FridayTalkingPoints.com

Friday Talking Points -- R.N.C. Purge

[ Posted Friday, March 15th, 2024 – 17:29 UTC ]

This week President Joe Biden and Donald Trump both secured their respective parties' 2024 presidential nominations. Most Americans, if the pollsters can be believed (and they do all seem to be telling the same story), are not exactly thrilled with this rematch and would have preferred different choices. But we are where we are, so that's not going to happen for another four years.

Trump moved quickly to consolidate his power by installing loyal toadies (including his daughter-in-law Lara) at the head of the Republican National Committee. An already-existing exodus of people working for the R.N.C. then accelerated, as 60 staffers were shown the door. The R.N.C. is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Trump campaign, in other words.

The new ever-more-Trumpy R.N.C. stumbled out of the gate, as it was first revealed that they were shutting down their minority-outreach offices, but then had to backtrack and say that they weren't going to do that. But the message was pretty clear. Lara Trump has publicly stated that "every dollar" the R.N.C. controls is now going to go to one sole purpose: electing Trump.

This is somewhat amusing to watch, of course. What could possibly go wrong with firing all the people who know what they are doing and installing MAGA-crazed loyalists who only swear fealty to the Dear Leader? If the R.N.C. does focus exclusively on the Trump campaign, that means that they won't be paying any attention to any of the down-ballot races for House, Senate, governor, or statehouse. Several state-level Republican Party organizations are already melting down (see: Michigan, for one), so this could be the final nail in their coffin, at least for this election cycle. As one former Republican House member colorfully put it: "There are crazy people" running the R.N.C. right now, "and it's going to get worse." That's from a fellow Republican, mind you.

It all seems reminiscent of how George W. Bush's administration "rebuilt" Iraq. For those who might have forgotten, this effort was conducted as a neoconservative "nation-building" exercise and was staffed by people who had zero experience setting up a functioning society and government, but did have impeccable credentials as neocons. They were ideologically pure, in other words, even if they didn't know beans about what they were supposed to do. The result was an unmitigated disaster, as we all know.

To Trump, loyalty to Trump is all that really matters. And he learned his lesson from his first term in office -- he will not abide any more "adults in the room" (who have a propensity to tell him he can't do exactly what he wants to do). Instead he will surround himself with people who will carry out any order he gives (no matter how insane or unworkable).

Again: what could possibly go wrong?

Maybe the R.N.C. and the Trump campaign will implode from within, collapsing into a pile of dazed unqualified sycophants wondering what happened to their dreams. It's certainly looking like a distinct possibility, at this point.

Joe Biden, meanwhile, has hit the ground running after his memorable "State Of The Union" speech last week. Biden's been making campaign appearances, giving speeches on policy, and hitting the airwaves with his first campaign ad. The White House also released its budget proposal this week, which was more of a campaign document outlining what Biden would like to do in a second term, especially if the voters send him some more Democrats to Congress.

Trump and Biden both showed the voters what kind of person they truly are this week, as Trump mocked Biden for stuttering during his State Of The Union speech (which is a lie, Biden didn't actually stutter during it), in true schoolyard-bully fashion. Stutterers from across the country pushed back on Trump's cruelty, but Biden showed how to counter such things by meeting with a 9-year-old boy who had written to him about his own stutter. Biden even took the time to offer the kid a few tips on what has worked for him. The entire thing was endearing and showed Biden's humanity at its best. That is the clear contrast between America's presidential choice: cruelty and bullying versus empathy and support.

Need more proof? Yet another close Trump aide (former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly) said that he had heard Donald Trump praise Adolf Hitler. No real surprise, since we've heard similar stories from others before, but the staggering ignorance and dictator-love of Donald Trump needs to be pointed out as often as possible.

Trump casually tossed out the idea of cutting Social Security and Medicare this week, but then hastily tried to walk it back. The Biden campaign is not going to let him get away with it, however, as they're already using it as a major focus in Biden speeches.

In Trump legal woes news, there has been a flurry of activity of late. First up was Trump once again defaming E. Jean Carroll with the same lies he's been telling about her all along. Her attorneys pointedly mentioned that they could very well file another defamation lawsuit against Trump and that they were carefully monitoring his statements, which seemed to shut him up (for now, at any rate, until his next eruption of legally-liable statements).

One of the witnesses in the Trump national security documents case came forward of his own volition this week and told how he had personally loaded "10 or 15" boxes containing papers into Trump's plane right before Trump left for New Jersey, which means Trump still might have classified documents in his possession. Maybe it's time for another F.B.I. search? One that happens at all of Trump's residences, this time? Just an idea....

