Banging

Because it's better than not banging at Hillary's headquarters.

Saturday, November 18, 2017

Earworm of the Afternoon -- Daisy Jane


Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt

It's hard for me to accuse any women reporting sexual misconduct of exaggerating. I'm a man, and I have no clue what it's like to experience the things women go through every day. However I think I've had my tail stepped on way too many times by Republicans and I have to reluctantly say that I'm not sure I believe all of Leeann Tweeden's story. Frankly, it's almost scary to me to say that.


Earlier today, I tweeted:



Within five minutes, I found my tweet had been included in a Twitter moment entitled "Misogynists on the left attack Tweeden."


If you go through that Moment, curated by @SchenkNethery, who seems to be a totally decent person (and also hails from my former home, Brooklyn!), there really are a number of tweets in there that "slut-shame" Tweeden. But that's not what I was trying to do. Leeann has the right to pose in any magazine, or appear on any show, or express any political opinion that she wants to.


The problem is, that the Republicans just have too much of a record of figuring out ways to turn Democrat against Democrat -- that happened throughout the 2016 election and is still going on today.


There is no doubt that Al Franken, at the very least, did something inappropriate and juvenile that is barely appropriate for a comedian and certainly not appropriate for someone with political ambitions or anyone outside that realm.





He very well may have touched Tweeden there, but he clearly was not touching her in the picture. Presuming she was asleep, it's a pretty dirtbag move. There's talk that they were just rehearsing a skit and that was part of it, but still would be undignified and deserving of an apology from a grown man.


But this is all we have, other than Tweeden's word. And this is her word:


"You knew exactly what you were doing," Tweeden wrote. "You forcibly kissed me without my consent, grabbed my breasts while I was sleeping and had someone take a photo of you doing it, knowing I would see it later, and be ashamed."


If he did, in fact, forcibly kiss her without her consent and actually grab her breasts, then I believe he should resign. I'm just not sure that's the case.


Franken apologized to Tweeden, as he should have:


"I respect women. I don't respect men who don't. And the fact that my own actions have given people a good reason to doubt that makes me feel ashamed.
"But I want to say something else, too. Over the last few months, all of us—including and especially men who respect women—have been forced to take a good, hard look at our own actions and think (perhaps, shamefully, for the first time) about how those actions have affected women.
"For instance, that picture. I don't know what was in my head when I took that picture, and it doesn't matter. There's no excuse. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It isn't funny. It's completely inappropriate. It's obvious how Leeann would feel violated by that picture. And, what's more, I can see how millions of other women would feel violated by it—women who have had similar experiences in their own lives, women who fear having those experiences, women who look up to me, women who have counted on me.
"Coming from the world of comedy, I've told and written a lot of jokes that I once thought were funny but later came to realize were just plain offensive. But the intentions behind my actions aren't the point at all. It's the impact these jokes had on others that matters. And I'm sorry it's taken me so long to come to terms with that.
"While I don't remember the rehearsal for the skit as Leeann does, I understand why we need to listen to and believe women's experiences.
"I am asking that an ethics investigation be undertaken, and I will gladly cooperate.
"And the truth is, what people think of me in light of this is far less important than what people think of women who continue to come forward to tell their stories. They deserve to be heard, and believed. And they deserve to know that I am their ally and supporter. I have let them down and am committed to making it up to them."




A few points here. One, that's the way to apologize.


Two, he's right. Many jokes that used to be funny are just plain offensive. I thought Modern Family was so progressive a decade ago, and now it makes me cringe.


Three, he never said he did anything but take the picture.


Four, he called for an ethics investigation against himself! At a time where the Republicans control the Senate. Either he doesn't believe they'll do it, or he doesn't think they'll find that he did what Tweeden said.


There are also a few ways in which this is suspicious:


First, the easy one. Roger Stone knew ahead of time that this announcement was coming. We all know what happened last time he displayed his magical clairvoyance. Roger Stone is one of the pioneers of "ratfucking" (political sabotage that often involves trying to make someone look guilty, and commonly to cause infighting) and has never stopped engaging in such behavior since the Nixon administration.


Second, as I mentioned above, is that the picture does not exactly display what Franken is being accused of doing.


The third is the sequence of events since Franken's apology. Tweeden accepted it right away. In a vacuum, that seems slightly weird, but OK, maybe she's a forgiving person. But then consider the context (outside of #MeToo, which is a very welcome development). Roy Moore is looking to stay in the Alabama Senate race despite the fact that he can barely even deny that he's a pedophile. He's been let go by the Senate fundraising arm of the GOP. The Alabama GOP is still sticking with him, and look at their argument:


On Wednesday evening, the Alabama Republican Party Steering Committee, comprised of 21 members, met to discuss the events and circumstances regarding the December 12 U.S. Senate race.
The ALGOP Steering Committee supports Judge Roy Moore as our nominee and trusts the voters as they make the ultimate decision in this crucial race.


