Today's Political Fuckery

Straight out of the Daddy State Playbook:

If everyone is guilty, then no one can be held to account.

Dallas Morning News, Ruth May:

Donald Trump and the political action committees for Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio, Scott Walker, Lindsey Graham, John Kasich and John McCain accepted $7.35 million in contributions from a Ukrainian-born oligarch who is the business partner of two of Russian president Vladimir Putin's favorite oligarchs and a Russian government bank.

During the 2015-2016 election season, Ukrainian-born billionaire Leonid "Len" Blavatnik contributed $6.35 million to leading Republican candidates and incumbent senators. Mitch McConnell was the top recipient of Blavatnik's donations, collecting $2.5 million for his GOP Senate Leadership Fund under the names of two of Blavatnik's holding companies, Access Industries and AI Altep Holdings, according to Federal Election Commission documents and OpenSecrets.org.

The shit is apparently wider than I thought, and it runs way deeper. 

Some probables:

• It'll take a good long time to get it sorted out and squared up
• we won't ever know but maybe half of the real story
• the loudest voices will belong to the dirtiest culprits

And don't forget there's a (continuing) concerted effort coming out of the Wingnut Dis-Infotainment Complex to gloss it over.

Fox Politics:

WOULD YOU EVEN CARE IF HE WAS GUILTY?

The stock market is up, unemployment is down and the economy seems to be picking up some steam. The streets are mostly safe, the nation is mostly secure and the world is mostly at peace.

So does it matter to you whether or not the president is a crook? The answer for a lot of Americans may be no.

With the revelation that a grand jury is looking at evidence against members of President Trump’s 2016 campaign team, we move closer still to the possibility that someone could be in very big trouble.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his squad are moving fast, and the likelihood that some charges will be brought can no longer be ignored. It is not hard to imagine a moment in the very near future where some associate of the president is in the dock, charged with misdeeds relating to Russian interference in the 2016 election.

But, again, we ask: Would it matter to you?

Episode 400

Episode 400 - The podcast that's lasted more than 275 times longer than The Mooch's gig at the White House. That's something worth celebrating.

The Professional Left

podcast

Every week for more than 7 1/2 years.  Every week.

Crime And Punishment

Sturm und Drang abounds over the "Murder-by-Text" trial (and as of yesterday the sentencing) of Michelle Carter.

The Hill, David Shapiro:

With the news in that a Massachusetts judge sentenced homicide-by-text defendant Michelle Carter to fifteen months in prison and six years on probation, many are outraged at the perceived leniency of the sentence.

They may have a point, but only because brutally harsh sentences have become the norm in American criminal justice, and with devastating effects. The past decades have witnessed massive “sentencing inflation” as periods of incarceration have become longer and longer.
In the past 40 years, the incarceration rate in the United States skyrocketed by 500 percent. The United States now locks up more of its people than Russia and China — some 2.2 million of us. According to the Sentencing Project, “Changes in law and policy, not changes in crime rates, explain most of this increase.” 

If Carter’s sentence seems short, it is because we are weighing it on a broken scale.
Increasing rates of incarceration at best has a minimal effect on crime, and may have no effect at all. In other words, mass incarceration is all about politics, not public safety.


We've been through a long and damaging period of "Law-n-Order" that's done little but make real the grotesque Dickensian villainy of the Prison Entrepreneur, and a Coin-Operated Justice System.

Maybe we're seeing something of a backlash now.

But we still have to contend with certain Daddy Staters, per Charlie Pierce:

Were you wondering if Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III was still the prickly authoritarian yahoo that he's always been, now that he has gotten on the bad side of the president*? Wonder no longer, says The Washington Post.

Dots

It starts to look like the dots are connecting themselves.

Listen to Bob Cesca and Jackie Schechter (sorry, unable to embed)...

The Bob Cesca Show, presented by Bubble Genius - 08-03-17

...and then go sign up for Investigate Russia

BTW - it's time to take the whole "smoke but no fire" thing and put it to bed.

Ask any firefighter what happens to your house if you wait until you see flames before you call 911.

President Capone

While we don't get to see 45*'s tax records right now, we can learn part of what we need to know by looking at the tiny sliver of information they do allow us to see.

It ain't sexy - it won't excite anybody outside a relatively small circle of Numbers Nerds - but this is how these things get done.

