob Vander Plaats , a leading figure of the state ’ s evangelical right , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state capitol , pushing voters to vote no on three of the supreme court judges up for retention that year thanks to their vote on Varnum .
Vander Plaats ’ efforts were boosted by a string of rightwing national groups— the American Family Association , the National Organization for Marriage , and the Family Research Council—with nearly a million dollars spent to fund TV ads and a bus tour for the sort of race that had typically had zero dollars in campaign cash .
Each of the three Varnum judges lost .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ but he doesn ’ t spend much time at his events dwelling on the trailblazing aspect of his campaign .
At a Thursday morning rally in Decorah , a small town in the upper northeast corner of the state , he didn ’ t make any reference to his sexuality until the last minute of his prepared remarks .
When I saw him at his next event 60 miles south in Independence , he excised that aspect of intro , instead using it as his closing note at the end of the Q @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he spun out that detail in the same fashion : “ Iowa has this beautiful capacity for showing what can be done for people who aren ’ t quite sure , ” he said in Decorah .
“ I was a volunteer—first time I ever came through Iowa , first time I set foot in this state , they sent me to Creston as a volunteer on the Obama campaign in 2008 .
And I was here in Iowa when this state changed what the country and world thought was possible in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about a decade ago , I wasn ’ t here to see it , but I was watching from where I lived , when this state gave me permission to believe that someone like me could be wearing this wedding ring that I ’ ve got on right now.
” If you ’ d asked political analysts five years ago if an openly gay candidate could capture a swell of support in Iowa , that wouldn ’ t have been unimaginable .
But they likely would have assumed that said candidate had gained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s cities , the places that were already more friendly to same-sex couples before Varnum came around .
But if Buttigieg ends up winning Iowa , it ’ ll be thanks to places like Decorah and Independence .
While Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden have worked to rev up voters in the state ’ s cities and suburbs , Mayor Pete ’ s closing push has been all about the rural eastern part of the state , places that flipped from Obama to Trump .
That ’ s the case for both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by 23 percent in 2008 but which Trump won narrowly in 2016 , and Buchanan County—home of Independence—which was +18 percent for Obama in ’ 08 before Trump won by 15 points .
His campaign boasts that the large audiences Buttigieg is turning out draw from some of the the same crowd who voted for Trump four years ago .
“ I am meeting so many of what I like to call future-former-Republicans , who are determined to replace this president , ” Buttigieg said in Decorah .
“ And they are more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ built.
” “ He ’ s getting support in the areas where we lost the worst on marriage , ” says Troy Price , the chair of the Iowa Democratic Party , who I first met back in 2011 when he was in charge of One Iowa , the state LGBTQ rights group that had helped spearhead the lawsuit that legalized marriage .
“ It ’ s the suburban areas , it ’ s the rural areas , that ’ s where he ’ s doing really well.
” Back in 2012 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to track the Republicans challenging Barack Obama , I stuck around after the caucuses to try and answer a question : In the three years since Varnum , how had legal same-sex marriage changed perceptions in small town Iowa ?
At the time , whether same-sex marriage could garner mainstream support was still an open dispute .
Barack Obama had so far stayed silent on the issue , and no state had legalized marriage through a popular vote ( though both of those facts would change by the end of that year ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which went heavily against the three judges in 2010 , voting them out by double digit margins .
The county seat , Elkader , with a population of just over 1,200 people , draws tourist traffic during the spring and summer .
There is little change in gradient to most of Iowa ’ s landscape except for the northeastern corner Elkader occupies , one of the few spots in this part of the Midwest that the ice age glaciers supposedly bypassed .
Elkader is particularly scenic , lying in the base of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approximation of mountains .
If you drew a line between Decorah and Independence , Elkader would be just a little east of the exact midpoint .
In Elkader , I met two men in their 80s who had moved to the town before the court decision , but married shortly after Varnum .
They told me they hadn ’ t encountered much backlash , and continued on with their lives as usual , still volunteering with the old ladies at the small local museum with no trouble .
“ You can do the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but that ’ s because in a big city you ’ re anonymous , ” one of them told me .
“ Well , nobody is anonymous here , and that ’ s what makes it very gratifying .
That you are known.
” The small stretch of downtown was anchored by an Algerian restaurant run by a young gay couple , one of whom , Brian Bruening , now runs the county Democrats .
When I stopped by a Saturday evening mass at the local Catholic church , the woman who served @ @ @ @ @ @ @ woman .
“ We don ’ t all have the same faith and we don ’ t all walk the same way , ” the church ’ s 77-year-old priest told me after the service , explaining why his congregation should make a concerted effort to reach out with an open heart to those who might have different views .
“ The hearts and minds of people started changing so quickly on it , once they started seeing couples getting married , ” Price says .
“ That was always the plan when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawsuit in ’ 05 , if we can get it in Iowa it will spread everywhere , because it ’ s not just an east coast or west coast thing.
” To be sure , not all was rosy .
Some parents were still wary to let their children around gay and lesbian couples .
The pastor at the evangelical church on the outskirts of town was far less welcoming .
“ If you want a church that will proclaim that homosexuality is ok , and that same-sex marriage is ok , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll find one , ” he told me back then .
“ They won ’ t follow the word of God as it ’ s written.
” But even he acknowledge that it wasn ’ t so clear cut .
“ It ’ s one of those subjects where everyone wants to be accepting of everyone , but we can ’ t compromise God ’ s truth for that.
” But it was clear that those personal interactions might slowly melt away the hate as time went by .
“ Being at One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Price says today , “ not only were there people still hesitant because of what happened with the judges , there were people bitter that it was ‘ our fault ’ for pushing that lawsuit and putting us in this position , that we would have won all this stuff if it hadn ’ t been for Varnum .
By 2015 , when the US Supreme Court ruling came out , [ the politics of marriage equality had become ] a positive out there .
You could feel it , you could see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really quickly after 2010 , it just moved really fast.
” Buttigieg swung by Elkader last September .
“ The most important , best thing in my life , my marriage , only exists by the grace of a single vote on the US Supreme Court , ” he said in his remarks .
“ And by the way , thank you Iowa for what you did to bring about marriage equality in the United States.
” He ’ s earned the support of Bruening , who said in his endorsement , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see a better future in him—a better America and a better world.
” Bruening told me that Buttigieg drew the biggest crowd of any of the Democrats running , and that perhaps about a third of the attendees were people who have voted Republican .
“ That he ’ s married to a man , ” Bruening says , “ is so not an issue.
” Buttigieg ’ s hesitancy to make too much of his place as a first in presidential politics hasn ’ t exactly engendered good will from some activists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Iowan Lyz Lenz wrote a piece for Gen titled “ What Pete Buttigieg Doesn ’ t Understand About LGBTQ Life in Iowa , ” in which she explained how , while marriage might be a more settled issue , there are still plenty of equality fights being had in the state , and the local community wasn ’ t fully behind Mayor Pete .
But the fact that Buttigieg ’ s allyship is quieter , that his marriage to Chasten Buttigieg would be a boringly bland political marriage were it not for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helps normalize his relationship for these rural communities .
“ The fact that he ’ s palatable to middle America , ” Bruening says , “ is why he ’ s popular in Iowa.
” “ If you step into some of the smaller towns , the more rural towns , you can hear the slurs used as a casual form of language , but the young people today are much more open to letting people live their lives however they want , ” Dan Callahan , the chair of the Independence County @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told me after his event in Buchanan county last week , as George Michael ’ s “ Freedom ” played over the loud speakers to usher out the crowd .
“ There ’ s a lot of these older people here today , they ’ re the same way .
‘ What you do doesn ’ t affect me , so I ’ ll let you do it , if you let me do what I want .
That ’ s a lot of what Iowa is all about.
” As much as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2010s , people across the LGBTQ spectrum still face plenty of discrimination—and things haven ’ t come nearly as far on trans rights as they have on marriage equality .
Just last week , a group of nine Republicans in the state legislature , including the representative for Clayton County , introduced a bill that would have stripped trans-protections from the Iowa Civil Rights Act—but the Republican in charge of the relevant committee quickly killed the provision .
“ It ’ s one of those issues , ” Price says , “ that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a non-issue for most people ’ s minds that when the Republicans do start talking about it , they get immediate pushback.
” Should Iowa send Mayor Pete forward as its top choice to run against Trump , it doesn ’ t mean the state is absolved of any lingering homophobia , just as Barack Obama ’ s win here in the 2008 caucuses didn ’ t mean racism was solved in the Hawkeye state .
But the fact that Pete ’ s even a competitive candidate , and that the main reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the small towns that just a decade ago would have been highly judgmental to someone like him is a quiet success story , one of the few political bright spots of the Trump era .
“ There ’ s a lot of people here who are probably still uncomfortable , ” Callahan told me .
“ But it doesn ’ t mean they ’ re going to treat you different , or do anything differently .
And they ’ re certainly not going to vote to support those kinds of actions .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
Pete Buttigieg doesn’t often remind people that he’s running a historic presidential campaign. The 38-year-old former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, has emphasized an easy-to-like persona: a nice-guy Midwesterner with middle-of-the-road policies and a bit of Obama-style hope-and-change rhetoric. As he campaigns across Iowa ahead of Monday’s caucuses, he doesn’t make much of the fact that he’s the first openly gay candidate with a serious chance of being the nominee of a major political party.
That Mayor Pete’s sexuality isn’t a primary point of conversation in the 2020 race is a remarkable testament to how much LGBTQ rights have progressed over the past decade. And it’s even more striking in Iowa, where Buttigieg has centered his campaign on winning smaller, rural counties, places that just a decade ago were the epicenter of anti-LGBTQ sentiment in the state.
