SPP Vol.704 & Old Time Froggy Botttom Cafe

Hello again painting fans.

This week I will be continuing with the painting of the eastern shore Virginia farmhouse. The photo that I’m using is seen directly below. I’ll be using my usual acrylic paints on a 5×7 inch canvas.

When last seen the painting appeared as it does in the photo seen directly below.

Since that time I have continued to work on the painting.

I have moved on to the siding which now appears in blue.  Below the porch roof I have started to paint the shadowed are.  Finally, the shed roof (far left rear) and lawn have been repainted.

 
The current state of the painting is seen in the photo directly below.

I’ll have more progress to show you next week. See you then.

Earlier paintings in this series can be seen here.

We Hired a Crook to Solve His Own Crime

The Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey was built with the labor of undocumented workers. As the Washington Post reports, undocumented workers have been consistently employed there over the years, including a large number from the Costa Rican village of Santa Teresa de Cajon.

Soon after Trump broke ground at Bedminster in 2002 with a golden shovel, this village emerged as a wellspring of low-paid labor for the private club, which charges tens of thousands of dollars to join. Over the years, dozens of workers from Costa Rica went north to fill jobs as groundskeepers, housekeepers and dishwashers at Bedminster, former employees said. The club hired others from El Salvador, Mexico and Guatemala who spoke to The Post. Many ended up in the blue-collar borough of Bound Brook, N.J., piling into vans before dawn to head to the course each morning.

Imagine if someone ran for president arguing that the number one priority for the country was to combat the influx of drugs entering the country through the Mexican border. Imagine if they argued that the problem was so severe that we needed to surrender some of our constitutional rights in support of the effort to fix the problem. Imagine that this candidate succeeded in getting elected on this platform.

Finally, imagine that it soon emerged that they were actually one of the larger customers for Mexican drugs and that they had a vast criminal enterprise dedicated to putting those drugs up our kid’s noses and into their veins.

That is very close to what we’re dealing with here. Trump ran a more general campaign against Latin American immigration, so the drug problem was only a subset of his pitch. He was also complaining about other kinds of crime, especially of the violent variety. But a main concern of his was that illegal immigration drives down wages and costs Americans opportunities for employment. Yet, he was a large American employer who was emptying villages of people eager to cross our border and work for his hotels and resorts.

Over the years, the network from Costa Rica to Bedminster expanded as workers recruited friends and relatives, some flying to the United States on tourist visas and others paying smugglers thousands of dollars to help them cross the U.S.-Mexico border, former employees said. New hires needed little more than a crudely printed phony green card and a fake Social Security number to land a job, they said.

Some workers described Bedminster as their launchpad to buy homes and start businesses. Others remembered it as grueling labor under bosses who were demanding, even bigoted — and who at times used the workers’ illegal status against them…

…“For me, moving to the U.S. wasn’t a very drastic change,” said Mauricio Garro, 36, who worked in maintenance at the golf course for five years until he returned to Santa Teresa in 2010. “My whole town practically lived there.”

Anyone who is angry about undocumented people taking American jobs and still takes anything Trump has to say about the issue seriously is no different from someone who would support a anti-drug candidate even after learning that they were one of El Chapo’s biggest American distributors.

Anyone can be the victim of a con, but when the con is exposed you are supposed to take some kind of defensive action to prevent being conned again.  Too many of our citizens seem incapable of learning from their mistakes. It’s becoming a rather pathetic spectacle.

AOC Lays Down the Law…The REAL "Law."

I am grateful to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the people who helped to get her elected and…most of all…the benevolent universe for giving her the brains, courage and platform to say the things that she is saying.

Read on.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “lightning round” on money in politics goes viral

AOC points out it’s “super legal” for her to be a “pretty bad guy.”

US campaign finance laws are, well, less than ideal — or, as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez put it in a House committee hearing this week, they make it “super legal” for lawmakers to be a “pretty bad guy.”