WaPo, David Herzig and Bridget Crawford


It’s possible the president filed the right paperwork. But without a full release of his tax returns, the available evidence suggests he hasn’t. According to New York City property records, Trump paid $13,000 in state and local transfer taxes for these two sales. That is the correct amount for a sale between strangers. But if he paid state and local transfer taxes, that means he didn’t treat the transfers as gifts. And on the real estate forms filed in New York, Trump didn’t check any of the boxes indicating that these were sales between relatives or sales of less than the entire property. It would seem, then, that he treated the transactions as if they were sales for fair market value to a stranger.

-snip-

Since Trump did not cast the transactions as gifts for state and local tax purposes, it is almost certain that he did not do so for federal gift tax purposes, either. In our combined 40 years of experience as tax lawyers, we are unaware of a situation in which a taxpayer would report a transaction as a fair market value between strangers on the state level (and thus incur real estate taxes) but treat it as a gift at the federal level (and thus incur an additional tax). It’s fair to infer that Trump didn’t follow the rules.

And just in case you're looking for work in a field that's almost perfect for keeping you busy for decades to come as we try to unravel the shit blanket that's been thrown over our heads, it's worth considering a career in Forensic Accounting (yes - that's a thing). And if we're going to have any real chance to fix a tax system that's totally FUBAR, we'll be in dire need of some very good Numbers Nerds.

Today's GIF

From whence we came

Today's Self-Inflicted Foot Wound

It's never about anything but trying to make himself look good.

Read the transcripts at WaPo

A "highlite":
 Pena Nieto: Yes, Mr. President. The proposal that you are making is completely new, vis-à-vis the conversations our two teams have been having. But I have gathered this from the position that you have taken in terms of trade. I think we have the route to continue having balanced trade between both nations. And frankly, to tell you the truth Mr. President, I feel quite surprised about this new proposal that you are making because it is different from the discussion that both of our teams have been holding —

 Trump: Enrique, if I can interrupt – this is not a new proposal. This is what I have been saying for a year and a half on the campaign trail. I have been telling this to every group of 50,000 people or 25,000 people – because no one got people in their rallies as big as I did. But I have been saying I wanted to tax people that treated us unfairly at the border, and Mexico is treating us unfairly. Now, this is different from what Luis and Jared have been talking about. But this was not a new proposal – this is the old proposal. This was the proposal I wanted. But they say they can come up with some other idea, and that is fine if they want to try it out. But I got elected on this proposal – this won me the election, along with military and healthcare. So this is not a new proposal this is been here for a year and half.

You Don't Get One Without The Other

Zeeshan Aleem at Vox:

Democrats, not Donald Trump, are the real populists on trade in Washington. 

That’s the major takeaway from the Democrats’ bold new trade platform that they unveiled on Wednesday morning, the second rollout of their “Better Deal” messaging agenda in the runup to midterm elections in 2018. 

It's a collection of proposals aimed at protecting American workers from foreign competition — and it’s designed to edge out Trump's own messaging on how he's going to transform US trade to help bring back jobs to America.
The first 34 items on the 2016 Democratic Party Platform are all about helping everyday American Workin' Folk get a better chance to participate (to a slightly greater degree) in a system that actually fucking depends on their participation.

Don't gimme no shit about how the Dems fucked up by not addressing the problems of middle America.

If people missed it, then they weren't listening, cuz Hillary and Bernie and Tim all hit it plenty hard every time they stepped into the box last fall.

And maybe this had something to do with how we've been missing the point for 30 years:

The idea of evaluating foreign investment to ensure it doesn’t pose a threat to American jobs is bound to be incredibly controversial in Washington.

-snip-

That kind of scrutiny and interference with foreign investment would be unprecedented for the United States, says Edward Alden, a trade expert and senior fellow at the nonpartisan Council on Foreign Relations. “The US has had a very open stance on foreign investment — it’s only restricted if it’s considered a national security threat,” he told me. (*)
'Scuse me, Mr Alden - the health of our economy kinda depends on Americans having jobs that pay them enough to live on, so it seems pretty important to ask, "When did you decide a fucked up US Economy was somehow disconnected from a threat to US National Security?"

Keith

Score it 517 to 5. So much winning.

Watch this video on The Scene.

It Only Works When You Work It

Quick reminder: Checks and Balances is a metaphor, not a mechanism.

AP News:

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware plan to introduce the legislation Thursday. The bill would allow any special counsel for the Department of Justice to challenge his or her removal in court, with a review by a three-judge panel within 14 days of the challenge.

The bill would be retroactive to May 17, 2017 — the day Mueller was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to investigate Russian meddling in the 2016 election and possible ties to Donald Trump’s campaign.