In April 2009, six years before same-sex marriage was legalized nationwide, the Iowa Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in favor of it. The case, Varnum v. Brien, made Iowa the first state outside the liberal coastal enclaves to legalize gay marriage. Only Massachusetts and Connecticut had marriage equality at that time. (California had briefly legalized gay marriage thanks to a court ruling, before voters approved a constitutional amendment in 2008 banning it.) While it might have seemed out of step for Iowa to be at the forefront of the issue, as I wrote for the American Prospect in 2011: “The state also has a history of extending civil rights earlier than the federal government. In 1839, the Iowa Supreme Court’s first opinion granted citizenship to a slave when he entered the territory from Illinois. Iowa had desegregated its schools by 1868; a year later, it became the first state to admit women to the bar.”
Beyond checking off another state for activists, Iowa represented something different from the previous victories, a test case for how marriage equality might be accepted in the more rural parts of the country.
It didn’t go well at first. In Iowa, state Supreme Court judges are subject to judicial “retention” elections, a yes-or-no vote on whether a judge should keep their seat on the bench. Prior to Varnum, these had been staid elections. Judges didn’t run any sort of political campaigns to keep their jobs, and in the five decades the system had been in place only four judges, each accused of malfeasance at work, had lost a vote. But three months before Election Day 2010, Bob Vander Plaats, a leading figure of the state’s evangelical right, launched a campaign on the steps of the state capitol, pushing voters to say no to three of the Supreme Court judges up for retention that year thanks to their vote on Varnum. Vander Plaats’ efforts were boosted by a string of right-wing national groups—the American Family Association, the National Organization for Marriage, and the Family Research Council—with nearly $1 million spent to fund TV ads and a bus tour for the sort of race that typically had zero dollars in campaign cash. Each of the three Varnum judges lost.
“He’s getting support in the areas where we lost the worst on marriage.”
Buttigieg doesn’t ignore Varnum, but he doesn’t spend much time at his events dwelling on the trailblazing aspect of his campaign. At a Thursday morning rally in Decorah, a small town in the upper northeast corner of the state, he didn’t make any reference to his sexuality until the last minute of his prepared remarks. When I saw him at his next event 60 miles south in Independence, he excised that aspect as intro instead using it as his closing note at the end of the Q&A portion.
In both instances, he spun out that detail in the same fashion: “Iowa has this beautiful capacity for showing what can be done for people who aren’t quite sure,” he said in Decorah. “I was a volunteer—first time I ever came through Iowa, first time I set foot in this state, they sent me to Creston as a volunteer on the Obama campaign in 2008. And I was here in Iowa when this state changed what the country and world thought was possible in American presidential politics. And then, about a decade ago, I wasn’t here to see it, but I was watching from where I lived, when this state gave me permission to believe that someone like me could be wearing this wedding ring that I’ve got on right now.”
If you’d asked political analysts five years ago if an openly gay candidate could capture a swell of support in Iowa, that wouldn’t have been unimaginable. But they likely would have assumed that said candidate had gained momentum through anchoring support in the state’s cities, the places already more friendly to same-sex couples before Varnum came around.
But if Buttigieg ends up winning Iowa, it’ll be thanks to places like Decorah and Independence. While Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden have worked to rev up voters in the state’s cities and suburbs, Mayor Pete’s closing push has been all about the rural eastern part of the state, places that flipped from Obama to Trump. That’s the case for both Winneshiek County—home of Decorah—which went for Obama by 23 percent in 2008 but which Trump won narrowly in 2016, and Buchanan County—home of Independence—which was +18 percent for Obama in ’08 before Trump won by 15 points. Buttigieg’s campaign boasts that the large audiences he is turning out draw from some of the the same crowd who voted for Trump four years ago. “I am meeting so many of what I like to call future-former-Republicans, who are determined to replace this president,” Buttigieg said in Decorah. “And they are more than welcome to this movement that we built.”
“He’s getting support in the areas where we lost the worst on marriage,” says Troy Price, chair of the Iowa Democratic Party, who I first met back in 2011 when he was in charge of One Iowa, the state LGBTQ rights group that had helped spearhead the lawsuit that legalized marriage. “It’s the suburban areas, it’s the rural areas, that’s where he’s doing really well.”
Back in 2012, after a month of crisscrossing the state to track the Republicans challenging Barack Obama, I stuck around after the caucuses to try to answer a question: In the three years since Varnum, how had legal same-sex marriage changed perceptions in small-town Iowa? Whether same-sex marriage could garner mainstream support at the time was still an open dispute. Barack Obama had so far stayed silent on the issue, and no state had legalized marriage through a popular vote (though both of those facts would change by the end of that year).
I traveled to Clayton County, which went heavily against the three judges in 2010, voting them out by double-digit margins. The county seat, Elkader, with a population of just over 1,200 people, draws tourist traffic during the spring and summer. There is little change in gradient to most of Iowa’s landscape except for the northeastern corner Elkader occupies, one of the few spots in this part of the Midwest that the ice age glaciers supposedly bypassed. Elkader is particularly scenic, lying in the base of a valley surrounded by Iowa’s best approximation of mountains. If you drew a line between Decorah and Independence, Elkader would be just a little east of the exact midpoint.
In Elkader, I met two men in their 80s who had moved to the town before the court decision, but married shortly after Varnum. They told me they hadn’t encountered much backlash, and continued on with their lives, still volunteering at the small local museum with no trouble. “You can do the same thing in a big city, but that’s because in a big city you’re anonymous,” one of them told me. “Well, nobody is anonymous here, and that’s what makes it very gratifying. That you are known.” The small stretch of downtown was anchored by an Algerian restaurant run by a young gay couple, one of whom, Brian Bruening, now runs the county Democrats. When I stopped by a Saturday evening mass at the local Catholic church, the woman who served as the cantor was married to another woman. “We don’t all have the same faith and we don’t all walk the same way,” the church’s 77-year-old priest told me after the service, explaining why his congregation should make a concerted effort to reach out with an open heart to those who might have different views.
“The hearts and minds of people started changing so quickly on it, once they started seeing couples getting married,” Price says. “That was always the plan when they started down this path of the lawsuit in ’05, if we can get it in Iowa it will spread everywhere, because it’s not just an east coast or west coast thing.”
To be sure, not all was rosy. Some parents were still wary to let their children around gay and lesbian couples. The pastor at the evangelical church on the outskirts of town was far less welcoming. “If you want a church that will proclaim that homosexuality is ok, and that same-sex marriage is ok, if you look long enough, you’ll find one,” he told me back then. “They won’t follow the word of God as it’s written.” But even he acknowledged that it wasn’t so clear cut. “It’s one of those subjects where everyone wants to be accepting of everyone, but we can’t compromise God’s truth for that.”
But it was clear that those interactions might slowly melt away the hate as time went by. “Being at One Iowa in 2010 and 2011,” Price says today, “not only were there people still hesitant because of what happened with the judges, there were people bitter that it was ‘our fault’ for pushing that lawsuit and putting us in this position, that we would have won all this stuff if it hadn’t been for Varnum. By 2015, when the US Supreme Court ruling came out, [the politics of marriage equality had become] a positive out there. You could feel it, you could see that out there. It just moved really quickly after 2010, it just moved really fast.”
Buttigieg swung by Elkader last September. “The most important, best thing in my life, my marriage, only exists by the grace of a single vote on the US Supreme Court,” he said in his remarks. “And by the way, thank you Iowa for what you did to bring about marriage equality in the United States.” He’s earned the support of Bruening, who said in his endorsement, “I’m with Pete because I see a better future in him—a better America and a better world.” Bruening told me that Buttigieg drew the biggest crowd of any of the Democrats and that perhaps about a third of the attendees were people who have voted Republican. “That he’s married to a man,” Bruening says, “is so not an issue.”
Buttigieg’s hesitancy to make too much of his place as a first in presidential politics hasn’t exactly engendered good will from some activists in the LGBTQ community. Last week, Iowan Lyz Lenz wrote a piece for Gen headlined “What Pete Buttigieg Doesn’t Understand About LGBTQ Life in Iowa,” in which she explained how, while marriage might be a more settled issue, there are still plenty of equality fights in the state, and the local community wasn’t fully behind Mayor Pete.
But the fact that Buttigieg’s allyship is quieter, that his marriage to Chasten Buttigieg would be a boringly bland political marriage were it not for their respective genders, might be what helps normalize his relationship for these rural communities. “The fact that he’s palatable to middle America,” Bruening says, “is why he’s popular in Iowa.”
“If you step into some of the smaller towns, the more rural towns, you can hear the slurs used as a casual form of language, but the young people today are much more open to letting people live their lives however they want,” Dan Callahan, the chair of the Independence County Democrats, who had introduced Buttigieg, told me after his event in Buchanan county last week, as George Michael’s “Freedom” played over the loud speakers to usher out the crowd. “There’s a lot of these older people here today. They’re the same way. ‘What you do doesn’t affect me, so I’ll let you do it, if you let me do what I want.’ That’s a lot of what Iowa is all about.”
As much as rigid gender norms loosened nationally in the 2010s, people across the LGBTQ spectrum still face plenty of discrimination, and things haven’t progressed nearly as far on trans rights as they have on marriage equality. Just last week, a group of nine Republicans in the state legislature, including the representative for Clayton County, introduced a bill that would have stripped trans protections from the Iowa Civil Rights Act, but the Republican in charge of the relevant committee quickly killed the provision. “It’s one of those issues,” Price says, “that has moved so quickly and become such a non-issue for most people’s minds that when the Republicans do start talking about it, they get immediate pushback.” Should Iowa send Mayor Pete forward as its top choice against Trump, it doesn’t mean the state is absolved of any lingering homophobia, just as Barack Obama’s win here in the 2008 caucuses didn’t mean racism was solved in the Hawkeye state.