A viral video of Ocasio-Cortez during a hearing held by the House Oversight and Reform Committee on strengthening ethics rules for the executive branch swept across the internet this week. The video, put together by NowThis News, shows the high-profile New York Congress member playing a “lightning round” game with witnesses. The purpose: to highlight how it’s legal for congressional candidates to do a lot of shady stuff. And they’re held to a higher standard than the president.

“I’m going to be the bad guy, which, I’m sure, half the room would agree with anyway, and I want to get away with as much bad things as possible, ideally to enrich myself and advance my interests, even if that means putting my interests ahead of the American people,” Ocasio-Cortez said during the Wednesday hearing. “I have enlisted all of as my co-conspirators, so you’re going to help me legally get away with all of this.”

She then asked a litany of questions. Can she run a campaign entirely funded by corporate political action committees? Yes. Can she use that money to make hush payments and pay people off to get elected? Yes. Once in office, can she influence and write laws that might affect the groups from which she’s taken special interest money? Yes. And can she hold stocks in companies the legislation she’s writing might boost? Yes.

Walter Shaub, senior adviser to the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and former head of the Office of Government Ethics who resigned under President Donald Trump, was one of the witnesses in the hearing. Ocasio-Cortez asked him whether the ethics limits placed on members of Congress and the president are comparable. “In terms of laws that apply to the president … there’s almost no laws at all that apply to the president,” he said.

“It’s already super legal, as we’ve seen, for me to be a pretty bad guy. So it’s even easier for the president of the United States to be one, I would assume,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

She also took a bit of a swipe at her colleagues.

“We have a system that is fundamentally broken. We have these influences existing in this body, which means that these influences are here in this committee shaping the questions that are being asked of you all right now,” she said.

The NowThis video, published on Thursday, has been seen more than 13 million times. It is yet another example of Ocasio-Cortez, one of the most high-profile new members of Congress, making headlines and generating buzz.

—snip—

Ocasio-Cortez, in her lightning round of questions, identifies a way to break down campaign finance laws — and all the surprising things they allow — in a way that’s easy to digest. That a politician can legally take money from, for example, the oil and gas industry and then, once elected, write laws that help the industry and invest in oil and gas stocks is pretty wild. As she puts it, it’s easy for her to be a “pretty bad guy.”

Will she and her allies “win?”

This time?

Probably not.

But it’s a start.

All of those…here or anywhere else, including the mainstream Democratic Party…who want to stand up for the old ways?

Feel free.

But always remember…

That line starts to the right.

Way to the right, no matter how many protestations of “But…but…I’m a progressive!!!” you might make.

Enjoy.

You are already old news.

AG

Portrait of an Impeachable Offense

I’ve written about the lengths the Trump Organization went to build Europe’s tallest skyscraper in Moscow during the 2016 campaign, and about why those efforts (and the lies they told about them) constitute impeachable offenses. I don’t want to rehash all of that here. Instead, I just want to paint a portrait that I hope will illustrate my point.

The president’s attorney Michael Cohen is going to jail in part because he lied to committees in both the House and Senate about the details and timing of the Moscow Trump Tower deal. Thanks in large part to electronic records obtained by BuzzFeed, we have an extraordinary amount of detail about the work Cohen and his childhood friend Felix Sater did in an effort to make a tower deal happen. In fact, we even have some insight into how much effort the Trump Organization put into it, including detailed architectural plans and a lot of man-hours from their legal department as they hammered out the contractual language.

A key part of Cohen’s perjury has to do with his false claim that he decided to shut down the project in January, 2016, “before the Iowa caucus and months before the very first primary.” In truth, the effort continued on much later into the year. One major reason Cohen initially thought he could get away with this lie is that in January he and Sater stopped using regular chat and email to correspond with each other.

Sater has told investigators that during the first months of 2016, he and Cohen were using Dust, at Cohen’s suggestion, to communicate secretly about the Moscow project. Those messages, which were encrypted and are deleted automatically, have disappeared forever, Sater told BuzzFeed News.