Let the voters decide.


After "accepting" Franken's apology, Tweeden said:


When asked if Franken should step down, Tweeden says: "That's not my call. I didn't do this to have him step down ... I think that's for the people of Minnesota to decide."
The two statements were within 18 hours of each other. Can't be a coincidence. Franken isn't up for reelection until 2020, so the voters of Minnesota can't decide for quite a while. But Moore is up in less than a month. And the Republicans REALLY need to hold that seat. This seems like "whataboutism" at its finest, and the GOP is probably trying to muddy the waters.


This is why Steve M. believes Franken should resign -- so the Republicans can't use him for false equivalence. It's hard to disagree with him, but I think Franken should hang in there.




Keep in mind, the Republicans have a history of using women in this way:





Should we give into that?

Friday, November 10, 2017

Late Night Track -- Silvergun Superman

The Pee Pee Tape Is Real






As you've probably read, Keith Schiller, Trump's former personal bodyguard, testified that a Russian did, in fact, offer Trump five Russian women at the hotel that the dossier indicated, on the day that the dossier said the "pee pee tape" was recorded, but that Trump turned him down and went to bed, and Schiller went to bed too and didn't see anything.


What are the odds of such a wholly unlikely story having one of its deniers confirm that 95 percent of it is true and then not have the end be true? This sort of trail doesn't stop at the water's (or urine's) edge. I went from 80 percent believing in the pee pee tape to sure today.


Simple logic, kids.

Tuesday, November 7, 2017

Earworm of the Afternoon -- Can't Stop the Sun


Orwell Rolls Over in His Grave





TPM highlights two examples of Republican punch-me-face smugness today.


Paul Ryan on the San Antonio shooting:


When asked about the backlash on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” show, Ryan said the criticism was “disappointing” and said “people who do not have faith don’t understand faith,” and claiming the “secular left” is responsible for some of the “disunity” in the U.S.
“It is the right thing to do in moments like this because, you know what? Prayer works,” he said. “And I know you believe that and I believe that and when you hear the secular left doing this think, no wonder you have so much polarization and disunity in this country when people think like that.”


No, FUCK YOU. You don't get to tell us prayer stops shootings when you're talking about 25+ people killed IN A FUCKING CHURCH! Were the victims members of the "secular left?" Did they get shot because they were praying incorrectly? It should be criminal to be that much of an asshole.


On to someone I haven't heard of before -- Seema Verma, Trump's Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. And of course, being selected by Trump, she's a dickbag. She unveiled a plan to "overhaul" Medicaid, which will result in fewer people getting covered, and makes it sound like a good thing:


In a statement distributed to reporters Tuesday morning, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Seema Verma called the goal of covering more people a “hollow victory of numbers,”
"A hollow victory of numbers?" I am just at a loss for words over this one. All I have is a burning sensation in my face.


and instead called for changes that “reduce federal regulatory burdens, increase efficiency, and promote transparency and accountability.”

None of those terms are ever good coming from the mouth of a Republican, and of course it's all horseshit:


The announcement also promises to fast-track approval of states’ proposed Medicaid changes (which HHS grants in the form of waivers from existing Medicaid requirements) and to scrap some of the requirements that states report back to the federal government whether the changes improve health outcomes for recipients.


As usual, "reducing federal regulatory burdens" leads to LESS transparency and accountability -- this EXPLICITY reduces transparency and accountability.


One of the biggest changes Verma signaled Tuesday was a rule change allowing states to impose work requirements on their Medicaid recipients and kick people out of the program who cannot find gainful employment.
“Every American deserves the dignity and respect of high expectations and as public officials we should deliver programs that instill hope and say to each beneficiary that we believe in their potential,” Verma said. “CMS believes that meaningful work is essential to beneficiaries’ economic self-sufficiency, self-esteem, well-being, and health of Americans.” 


So taking people's healthcare from them because they can't find a job, often because they're too sick to work is giving them "the dignity and respect of high expectations." That's based off of a Michael Gerson original, and it's a doozy.


A 2017 study by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that only 27 percent of Medicaid recipients are adults without disabilities, and 60 percent of that group are already working. Most of those not employed are either caring for a family member full-time, have a criminal record, live in an area without job opportunities, or face other “major impediments” to employment. 


Yup. So 73 percent of the people they're fucking over are people who can't possibly work.
“I’m not sure how denying coverage for people based on their inability to find work really meets the objective of providing health insurance to low-income individuals,” said Jessica Schubel, a senior advisor for CMS during the Obama administration.