But the fact that Pete is even a competitive candidate, and that the main reason he has a chance is thanks to the small towns that just a decade ago would have been highly judgmental to someone like him, is a quiet success story—one of the few political bright spots of the Trump era.
“There’s a lot of people here who are probably still uncomfortable,” Callahan told me. “But it doesn’t mean they’re going to treat you different, or do anything differently. And they’re certainly not going to vote to support those kinds of actions.”


motherjones--2020-02-03--Who Gave Bezos’ Dick Pics to the National Enquirer? A New Lawsuit Says the Mystery Is Far From Over.

For over a year , intrigue has hung over the January 2019 National Enquirer story that revealed Amazon boss Jeff Bezos ’ s intimate texts to his secret girlfriend , Lauren Sanchez , an on-camera Hollywood regular and aerial cinematography entrepreneur .
On Friday night , the saga took yet another soap-operatic turn : Lauren ’ s older brother Michael , the LA-based talent manager she accuses of betraying her by selling her communications to the Enquirer , filed a lawsuit against Bezos in a Los Angeles state court alleging the billionaire defamed him in the press .
The suit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by some to have been solved : Who leaked Bezos ’ dick pics to the tabloids ?
Was it the rogue sibling ?
Was it a Saudi plot ?
In the legal complaint , Sanchez accuses Bezos and his longtime security associate Gavin de Becker of defaming him by stating that Sanchez was the source of unpublished nude photographs of Bezos .
He also accused Team Bezos of “ peddling rumors to reporters that Mr. Sanchez was involved in a conservative conspiracy with high-profile political operatives , including Roger Stone and Carter Page @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down Mr. Bezos.
” The Daily Beast reported just over a year ago that Sanchez was an outspoken Trump supporter with ties to Roger Stone and Carter Page .
Lauren Sanchez quickly denied her brother ’ s version of events outlined in the lawsuit .
She sent a statement to Mother Jones through her lawyer , Terry Bird , saying she believes her older brother , “ secretly provided my most personal information to the National Enquirer—a deep and unforgivable betrayal.
” “ My family is hurting over this new baseless and untrue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement , which first appeared in TMZ .
“ We truly hope my brother finds peace.
” Sanchez , through her lawyer , did not respond to detailed questions outlining specific allegations her brother made in the lawsuit .
To understand the Sanchez complaint , it ’ s important to look at just how intense the fallout from the Enquirer ’ s 11-page special edition spread has been .
It sparked the world ’ s most expensive divorce , valued at $ 38 billion , and thus far has featured two “ you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” twists : Bezos publishing emails that revealed Enquirer executives were holding him ransom over unpublished dick pics , and his associate , de Becker , alleging a malign cybersecurity conspiracy between the Enquirer and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia , who he said were operating “ in league ” to bring the billionaire down .
It ’ s a claim that Bezos ( aided by the United Nations ) only partially backed up this January with privately commissioned forensics showing that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman , known as MBS , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ malware and has been sucking up a mind-bending amount of personal data since May 2018 .
The report sought to strengthen evidence of MBS ’ s alleged motive : Bezos owns the Washington Post , where relentless coverage of the grisly death of its columnist , Jamal Khashoggi , had enraged the crown prince .
The report however , failed to connect the Saudis to the Enquirer .
The 14-page complaint will likely inflame one of the most contested questions at the heart of the scandal : What did American Media Inc. , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , know—and more importantly , how and when did AMI know it ?
The lawsuit doesn ’ t provide any additional documentary evidence on those questions .
( Mother Jones didn ’ t obtain the complaint through the court , but a copy was verified as authentic by Sanchez ’ s lawyer , Enoch Liang . )
The suit does , however , present the most detailed version to date of Michael Sanchez ’ s side of the story , and his professed motivations , and it could potentially force new evidence to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Since the story broke last year , Sanchez has admitted to working with AMI on the story in some capacity ( a “ deal with the devil , ” he told Fox News ) , but he has denied having ever possessed the dick pics at the heart of AMI ’ s alleged extortion attempt , even as fresh reports emerged in the Wall Street Journal in January that federal investigators possessed information indicating Sanchez had received some of the text messages in question from his sister .
In a widely circulated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media outlets last week , Sanchez claimed , “ without a shadow of a doubt , my sister Lauren never sent me Jeff Bezos ’ ‘ below-the-belt-selfies , ' ” and accused AMI of being “ desperate to distract from their business deals with Mohammad bin Salman.
” According to the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal , Sanchez entered into a $ 200,000 arrangement with the company several months before the Enquirer story dropped .
But in the lawsuit , Sanchez says the company already knew about his sister ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the time he struck a deal , and that he was working to soften the impact of a potential scandal by engaging with the supermarket tabloid .
“ With AMI stating it had multiple sources claiming that Mr. Bezos and Ms. Sanchez were having an affair , Mr. Sanchez agreed to corroborate the existence of the relationship under conditions that would help Mr. Sanchez manage the timing of the story and the way in which the affair was portrayed , ” the lawsuit reads .
Sanchez also claims , without providing supplementary evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ prevented The National Enquirer from publishing any screenshots Mr. Sanchez provided.
” Sanchez also claims his house was raided by the FBI .
AMI ’ s press representative did not respond to detailed questions from Mother Jones , but the company has been at pains to clarify that Michael Sanchez was the sole leaker of all information regarding his sister ’ s relationship , and has described its practices as legitimate negotiations in the pursuit of news-gathering .
“ The single source of our reporting has been well documented , ” AMI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Any suggestion that a third party was involved in or in any way influenced our reporting is false.
” The company ’ s denials of any untoward interference began almost immediately after Bezos ’ s extortion allegations , made in a February 7 , 2018 , post on Medium .
A few days later , AMI ’ s lawyer Elkan Abramowitz appeared on ABC ’ s This Week with George Stephanopoulos to start shoveling blame in that direction .
“ It was somebody close to both Bezos and Miss Sanchez , ” Abramowitz @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to investigate this knew who the source was .
It was not the White House , it was not Saudi Arabia.
” AMI dropped any protections for its source soon after .
AMI ’ s loud denials of wrongdoing are perhaps unsurprising to close observers of AMI ’ s role in the Trump universe : Any evidence raising questions about its legal propriety could imperil an immunity deal the company hammered out with federal prosecutors in 2018 over the Trump campaign hush-money scandal .
In that case , investigators seeking more information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news about the president ’ s alleged affairs allowed AMI boss David Pecker and his top lieutenant Dylan Howard to provide information about Trump ’ s fixer , Michael Cohen , who is now serving three years in prison for campaign finance charges and other crimes .
But as Mother Jones reported last year , the deal was conditioned on AMI keeping to the letter of the law—and it could be re-assessed at any time in light of new information .
In August , Mother Jones reported that federal investigators began requesting corporate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company produced a National Enquirer special edition that lavished praise on Saudi Arabia and MBS—the very same leader now accused of hacking Bezos ’ s phone .
FBI agents had zeroed in on the circumstances behind the magazine ’ s publication to assess whether AMI had engaged in illegal influence peddling on behalf of a foreign power .
Amazon ’ s spokesperson declined to answer specific questions about the case , but William Isaacson , a lawyer for Jeff Bezos and Gavin de Becker , told Mother Jones in an emailed statement that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this lawsuit in court and we will do that soon .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
Update, February 4, 12:00 a.m. ET: On Friday, Michael Sanchez, the brother of Jeff Bezos’s girlfriend, sued the Amazon boss and his security associate, Gavin de Becker, in a California court, alleging defamation. Now the Bezos camp is hitting back in a scathing motion filed by his powerhouse lawyers on Monday, slamming the case as a shakedown and seeking an immediate dismissal.
“Mr. Sanchez is now bringing this action to gain money from Mr. Bezos, the very person whose information he sold to the National Enquirer,” the filing reads. “Mr. Sanchez claims he is doing so because he is now unhappy about news coverage concerning the media maelstrom that he helped cause after receiving the $200,000 and betraying his sister.”
“Extortion rears its head again,” the lawsuit continues. “The Complaint fabricates defamatory statements to manufacture a basis for a lawsuit.” The lawyers are seeking a dismissal of all allegations by a California court under the state’s “anti-SLAPP” laws, which allow courts to kick out lawsuits that could stifle someone’s First Amendment rights, if they are deemed meritless. Mother Jones has contacted Sanchez for a reaction to the counterclaims.
For over a year, intrigue has hung over the January 2019 National Enquirer story that revealed Amazon boss Jeff Bezos’s intimate texts to his secret girlfriend, Lauren Sanchez, an on-camera Hollywood regular and aerial cinematography entrepreneur. On Friday night, the saga took yet another soap-operatic turn: Lauren’s older brother Michael, the LA-based talent manager she accuses of betraying her by selling her communications to the Enquirer, filed a lawsuit against Bezos in a Los Angeles state court alleging the billionaire defamed him in the press.
The suit could muddy a mystery that was thought by some to have been solved: Who leaked Bezos’ dick pics to the tabloids? Was it the rogue sibling? Was it a Saudi plot?
In the legal complaint, Sanchez accuses Bezos and his longtime security associate Gavin de Becker of defaming him by stating that Sanchez was the source of unpublished nude photographs of Bezos. He also accused Team Bezos of “peddling rumors to reporters that Mr. Sanchez was involved in a conservative conspiracy with high-profile political operatives, including Roger Stone and Carter Page, and the Saudi government to take down Mr. Bezos.” The Daily Beast reported just over a year ago that Sanchez was an outspoken Trump supporter with ties to Roger Stone and Carter Page.