Presumably, it’s true that Cohen and Sater’s communications in the late winter and early spring of 2016 have been lost forever. But there are other records from the time period that demonstrate that Sater was still working feverishly to make a deal, and as part of that he was trying to get both Cohen and Trump to travel to Russia to meet with top Kremlin officials, possibly including Vladimir Putin himself.

By May, with the Republican nomination all but secured for Trump, Cohen and Sater were back to communicating on unencrypted channels. They discussed whether Trump should travel to Russia before or after the July 18-21 Republican National Convention in Cleveland. Cohen said he would travel prior to the convention but that Trump’s trip would have to wait until after “he becomes the nominee after the convention.”

Working, he claimed, with Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov, Sater won Cohen an invitation to attend the June 16-18 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. However, he ran into a snag trying to get Cohen a visa in time for the trip. On June 13, he received the documents he needed Cohen to fill out, but realized that it would take Russia five days to process the application. On June 14, he received a “visa support letter” from someone at the Roscongress Foundation who was helping to organize the forum and was assured that he could use it to get an expedited visa within 24 hours. Early that morning, he began texting Cohen to let him know that they needed to take care of the visa that day, but Cohen did not immediately respond. It wasn’t until shortly after noon that Cohen finally got back to him.

Around 11:35 am, approximately a half hour before Cohen told Sater he would call him in two minutes, the Washington Post  broke the story that Russian hackers had broken into the DNC and stolen documents, including the Democrats’ opposition research file on Trump. If Cohen was not aware the story had been published at 12:06 pm, he certainly was aware of it by 2:41 pm when Sater arrived at Trump Tower to pick Cohen up to deal with the visa issue.

Cohen marched down from his office high up in Trump Tower to meet with Sater in the atrium snack bar. It was there that he explained to Sater that he would not be making the trip to St. Petersburg after all. Here is how the meeting is described in the Office of Special Counsel’s indictment of Cohen, in which Sater is referred to as “Individual 2.”

The Russians were trying to be clever when they made the first thing they released from the stolen documents the opposition research file on Trump. This made it look like Trump was the one being harmed by the breach. But no one was fooled for very long, and certainly within the Trump Organization it was immediately understood that the Moscow Trump Tower project was going to have to be shelved. That explains why Cohen did an abrupt about-face and cancelled his plans to get a visa that day.

Yet, Sater did not give up.

Sater kept holding out hope — working his sources in Russia right through the convention — until July 26, 2016, when Sater, while relaxing in the backyard of his Long Island home, read a tweet by Trump and knew right then that the deal was dead.

Fuck me, I thought to myself. All that work for nothing,” Sater told BuzzFeed News.

He poured himself a big glass of scotch, he recalled, and lit a cigar.

What finally convinced Sater that the Moscow Trump Tower deal was dead was seeing Donald Trump explicitly deny on July 26, 2016 that he had any investments in Russia. It was far from the first time that Trump had made that kind of denial, but the context was now different. On July 22, WikiLeaks did their first major dump of DNC files, timed to prevent the unification of the Clinton and Sanders camps at the Democratic National Convention and leading to the immediate resignation of DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Sater knew that there was no longer any way that Trump could be seen as seeking a business deal with Moscow.

What he also knew is that he and the Russians now had absolute leverage over Trump and his campaign. At any time, they could reveal all the work they had been doing on the tower during the primaries while Trump was denying that he had financial ties or interests in Russia.

Ending the effort to build the tallest skyscraper in Europe didn’t make the candidate’s vulnerability go away in the least. The vulnerability did not disappear when he won the election or when he became the president. Trump was compromised and would never actually escape from the net he had created for himself.

It’s hard to envision anything that would be more of an impeachable offense.

Watching the Orange Buffoon Panic

I’m not surprised that House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff of California is hiring former members of the National Security Council to be on his investigatory staff. After all, his predecessor Devin Nunes did the same thing last September when he scooped up Derek Harvey after his dismissal by then-National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. For the record, Chairman Schiff denies that he’s hired anyone who was currently working inside the administration, although he does not deny that some of his hires may have worked with them at some point.