Liberals, always having low expectations for people...

Sunday, November 5, 2017

Late Night Track -- Chile




It's hard to tell the right from the wrong
When the right is protecting the wrong...

The Last Thing I'll Ever Ask For...


Can Mueller make Trump shut the fuck up?


Not only is Trump acting unethically, his behavior could result in action from special counsel Robert Mueller.
Former Watergate prosecutor Nick Akerman warned that the president had defamed a potential government witness — his former campaign official George Papadopoulos, who pleaded guilty to lying to federal agents about communications between the Trump campaign and Russia.
“This could be grounds for Mueller to obtain a gag order on Trump,” Akerman said. “It would be unprecedented, but he is interfering with the government’s right to a fair trial.”
A gag order would prohibit Trump from speaking publically about parts of, or possibly the entirety of, Mueller’s investigations, depending on the scope of the order.


 




 

Open Thread -- Welcome

We've had more traffic in the last three days than any entire week in the last year. So, if you're new, feel free to say hi in the comments.

Also, I'm traveling all day, so let me know if I'm missing any big news...


Weekend Long Read -- The Paradise Papers



The Guardian's Jon Swaine and Luke Harding report on MORE Russian-Kushner ties, along with Russian investments in Facebook and Twitter:

Two Russian state institutions with close ties to Vladimir Putin funded substantial investments in Twitter and Facebook through a business associate of Jared Kushner, leaked documents reveal.

The investments were made through a Russian technology magnate, Yuri Milner, who also holds a stake in a company co-owned by Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior White House adviser.

The discovery is likely to stir concerns over Russian influence in US politics and the role played by social media in last year’s presidential election. It may also raise new questions for the social media companies and for Kushner.

Read the whole thing. Also make sure you read the backgrounder on the whole trove of Paradise Papers. Wilbur Ross is implicated in them too:

Donald Trump’s commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, is doing business with Vladimir Putin’s son-in-law through a shipping venture in Russia.

Leaked documents and public filings show that Ross holds a stake in a shipping company, Navigator, through a chain of offshore investments. Navigator operates a lucrative partnership with Sibur, a Russian gas company part-owned by Kirill Shamalov, the husband of Putin’s daughter Katerina Tikhonova.

Ross, a billionaire and close friend of Trump, retained holdings in Navigator even after taking office this year. The relationship means that he stands to benefit from the operations of a Russian company run by Putin’s family and close allies, some of whom are under US sanctions.

Make an afternoon of it. It's worth it.

Earworm of the Afternoon -- The Battle of Evermore


The Professional Left Podcast, Episode 413 -- Memo to the Next Democratic President





Spoiler -- the message is to tell the mainstream press to go fuck themselves!


Listen to the podcast here.

Is Flynn Next?





According to NBC News, he is:


Federal investigators have gathered enough evidence to bring charges in their investigation of President Donald Trump's former national security adviser and his son as part of the probe into Russia's intervention in the 2016 election, according to multiple sources familiar with the investigation.
Michael T. Flynn, who was fired after just 24 days on the job, was one of the first Trump associates to come under scrutiny in the federal probe now led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller into possible collusion between Moscow and the Trump campaign.

If the story is true, the only way he's getting out of this is if he flips on someone bigger:
Mueller is applying renewed pressure on Flynn following his indictment of Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, three sources familiar with the investigation told NBC News.


It doesn't get much bigger than a recent Cabinet member... and Mueller getting pretty much anyone I could think of that's higher on the food chain would make me awfully happy.


Jared Kushner was basically shadowing Flynn for a while. He's my best guess.

UPDATE (11/5/17, 12:28 ET): Seth Abramson thinks Mueller's thinking bigger than that:

Sunday Morning Twitshit


Not much to report from Japan:








No fun today...

I Think I'm Paranoid

Soundtrack for this post...





Victoria Brownworth flagged a tweet by an organization called "Northeast Democrats" this morning.




The organization's timeline appears to make it look like a mainstream (read: non-Bernie) group. So there's a Hillary-supporting Twitter feed spouting some seriously awful stuff.


Victoria calls them out for the racism and misogyny, but also for being counterproductive.


It felt more like sabotage to me, so I decided to look a bit deeper, particularly in light of this story:


According to information released by House Democrats earlier this week, Abrams was one of more than 2,750 fake Twitter accounts created by employees at the Internet Research Agency, a “troll farm” funded by the Russian government based in St. Petersburg. In addition to the Abrams account, several other popular conservative social media personalities — @LauraBaeley, SouthLoneStar, Ten_GOP — were all revealed to be troll accounts. All have been deactivated on Twitter.