“It is critical that special counsels have the independence and resources they need to lead investigations,” Tillis said in a statement. “A back-end judicial review process to prevent unmerited removals of special counsels not only helps to ensure their investigatory independence, but also reaffirms our nation’s system of check and balances.”
Legislators have been ceding power to the Executive for decades - this is one of a very few times Congress Critters have reared up and made a noise like they understand the idea of "First Among Equals".

Defend your institutions or lose them forever.

So way to go, guys. 

But seriously - it's about fuckin' time.

Today's Aww

And here it is - your moment of manly cuteness.

the most normal thing in 2017 so far pic.twitter.com/X05h6nQFrG

— Adam Parkhomenko (@AdamParkhomenko) August 3, 2017

hat tip = @kfury

Today's Pix

Today's Tweet

DONALD TRUMP is the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES and we're really supposed to believe mediocre white people aren't getting a fair shake

— Emily (@emilydawnlove) August 2, 2017

Spit Ballin'

Looking for something that explains why "conservatives" are so dead set against policies aimed at equalizing treatment (ie: rights, opportunities, etc) for women and minorities under the law, we always eventually bump into an underlying thingie that translates to: 

"What if black people treat us like we've always treated them?"

-or-

"If we give gays the same rights as the rest of us, we're afraid they'll treat us just like we've always treated women".

So let's take that as a template, and overlay the shitty attitude held by so many "conservatives" towards immigrants.

OK so far?

Now consider this - the American population is at an average of 56 years old.

In 15 or 20 years, those "conservatives" are looking at an increasing probability of being taken care of by women and minorities and - wait for it - immigrants!!!

Karma's a bitch, motherfucker.

You Know What They Say

"Well, y'know [insert any compliment about anybody here], but he cheats at golf, so...yeah - fuck that guy"

Starting with Dana Milbank at WaPo:

Golf is a game of humility: Even the best players are brought low by nature and chance. And it’s a game of honor: You keep your own score and are often unseen by other players.

Then there is Trump golf. He breaks rules, exaggerates scores and ignores the game’s decorum. Sound familiar? He is, Sports Illustrated asserted, “easily the best golfer” ever to occupy the White House. Likewise, he is an enormously talented politician, with a genius for marketing. Yet in golf, as in life, he doesn’t leave it at that. He gilds the lily with dishonesty.
Golf.com - With special reporting by Michael Bamberger, Ben Baskin and Pete Madden.

[This article appears in the Aug. 7, 2017, edition of Sports Illustrated.]

Trump will sometimes respond to a shot he duffed by simply playing a second ball and carrying on as if the first shot never happened. In the parlance of the game, Trump takes floating mulligans, usually more than one during a round. Because of them it is impossible to say what he has actually shot on any given day, according to 18 people who have teed it up with Trump over the last decade, including SI senior writer Michael Bamberger, who has done so nine times. In 2007, Trump called Bamberger to brag about a 68 he had shot at Bel-Air Country Club in Los Angeles. Trump's handicap index is officially 2.8, but he has posted only three scores since '14. Els, a South Florida resident who has known Trump for many years, estimates he is "an eight or a nine." For Trump to shoot 68 on a tough course like Bel-Air would require him to play nearly perfectly from tee to green while making a number of substantial putts. One of his playing partners that day confirmed that Trump played "good," but that he took all the usual liberties common among everyday golfers: mulligans, gimmes, improved lies, etc. There was no mention of the 68 in a subsequent story, and Bamberger heard about it from Trump.

-and-

In a 2013 tweet aimed at entrepreneur Mark Cuban, Trump wrote, "Golf match? I've won 18 Club Championships including this weekend. @mcuban swings like a little girl with no power or talent. Mark's a loser." Trump has never made public a list of his club titles, and fact-checking calls to all of the Trump properties on this subject went universally un-returned. Winged Foot is the one non-Trump club at which the President is a member, and his name does not appear on any of the honor boards in the old clubhouse.

It seems the guy is simply not capable of telling the truth abut anything.

Bonus BTW:

Here Trump interjected, "It's a crazy—no, I actually I said I was the best golfer of all the rich people, to be exact, and then I got a hole in one. So it was sort of cool."

That little slice of a story is probably not totally untrue - it's likely as close to "the truth" as 45* will ever get - but the point here is that I'll bet you dollars to dingleberries he's said exactly the same thing on many many occasions just before stepping up and shanking one into the lake.

But it paid off that one time, so he throws up a little variation on a Logical Fallacy called The Texas Sharpshooter.