Lauren Sanchez quickly denied her brother’s version of events outlined in the lawsuit. She sent a statement to Mother Jones through her lawyer, Terry Bird, saying she believes her older brother, “secretly provided my most personal information to the National Enquirer—a deep and unforgivable betrayal.”
“My family is hurting over this new baseless and untrue lawsuit,” Sanchez said in the statement, which first appeared in TMZ. “We truly hope my brother finds peace.” Sanchez, through her lawyer, did not respond to detailed questions outlining specific allegations her brother made in the lawsuit.
To understand the Sanchez complaint, it’s important to look at just how intense the fallout from the Enquirer’s 11-page special edition spread has been. It sparked the world’s most expensive divorce, valued at $38 billion, and thus far has featured two “you can’t make this stuff up” twists: Bezos publishing emails that revealed Enquirer executives were holding him ransom over unpublished dick pics, and his associate, de Becker, alleging a malign cybersecurity conspiracy between the Enquirer and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, who he said were operating “in league” to bring the billionaire down. It’s a claim that Bezos (aided by the United Nations) only partially backed up this January with privately commissioned forensics showing that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, known as MBS, infected Bezos’s iPhone with WhatsApp malware and has been sucking up a mind-bending amount of personal data since May 2018. The report sought to strengthen evidence of MBS’s alleged motive: Bezos owns the Washington Post, where relentless coverage of the grisly death of its columnist, Jamal Khashoggi, had enraged the crown prince. The report however, failed to connect the Saudis to the Enquirer.
The 14-page complaint will likely inflame one of the most contested questions at the heart of the scandal: What did American Media Inc., the former owners of the National Enquirer, know—and more importantly, how and when did AMI know it? The lawsuit doesn’t provide any additional documentary evidence on those questions. (Mother Jones didn’t obtain the complaint through the court, but a copy was verified as authentic by Sanchez’s lawyer, Enoch Liang.)
The suit does, however, present the most detailed version to date of Michael Sanchez’s side of the story, and his professed motivations, and it could potentially force new evidence to come to light if the case proceeds. Since the story broke last year, Sanchez has admitted to working with AMI on the story in some capacity (a “deal with the devil,” he told Fox News), but he has denied having ever possessed the dick pics at the heart of AMI’s alleged extortion attempt, even as fresh reports emerged in the Wall Street Journal in January that federal investigators possessed information indicating Sanchez had received some of the text messages in question from his sister. In a widely circulated email to reporters across a spectrum of media outlets last week, Sanchez claimed, “without a shadow of a doubt, my sister Lauren never sent me Jeff Bezos’ ‘below-the-belt-selfies,'” and accused AMI of being “desperate to distract from their business deals with Mohammad bin Salman.”
“Without a shadow of a doubt, my sister Lauren never sent me Jeff Bezos’ ‘below-the-belt-selfies,'” Sanchez claimed.
According to the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, Sanchez entered into a $200,000 arrangement with the company several months before the Enquirer story dropped. But in the lawsuit, Sanchez says the company already knew about his sister’s relationship with Bezos from others at the time he struck a deal, and that he was working to soften the impact of a potential scandal by engaging with the supermarket tabloid. “With AMI stating it had multiple sources claiming that Mr. Bezos and Ms. Sanchez were having an affair, Mr. Sanchez agreed to corroborate the existence of the relationship under conditions that would help Mr. Sanchez manage the timing of the story and the way in which the affair was portrayed,” the lawsuit reads. Sanchez also claims, without providing supplementary evidence, that the confidentiality agreement with AMI “prevented The National Enquirer from publishing any screenshots Mr. Sanchez provided.” Sanchez also claims his house was raided by the FBI.
AMI’s press representative did not respond to detailed questions from Mother Jones, but the company has been at pains to clarify that Michael Sanchez was the sole leaker of all information regarding his sister’s relationship, and has described its practices as legitimate negotiations in the pursuit of news-gathering. “The single source of our reporting has been well documented,” AMI recently told the Washington Post. “Any suggestion that a third party was involved in or in any way influenced our reporting is false.” The company’s denials of any untoward interference began almost immediately after Bezos’s extortion allegations, made in a February 7, 2018, post on Medium. A few days later, AMI’s lawyer Elkan Abramowitz appeared on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos to start shoveling blame in that direction. “It was somebody close to both Bezos and Miss Sanchez,” Abramowitz said. “Any investigator that was going to investigate this knew who the source was. It was not the White House, it was not Saudi Arabia.” AMI dropped any protections for its source soon after.
AMI’s loud denials of wrongdoing are perhaps unsurprising to close observers of AMI’s role in the Trump universe: Any evidence raising questions about its legal propriety could imperil an immunity deal the company hammered out with federal prosecutors in 2018 over the Trump campaign hush-money scandal. In that case, investigators seeking more information about a so-called catch-and-kill scheme to bury news about the president’s alleged affairs allowed AMI boss David Pecker and his top lieutenant Dylan Howard to provide information about Trump’s fixer, Michael Cohen, who is now serving three years in prison for campaign finance charges and other crimes. But as Mother Jones reported last year, the deal was conditioned on AMI keeping to the letter of the law—and it could be re-assessed at any time in light of new information.
In August, Mother Jones reported that federal investigators began requesting corporate documents and questioning AMI staff after the company produced a National Enquirer special edition that lavished praise on Saudi Arabia and MBS—the very same leader now accused of hacking Bezos’s phone. FBI agents had zeroed in on the circumstances behind the magazine’s publication to assess whether AMI had engaged in illegal influence peddling on behalf of a foreign power.
Amazon’s spokesperson declined to answer specific questions about the case, but William Isaacson, a lawyer for Jeff Bezos and Gavin de Becker, told Mother Jones in an emailed statement that his clients have “chosen to address this lawsuit in court and we will do that soon.”


motherjones--2020-02-02--In His First Major TV Interview in Seven Months, the President Made Fun of His Rival’s Height

On Sunday , Fox News aired an interview between host Sean Hannity and President Donald Trump as part of the network ’ s pre-game Super Bowl show .
It was mostly milquetoast , lame , and boring while trying to be special through pure belligerence—like Sean Hannity !
It ’ s telling that the most meaningful part was Trump making fun of Michael Bloomberg ’ s height ( an echo of his tweets about “ Mini Mike ” ) and that Bloomberg campaign recently shot back on the “ Mini Mike ” rhetoric by making fun of Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and his hair .
This is hell .
And this is probably 2020 .
There are many serious ways to consider Trump ’ s policies , appeal , and rise .
But after interviews like this , it ’ s clear that throughout this campaign we all—as a public trying to stay up on the future of our country—will be dragged into the petty mind of our president .
Trump loves to label opponents with a single word .
And charade interviews like this , which felt like watching someone compliment their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump a “ lightning round ” of commenting on his opponents : Joe Biden ( “ sleepy ” ) , Hunter Biden ( corrupt ) , Bernie Sanders ( “ communism ” ) , Elizabeth Warren ( “ fairy tale ” ) , Nancy Pelosi ( “ nervous ” ) , and—the one shown above—Bloomberg ( “ little.
” ) The soft-balling was obvious coming in : “ My job is to let people hear from the president , not from me , ” Hannity told Fox last week .
“ And it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s also about the big game !
” ( Pin that up in a journalism school classroom . )
This is the first interview of Trump on a national broadcast network in seven months , according to Media Matters .
There was a chance to ask something , anything .
A pre-Super Bowl interview isn ’ t new or totally useless .
Other presidents have been interviewed before the game , notably Barack Obama , twice , by Bill O ’ Reilly—they more often mix serious questions with a note at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win the game .
In this one , Trump got to say impeachment was a sham that no president should have to go through .
He told Hannity he had made “ a positive revolution ” and should be up by 25 points because of the economy .
Hannity didn ’ t even push Trump on actual , relevant topics , like the fights the president has picked with the NFL and its players after Colin Kaepernick began to kneel during the national anthem to protest police violence , or his long grudge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to buy the Buffalo Bills ( after which Trump joined an upstart league called the USFL—and ruined it out of existence ) , or the time he said he wouldn ’ t have run for president in 2016 if he could ’ ve owned the Bills .
Ask about that ?
Nope .
And Trump didn ’ t even pick a winner in the game .
So here we are—watching someone make fun of other adults on TV .
In the words of Chiefs player LeSean McCoy , it is “ really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ a ] n asshole .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
On Sunday, Fox News aired an interview between host Sean Hannity and President Donald Trump as part of the network’s pre-game Super Bowl show. It was mostly milquetoast, lame, and boring while trying to be special through pure belligerence—like Sean Hannity!
It’s telling that the most meaningful part was Trump making fun of Michael Bloomberg’s height (an echo of his tweets about “Mini Mike”) and that Bloomberg campaign recently shot back on the “Mini Mike” rhetoric by making fun of Trump’s spray tan, his “obesity,” and his hair.
The first clip from Sean Hannity's big interview with the president features POTUS talking about Michael Bloomberg's height. pic.twitter.com/iRdX3fFUTg — Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) February 2, 2020
This is hell. And this is probably 2020.
There are many serious ways to consider Trump’s policies, appeal, and rise. But after interviews like this, it’s clear that throughout this campaign we all—as a public trying to stay up on the future of our country—will be dragged into the petty mind of our president. Trump loves to label opponents with a single word. And charade interviews like this, which felt like watching someone compliment their boss, enable it.