I'm sure the number is much higher, but the point here to me is that the mainstream press is now writing stories the give background into some of who these fake accounts were supposed to be.


According to the Daily Beast, the agency developed a following around the Abrams account by offering humorous, seemingly non-political takes on pop culture figures like Kim Kardashian. The agency also furnished the fake account, which dates back to 2014, with a personal website, a Gmail account and even a GoFundMe page.
Once the Abrams account began to develop a following, the tone of its tweets shifted from pokes and prods at celebrities to divisive views on hot topics like immigration and segregation.


I started writing this piece looking to see if the Russians were involved in that Twitter account or in the creation of that meme. (SPOILER: They weren't; the truth is both way more interesting and way less interesting that that. Bear with me here.)
I began with the Twitter account that posted this, @Jon4Vermont. Its username is "New England Democrats," but "Jon4Vermont" refers to a guy who briefly launched a 2018 Senate campaign against Bernie Sanders. The account was opened in July, right when I find the first evidence of him running:


The man who wants to take Bernie Sanders' seat in the U.S. Senate has been at odds with Sanders for more than three decades — from 1980s homeless shelters to last year's presidential campaign.
Jon Svitavsky was a supporter of Hillary Clinton's presidential bid who feels it is his duty to run for office.
"Sanders can't continue to split the party," said Svitavsky, 59, of Bridport. "I don't understand why he's been coddled for so long."
Svitavsky is seeking the Democratic Party nomination for the six-year term in the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Sanders. In interviews and social media posts, he has slammed Vermont's junior senator as a "control freak," an "arrogant egomaniac," and an inspiring speaker who has failed to pass legislation.
"I see him as a straw man in the sense there’s all rhetoric and there’s nothing behind it," Svitavsky said.
Svitavsky, a longtime political activist who has never held elected office, launched his campaign through Facebook and Twitter. He has not yet filed candidate paperwork with the Federal Election Commission.


So, OK, fringe candidate. But why was he really running against Sanders? Click through to the story for the specifics, but he had a beef with Sanders because he Svitavsky ran a homeless shelter that didn't allow drinkers and Sanders, as mayor of Burlington, funded the opening of a competing shelter that didn't believe that leaving people homeless because of addiction issues was OK. He then left in the mid-90s and tried and failed to open another shelter in 2015. So he had an axe to grind. Maybe Bernie wasn't fair to him; it's not clear. But I'm going to give Bernie the benefit of the doubt here because, well, Svitavsky has a history of being a racist:


Svitavsky is also active on his personal Facebook page, where in 2015 he called Republican presidential candidates Jeb Bush a "psychopath" and Ben Carson an "Oreo Bozo," using a derogatory term for an African-American perceived to be acting like a white person. When asked about the post, Svitavsky said he had also used the term to describe former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice but did not consider the term to be racial. Svitavsky said he would probably choose different words today.

So, that's a pattern. But whatever, not where this is going... I'll get to that soon.


Before Svitavsky opened his campaign Twitter account, he had another, @jonsvit. He started it in 2011 and only posted 17 times. Three were in October 2011:






So, he sounded like the kind of guy who would actually SUPPORT Bernie.


He tweeted twice to raise money for the shelter in 2015, and then three times against Bernie in 2017, ending with this one as his campaign was launching:


His first few tweets on his campaign account were in early July, and were retweets of the Vermont Democratic Party, like this one:


He then retweeted a Barack Obama tweet from a few weeks earlier:


His next ten tweets were retweets about Burlington-area politics and commerce, like this one:
Then this one about his campaign launch:
His tweets for the rest of July were mostly anti-Sanders retweets, like this one:


The whole time, he never actually wrote a tweet. But once again, whatever.

NOW the interesting part begins. One more anti-Bernie retweet on August 1st:

... and then on the same day:



The next three tweets were of this article from the Burlington Free Press (a local version of USA Today) with the following insults against Svitavsky: "OFD dropped this fool! Svitavsky backs Michelle Bachman, believes vaccines 'very likely a contributor' to autism," "OFD Dropped this fool! 'I also hate the intolerance, at times of the gay rights movement'. - Jon Svitavsky," and "'Svitavsky's past encounters with law enforcement are also receiving scrutiny'."