What actually does surprise me, however, is that the president is so exercised about Schiff’s hiring practices that he felt compelled to tweet about them.

I guess Trump is worried that people with inside firsthand knowledge of his national security operation might add a little extra oomph to the inquiries into his odd and solicitous behavior toward foreign powers like Russia and Saudi Arabia.  As for Schiff, he simply responded, “If the President is worried about our hiring any former administration people, maybe he should work on being a better employer.”

Again, I can see why this discomforts the president but I have a hard time understanding why he wants everyone to know that it discomforts him.

If I had to guess, he thinks it feeds the narrative that the Deep State is out to get him. In reality, it actually just makes him look guilty and scared.

When Is It Don Jr.’s Time in the Barrel?

In December, when the Republicans still controlled the House Intelligence Committee, they fulfilled a request from the Office of Special Counsel by sending them an official copy of the transcript of Roger Stone’s testimony. About a month later, Roger Stone was indicted on multiple counts, including five for making false statements to Congress. On Wednesday, the House Intelligence Committee approved a move to send “more than 50 transcripts from its Russia investigation interviews to [Robert] Mueller.” Those transcripts include interviews with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, Hope Hicks, and Trump’s former bodyguard Keith Schiller.

It would not be shocking if new indictments shortly follow.

The new chairman of the committee, Democrat Adam Schiff of California, presented an ambitious agenda to get to the bottom of the president’s financial entanglements with foreign powers and entities.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff announced Wednesday a broad investigation his committee would undertake “beyond Russia” into whether President Donald Trump’s financial interests are driving his actions.

Schiff said the investigation would “allow us to investigate any credible allegation that financial interests or other interests are driving decision-making of the President or anyone in the administration.”

“That pertains to any credible allegations of leverage by the Russians or the Saudis or anyone else,” Schiff told reporters after the House Intelligence Committee’s first meeting in the new Congress.

In a statement, Schiff said the investigation would include a continued probe into Russia’s actions during the 2016 election and contacts between the Russia and Trump’s team, as well as an examination of “whether any foreign actor has sought to compromise or holds leverage, financial or otherwise, over Donald Trump, his family, his business, or his associates.”

Schiff said the investigation, which could involve additional congressional committees, would also look at whether Trump or his associates have “sought to influence US government policy in service of foreign interests” and any potential obstruction into the various investigations.

The president responded with something approaching panic: “[Rep. Schiff] has no basis to do that. He’s just a political hack who’s trying to build a name for himself…No other politician has to go through that. It’s just presidential harassment and it’s unfortunate, and it really does hurt our country.”

Members of both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees are constrained in what they can say about non-public testimony, but several of them have made it clear that Donald Trump Jr. probably committed perjury during his appearances before them.

It’s not just the intelligence committees, either. Senate Judiciary Committee member Chris Coons (D-DE) has been arguing since May 2018 that Don Jr. lied during testimony before his panel. He made that allegation in a letter to then-chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, in which he wrote “I am deeply concerned that, based on new information we learned this week, Donald Trump Jr. provided false testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee.”

In that case, the new information contradicted Don Jr.’s sworn testimony that he was not aware of any “foreign governments other than Russia offering or providing assistance to the Trump campaign.”

His comments are not consistent with a reported meeting he had in August 2016, Coons said.

“This testimony is contradicted by multiple recent news reports that three months before the election, Mr. Trump Jr. and campaign adviser Stephen Miller met with George Nader, an emissary for the crown princes of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia; Joel Zamel, an Israeli social media specialist linked to Israeli intelligence and the Emirati royal court; and Erik Prince, a campaign donor and private security contractor with business in the Middle East,” Coons wrote.

