Thanks Jessica, and there will be much more of this if the federal government doesn’t get this rogue governor, Greg Abbot, under control. Let’s not forget that there was at least one other death (and possibly two) due to illegal razor wire placed in the Rio Grande previously. The federal government is still fighting to get that extreme hazard removed. This is a governor who said that he would have migrants shot if he wouldn’t be prosecuted by the federal government.
I'd like to see more reporting and commentary on a different 'bigger picture' take; the slowly increasing crumbling of the US govt's authority over its affairs. The Texas v US standoff(s), the various free passes reissued to Trump each month, the trampling of judicial norms and precedents by a radical majority SCOTUS, the installation of a nonfunctional legislature. All indicate things-are-not-going well, and in a way that seems both intentional, and unfixable.
tRump simply doesn't give a shit about courtroom decorum, or trying not to displease judges, he KNOWS he's lost the business fraud case, he KNOWS he's lost (twice) in the E Jean Carroll defamation, but he also KNOWS that these courtroom histrionics play well with the MAGA set, and as well serve as fund-raising pegs.
Exactly, he has more to gain by behaving like the crazed imbecile that he is than not. And although most people aren’t talking much about it, I think he’s a serious flight risk. This New York fraud trial, and the case coming up with Alvin Bragg in March, could ruin him completely. I’m not sure why the DOJ did not confiscate his passports.
“This is the contest for the GOP nomination, and there’s no one who can dare attack Trump let alone mount an effective challenge to him. Period.” That’s exactly right, no other way to look at it. And 19% Classic vs MAGA. Don’t fool ourselves into thinking Republicans are not hard core MAGA.
We are "whistling past the graveyard" if we operate on the idea that Trump is not as strong in the GOP as he thinks. He IS that strong.
Chris Cillizza picked up on a point too many of us were missing. The caucus-goers were asked a second question after they were asked who they were supporting. That question was: who would you be voting for if your candidate was not on the ballot?
The answers are what we should be paying attention to: 75% of DeSantis voters said they would vote for Trump if DeSantis wasn't there. 40% of Haley voters said they would vote for Trump if she wasn't on the ballot. In a 1 on 1, with DeSantis out, Trump beats Haley with around 72-74% of the vote. With Haley out, Trump beats DeSantis with 64-65%. Those are "respectable incumbent numbers."
We have to stop this magical thinking that the constitution, or this story or that one, or an editorial in the NYT, is going to save us. What our favorite MSNBC host says is irrelevant (I was really disturbed last night to see Lawrence, who should know better from his own experience, jumping on the Trump Is Weak train).
We all said "He can't possibly win!" in 2016 and what did we get?
There are no magic beans that will kill the monster. WE have to do it by getting off our dead asses and onto our dying feet (to recall my old drill instructor) and each do what we can to push things in the right direction.
Nothing of value has ever come easy, ever.
We have to be clear-eyed about this. He might not be exactly as strong as he was, but that is not the same as saying he is weak. He is strong enough to win, if we let him.
Dunno if that statement from the Republican judges on the DCCA panel were suggesting that the defendant should bring a motion for another rehearing, this time citing executive privilege. OTOH, I don’t think that’s possible and given the makeup of the DCCA, wouldn’t help.
That said, I initially took it as the Rs on the panel flipping the bird to the defendant.
As to Iowa, my takeaway FWIW is that fPOTUS won with ~7% of Republican caucus-participant. Another ~7% vote for one o the wannabes. So there’s a mystery what the small turnout means. Obviously, weather reduced participation but that can’t be the whole story when the number sitting it out was ~86%.
Time of course will tell whether some in the 86% are trying to tell us something about the presumptive nominee.
None of this is about Trump exclusively as a sizable portion of white Americans appear to feel their hold on our country is losing strength. The real threat to them is the loss of a control they have enjoyed and exploited since our nation's founding
No mention of specifically what happened in Eagle Pass though? A mom and her kids drowned because of Abbott’s policy. Seems newsworthy.
Thanks Jessica, and there will be much more of this if the federal government doesn’t get this rogue governor, Greg Abbot, under control. Let’s not forget that there was at least one other death (and possibly two) due to illegal razor wire placed in the Rio Grande previously. The federal government is still fighting to get that extreme hazard removed. This is a governor who said that he would have migrants shot if he wouldn’t be prosecuted by the federal government.
