Mayor Pete on Backyard Bullying

Andrew Yang on Incompetence and Elections

No Malarkey from Joe Biden?

Apparently, former Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE) is not totally detached from reality as he offered a no malarkey assessment of his campaign's performance in the 2020 Iowa Caucuses.  With less than 70% of the vote tallied after two days, Biden is running in 4th place with 15.9% support.  On the bright side, Biden (barely) qualifies for delegates.  But on the dark side, he might place fifth behind Senator Amy Klobachar (D-MN).

Iowa is not about delegates, as only 41 were available from the Iowa Caucuses.  It is about gaining momentum at the start of the Presidential Primary campaign.  Conventional wisdom is that there are three tickets out of Iowa, and it looks like Lunch Bucket Joe got a gut punch rather than his ticket punched.  Granted,  Biden did not pour all of his resources into organizing in the Hawkeye State, like Mayor Pete Buttigieg (D-South Bend, IN) or Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).  But a former Vice President, who the media kept touting as the national front runner,  being an also ran is devasting.

Some have suspected that the Democrat Establishment have been obliquely seeking to help Biden, because the prospect of nominating socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (Socialist-VT) scares the bejesus out of them.  Thus, the delayed submission of the Articles of Impeachment curiously required that sitting Senators (Sanders, Warren, Klobachar, Bennett) could not be out on the Hawkeye hustings when the Senate was trying President Trump.   Moreover, the prolonged odd delay in reporting results from the Iowa Caucuses (which has been attributed to software output issues) both steals the thunder from winning candidates like Buttigieg and Sanders, thus taking away momentum from Iowa and it obscures the gut punch of a fourth place finish for Biden. 

Political junkies know that Biden planned on having a South Carolina strategy, as he expects to garner giant support from the largely black electorate who would give fealty to Barack Obama's number two.   The problem is that he has to make it to the end of February.  When a candidate, like Biden, is competing as a front runner, it burns cash. If Biden has another disappointing result in New Hampshire, the money dries up and the staff starts to bolt. 

The Establishment's chosen candidate has been floored by a Hawkeye gut punch and they feel they need to slow the Sanders juggernaut lest he becomes the inevitable nominee.  So they need someone to last until the March 3rd Super Tuesday primaries, when ex Mayor Michael Bloomberg (R, I, D) can buy them some time and victories before the Milwaukee convention in July.

And THAT'S no malarkey.

Tulsi Gabbard on the DNC

As Democrat voters begin the 2020 Election Cycle, it seems that establishment Democrats are putting their thumbs on the scale to try to shape the outcome.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is outraged that the DNC and CNN are not allowing her on stage for the New Hampshire debate, despite garnering 8% support, while they are letting former Governor Deval Patrick (D-MA) onstage as he only has 2% support.

The DNC seems worried that Senator Bernie Sanders (Socialist- NH) may well sweep the first few primaries, which would make him the odds on favorite to win the Presidential nomination.  So the DNC changed the rules for qualifying for future debates, ignoring the grass roots element of qualifications.  

That rules change allows billionaire candidate ex NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg to participate.  That becomes crucial as Bloomberg is banking on a strong Super Tuesday showing on Tuesday March 3rd and the fact that he can self finance his campaign.  

Rudy Giuliani on Impeachment

Pelosi's Procedural Ploys on Impeachment

The Democrat led House of Representatives broke light speed records in order to vote to impeach President Donald Trump before Christmas.  Yet House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA12th) has refused to name impeachment managers and send the Impeachment Resolution to the Senate. Inquiring minds seek to know why.

As the final impeachment vote was taken on December 18th, 2019, perhaps Pelosi hoped that it would dominate holiday conversations while the House was adjourned. This tactic did not achieve the tsunami of support for removing President Trump.  In fact, polling show that Mr. Trump increased his favorability ratings.  After the vote was taken, it was difficult for the mainstream media to keep up the clamor about impeachment, especially as it is procedurally stalled. 