It’s doubtful that Don Jr. was consistently truthful in his testimony. He may have lied about a fairly wide variety of subjects which include his foreign contacts, the extent of his involvement in a plan to build a tower in Moscow, his meeting with Alexander Torshin at a National Rifle Association conference in Kentucky, and many of the details surrounding the infamous meeting in Trump Tower with Kremlin-affiliated Russians, including whether his father was informed about it beforehand.

It’s hard to say how Trump would react if his son is indicted for perjury, and I suspect that the Office of Special Counsel will not want to take that step without at the same time making its case against the president.

Any perjury charges against Jared Kushner could be just as explosive, and there’s at least some reason to believe he could be vulnerable, too. As for others who may have lied to Congress, they’ll have the option of cooperating with Mueller.

You can call this “presidential harassment,” but lying under oath is a crime even when you do it to help the president. It hasn’t been a good option for George Papadapolous, Michael Flynn, Rick Gates, Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen or Roger Stone. Why should Don Jr. and Jared Kushner fare any better?

The Justice Democrats? My Kinda People. They Should Be Yours, Too.

I am sure that I will get hate replies for what I am about to present…that’s what those astoundingly hostile replies are, really, hate mail from stuck-in-the-past so-called “progressives” who are about as progressive as a worn out, beaten down pair of shoes. But I’m going to present it anyway. Somebody has to say something on this once progressive blog before the Dems nominate yet another old shoe that Trump or some other regressive will once again beat like…like an old shoe. And even if that old shoe wins…all gussied up in new polish by the DNC hustlers…it still won’t walk any different path than did Obama and the Clintons I and II.

Neoliberalism Rules!!! Hooray For The Good Guys!!!

The good guys…??? The ones that by their multiple failures brought us G. W. Bush, Dick Cheney, our lovely “Peace President” Barack Obama and a presently totally divided nation??

Give me a break!!!

Read on.
Emphases mine:

`There Is Going to Be a War Within the Party. We Are Going to Lean Into It.’

The Justice Democrats helped get Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez elected. Who are they after next? By DAVID FREEDLANDER February 04, 2019

Maybe you’ve heard the warning: The country is beset by a menace. A fringe conservative minority is holding Congress hostage, extracting radical policy concessions over the will of the majority. And it’s leading the nation to fiscal, environmental and moral ruin.

Maybe you haven’t heard this part: These dangerous conservatives are Democrats.

I call them neocentrists, myself, but “dangerous conservatives” will fill the bill too.

Dangerous, cloaked conservatives.

“I am talking about the radical conservatives in the Democratic Party,” said Saikat Chakrabarti. “That’s who we need to counter. It’s the same across any number of issues–pay-as-you-go, free college, “Medicare for all.” These are all enormously popular in the party, but they don’t pass because of the radical conservatives who are holding the party hostage.”

Translation: “Radical conservatives” means the DNC and the old-line party leaders…the Clintons, Obama, Pelosi, Schumer etc.

Not long ago, this would have been an outlier position even among American liberals. Today, it’s the organizing principle of a newly empowered segment of the Democratic Party, one with a foothold in the new Congress.

Chakrabarti is chief of staff to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the closest thing to a new celebrity Congress has had in years–a 29-year-old former activist and bartender who, on the most recent Martin Luther King Day, sat on the same New York stage as the rapper Common, Black Panther director Ryan Coogler and MacArthur “genius award” winner Ta-Nehisi Coates.

Although it’s Ocasio-Cortez who gets all the headlines, she arguably wouldn’t be in Congress in the first place without the group Chakrabarti founded: Justice Democrats, a new, central player in the ongoing war for the soul of the Democratic Party. It was the Justice Democrats who recruited her in a quixotic campaign early on, providing a neophyte candidate with enough infrastructure to take down a party leader. And it is the Justice Democrats who see Ocasio-Cortez as just the opening act in an astonishingly ambitious plan to do nothing less than re-imagine liberal politics in America–and do it by whatever means necessary.

If that requires knocking out well-known elected officials and replacing them with more radical newcomers, so be it. And if it ends up ripping apart the Democratic Party in the process–well, that might be the idea.