According to the Free Press article, those things are true:
Svitavsky also has posted online about vaccines, which he believes are "very likely a contributor" to autism, contrary to statements from the Centers from Disease Control and Prevention that studies have shown no link between vaccines and autism.
"I'm not anti-vaccine at all, but I think that it's wise to check what the preservative is in your vaccine," Svitavsky said, citing research done by his wife.
In 2015, Svitavsky defended the conservative evangelical leader Franklin Graham against what Svitavsky called the "in your face" gay rights movement.
Svitavsky said Wednesday that he opposes Graham but finds the gay rights movement "very, very intolerant."
In another post in 2011, Svitavsky suggested that Satan was the leader of the Republican Party. Svitavsky, who is a Christian, said he stands by the statement.
"The truth is being twisted at great harm to the name of Christ and Christianity," Svitavsky said.
Svitavsky's past encounters with law enforcement are also receiving scrutiny. Svitavsky had a number of interactions with the Bristol Police Department in 2014 and early 2015, according to records provided by Chief Kevin Gibbs.
"He seemed to have an ongoing issue with keeping his license valid and would drive," Gibbs said. Svitavsky was ticketed for driving with his license suspended, for driving without registration, and for driving without liability insurance, according to police records. The records were first reported Wednesday by Seven Days.


If Jon was gone, who was running his account? The next tweet, on August 2nd, gives us an idea:



What is OFD? Per the Free Press article, it's the organization that recruited Svitavsky into the race:


Svitavsky said he was asked to run for the Senate seat after being contacted by a group called Organizing for Democrats, led by a North Carolina man named David Moore who noticed Svitavsky's posts on Facebook.
The group continues to advise Svitavsky and runs his campaign Twitter account, which posts frequent criticism of Sanders.
"No-Show Bernard Sanders supporters have killed or injured 8 people in June," an apparent reference to the former Sanders campaign volunteer suspected of shooting a Republican member of Congress and four others.
Another post claims that Svitavsky's interim campaign manager is the "Architect of the 2016 Southern Firewall," a reference to Clinton's presidential campaign strategy. The person running the account did not respond to a Twitter post asking for an interview.



OFD also created that Warren Pocahontas meme that was posted by @Jon4Vermont.


In the August 3rd tweet, Tracie Flowers, who claims to be OFD's "Comms Director," includes a Facebook post that she had written on the same day. In that post, she accused Svitavsky of being a secret Trump supporter, and then of being a secret Bernie supporter. That post has now been deleted from Facebook. Tracie has a Facebook profile that is still live, but she has not posted since August 3rd. This was her second to last post, which was probably an allusion to the ending of their relationship with Svitavsky:








It appears that OFD is, in fact, continuing to run Svitavsky's Twitter feed, and they're vicious:




As I've been writing this, they also doubled down on their racist and misogynistic attacks on Elizabeth Warren:


It's either David Moore or Tracie Flowers, or both, who is keeping Svitavsky's feed going. But why? The feed is a mix of anodyne Hillary support (a lot of retweets of pro-Hillary Twitter stars like Peter Daou and Sally Albright). Their Facebook page is pretty much the same stuff, including the Pocahontas references.


Flowers has a history of invective against Bernie -- this is back in January 2016, even before the Democratic primaries got bitter:



She posted that in response to Bernie coming to visit her Congressional district in North Carolina. And her anti-Bernie posts go way back into the summer of 2015.

But she's probably not behind the Elizabeth Warren post that kicked this all off:





Anyway....
According to an independent Vermont newspaper, Svitavsky is still in the race. Svitavsky says David Moore, a North Carolina man who claimed to represent a group called "Organizing for Democrats," approached him about managing the campaign. "He did do a hell of a job of attracting national attention for my campaign," Svitavsky says. "He arranged a lot of interviews. But I think he was playing me." During a face-to-face meeting about two weeks ago, according to Svitavsky, Moore laid out a plan for a "dirty campaign." The Twitter account, presumably authored by Moore, bears that out; it refers to Sanders as a "commie," a fraudster, even a pedophile. "I told him, 'I'm Andy Griffith. I want to run a clean campaign," Svitavsky says. The last straw came when Moore sent a contract for his services. "He wanted complete control over me and my campaign," Svitavsky claims. He refused to sign. That's when Moore apparently terminated the Twitter account. 


Svitavsky said he fired Moore because he was in favor of posting crazy stuff on social media, but Moore said he stopped working with Svitavsky because HE was already posting crazy stuff on social media:


Moore said Svitavsky refused to delete a "wide range of problematic social media posts."
"His social media presence is probably worse than Donald Trump's," Moore said. "He wouldn’t take advice."
Anyway, who is Moore? Not much of anyone. Really all there is of substance about him online is a comment on this post, written in 2015. He called himself "Chair, North Carolina; Organizing For Democrats – Hillary Clinton 2016."


At the end of the day, the story is about the nature of the internet in our political system today. A random racist dude in North Carolina manufactured some level of self-importance and somehow got a random racist dude in Vermont to challenge the 2016 Democratic Presidential runner-up for his Senate seat, with the help of a random woman with a made-up job.


So, it appears this time it wasn't the Russians, and was in fact some dude on a computer in a basement. And 2017 has seriously driven me nuts.