Hannity gave Trump a “lightning round” of commenting on his opponents: Joe Biden (“sleepy”), Hunter Biden (corrupt), Bernie Sanders (“communism”), Elizabeth Warren (“fairy tale”), Nancy Pelosi (“nervous”), and—the one shown above—Bloomberg (“little.”)
"Don't under-estimate what he's doing," @JulianZelizer warns, with Trump "making disparaging remarks about Mike Bloomberg and his physical being. That's what he's going to do between now and November. That's something Democrats are going to have to figure out" how to handle… pic.twitter.com/KSnBlyciBY — Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) February 2, 2020
The soft-balling was obvious coming in: “My job is to let people hear from the president, not from me,” Hannity told Fox last week. “And it’s the Super Bowl, so it’s also about the big game!” (Pin that up in a journalism school classroom.)
This is the first interview of Trump on a national broadcast network in seven months, according to Media Matters. There was a chance to ask something, anything. A pre-Super Bowl interview isn’t new or totally useless. Other presidents have been interviewed before the game, notably Barack Obama, twice, by Bill O’Reilly—they more often mix serious questions with a note at the end about who is going to win the game.
In this one, Trump got to say impeachment was a sham that no president should have to go through. He told Hannity he had made “a positive revolution” and should be up by 25 points because of the economy.
Hannity didn’t even push Trump on actual, relevant topics, like the fights the president has picked with the NFL and its players after Colin Kaepernick began to kneel during the national anthem to protest police violence, or his long grudge against the league after he was not able to buy the Buffalo Bills (after which Trump joined an upstart league called the USFL—and ruined it out of existence), or the time he said he wouldn’t have run for president in 2016 if he could’ve owned the Bills. Ask about that? Nope. And Trump didn’t even pick a winner in the game.
So here we are—watching someone make fun of other adults on TV.
In the words of Chiefs player LeSean McCoy, it is “really sad” that “our president is [a]n asshole.”


motherjones--2020-02-02--In Iowa, Amy Klobuchar Faces a Vice Presidential Problem

As he waited for Joe Biden to speak in Sioux City earlier this week , Virgil Nice of Sergeant Bluff told me he had earned his support at Monday ’ s caucus , but hoped that when it comes time for the former vice president to pick a running mate , he ’ d put a woman on the ticket .
“ If this gets back to him , ” Nice told me , “ I ’ d like him to pick either Kamala or the Minnesota gal.
” The Minnesota Gal , of course , being that state ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Klobuchar might be the biggest wild card in Iowa right now .
Written off after her campaign seemed to flounder for much of the summer , she stuck around after many of her Senate colleagues dropped out , positioned herself as a moderate alternative for voters who believe the party needs a new face in November , and now finds herself in the thick of it—at least in Iowa .
One poll of the race this week put her in third place , ahead of Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren , and just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Klobuchar makes her closing push across Iowa , she faces a problem familiar to women candidates : many voters seem to want to elect her to an office different from the one she ’ s seeking .
Waiting to get into a gymnasium in Cedar Rapids on Saturday , I met Linda Krewson , a retiree who told me she was supporting Biden because he exuded “ likability.
” “ You just want go up and hug him , ” she said , acknowledging that such behavior on his part had gotten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about Klobuchar , she leaned in and in a half whisper said , “ I think they ’ d make a good pair.
” Klobuchar—Midwestern , practical , and “ young but not too young ” —would , in her view , perfectly complete the ticket .
Pat Hammerstrom of Sioux City told me Klobuchar was running second behind Behind for her vote , but added : “ I hope he will take a woman as vice president—I think any of the women they have running are perfectly qualified.
” Another voter I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Warren or “ that woman down in Georgia , ” referring to former gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams .
This was a recurring pattern in conversations with voters this week , and in my previous visit this fall .
With male candidates starting to cluster at the top of both Iowa and national polls , the largest field of female presidential candidates in history looks like it is on the verge of becoming the largest field of female vice presidential candidates in history .
It ’ s not the rudest of sentiments .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ bucket of warm piss ” are over , and Biden has already signaled that his running mate would use the job , like he has , as a stepping stone to the Oval Office .
( He ’ s also suggested that Harris has his eye . )
But Klobuchar is running for president now .
There are , of course , plenty of Iowans who think Klobuchar ’ s rightful place is at the top of the ticket .
I met a bunch of them on Saturday morning in Bettendorf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brewery and adjacent bicycle shop .
Supporters donned t-shirts touting her record of electoral accomplishments and “ Heartland ” roots , as volunteers handed out green stickers—a nod , the senator explained , to her home state political idol , Sen. Paul Wellstone .
A few hardy ( is that the word ? )
souls availed themselves of the establishment ’ s diverse range of micro-brews , notwithstanding the fact that it was not yet 10 a.m. Margie Schwaninger , sitting in the back with two friends , considered herself a Klobuchar fan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I loved the way she interviewed Kavanaugh , ” she said .
“ That was just outstanding .
And I watched her in the debates and was impressed .
She ’ s feisty.
” The word I heard most often was “ moderate.
” Voters believe she can win , and they can trust her not to burn the house down once she does—they have enough problems to deal with right now .
And who knows .
If Klobuchar can pull off an upset in Iowa , perhaps the idea of her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t be so far-fetched .
I hear there ’ s a man from Delaware who might make a good one .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
As he waited for Joe Biden to speak in Sioux City earlier this week, Virgil Nice of Sergeant Bluff told me he had earned his support at Monday’s caucus, but hoped that when it comes time for the former vice president to pick a running mate, he’d put a woman on the ticket. “If this gets back to him,” Nice told me, “I’d like him to pick either Kamala or the Minnesota gal.” The Minnesota Gal, of course, being that state’s senior senator, Amy Klobuchar.
Klobuchar might be the biggest wild card in Iowa right now. Written off after her campaign seemed to flounder for much of the summer, she stuck around after many of her Senate colleagues dropped out, positioned herself as a moderate alternative for voters who believe the party needs a new face in November, and now finds herself in the thick of it—at least in Iowa. One poll of the race this week put her in third place, ahead of Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren, and just one point shy of Biden. But as Klobuchar makes her closing push across Iowa, she faces a problem familiar to women candidates: many voters seem to want to elect her to an office different from the one she’s seeking.
“I’d like him to pick either Kamala or the Minnesota gal.”
Waiting to get into a gymnasium in Cedar Rapids on Saturday, I met Linda Krewson, a retiree who told me she was supporting Biden because he exuded “likability.” “You just want go up and hug him,” she said, acknowledging that such behavior on his part had gotten him in trouble. When I asked about Klobuchar, she leaned in and in a half whisper said, “I think they’d make a good pair.” Klobuchar—Midwestern, practical, and “young but not too young”—would, in her view, perfectly complete the ticket.
Pat Hammerstrom of Sioux City told me Klobuchar was running second behind Behind for her vote, but added: “I hope he will take a woman as vice president—I think any of the women they have running are perfectly qualified.”
Another voter I met in Council Bluffs offered two names: Warren or “that woman down in Georgia,” referring to former gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams.
This was a recurring pattern in conversations with voters this week, and in my previous visit this fall. With male candidates starting to cluster at the top of both Iowa and national polls, the largest field of female presidential candidates in history looks like it is on the verge of becoming the largest field of female vice presidential candidates in history. It’s not the rudest of sentiments. The days of the vice presidency as a “bucket of warm piss” are over, and Biden has already signaled that his running mate would use the job, like he has, as a stepping stone to the Oval Office. (He’s also suggested that Harris has his eye.) But Klobuchar is running for president now.
There are, of course, plenty of Iowans who think Klobuchar’s rightful place is at the top of the ticket. I met a bunch of them on Saturday morning in Bettendorf, where a few hundred filled a brewery and adjacent bicycle shop. Supporters donned t-shirts touting her record of electoral accomplishments and “Heartland” roots, as volunteers handed out green stickers—a nod, the senator explained, to her home state political idol, Sen. Paul Wellstone. A few hardy (is that the word?) souls availed themselves of the establishment’s diverse range of micro-brews, notwithstanding the fact that it was not yet 10 a.m.
Margie Schwaninger, sitting in the back with two friends, considered herself a Klobuchar fan even before she announced her candidacy. “I loved the way she interviewed Kavanaugh,” she said. “That was just outstanding. And I watched her in the debates and was impressed. She’s feisty.” The word I heard most often was “moderate.” Voters believe she can win, and they can trust her not to burn the house down once she does—they have enough problems to deal with right now.
And who knows. If Klobuchar can pull off an upset in Iowa, perhaps the idea of her getting to pick her own running mate won’t be so far-fetched. I hear there’s a man from Delaware who might make a good one.


motherjones--2020-02-02--The Iowa Caucuses Are a Democracy Disaster

A dozen years ago , I set up shop at a Des Moines middle school to cover the Iowa caucuses on a snowy January night .
In a process that has since remained unchanged at heart , participants filed in and divided by neighborhoods between a classroom , the library , and the gym .
In each space , they then gathered into clusters in support of their candidate—the big ones in 2008 being Barack Obama , Hillary Clinton , and some guy named John Edwards .
Speeches were made and buttons were donned .
After seeing the size of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their neighbors , some people—whether from the warmness of their heart or the pressure of their peers—moved to pad out a group who otherwise would fall short of the 15 percent viability threshold needed to remain in the contest .
Delegates selected that night would work through a months-long ladder of party gatherings , with a handful being sent to Democratic National Convention in August to formally select a presidential nominee .
But before that could happen , headcounts needed to be made and math be done .
Eliminated candidates ’ supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s designated caucus captains and self-selected extroverts tried to woo them to join the remaining contenders .
Among the books , Edwards supporters offered snacks .