Officially, Pelosi has proffered the rationale that she was withholding the Articles of Impeachment from a Senate to ensure a fair trial.  This is laughable considering how the Democrat majority ignored its own precedents on impeachment, ditched due process and achieved passage on a partisan nearly party line vote, with Democrat Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbord (D-HI 2nd) voting present and three House Democrats voting “nay”, including Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ 2nd) who switched parties after the vote.



Pelosi reportedly got the idea to stall sending the Impeachment Resolution to the Senate based upon a suggestion from Nixon White House counsel and MSNBC contributor John Dean. This may be a ruse to allow the leftist firebrands of the party to claim victory for getting Mr. Trump impeached without going through the formality of a trial which is destined to fail as it can not achieve 67 votes.  Or it may have been a delay tactic to try to tack on more articles of impeachment to accompany the rather weak tea “Obstruction of Congress” and “Abuse of Power” allegations.  However, the taking down of Iranian terror leader Solemani did not lead to an undeclared war, so that charge was for naught.

Surely the Speaker’s staff knows that having an outsider dictate how the Senate will take up an impeachment trial is unconstitutional. Article I Section 3 Clause 6 of the Constitution stipulates that:  “The Senate has to sole Power to try all Impeachments”.  

Of course, constitutional considerations might not prevent some grandstanding in a power play over the Christmas holidays.  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had pencilled in a light legislative schedule for January 2020 in anticipation of an impeachment trial.  With Speaker Pelosi’s incalcitrance on sending the Senate the Articles of Impeachment, Leader McConnell proposed that the Senate might well take up the Impeachment even if the House fails to name Impeachment Managers, which would effectively dismiss the charges.  This move prompted Ms. Pelosi to indicate that she may take steps to move the resolution forward next week.

The reasons for holding the Articles of Impeachment from the Senate might been more political.  Former South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy suggested on Fox News that holding the Impeachment into the primary season might have caused tough votes for vulnerable Republican freshman Senators Martha Mc Sally (R-AZ) Corey Gardiner (R-CO) and Joni Ernst (R-IA).  That may be true but the politics may well have been more intermural. 

Democrats are engaged in an uncertain Presidential primary process with no clear leader before the Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire Primary.  Several leading candidates (and a few also rans still in the race) are still in the Senate.  Impeachment trial rules require all Senate participants to attend all of the trial in order to vote, which effectively would take Senators Sanders (Socialist/Democrat-VT), Warren (D-MA), Klobachar (D-MN) and Booker (D-NJ) off of the campaign trial or reveal them as slackers of the current elective office.  Had the Articles of Impeachment been immediately been sent to the Senate in December, it is likely that it would have impeded the January 14th debate, which is the last debate before the Iowa Caucuses. 

Democrat Impeachment backers have argued for an expanded trial, which would include public witnesses which go beyond the nearly non-existent fact witnesses during the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff (D-CA 28th) Show and House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler (D-NY 10th) proceedings.  But if the witness list is opened up to President Trump’s defense, former Vice President and presidential candidate Joe Biden (D-DE) and his controversial son Hunter Biden may be compelled to testify, which could be messy and take a favorite of establishment Washington Democrats off the hustings and into the fire of tough invigilation.

Presuming that Pelosi is being procedurally political and tipping the scale to favor the only establishment candidate who consistently has a chance to beat President Trump,  it would be prudent for the Speaker to prompt a floor vote on Thursday January 16th and then adjourn for the Martin Luther King Holiday (oh, that’s right, District Work Sessions) and it would not be picked up until January 28th.  Even if House Judiciary Chair Nadler worked expeditiously in sending things to the Senate, it might not be received until the eve of the Iowa Caucus.  

That sort of scheduling would require Senators to be present in Washington and not canvass in the final days of the New Hampshire primary, which would give Joe Biden and South Bend “Mayor Pete” Buttigieg a leg up on the competition during opening arguments which may last about a week.    The next week is the South Carolina primary where (if polling is accurate), Biden has a commanding lead and Mayor Pete is quite weak.  That might give Biden the mojo to become the front runner. 