Saturday, November 4, 2017

Late Night Track -- Lines on My Face


Open Thread -- The Last Words on Donna Brazile (UPDATE: Now with #DonnaBrazileBookExcerpts!)



Meet Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, the new "second" worst former DNC Chair.


I'm giving them to #TheResistance Twitter, because I'm just done. I mean, until she signs on with a 2020 candidate (whom I, by default, will then not support), this is the last time I type the words "Donna Brazile" in a post. Feel free to leave some of your best finds or snark in the comments.














Yup. That's that. *Goes off to find the bleach to wash my eyeballs*

Update: The #DonnaBrazileBookExcerpt hashtag might be Peak Internet:











OK, That's Enough, Donna





Just... what the fuck? The Washington Post drops more excerpts from Donna Brazile's book, and I have to wonder who greenlit this book, because I think even a fiction publisher would've thrown this manuscript in the circular file.


Former Democratic National Committee head Donna Brazile writes in a new book that she seriously contemplated replacing Hillary Clinton as the party’s 2016 presidential nominee with then-Vice President Biden in the aftermath of Clinton’s fainting spell, in part because Clinton’s campaign was “anemic” and had taken on “the odor of failure.”
In an explosive new memoir, Brazile details widespread dysfunction and dissension throughout the Democratic Party, including secret deliberations over using her powers as interim DNC chair to initiate the removal of Clinton and running mate Sen. Tim Kaine (Va.) from the ticket after Clinton’s Sept. 11, 2016, collapse in New York City.


Huh? On September 10th, WaPo said that Hillary's lead was dropping, but she was still up 5 points among likely voters and 10 among registered voters. 5 points would've been a really nice win. If you're up 5, you don't expect to lose.


What was her "solution?"


Brazile writes that she considered a dozen combinations to replace the nominees and settled on Biden and Sen. Cory Booker (N.J.), the duo she felt most certain would win over enough working-class voters to defeat Republican Donald Trump.


Cory Booker? To win working-class (read: "white") voters? Forgetting for a moment that he's African-American; he has a reputation (earned or unearned, that's not the purpose here) of being one of Wall Street's favorite Democrats. That's how she'd appeal to the working class? Then again, it was a campaign she ran that nominated JOE FUCKING LIEBERMAN onto the 2000 ticket.


 But then, she writes, “I thought of Hillary, and all the women in the country who were so proud of and excited about her. I could not do this to them.”


She's clearly so noble...


Brazile paints a scathing portrait of Clinton as a well-intentioned, historic candidate whose campaign was badly mismanaged, took minority constituencies for granted and made blunders with “stiff” and “stupid” messages. The campaign was so lacking in passion for the candidate, she writes, that its New York headquarters felt like a sterile hospital ward where “someone had died.”


Oh, go fuck yourself, Donna. Were you ever actually in those headquarters? I spent weeks there volunteering; there was so much enthusiasm there that the last few days and nights we had volunteers filling up an extra overflow room and several hallways. And all the pizza! And we were filling up busses every weekend to canvas out of town. But of course, I was just a volunteer. However, another thing I volunteered to do was stick around after the election for a couple of weeks and spend my days cleaning up the offices of the paid staff. It had all been put together really professionally, and it looked like they'd had a lot of fun -- group pictures everywhere, hundreds of bottles of liquor and wine, signs, maps, computer networks, posters, buttons -- all the things you'd expect in a campaign where people were both enjoying themselves and working their asses off.


Brazile alleges that Clinton’s top aides routinely disrespected her and put the DNC on a “starvation diet,” depriving it of funding for voter turnout operations.


SHE FUCKING SAVED THE DNC! The whole reason she signed the joint agreement was because the DNC was going broke! She didn't deprive it of money, she replenished its coffers.


As one of her party’s most prominent black strategists, Brazile also recounts fiery disagreements with Clinton’s staffers — including a conference call in which she told three senior campaign officials, Charlie Baker, Marlon Marshall and Dennis Cheng, that she was being treated like a slave.
“I’m not Patsey the slave,” Brazile recalls telling them, a reference to the character played by Lupita Nyong’o in the film, “12 Years a Slave.” “Y’all keep whipping me and whipping me and you never give me any money or any way to do my damn job. I am not going to be your whipping girl!” 


OK. Who's playing her in the movie that Mark Halperin is currently writing as his big comeback after 30 days in the penalty box?


Brazile’s book, titled “Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House,” will be released Tuesday by Hachette Books. 