“There is going to be a war within the party. We are going to lean into it,” said Waleed Shahid, the group’s spokesman.

The top Democrats in Congress have their hands full already, trying to use their new control of the House of Representatives to fight President Donald Trump, expand their majority in 2020, and maybe even capture the Senate. But they also find themselves with real anxieties about their left flank for the first time in memory. Justice Democrats is one of a handful of groups that represent a new and restive spirit in the party, a Tea Party-like populist coalition of voters awakened by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ cannonball run in 2016 and united by their superprogressive politics and a millennial disdain for the establishment.

Mark this phrase down. Remember when “The Tea Party” was considered a fringe group of deplorables and other losers by the Dems? About 10 years ago? Or…say 6 or 7 years before Trump began his march to Deploraglory? Things are moving even faster now. Watch. This movement is a popular movement in the U.S…especially in large parts of the 40% who haven’t been voting. Chakrabarti says above “It’s the same across any number of issues–pay-as-you-go, free college, “Medicare for all.” These are all enormously popular in the party.” What he doesn’t say is that these issues…along with higher taxation of the wealthy…are also very popular with habitual non-voters (See my recent post “An Alternate Look At Booman’s ‘Dems Prefer Electability to Ideological Purity’ Post” for more on that idea.), especially the young and working class/lower middle class voters of all races and cultures who have basically given up believing either party. Need I point out the very low approval ratings of the House and Senate in poll after poll after poll after poll over the past several years? Even the bought-and-sold pollsters can’t hide that simple fact.

–snip–

Four years ago, Ocasio-Cortez was waitressing at a Union Square taqueria, Donald Trump was the host of a fading reality-TV franchise, and Chakrabati was a digital entrepreneur who had nothing at all to do with politics. He was living in the San Francisco Bay Area and working for a digital payment processing company when he suddenly, unexpectedly found himself electrified by a 73-year-old presidential candidate named Bernie Sanders. “I liked what he was saying. He seemed like he was one of the people,” Chakrabarti says. “It wasn’t just that he was a progressive, but that he really cared about building a movement around these ideas.”

He reached out to Claire Sandberg, the digital organizing director of the Sanders campaign, who was arranging “Bernstorms” around the country, getting previously apolitical activists together to host phone banking and door-knocking parties.

Eventually, it became clear that Bernie wasn’t going to win. But it felt clear to Chakrabati that the political revolution Sanders had stoked was close to coming to fruition. He began meeting with a small group of his fellow Sandersistas to figure out how to channel that energy in the next election.

Like Chakrabarti, they were entirely from outside government, and mostly outside politics altogether. Corbin Trent was a political neophyte who’d been volunteering for Sanders in Knoxville, Tennessee; when the food truck he owned burned down, he left Knoxville and joined the campaign in Vermont. Alexandra Rojas was a student in community college in Orange County, Calif., when Sanders announced his run — “It was the first time I got excited about politics,” she said — and started volunteering on campus.

Today, she’s the executive director of Justice Democrats, and Trent, the group’s co-founder and former communications director, is Ocasio-Cortez’s spokesman. The group’s current communications director and perhaps fiercest firebrand is Shahid, the only member in its leadership who had any experience in politics before the Sanders campaign.

–snip–

“The idea is that you bring moral questions to the public’s attention, and have the public rally around it,” [Shahid] says. “Reframe the issue so that the choices are stark, and let the public decide rather than people in power.” He points to how the “99 percent” became a buzzword after Occupy Wall Street; how Obama and Hillary Clinton eventually came to oppose the Keystone Pipeline after supporting it; how “Abolish ICE” quickly went from a fringy Twitter slogan to one embraced by mainstream Democrats. Either you favor ripping kids from their homes, or you don’t. And if you don’t, suddenly the policy choices aren’t incremental: They’re rather stark.