On the basketball court , pro-Obama chants broke out as talliers repeatedly asked scores of caucus goers packing the bleachers and standing in the backcourt to please , please , please stay still so they could get accurate numbers .
People with other obligations—maybe the night shift , maybe a new baby , maybe their own bedtime—filtered out , effectively disenfranchised as counting went well past an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , friends asked for a debrief .
I told them it reminded me of something I ’ d recently seen on YouTube : grindadráp , a centuries-old community organized whale hunt practiced annually in the Faroe Islands , when the animals are driven out of the North Atlantic into shallow bays and then beached and bludgeoned with clubs , or stabbed with gaffs until the water runs red .
Both events were dynamic , homespun , an exercise of tradition , a visual spectacle—yet archaic and totally disturbing .
How do these things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what I witnessed in Des Moines really be the best way to kick off the selection of the next Leader of the Free World ?
This week , I spoke with Josh Putnam—an academic whose PhD research focused on the parties ’ quadrennial convention delegate selection processes , and who runs FrontloadingHQ , a blog that has exhaustively chronicled the subject—to ask if time is catching up to Iowa ’ s process or its place at the head of the line .
Both have long been questioned .
Before Julián Castro left the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of putting Iowa and New Hampshire in a position to winnow the field and create momentum defining victories when states with more diverse demographics would likely make different choices .
“ There is a reason that Nevada and South Carolina were added to the lineup of early states in the 2008 cycle and have been there ever since , ” says Putnam .
“ But it remains the fact that you have these overwhelmingly white states that are going first.
” That night in 2008 , Hillary Clinton lost to both Edwards and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of events , spurred by Clinton ’ s dislike of the contests , that has made caucuses something of an endangered species .
On Friday , a podcast was released where she turned up the heat , flatly calling Iowa ’ s system “ undemocratic.
” She ’ s not wrong .
Putting aside racial demographics , the way Iowa Democrats caucus is destined to disenfranchise .
They kick off at 7 p.m. , and wrap up on their own schedule—if you can ’ t make it then , or if you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end , you ’ re mostly out of luck .
Absentee voting isn ’ t an option for Iowans out of state for work or school .
If you have a mobility related disability or anxiety about crowds , the process of shuffling around sometimes packed and rowdy rooms creates unique barriers .
Like the Electoral College , the party ’ s rules can advantage rural areas .
One recent analysis showed that it only takes 43 participants in tiny Fremont County to win a delegate from a caucus , but in Johnson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state universities , it takes more than 200 .
In Polk , home to Des Moines and the state ’ s largest county , the number is about 150 .
Iowa ’ s caucuses are a relic of the age where a smaller group of Democratic heavies had more sway over the selection of the nominee .
In the big cities , think ward bosses and power brokers .
In Iowa , a few dozen die-hard party activists would gather in precincts to select their delegates to county conventions , who in turn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ congressional district , who in turn would select state delegates .
( It all takes awhile , so they have to start early in the year . )
In fact , Iowa Democrats go through the same precinct-on-up process every two years before holding their state convention , where they tinker with their platform , endorse local candidates , and conduct other party business .
Most of the time , away from the glare of the national media , the first caucus night in the dead of winter is a modestly attended affair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential race , participation booms .
In 2016 , when Bernie Sanders and Clinton faced off , the busiest caucus site saw 900 people turn out , and took hours to count .
That year , Sanders , with his energized and activist base , performed well in caucus states across the county , providing a ballast of delegates that allowed him to nip at Clinton ’ s heels through the last primary contest .
After the convention , representatives of their campaigns began meeting under a party “ Unity and Reform Commission @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nominee , had the upper hand .
“ The fact that caucuses are lower turnout affairs and disenfranchise some voters more so than others was seen as a problem in her camp , going back to 2008 and to a lesser extent in 2016 , ” Putnam says .
Clinton ’ s allies used their power to urge local parties to switch to primaries , and to encourage states sticking with caucuses to draft plans that would broaden participation .
Since then , Democrats in Washington , Idaho , and Nebraska have abandoned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ select their presidential convention delegates in state run primaries that accommodate a vastly greater number of voters through a largely intuitive process .
In Hawaii and Alaska , they ditched caucuses for party run primaries .
According to Putnam , such changes have left Iowa , Nevada , and Wyoming as the only states still caucusing in 2020 .
“ There ’ s kind of a disconnect , ” Putnam says , explaining Democrats ’ evolving opinion on caucuses .
“ ’ Here we are as a party talking about how everyone should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ability to vote , and we should increase participation .
But we ’ ve got these institutions , these caucuses , where we see low turnout .
So we need to square that to some degree.
’ Most state parties took that very seriously.
” Iowa , too , headed the call—in its own small way .
The state party website boasts of its changes , promising they ’ ll make this year “ the most accessible , transparent , and successful caucuses ever.
” But compared to switching to a primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And the new rules end up providing evidence of how Iowa ’ s system still flies in the face of basic notions of democratic fairness .
The clearest boost to transparency will be the release of three official sets of numbers : Not just , as the state party has always made available , the smaller number of how many local delegates each candidate won on caucus night , but also much larger headcounts of caucus-going Iowans ’ first and final choices .
This could create the impression of two , or even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , triggering a debate about who really “ won.
” ( The caucus determines fewer than 1 percent of the pledged delegates who will select the presidential candidate ; winning Iowa , however defined , has always been more a show of force than a practical step to the nomination . )
A disconnect where one or both headcount numbers show a candidate with more supporters turning out on caucus night but emerging with fewer delegates would only highlight how the contest ’ s intricacies can work against the principle of one person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and participation in 2020 , Iowa initially proposed creating a “ virtual caucus , ” a phone-in system that would have allowed the state ’ s registered Democrats to key in a PIN number and select a candidate .
But after nearly a year of planning , the DNC rejected the idea in August , citing security issues .
“ After Russian interference in the 2016 election , there just wasn ’ t a level of comfort there to allow Iowa to move forward with that , ” Putnam says .
Instead , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 pilot program creating “ satellite ” caucus locations , where people who can ’ t make it to their normal caucus can participate .
Most of the 87 locations are in Iowa , and aim to give a bit of flexibility to people who can ’ t attend a caucus at 7 p.m. , or to nursing or retirement home residents .
But the ones that aren ’ t in the state illustrate how the nice-sounding goal of expanding participation can easily create new forms of unequal access .
Iowans living out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the events ; about a third are in places in Arizona , California , and Florida—communities popular with snowbirds , including a country club house , a resort , and a beachfront condo building .
Three will take place in buildings affiliated with Ivy League universities .
There ’ s one in Glasgow , and one in Tbilisi , Georgia—yes , a that ’ s a satellite caucus in a former Soviet satellite in the Caucasus—but none in Mexico City , London , or anywhere in Africa , Asia , or South America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is it that the Iowa caucus still exists and lies at the start of the process next time Democrats select a nominee ?
According to Putnam , pretty likely .
Any movement to pressure Iowa to switch to a primary would need to account for a New Hampshire law requiring state officials to schedule their primary so it remains the nation ’ s first .
And adjusting the order of the early states would almost certainly require the cooperation of both national parties—and “ what do the parties agree on these days , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There ’ s got to be political will to do this—not only to do this , but to have an alternative .
And I don ’ t get the sense there is a distinct alternative that will appeal to enough people.
” For more than a year , the Democratic presidential contenders have crisscrossed Iowa warning about the supreme importance of defeating President Donald Trump , of removing a president who was elected without majority support , who has denigrated people of color , who has worked to suppress votes , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democratic institutions .
When dust settles after 2020 , perhaps the party ’ s leaders should spare a moment to think about those issues , alongside what happened in Iowa on Monday night .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
A dozen years ago, I set up shop at a Des Moines middle school to cover the Iowa caucuses on a snowy January night. In a process that has since remained unchanged at heart, participants filed in and divided by neighborhoods between a classroom, the library, and the gym. In each space, they then gathered into clusters in support of their candidate—the big ones in 2008 being Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and some guy named John Edwards.
Speeches were made and buttons were donned. After seeing the size of preliminary huddles, under the prying eyes of their neighbors, some people—whether from the warmness of their heart or the pressure of their peers—moved to pad out a group who otherwise would fall short of the 15 percent viability threshold needed to remain in the contest. Delegates selected that night would work through a months-long ladder of party gatherings, with a handful being sent to the Democratic National Convention in August to formally select a presidential nominee.
But before that could happen, headcounts needed to be made and math be done. Eliminated candidates’ supporters moved around again, as campaigns’ designated caucus captains and self-selected extroverts tried to woo them to join the remaining contenders. Among the books, Edwards supporters offered snacks. On the basketball court, pro-Obama chants broke out as talliers repeatedly asked scores of caucus goers packing the bleachers and standing in the backcourt to please, please, please stay still so they could get accurate numbers. People with other obligations—maybe the night shift, maybe a new baby, maybe their own bedtime—filtered out, effectively disenfranchised as counting went well past an hour.
Back home the next week, friends asked for a debrief. I told them it reminded me of something I’d recently seen on YouTube: grindadráp, a centuries-old community organized whale hunt practiced annually in the Faroe Islands, when the animals are driven out of the North Atlantic into shallow bays and then beached and bludgeoned with clubs, or stabbed with gaffs until the water runs red. Both events were dynamic, homespun, an exercise of tradition, a visual spectacle—yet archaic and totally disturbing. How do these things happen in the 21st century? Could what I witnessed in Des Moines really be the best way to kick off the selection of the next Leader of the Free World?