While it is highly unlikely that the Senate will muster the 2/3rds Super-majority to remove President Trump, the case may not be dismissed in a summary judgment like vote after opening argument.  In the even that Biden is requested to testify by the Senate, he may be able to stall until after Super Tuesday March 3rd, when he would either be the odds on favorite or an oddball also ran.

So Pelosi’s slow roll of advancing the Articles of Impeachment presumably are political but may well be partisan in inter-Democrat politics along with trying to take the Senate back into Democrat hands in the 117th Congress. 

Biden Should Host the Cornpop Challenge Invitational

While campaiging in Iowa,  Ex-Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE) took a hostile question from a Hawkeye voter.  The man asked Biden about setting his son Hunter Biden up for business with a Ukraine energy company  during his tenure as Vice President.  Biden responded to the allegation of selling access with indignation, calling the questioner a damned liar.

 

  This pointed question appeared to raise Biden's hackles.  In order to prove that the 77 year old Democrat presidential candidate was in shape for the Oval Office, Biden challenged the man to a foot race,  push up contest or even an IQ test.  Later, as he sought to end the colloquy, Biden said "Look fat...listen, here's the deal." What a way to win friends and influence people, man (sic).

Biden has long cultivated a "Lunch Bucket Joe" image, and feigning a tough guy may well be meant to appeal to rough and tumble working class voters.  Remember when Biden mused that instead of debating Donald Trump, Biden would like to take his opponent in back of the gym and beat the hell out of him.  This tough guy mystique may work well against his political opponents but it looks mean and out of place at a campaign rally meant to influence Iowa voters.  

Furthermore, Biden's odd obsession to physical challenges comes at the heel the video which Biden reminisced about his time as a life guard at an urban pool, when Biden was willing to fight Corn Pop and was fine about kids sitting on his lap and pulling at his leg hairs.  No wonder Biden's handlers wanted to restrict access to Biden for as long as possible during the 2020 Primaries.

Considering his presumed prowess at physical contests, maybe Joe Biden can inaugurate the Corn Pop Challenge Invitational.   These feats of strength could be held on Festivus on December 23rd  right after the Airing of Grievances.  Maybe they could add hair sniffing. 




   

Mulling Over the DNC Miami Mixup #1

Democrats held the first in a series of debates for prospective 2020 Presidential candidates in Miami.  Since the DNC qualified 20 of 25 candidates to take the stage, the debate was done over two nights with purportedly random match ups.  The first night mostly featured 1%-ers – no not the taxpayers that Democrats want to jack up their rate to 70% but those who barely qualified for the debate with more than blips on political polls.  The only first tier candidate that night was Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA),

In the 2020 election cycle, a gaggle of Democrats pandering for POTUS will march like ten left feet together, so their policy proposals will track a similar progressive path.  So political junkies enduring this exercise look for overarching themes which brand a candidate’s campaign and for break out moments which elevate or deflate a debater.

During the first third of the Miami Mixup, Warren came out strong with an anti-corporate aura.  It was interesting that in an era of a booming economy with record unemployment, her thesis is that the economy isn’t working for everyone so we must dismantle the system. 

Senator Warren was one of the two hands raised to eliminate private health insurance when reforming American health care.  But when the organizers lost their close control of the debate stage, Warren became a less dominating figure, particularly when the exchanges turned to abortion and immigration.


Former two term Congressman and failed Texas Senate candidate Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX 19th) tried to make his mark out of the box, starting to answer his first question  to him in Spanish. Booker had a remarkable look at “Beto’s” bilingual blurtation, which gives the impression of “Damn, he beat me to it on that pandering gimmick”.

But the problem with Beto is that he offers an alluvia of words but never actually answering a question.  Granted, a time tested political media trick is to answer the question that you want, not the one that is asked.  But when O’Rourke could not clearly respond to a direct question on whether he supported a 70% federal income tax rate for the very rich, it highlighted how “Beto” was all style and no substance.  Or to put it in faux Texan terms for a faux identity politics Hispanix (sic)– He’s all hat and no cattle.