–snip–

…in the wake of Trump’s shocking win, the notion of a nonpartisan effort to replace every member of Congress with some nonpolitical person didn’t seem as important as creating the sharpest possible counterweight on the left. And so after the election, Chakrabarti, Trent, Rojas, Uygur and others split off to found Justice Democrats.

This time, the goal was far more modest: Push the Democratic party closer to Sanders’ politics by challenging centrist Democrats in their primaries. The idea was to recruit 12 working-class candidates to confront incumbents, muster some of that Sanders-style populist energy on a local level and push incumbents to the left. If a couple of breaks went their way, they might even score an upset or two.

“After the election, was I mad at Donald Trump? I guess, kinda,” said Uygur, who ended up leaving the group when a series of previously deleted misogynistic blog posts were unearthed. “But mainly I was mad at the Democratic Party for blowing it. How could you lose to this guy?”

“I came to realize Democrats are never going to learn,” he said, “and that the only way to make a difference is to defeat the corrupt corporate Democrats. They get paid to lose. The corporate donor pays them to be weak, and pays Republicans to be strong.”

I repeat:


“The corporate donor pays them to be weak, and pays Republicans to be strong.”


There it is in a nutshell, folks.

Deal wid it.

–snip–

Ocasio-Cortez took on one of the most powerful congressional Democrat not named Nancy Pelosi, and by a decisive margin, she unseated him–shaking the party’s power structure and getting nationwide attention for a democratic socialist newcomer who embodied nearly everything that thrilled young movement voters. Several other candidates they’d endorsed, but weren’t as closely involved with, also won, including Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar.

The Crowley defeat brought to mind Dave Brat’s surprise 2014 victory in Virginia, taking out Republican majority leader Eric Cantor by primarying him from the right. Shahid looks back at the power of what a single race can do, recalling the Politico headline that ran at the time: “Eric Cantor Loss Kills Immigration Reform.”
“It was just one fucking race,” he said. “One fucking race and suddenly immigration reform was dead.”
The Sanders race had established the existence of a populist Democratic base eager to vote against its own party’s establishment. Now there was an organization willing to lead the charge. “It’s remarkable,” said Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which started a decade ago as a liberal alternative to what it saw as its stodgy counterparts in Washington. “Everybody is so concerned about clout and about relationships, and they have no relationships, so they just go for it, taking big chances.”

The fact that Ocasio-Cortez, and for that matter Pressley, Tlaib and Omar don’t hail from the traditional background in a body in which the median wealth is over $1 million is very much part of the point. As Ocasio-Cortez faces criticism for her bank account, her wardrobe and her supposed lack of knowledge of the details of policy, the strategy from Justice Democrats and her team has been to face it head on.

“Our theory is that when a working-class person wins, when a person without a political background wins, there is going to be a backlash–you don’t have experience, you don’t know anything, you are dumb,” said Shahid. “All of this happened with Ocasio.”

This, as he sees it, is the culture shift, a way of turning the lens around to reveal the now stark choices. “That is an awesome story for people to see, because the way the D.C. media and the conservative media in particular tear into AOC around being a working-class person or a person of color or a Puerto Rican, I don’t think the public likes it very much,” he said. “The public sees a Cinderella story, a bartender who goes against the machine and wins. And you see the way she is dragged by the D.C. establishment and the media, we lean into it, as if to say, `If that’s what they think about her, what do you think they think about you?'”

Nice!!!

For now, it is still unclear where Justice Democrats will fit in among the various groups that emerged in big numbers out of the 2016 election, including Democratic Socialists of America, Indivisible, Brand New Congress, Swing Left and the Sunrise Movement, just to name a few. Justice Democrats made a bet that a single giant felled would rewrite the political landscape, and so far they have been proven right.

The Green New Deal, a joint production of Justice Democrats and the Sunrise Movement, has 45 co-sponsors and is embraced by several Democrats running for president. Justice Democrats helped galvanize support, getting 150 people to sit in at Nancy Pelosi’s office just after the midterms.