How appropriate, given that she's one of the biggest Democratic hacks I've ever encountered; that's not revisionist. I always grouped her in my mind with the losers -- the Bob Shrums, Juan Williamses, Alan Colmeses... As I wrote Friday night:


She's since held a number of different positions in the party, but also was one of the first Democratic talking heads I became familiar with when I began watching cable news in the early 2000s. She was never very strong on TV, and as I started to identify with the Democratic Party more and more, I always cringed to see her represent the Democratic point of view.


Back to WaPo:


Brazile writes that she was haunted by the still-unsolved murder of DNC data staffer Seth Rich and feared for her own life, shutting the blinds to her office window so snipers could not see her and installing surveillance cameras at her home. She wonders whether Russians had placed a listening device in plants in the DNC executive suite. 


*Blinks about twenty times*. SETH RICH? That's quite the tell. Only Fox News thought that his death had anything to do with his political work.


That fall, Brazile says she tried to persuade her Republican counterparts to agree to a joint statement condemning Russian interference but that they ignored her messages and calls.


Obama and other members of the Democratic leadership did too, and got the same response. This isn't news.


I have something else in the works that's more interesting than this, and I'm sure many better writers will dissect her whining about where she was sat at a debate and whether she got a call from Hillary after the campaign (which she clearly didn't deserve at all if this was how she behaved), so I'm going to just leave you with one more quote:


Brazile writes with particular disdain about Brandon Davis, a Mook protege who worked as a liaison between the DNC and the Clinton campaign. She describes him as a spy, saying he treated her like “a crazy, senile old auntie and couldn’t wait to tell all his friends the nutty things she said.”


Robby Mook didn't need a spy to get those nutty things; she's apparently compiled them all in one handy book!

Earworm of the Afternoon -- Army Reserve


Saturday Morning Twitshit



Quiet morning today... does that means something's in the works or nothing's in the works?

Some of the usual praising himself...

I don't even understand this one. And likely, neither does he.

*Shrug*

Late Night Track -- Doll Parts




I wanna be the girl with the most cake...

Friday, November 3, 2017

Donna Brazile Backs Down





So, now that she's in a corner, Donna Brazile corrects the record and admits the Democratic primaries weren't fixed:



She had to do it, because it was proven that she was wrong:


The Democratic National Committee struck a deal with Hillary Clinton in 2015 that gave her campaign input on some party hiring and spending decisions, but required they be related only to preparations for the general election, according to a memo obtained by NBC News. It also left the door open for other candidates to make similar arrangements.


 But this is in her book!


I had promised Bernie when I took the helm of the Democratic National Committee after the convention that I would get to the bottom of whether Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process, as a cache of emails stolen by Russian hackers and posted online had suggested. I’d had my suspicions from the moment I walked in the door of the DNC a month or so earlier, based on the leaked emails. But who knew if some of them might have been forged? I needed to have solid proof, and so did Bernie.


If she really means it, then she'll have the book edited, and she'll actually apologize. Will she? Remains to be seen.



Earworm of the Afternoon -- Horse with No Name

I'm a huge America fan (I saw them twice last year)... I love this cover.



Also, season 4 of Bojack was incredible. I need more!

Friday Morning Twitshit





Doesn't matter if it's true or not, Donald Duck L'Orange is taking advantage of Donna Brazile's idiocy/duplicity. Because of course he is.

















Brazile lies, Trump lies. Trump tweeted a few more times about other things, but I'm too pissed off at Brazile to care.

I'll let Josh have the last word.


If Brazile wants to make these accusations she needs to provide the documents she’s referring to and something concrete about actions the DNC took to rig the primaries against Sanders. The fact that Wasserman-Schultz was a bad chair, the fact that the DNC was poorly run, that not enough money went to state parties – all true. But none of that is what made Brazile’s claims a bombshell. All of that was known. If she can’t back these claims up she owes every Democrat a huge apology. And I have to say that applies to Elizabeth Warren too who jumped on the bandwagon.

Fuck Donna Brazile



By now, you've likely heard that former interim chair of the DNC Donna Brazile is accusing the Clinton campaign of rigging the 2016 primaries against Bernie Sanders.


This is an insane accusation for reasons I'll let others explain below, but I have never been impressed with Brazile. She ran Al Gore's 2000 campaign, which chose Joe-friggin'-Lieberman as a VP candidate and which ran away from Bill Clinton, who had a 60%+ approval rating. She's since held a number of different positions in the party, but also was one of the first Democratic talking heads I became familiar with when I began watching cable news in the early 2000s. She was never very strong on TV, and as I started to identify with the Democratic Party more and more, I always cringed to see her represent the Democratic point of view. I am a huge Debbie Wasserman-Schultz hater, but didn't think that Brazile was much of an upgrade when Wasserman-Schultz had to resign last year.