Many of the low polling Democrats in the first Miami Mixup clung to their bio as a crutch to define their campaigns as sometimes as a cudgel as they fight for the political spotlight against their comrades.  Some candidates seemed more successful in weaponizing their bio.  While it seemed tedious for Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI 2nd) to keep referencing her military service, but it gave her gravitas when she verbally parried with Congressman Tim Ryan (D-OH 13th) over continued American military involvement in Afghanistan. This may be why Gabbard topped a Drudge Report instant poll on who won the debate.  That moment both may be a break out moment for Gabbard and a break down moment for Ryan.

Former San Antonio Mayor and  Obama HUD Secretary Julian Castro burnished his Hispanic identity politics credentials by highlighting his bio. Castro came prepared to be the immigration expert on stage and outstaged “Beto” on his immigration answer, with Castro chiding “Beto” to “do your homework”.

Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) garnered the most time in the spotlight that night, started nearly every exchange citing that he lives (or more honestly put– owns a condo) in a sketchy Newark neighborhood. Presumably, Booker is trying to swing some African American support away from former Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE) while appealing to social justice warriors.  But the repeated references became too obvious.  Inquiring minds might connect Newark’s persistent urban problems to his seven years tenure as Newark’s mayor before ascending to his Senate seat.

Governor Jay Inslee (D-WA) defined his campaign as being all about climate change.  Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) was a me too women’s candidate who fights for the total right to abort unwanted unborn children. Comrade New York Mayor Bill De Blasio (D-NYC) seemed to be about changing the character of the Democrat party to be union oriented and progressive.  In his four years running for the Democrat presidential nomination, ex Rep. John Delaney (D-MD 6th) has tried to steer a somewhat centrist course to his campaign. Delaney applied his campaign’s premise in disputing the wisdom of totally overhauling America’s health care system by qupping “We should be the party that keeps what is working but fixes what is broken.”  Wise words but such wisdom is unappealing in an unbridled pander-fest.

Perhaps the most egregious example of progressive pandering was Julian Castro’s reproductive justice tact for supporting abortion.

Castro’s invocation that men can have abortion too may sell well with convicted intersectional progressives but hardly seems like it would appeal to Trump Democrats in the general election.


This early in the campaign cycle, political promises are ambiguous and do not stand for close scrutiny.  But the rhetoric used during this Democrat Debate repeatedly invoked emergencies for climate; gun control and health care.  This may be the modus operandi for a successful Democrat President to impose unpopular progressive policies under the guise of “emergency action”, particularly if their nemesis President Trump cites in addressing illegal immigration issues.

President Trump had promised to live tweet during the Democrat debate.  He summed up his impressions of the debate with a one word critque: BORING!

But the real Donald Trump did not spare debate hosts NBC News for their five minute technical difficulties by not cutting the mikes of the first panel of interviewers.  For a network celebrating seventy years on the air, this TV Miami Mixup merits mockery.

Hopefully, President Trump will live tweet the second debate, with leading candidates socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) and former Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE). Nevertheless, expect more live tweeting from @CalamityDC using the #DemDebate heading. 

Tulsi Gabbard on Hate Crime Hoaxes

Nancy Pelosi on Vulgar Calls for Impeaching President Trump

Newly elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried to tamp down the controversy  created by freshman Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib's vulgar call to impeach President Trump.

Pelosi dismissed criticism of Tlaib's vow to impeach the "motherf*cker as being "No big deal" as it was free speech from an individual and is just the way people talk




However, Pelosi proclaimed that President Trump's rhetoric mattered as his words have a direct impact on people. Huh? Hypocrisy much?  