This week, I spoke with Josh Putnam—an academic whose PhD research focused on the parties’ quadrennial convention delegate selection processes, and who runs FrontloadingHQ, a blog that has exhaustively chronicled the subject—to ask if time is catching up to Iowa’s process or its place at the head of the line.
Both have long been questioned. Before Julián Castro left the race, he decried the sorry situation of putting Iowa and New Hampshire in a position to winnow the field and create momentum defining victories when states with more diverse demographics would likely make different choices. “There is a reason that Nevada and South Carolina were added to the lineup of early states in the 2008 cycle and have been there ever since,” says Putnam. “But it remains the fact that you have these overwhelmingly white states that are going first.”
That night in 2008, Hillary Clinton lost to both Edwards and Obama, setting off a decade-long chain of events, spurred by Clinton’s dislike of the contests, that has made caucuses something of an endangered species. On Friday, a podcast was released where she turned up the heat, flatly calling Iowa’s system “undemocratic.” She’s not wrong.
“It remains the fact that you have these overwhelmingly white states that are going first.”
Putting aside racial demographics, the way Iowa Democrats caucus is destined to disenfranchise. They kick off at 7 p.m., and wrap up on their own schedule—if you can’t make it then, or if you can’t stick it out to the end, you’re mostly out of luck. Absentee voting isn’t an option for Iowans out of state for work or school. If you have a mobility related disability or anxiety about crowds, the process of shuffling around sometimes packed and rowdy rooms creates unique barriers. Like the Electoral College, the party’s rules can advantage rural areas. One recent analysis showed that it only takes 43 participants in tiny Fremont County to win a delegate from a caucus, but in Johnson and Story counties, which both host state universities, it takes more than 200. In Polk, home to Des Moines and the state’s largest county, the number is about 150.
Iowa’s caucuses are a relic of the age where a smaller group of Democratic heavies had more sway over the selection of the nominee. In the big cities, think ward bosses and power brokers. In Iowa, a few dozen die-hard party activists would gather in precincts to select their delegates to county conventions, who in turn would select delegates based on region or congressional district, who in turn would select state delegates. (It all takes awhile, so they have to start early in the year.) In fact, Iowa Democrats go through the same precinct-on-up process every two years before holding their state convention, where they tinker with their platform, endorse local candidates, and conduct other party business. Most of the time, away from the glare of the national media, the first caucus night in the dead of winter is a modestly attended affair. But when there’s a presidential race, participation booms. In 2016, when Bernie Sanders and Clinton faced off, the busiest caucus site saw 900 people turn out, and took hours to count.
That year, Sanders, with his energized and activist base, performed well in caucus states across the county, providing a ballast of delegates that allowed him to nip at Clinton’s heels through the last primary contest. After the convention, representatives of their campaigns began meeting under a party “Unity and Reform Commission,” where Clinton, as the nominee, had the upper hand. “The fact that caucuses are lower turnout affairs and disenfranchise some voters more so than others was seen as a problem in her camp, going back to 2008 and to a lesser extent in 2016,” Putnam says. Clinton’s allies used their power to urge local parties to switch to primaries, and to encourage states sticking with caucuses to draft plans that would broaden participation.
Since then, Democrats in Washington, Idaho, and Nebraska have abandoned party run caucuses, instead opting to select their presidential convention delegates in state run primaries that accommodate a vastly greater number of voters through a largely intuitive process. In Hawaii and Alaska, they ditched caucuses for party run primaries. According to Putnam, such changes have left Iowa, Nevada, and Wyoming as the only states still caucusing in 2020.
“There’s kind of a disconnect,” Putnam says, explaining Democrats’ evolving opinion on caucuses. “’Here we are as a party talking about how everyone should have the right to vote, and the ability to vote, and we should increase participation. But we’ve got these institutions, these caucuses, where we see low turnout. So we need to square that to some degree.’ Most state parties took that very seriously.”
Iowa, too, heeded the call—in its own small way. The state party website boasts of its changes, promising they’ll make this year “the most accessible, transparent, and successful caucuses ever.” But compared to switching to a primary, the tweaks are extremely modest. And the new rules end up providing evidence of how Iowa’s system still flies in the face of basic notions of democratic fairness.
The clearest boost to transparency will be the release of three official sets of numbers: Not just, as the state party has always made available, the smaller number of how many local delegates each candidate won on caucus night, but also much larger headcounts of caucus-going Iowans’ first and final choices. This could create the impression of two, or even three, separate winners on caucus night, triggering a debate about who really “won.” (The caucus determines fewer than 1 percent of the pledged delegates who will select the presidential candidate; winning Iowa, however defined, has always been more a show of force than a practical step to the nomination.) A disconnect where one or both headcount numbers show a candidate with more supporters turning out on caucus night but emerging with fewer delegates would only highlight how the contest’s intricacies can work against the principle of one person, one vote.
To increase accessibility and participation in 2020, Iowa initially proposed creating a “virtual caucus,” a phone-in system that would have allowed the state’s registered Democrats to key in a PIN number and select a candidate. But after nearly a year of planning, the DNC rejected the idea in August, citing security issues. “After Russian interference in the 2016 election, there just wasn’t a level of comfort there to allow Iowa to move forward with that,” Putnam says.
Instead, Iowa’s party expanded a tiny 2016 pilot program creating “satellite” caucus locations, where people who can’t make it to their normal caucus can participate. Most of the 87 locations are in Iowa, and aim to give a bit of flexibility to people who can’t attend a caucus at 7 p.m., or to nursing or retirement home residents. But the ones that aren’t in the state illustrate how the nice-sounding goal of expanding participation can easily create new forms of unequal access. Iowans living out of state volunteered to create and host the events; about a third are in places in Arizona, California, and Florida—communities popular with snowbirds, including a country club house, a resort, and a beachfront condo building. Three will take place in buildings affiliated with Ivy League universities. There’s one in Glasgow, and one in Tbilisi, Georgia—yes, a that’s a satellite caucus in a former Soviet satellite in the Caucasus—but none in Mexico City, London, or anywhere in Africa, Asia, or South America.
Given its shortcomings, how likely is it that the Iowa caucus still exists and lies at the start of the process next time Democrats select a nominee? According to Putnam, pretty likely. Any movement to pressure Iowa to switch to a primary would need to account for a New Hampshire law requiring state officials to schedule their primary so it remains the nation’s first. And adjusting the order of the early states would almost certainly require the cooperation of both national parties—and “what do the parties agree on these days,” Putnam noted with a laugh. “There’s got to be political will to do this—not only to do this, but to have an alternative. And I don’t get the sense there is a distinct alternative that will appeal to enough people.”
For more than a year, the Democratic presidential contenders have crisscrossed Iowa warning about the supreme importance of defeating President Donald Trump, of removing a president who was elected without majority support, who has denigrated people of color, who has worked to suppress votes, and who has attacked the country’s democratic institutions. When dust settles after 2020, perhaps the party’s leaders should spare a moment to think about those issues, alongside what happened in Iowa on Monday night.


motherjones--2020-02-01--After the Boos, Bernie Sanders Takes a Softer Approach

Bernie Sanders ’ allies railed against the DNC and corporate Democrats out to get him , and Vampire Weekend was in Iowa to open up for the senator .
That was what I saw reporting from the state four years ago as caucus-goers faced choosing between Sanders and Hillary Clinton .
And over the past 24 hours I ’ ve had a strong sense of déjà vu .
Friday night , while Sanders was stuck in DC as the impeachment trial against President Donald Trump entered its final days , his campaign threw a concert and rally with surrogates in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ headlined by Justin Vernon , the Midwest indie-rock icon better known as Bon Iver .
( Vampire Weekend is set to play Saturday night in Cedar Rapids . )
Vernon played his mournful hits , and closed with a rousing rendition of Bob Dylan ’ s classic “ The Times They Are a-Changin ’ .
” But before the music , there was a heavy emphasis from his camp on recriminations against perceived slights against Sanders .
Earlier in the day , the Democratic National Committee had announced it was changing the rules @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , dropping the requirement that candidates surpass a minimum number of contributors—a move clearly designed to allow former New York City mayor , billionaire , and self-funder Michael Bloomberg to make the stage .
Sanders ’ campaign adviser and his 2016 campaign manager Jeff Weaver quickly blasted the shift .
At the rally in Clive , filmmaker and onetime Mother Jones editor Michael Moore took up the call—and went even further .
“ I have to wake up this morning and realize that we have to fight the corporate Democrats , the 1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thoroughly pissed that Bernie Sanders is now number one , that Bernie Sanders might win this primary season , that Bernie Sanders might be the next president of the United States .
Oooh , they ’ re so upset !
” Later in the evening , a panel of House members who have endorsed Sanders—Reps .
Pramila Jayapal , Ilhan Omar , and Rashida Tlaib—took the stage , subbing in for the missing senator .
When the moderator made reference to Hillary Clinton , the audience let out a smattering of boos .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was fresh reason Sanders supporters would feel irked by his ex-opponent .
Earlier in the day , a podcast interview came out wherein Clinton yet again ascribed some of her defeat to Trump to Sanders and his supporters .
“ All the way up until the end , a lot of people highly identified with his campaign were urging people to vote third party , urging people not to vote , ” she said .
Clinton ’ s attacks on Sanders offer a staggering contrast to how she handled her 2008 campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her primary defeat .
Over the course of that contest , her surrogates spread photos of Obama in traditional African clothes in a clear race-baiting attack and went on TV to call him a drug user unfit for the presidency .
When it was growing clear that Obama was likely to win the nomination , Clinton ’ s campaign picked a Hail Mary fight at the DNC ’ s rules committee to seat contested delegates who backed her .
Then a cohort of diehard Clinton stans organized as PUMAs—standing for Party Unity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she didn ’ t exactly expel all of them from polite Democratic circles .