So, I'm establishing here that I'm not a fan of hers. At all. And now she's gone from being disappointing to me to being infuriating. Perhaps the reason she's lost pretty much every election she's been involved with is that she doesn't understand how American politics works. The Clinton campaign has done nothing wrong here (though Politico's headline writer -- "Inside Hillary Clinton’s Secret Takeover of the DNC" -- thinks otherwise). On Twitter, journalist Victoria Brownworth has been addressing this all day:



It's worth reading through her entire timeline for today.

Some other important takes...

Kara Calavera:


Robert #Resist Sandy:



GirlPowerDon'tQuit:



Peter Daou:



There's really nothing to this, but I'm worried about it. I went through 2016 thinking that America was too smart to be fooled by idiocy like Russia, e-mails, etc... but I was wrong. But what matters is how the media covers this and how it spreads on social media (Putin must be loving this). They've so far not been falling for the Uranium One crap, but "Democrats in disarray" might be too juicy for them to ignore.

On the other hand, I saw Don Lemon half-dismiss this tonight as "good for book sales," so I guess we'll see. I really don't know why else Brazile would pull shit like this. But shit she is pulling, indeed.

And she's just feeding the fascist in the White House:

So, yeah, fuck you, Donna Brazile.

Tuesday, October 31, 2017

Regional Media





I found this tidbit in TPM's article about Trump's "not all media" comment a bit disturbing:


Cabinet officials will be “focusing on the regional media, which we find to be a much more credible media to be honest with you. In fact, I found it to be incredible how good they are,” he said.


Could this be a nod to Sinclair Broadcasting Group's takeover of local media stations?


If you haven't heard of it yet, Sinclair Broadcast Group is a media company that owns hundreds of local TV stations across the United States. By some estimates, it's able to reach 70 percent of American households. While there's nothing inherently wrong with owning hundreds of local stations, things do get morally questionable when it comes to how Sinclair approaches editorial control. Ideally, the news department of a TV station, be it local or one of the big national cable channels, would have editorial freedom from the channel's ownership. This is obviously not always the case (see News, Fox), but it's the goal. This freedom allows journalists to follow stories without fear that they might run afoul of a rich boss's financial interest or personal political grudges or what have you.
That is decidedly not what's happening at Sinclair broadcasting. In fact, just the opposite. Sinclair is taking newscasts that previously dealt in local news and politics and is now forcing heavily partisan, conservative opinions on national issues down every single station's throat.


I think the answer is yes. From Politico last December:


Donald Trump's campaign struck a deal with Sinclair Broadcast Group during the campaign to try and secure better media coverage, his son-in-law Jared Kushner told business executives Friday in Manhattan.
Kushner said the agreement with Sinclair, which owns television stations across the country in many swing states and often packages news for their affiliates to run, gave them more access to Trump and the campaign, according to six people who heard his remarks.
In exchange, Sinclair would broadcast their Trump interviews across the country without commentary, Kushner said. Kushner highlighted that Sinclair, in states like Ohio, reaches a much wider audience — around 250,000 listeners — than networks like CNN, which reach somewhere around 30,000.


 And Trump's FCC has been helping this along:


Sinclair Broadcast Group is expanding its conservative-leaning television empire into nearly three-quarters of American households — but its aggressive takeover of the airwaves wouldn’t have been possible without help from President Donald Trump's chief at the Federal Communications Commission.
Sinclair, already the nation’s largest TV broadcaster, plans to buy 42 stations from Tribune Media in cities such as New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, on top of the more than 170 stations it already owns. It got a critical assist this spring from Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who revived a decades-old regulatory loophole that will keep Sinclair from vastly exceeding federal limits on media ownership.
The change will allow Sinclair — a company known for injecting "must run" conservative segments into its local programming — to reach 72 percent of U.S. households after buying Tribune’s stations. That’s nearly double the congressionally imposed nationwide audience cap of 39 percent. 


Yesterday, I noticed a sudden shift on CNN from a largely tepid "Did they do it?" with regards to #TrumpRussia to, "They did it, now what?" I think Trump was fed the line about regional media, and we need to be on the lookout for a stepped-up propaganda battle on local news now that Trump finally appears to be almost entirely losing the trust of mainstream media outlets.

Earworm of the Afternoon -- Do You Feel Like We Do


Tuesday Morning Twitshit





Yeah, he has proven to have lied to the FBI. Which is why he had to flip and likely tape a whole bunch of juicy conversations that will help lead to your downfall.




Deflection and projection in 140 characters. Well done.



Wow, he truly does have the best words... "in a dither" is a new one to me;  but apparently it's a real expression. He knows words!








1. Is this a coherent statement? I don't know what it means. 2. Bob Mueller's the one making the indictments -- that has nothing to do with the news.