Perhaps Pelosi ought to consider the context of Rashida Tlaib's crude call for impeachment.  Even though Tlaib doubled down on her remarks as speaking truth to power, the reality was that her crude comment was directed to her young son.   So such free speech has no impact "on the children"?  Sure. 

h/t: MRC

"Young Turk" Rep. Rashida Tlaib Ready to Rumble in the House

Rashida Tlaib heckling Trump in 2016

First term Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI 13th) rose to prominence being the first Muslim woman in the Michigan legislature.  She first achieved national notoriety for heckling candidate Donald Trump at a Detroit Economic Club luncheon in August 2016.  Tlaib parlayed that protest into winning the 2018 House Democrat primary in a crowded race for a seat that represents Dearborn, Michigan in a crowded primary , which has a large Muslim population.

Tlaib ran unopposed in the 2018 general election and was one of two Muslim women elected to the House. Tlaib was sworn in on President Thomas Jefferson's Quran. As Rep. Tlaib was sworn in, her brother spoke to CSPAN to say that he was proud of her being a fighter despite the fact the he was a Trump conservative. 




Tlaib certainly lived up to that young turk reputation on her first day in office.  While Tlaib did vote for Speaker Pelosi (despite what she said on the stump),  Tlaib did make waves by modifying her House provided world map by inserting Palestine, backing her position for a one state solution.

Later that day, Tlaib made headlines at a Move On.org  reception when she called for President Trump's impeachment by a profanity laced ejaculation.  Tlaib lived up to her reputation for cursing like a trucker. But Tlaib should only metaphorically be labeled a young Turk as she proudly professes her Palestinian identity.

Most politicos expected the 116th Congress to be totally focused on the upcoming 2020 Presidential election, full of investigations and efforts to oust President Trump. Democrats seem to be obsessed by Trump Derangement Syndrome.  The hope is to persuade enough establishment Republicans who are offended by Trump's abrasive style and perceived lack of comity to limit Trump's term as chief executive.

Establishment Democrats may try to tamp down impeachment efforts, as the chances to force Mr. Trump from the Oval Office with a 2/3rds Senate majority seem slim.  It is reasonable to presume that their game will be to continue to drive down President Trump's favorability numbers and to pressure those close to him that he will throw in the towel.  Alas that strategy will not satisfy radicals like Rashida Tlaib.

The problem that young turks like Tlaib pose is their persistent in your face vulgar approach is great for generating headlines (much the same for their nemesis Donald Trump).  But that turns off independents and establishment Republicans who embrace civility.  Ironically, Democrats condemned Republicans about their supposed lack of civility in the wake of the shooting of former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ 8th).

Moreover, the more prominence that  Democrat Socialist radicals like Tlaib and Rep. Ocasio Cortez (D-NY 14th) are given, it is likely that the Democrats will be driven to the left, which will produce a presidential nominee who who the base loves but alienates any remaining Blue Dog Democrats and fails to win back "The Great Revolt" Trump voters and loses in a landslide, much like McGovern lost to the great silent majority in 1972.

Karl Marx in a Dress?

As the Democrats assume the majority in the House of Representatives during the 116th Congress, Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA 43rd) is poised to become the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. 






Sotto voce, business barons may morsely mutter that it will be like Karl Marx in a dress running the Financial Services Committee but that is the new order in the peoples' chamber.

When Winning Isn't Enough for Ocasio-Cortez

Congresswoman-Elect Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY 14th), a 29 year old Democrat Socialist who hails from The Bronx, New York, won her general election with 78% of the vote.  Yet her initial comments either indicated an unpreparedness for victory or a pose to propagandize her brand.

Due to the demographics of the district, it was virtually fait accompli that Ocasio Cortez would win in November after surprising House Democrat stalwart Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY 14th) by 15% in the June 2018 New York primaries.  Yet after she won, Ocasio Cortez publicly complained that she would not have income for three months, so it would be initially dicey for her to find digs in DC prior to her "inauguration" (sic). 

So an economics major from Boston University from Boston University could not budget enough buffer for a sure thing victory in order to have a place to stay in the District of Calamity prior to pulling her first paycheck  Sure.

Detractors of the rising Democrat Socialist star have derided her as Occasional Cortez, who they believe is not bright nor schooled in the political process.  However, the wording of her "too broke to move" sob story hint that it is contrived political posturing.