Yep. It's vicious, and it's awful, and we should all be screaming from the rooftops about it.
I'd like to see more reporting and commentary on a different 'bigger picture' take; the slowly increasing crumbling of the US govt's authority over its affairs. The Texas v US standoff(s), the various free passes reissued to Trump each month, the trampling of judicial norms and precedents by a radical majority SCOTUS, the installation of a nonfunctional legislature. All indicate things-are-not-going well, and in a way that seems both intentional, and unfixable.
These are excellent suggestions.
Haley hasn’t paid attention to his cases. Hah! and bulls**t.
May all these folks be held accountable.
Re: tRump's strength in Iowa, a paraphrase from the bible might be in order:
"Wherefore by their ignorance ye shall know them.”
tRump simply doesn't give a shit about courtroom decorum, or trying not to displease judges, he KNOWS he's lost the business fraud case, he KNOWS he's lost (twice) in the E Jean Carroll defamation, but he also KNOWS that these courtroom histrionics play well with the MAGA set, and as well serve as fund-raising pegs.
That's his strategy, and he's sticking with it.
It's what he's been doing for the past 50 years.
Exactly, he has more to gain by behaving like the crazed imbecile that he is than not. And although most people aren’t talking much about it, I think he’s a serious flight risk. This New York fraud trial, and the case coming up with Alvin Bragg in March, could ruin him completely. I’m not sure why the DOJ did not confiscate his passports.
“This is the contest for the GOP nomination, and there’s no one who can dare attack Trump let alone mount an effective challenge to him. Period.” That’s exactly right, no other way to look at it. And 19% Classic vs MAGA. Don’t fool ourselves into thinking Republicans are not hard core MAGA.
Thank you David.
Our plan? Not one step back!
Donate, even if it's just $5! Every bit helps. Postcards to Voters! Letters to editors and
reporters for shoddy reporting. Email your reps and President Biden. Move it
forward every single day in
2024! Take back the House,
overtake the Senate and secure President Biden another 4 years!
We are "whistling past the graveyard" if we operate on the idea that Trump is not as strong in the GOP as he thinks. He IS that strong.
Chris Cillizza picked up on a point too many of us were missing. The caucus-goers were asked a second question after they were asked who they were supporting. That question was: who would you be voting for if your candidate was not on the ballot?
The answers are what we should be paying attention to: 75% of DeSantis voters said they would vote for Trump if DeSantis wasn't there. 40% of Haley voters said they would vote for Trump if she wasn't on the ballot. In a 1 on 1, with DeSantis out, Trump beats Haley with around 72-74% of the vote. With Haley out, Trump beats DeSantis with 64-65%. Those are "respectable incumbent numbers."
We have to stop this magical thinking that the constitution, or this story or that one, or an editorial in the NYT, is going to save us. What our favorite MSNBC host says is irrelevant (I was really disturbed last night to see Lawrence, who should know better from his own experience, jumping on the Trump Is Weak train).
We all said "He can't possibly win!" in 2016 and what did we get?
There are no magic beans that will kill the monster. WE have to do it by getting off our dead asses and onto our dying feet (to recall my old drill instructor) and each do what we can to push things in the right direction.
Nothing of value has ever come easy, ever.
We have to be clear-eyed about this. He might not be exactly as strong as he was, but that is not the same as saying he is weak. He is strong enough to win, if we let him.
Dunno if that statement from the Republican judges on the DCCA panel were suggesting that the defendant should bring a motion for another rehearing, this time citing executive privilege. OTOH, I don’t think that’s possible and given the makeup of the DCCA, wouldn’t help.
That said, I initially took it as the Rs on the panel flipping the bird to the defendant.
As to Iowa, my takeaway FWIW is that fPOTUS won with ~7% of Republican caucus-participant. Another ~7% vote for one o the wannabes. So there’s a mystery what the small turnout means. Obviously, weather reduced participation but that can’t be the whole story when the number sitting it out was ~86%.
Time of course will tell whether some in the 86% are trying to tell us something about the presumptive nominee.
None of this is about Trump exclusively as a sizable portion of white Americans appear to feel their hold on our country is losing strength. The real threat to them is the loss of a control they have enjoyed and exploited since our nation's founding
Russian banks at the ready to provide bridge loans...DJT, Jr working the phones.