While Obama and Clinton patched things up enough that she became his Secretary of State , the first fundraiser she appeared at after leaving his administration in 2014 was hosted by leading PUMA Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild .
When the boos piped up in Clive , the moderator tried to tamp down the sentiment , but Tlaib wasn ’ t having it .
“ You all know I can ’ t be quiet , we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , egging on the crowd .
“ That ’ s alright .
The haters will shut up on Monday when we win.
” But by the next morning , as the sun popped out over Iowa for the first time in days , Tlaib had expressed regret about her comments on Twitter .
When Sanders , taking advantage of a weekend break from impeachment attendance , stumped at a rally at Simpson College in Indianola , Omar ’ s remarks offered only general references to attacks on Sanders .
“ The attacks on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” she said .
While Jayapal was also there , Tlaib wasn ’ t , though she hadn ’ t been on the event ’ s schedule before the boos .
When Sanders himself took the mic , he went out of his way to be deferential to his opponents in a way that gently pushed back at Clinton .
“ Let me say this so there is no misunderstanding , and I believe I speak for all of the other Democrats competing in this primary .
Certainly , I hope that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but if we do not win , we will support the winner and I know that every other candidate will do the same , ” he said .
“ We are united in understanding that we must defeat Donald Trump.
” Given his newly found frontrunner status in the state , and the fact that impeachment has limited opportunities to see him in Iowa , the event was overflowing with members of the national media .
After it wrapped , I spotted an old roommate of mine ’ s mom ( both of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knew was planning to caucus for Warren .
I scurried over to get her take on Bernie , but New York Times podcaster Michael Barbaro beat me to her .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
Bernie Sanders’ allies railed against the DNC and corporate Democrats out to get him, and Vampire Weekend was in Iowa to open up for the senator.
That was what I saw reporting from the state four years ago as caucus-goers faced choosing between Sanders and Hillary Clinton. And over the past 24 hours I’ve had a strong sense of déjà vu.
Friday night, while Sanders was stuck in DC as the impeachment trial against President Donald Trump entered its final days, his campaign threw a concert and rally with surrogates in the Des Moines suburb of Clive, headlined by Justin Vernon, the Midwest indie-rock icon better known as Bon Iver. (Vampire Weekend is set to play Saturday night in Cedar Rapids.) Vernon played his mournful hits, and closed with a rousing rendition of Bob Dylan’s classic “The Times They Are a-Changin’.”
From Bernie’s rally outside Des Moines last night, @BonIver also did a stellar cover of The Times They Are a-Changin’ to close his set pic.twitter.com/QuAETEaqQl — Patrick Caldwell (@patcaldwell) February 1, 2020
But before the music, there was a heavy emphasis from his camp on recriminations against perceived slights against Sanders.
Earlier in the day, the Democratic National Committee had announced it was changing the rules governing access to an upcoming presidential debate, dropping the requirement that candidates surpass a minimum number of contributors—a move clearly designed to allow former New York City mayor, billionaire, and self-funder Michael Bloomberg to make the stage. Sanders’ campaign adviser and his 2016 campaign manager Jeff Weaver quickly blasted the shift.
Jeff Weaver, a senior adviser for Bernie Sanders, said it would be “wrong” to change rules that would “accommodate" Bloomberg. “Now, at this late hour, to change the rules to accommodate a billionaire who wants to buy his way into the party would be unconscionable." https://t.co/XoZKem7hSN — Steve Peoples (@sppeoples) January 31, 2020
At the rally in Clive, filmmaker and onetime Mother Jones editor Michael Moore took up the call—and went even further. “I have to wake up this morning and realize that we have to fight the corporate Democrats, the 1 percent of the Democratic Party who are thoroughly pissed that Bernie Sanders is now number one, that Bernie Sanders might win this primary season, that Bernie Sanders might be the next president of the United States. Oooh, they’re so upset!”
Later in the evening, a panel of House members who have endorsed Sanders—Reps. Pramila Jayapal, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib—took the stage, subbing in for the missing senator. When the moderator made reference to Hillary Clinton, the audience let out a smattering of boos. Beyond general resentment lingering from 2016, there was fresh reason Sanders supporters would feel irked by his ex-opponent. Earlier in the day, a podcast interview came out wherein Clinton yet again ascribed some of her defeat to Trump to Sanders and his supporters. “All the way up until the end, a lot of people highly identified with his campaign were urging people to vote third party, urging people not to vote,” she said.
“Bernie Sanders might be the next president of the United States. Oooh, they’re so upset!”
Clinton’s attacks on Sanders offer a staggering contrast to how she handled her 2008 campaign against Barack Obama and the aftermath of her primary defeat. Over the course of that contest, her surrogates spread photos of Obama in traditional African clothes in a clear race-baiting attack and went on TV to call him a drug user unfit for the presidency. When it was growing clear that Obama was likely to win the nomination, Clinton’s campaign picked a Hail Mary fight at the DNC’s rules committee to seat contested delegates who backed her. Then a cohort of diehard Clinton stans organized as PUMAs—standing for Party Unity, My Ass—and while Clinton expressed general disapproval, she didn’t exactly expel all of them from polite Democratic circles. While Obama and Clinton patched things up enough that she became his Secretary of State, the first fundraiser she appeared at after leaving his administration in 2014 was hosted by leading PUMA Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild.
When the boos piped up in Clive, the moderator tried to tamp down the sentiment, but Tlaib wasn’t having it. “You all know I can’t be quiet, we’re going to boo,” Tlaib said, egging on the crowd. “That’s alright. The haters will shut up on Monday when we win.”
But by the next morning, as the sun popped out over Iowa for the first time in days, Tlaib had expressed regret about her comments on Twitter. When Sanders, taking advantage of a weekend break from impeachment attendance, stumped at a rally at Simpson College in Indianola, Omar’s remarks offered only general references to attacks on Sanders. “The attacks on Bernie have become more and more desperate,” she said. While Jayapal was also there, Tlaib wasn’t, though she hadn’t been on the event’s schedule before the boos.
When Sanders himself took the mic, he went out of his way to be deferential to his opponents in a way that gently pushed back at Clinton. “Let me say this so there is no misunderstanding, and I believe I speak for all of the other Democrats competing in this primary. Certainly, I hope that we’re going to win, but if we do not win, we will support the winner and I know that every other candidate will do the same,” he said. “We are united in understanding that we must defeat Donald Trump.”
Given his newly found frontrunner status in the state, and the fact that impeachment has limited opportunities to see him in Iowa, the event was overflowing with members of the national media. After it wrapped, I spotted an old roommate of mine’s mom (both of them are from Iowa) who I knew was planning to caucus for Warren. I scurried over to get her take on Bernie, but New York Times podcaster Michael Barbaro beat me to her.


motherjones--2020-02-01--Trump’s First Weekend Tweets Screw up Math and Compare Himself to a Circus

The president of the United States is probably in a good mood .
Last night in the Senate , a vote to call witnesses in Donald Trump ’ s impeachment trial failed , bringing him one step closer to acquittal .
So on Saturday morning , in time-tested Trump fashion , he took to Twitter to share some thoughts with America .
Never one to shy away from bragging about himself , Trump tweeted that his poll numbers are the highest they ’ ve been since his election .
( While they have spiked , this is false . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ which he claims are heavily attended but unnoticed by the media , as “ The Greatest Show on Earth ” …the tagline of the now-defunct Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey traveling circus .
( Trump held two rallies in the past week in venues whose maximum capacity were roughly 7,000 .
Both garnered extensive coverage . )
Trump also praised Lou Dobbs , the right-wing television host of Lou Dobbs Tonight which airs on Fox Business News .
Dobbs tweeted that his show has been # 1 for 49 months in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Trump , it ’ s because he covers the president “ fairly ” and “ objectively.
” Nevermind that Trump , the objectivity-lover , referred to himself in the third person as “ America ’ s Greatest President ” —he also failed to do some basic math .
Dobbs ’ rating ’ s coup predates the Trump presidency by a full year .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
The president of the United States is probably in a good mood. Last night in the Senate, a vote to call witnesses in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial failed, bringing him one step closer to acquittal. So on Saturday morning, in time-tested Trump fashion, he took to Twitter to share some thoughts with America.
Never one to shy away from bragging about himself, Trump tweeted that his poll numbers are the highest they’ve been since his election. (While they have spiked, this is false.)
Trump poll numbers are the highest since election, despite constant phony Witch Hunts! Tens of thousands of people attending rallies (which the Fake News never mentions) to see “The Greatest Show On Earth”. Fun because USA is WINNING AGAIN! https://t.co/L14hDtx6cT — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 1, 2020
He then referred to his rallies, which he claims are heavily attended but unnoticed by the media, as “The Greatest Show on Earth”…the tagline of the now-defunct Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey traveling circus. (Trump held two rallies in the past week in venues whose maximum capacity were roughly 7,000. Both garnered extensive coverage.)
Trump also praised Lou Dobbs, the right-wing television host of Lou Dobbs Tonight which airs on Fox Business News. Dobbs tweeted that his show has been #1 for 49 months in a row on “business TV.” According to Trump, it’s because he covers the president “fairly” and “objectively.”
Congratulations to @loudobbs, Number One. Lou has shown the Fake News what happens when you cover “America’s Greatest President” fairly & objectively! #MAGA #KAG https://t.co/68b0vPvmNd — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 1, 2020
Nevermind that Trump, the objectivity-lover, referred to himself in the third person as “America’s Greatest President”—he also failed to do some basic math. Dobbs’ rating’s coup predates the Trump presidency by a full year.