Ocasio Cortez comes from the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democrat Party (despite the fact that Sanders actually is no longer a member of the party).  Aside from her chops of being a community organizer, Ocasio Cortez tries to conjure the mien of being considered a working class hero.  What better way to identify with voters who live paycheck to paycheck to play up this wage gap before taking office?

This would not be the first time that Ocasio Cortez has played fast and loose with her bio to identify with the downtrodden.  Ocasio Cortez played up her roots in the Bronx, even after it became evident that she grew up living with her  architect father in well to do Westchester County while commuting to school in the Bronx. 

If Ocasio Cortez truly cannot afford an apartment before she is "viviendo del mamey" (Boricuan slang for living off the state budget, or living the easy life), she could follow the example of outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan, who slept in his office.  Surely the DNC has a room that they can set aside for the newly elected working class leader.  Just make sure that you pay the average daily rate for lodging lest you get hounded and forced to resign like former Trump Energy Secretary Scott Pruitt.  Check that, ethics rules usually only apply for Republicans.

Ocasio Cortez's post election kerfluffle may hint at trouble for Democrats organizing in Washington.  It would seem that Ocasio Cortez is not content to be a back bencher while learning the ropes on Capitol Hill.  

 It seems that there are three contending factions in the Democrat Caucus:  The old school, like presumed Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th) and current Democrat Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD 5th), who are established Democrats who are eager to regain their powerful positions. 

While it is a relatively small faction, there are moderates like Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH 13th), who seem like vestigial Democrats of old who champion patriotic union working class voters.  Their clout may be somewhat bolstered by the fact that many of the newly elected Democrats won because of their moderate credentials.  

Then there are the Young Turks, like Ocasio Cortez, who want the revolution now. Losing Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), labeled them the crazies.  These rabble rousers will not wait their turn for power.  They may chaff at having their leadership being comprised of septuagenarian establishment types who want to protect their positions rather than upturning the system.  

The question is how the (Democrat) Congressional Black Caucus will side in the leadership battle.  On the one hand, the CBC has paid their dues and followed a strategy of rising to ranking member status by hanging onto office forever (save ex Rep. John Conyers, who was chased out of office in late 2017 after fifty years because of sexual harassment allegations).   Congresswoman "Auntie Maxie" Waters (D-CA 43rd) is in line to be the Chair of the Financial Services Committee, so she has strong motivations to line up with the establishment.  But Waters also was a driving force during the Midterms to chant "Impeach 45".   Ms. Pelosi was trying to tamp down those voices during the campaign.  If House Democrats intend to govern, leadership may strive to quash those sentiments, which could cause resentment and a change of alliance.

In the last 115th Congress, the CBC felt slighted in leadership.  House Democrats made up a faux leadership position for Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC 6th) as "Assistant Democrat Leader", but who had  a title but little clout.  It is unclear if that will be enough for the CBC now that they are back at the helm in the House. Fourth term incumbent Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY 8th) is vying  to succeed Joe Crowley for the number four position in the Democrat Caucus as Caucus Chair.  This might split the CBC as Jeffries competitor includes entrenched left coast progressive CBC member  Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA 13th). 

Next week, Democrats will return to the Capitol City and organize their caucus.  Either Ocasio Cortez will have to couch surf or get a cash advance to participate.   

On Re-Evaluating House Leadership

Democrats with a Loco -Motive (sic)?

This loco label looms large in the mind of President Trump, as was echoed in his recent campaign rally in Johnson City, Tennessee. 

Senator Tom Cotton on FBI Background Checks

Mitch McConnell on Good Democrat Smears

Sheldon Whitehouse on Rules

On Trump and the Courts

Cory Booker on American Heartbreak

At the Netroots Nation conference conference in New Orleans, Senator Cory Booker's pensive philosophy intimated how may proceed on his path to the White House in 2020.

Pity that he was not more observant about with whom he was posing for photos.  

Booker claims that he did not know but the poseurs (sic) probably would embrace his critical cri-de-couer theme.