Shahid, the group’s spokesman, predicted that, besides further agitation on the Green New Deal, the group would attempt to push for free college and an end to mass incarceration. And to force some support, they won’t be afraid to threaten primary challenges against anyone unwilling to sign on.

“We already are a pariah in Washington, D.C.,” he said proudly. “It’s about attention. Either it helps you gain leverage because people are scared of you or you lose leverage because people are annoyed with you. We will see.”

–snip–

As they move into the next election cycle, their hope is that Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley, Tlaib and Omar form more of a unit, one in which they share staff, best practices and strategy, and care less about personal brand-building. Justice Democrats plans to provide cover with its 350,000-person email list and active social media feeds.

Limited resources mean that playing in the presidential primary will be difficult, but the energized new left has already seen some of what were once considered its most outré ideas–the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, Abolish ICE and free college–become a central part of several likely presidential campaign platforms. Next cycle, members of the group plan to target from five to 10 House Democrats who occupy safe blue seats. Some names of the targets have already been floated out, like Henry Cuellar, but Sean McElwee, a liberal activist and co-founder of Data for Progress, where he works closely with Justice Democrats, listed a handful more who are vulnerable to a Crowley-sized challenge, including Kathleen Rice of Long Island, Jim Cooper of Nashville and Dutch Ruppersberger of Baltimore. (Shahid, asked if they were targets, declined to list any names.)

–snip–

Will this group continue to grow in power?

Not if the Government Media Machine has anything to say about it, of course. But…how effective have that media been in stunting the growth of the Tea Party movement into a Trump presidency? Not very, on plain evidence.

Will they be more effective trying to stop what is really a grass roots progressive movement?

We shall see.

Won’t we.

Will it win in 2020?

I doubt it.

Maybe O’Rourke has a shot. And maybe not. The next few weeks will tell that tale.

But the seeds have been sown.

Watch.

An American Spring?

In say 2024?

Or even earlier?

Let us pray.

Later…

AG

Midweek Cafe and Lounge, Vol. 102

Welcome back, music lovers. The last two weeks have focused on Brian Eno as a solo recording artist and as a collaborator with other recording artists. This week, I will conclude my brief tour of Eno’s work by highlighting some of his efforts as a producer. Let’s start out with a track from Lodger which was responsible for turning me on to Eno in the first place:

“I am a DJ, I am what I play. I’ve got believers believing me.”

I’ll have more over the next couple days as time permits. My schedule has been especially tight this week, so posts might be a bit lighter.

New Mexico Isn’t Playing Trump’s Border Games

An interesting thing has happened since Donald Trump ordered 5,200 federal troops to the southern border last October in a ploy to influence the election. One of the border states elected and inaugurated a Democratic governor. While Trump has again ordered troops to the border in Texas (this time to highlight his need for a wall), over in New Mexico things are a bit different this time around.

The governor of New Mexico ordered the state’s National Guard to withdraw a majority of its troops from the southern border, slamming what she called President Donald Trump’s “charade” shortly before his State of the Union address on Tuesday.

“New Mexico will not take part in the president’s charade of border fear-mongering by misusing our diligent National Guard troops,” Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said in a statement…

…She also ordered troops from outside of the state, including Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Wisconsin, to return to their home states.

Governor Grisham is still mindful that there are communities in her state that are seeing migration, which is why she is committing some resources to Hidalgo County.

But how many resources does she think are necessary? It turns out that she is committing approximately 12 guardsman and six state police officers. So, by her estimation, she can adequately deal with the “emergency” on her state’s southern border with 18 people.

Now, perhaps she’s wrong. Perhaps she needs more than 18 people to adequately protect her state from all manner of crime and drugs. But she knows that she’ll suffer politically if anything bad happens, so it’s a safe bet that she isn’t taking security lightly. If she wanted to be a little more on the safe side, she could triple the number and maybe have a few more than fifty people dedicated to the “crisis.”

What she won’t do is humor the president’s “charade.”  Since she’s not a Republican, she doesn’t have any reason to humor him.