Trump is, if nothing else, the master of delaying legal cases. He got one such delay this week, as the prosecutors in the porn-star hush-money case had to ask for a delay of up to 30 days since the Justice Department had apparently just dumped a bunch of documents (over 10,000 of them) and more might be forthcoming. Trump also appeared in a Florida court in his documents case as his lawyers argued both for dropping all the charges or delaying the case until after the election, but the judge has yet to rule when the case will begin (she did shoot down several of his arguments for dropping the charges, however).

And Trump did score a partial win this week, at least for now. The judge in the Georgia election-interference case allowed Fani Willis to stay on the case (but forced her to fire the guy she had a relationship with), but he also threw out six charges, three of which were levelled at Trump. The charges were too vague, the judge ruled, but the prosecution will be able to refile them if they go back and make them more specific.

Peter Navarro lost his bid to stay out of jail until all of his appeals are ruled on, although he has now made an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court. Assuming it fails (appeals of this type almost never succeed), Navarro will be trading in his fancy suit for a set of jail clothes on March 19th, so we all have that to look forward to!

The special counsel who investigated Joe Biden's retention of classified documents appeared before a House committee this week so everyone could perform some partisan politics for the cameras. Right before this happened, the transcripts of Biden's actual interview with the special counsel were released, and they showed that rather than the picture of senility the special counsel painted in his report, Biden was cogent and in one instance the special counsel actually praised Biden for his "photographic understanding and recall." This merely proves what everyone already suspected, that the over-the-top language in the report was nothing more than a partisan smear job. We lost count of how many times the special counsel himself responded to a question: "I don't remember," which just drove the point home even more.

What else? Congress is facing yet another budget/government shutdown deadline next Friday, but didn't noticeably make any sort of progress at all on the problem this week. So look for yet another frenzy of last-minute dealmaking all next week, we suppose.

And finally, an amusing note to end on. Robert F. Kennedy Junior apparently has decided that he needs to name an extra-macho running mate to balance his presidential ticket out, and is promising to let us all in on who he's chosen in the next few weeks. The amusing part was hearing the names of the two finalists for this position: Jesse Ventura and Aaron Rodgers. Hoo boy. That'll certainly liven things up for his campaign, we suppose.

 

Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

This week, Vice President Kamala Harris became the first sitting vice president (or president) to visit an abortion clinic. Harris toured a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Paul, Minnesota, in an effort to remind voters of the importance of the issue to her and Joe Biden in the election.

Her historic visit was a continuation of Harris being at the forefront of the abortion issue ever since the Supreme Court threw out Roe v. Wade. And the issue continues to resonate with voters, creating a big advantage for Democrats. Here is Harris, leaning in to the issue:

After the tour, Harris told reporters she had met with about "two dozen health-care workers who... really care about their patients." She said she saw "people who have dedicated their lives to the profession of providing health care in a safe place that gives people dignity. And I think we should all want that for each other."

Harris also said that, in the wake of the decision to overturn Roe, there has been a "health-care crisis" that included the shutdown of clinics across the country that provide reproductive health care, including abortions.

The situation, she said, has left "no options within a reasonable geographic area for so many women who need this essential care" at these clinics, which provide an array of reproductive services beyond abortions, such as cancer screenings and access to birth control.

. . .

Harris said Thursday that elections are "what has led to ensuring that these fundamental rights are intact" in states such as Minnesota.

We had already chosen Harris for this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week when we saw this late-breaking story today -- which we present just as "icing on the cake," as it were:

Vice President Kamala Harris called the current classification of marijuana under federal law "absurd" during a White House event on Friday, and said she is looking forward to seeing what the Drug Enforcement Administration decides about moving it to a different category.

"I'm sure DEA is working as quickly as possible and will continue to do so, and we look forward to the product of their work," Harris said at the beginning of a roundtable discussion on cannabis policy with Gov. Andy Beshear (D-Ky.), a handful of people who received pardons from President Joe Biden for low level cannabis offenses and rapper Fat Joe.

Can't argue with that -- federal cannabis law is absurd. We've been making the exact same case for years, in fact. But it is good to hear the vice president speak so plainly on the issue, since that is the clearest statement from the highest-ranking government official we have ever heard. So for not just one but two historic events this week, Vice President Kamala Harris is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week.

[Congratulate Vice President Kamala Harris via the White House contact page, to let her know you appreciate her efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

We're reaching back into the past for this one, as it has been a while indeed since we gave a Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week to Joe Lieberman.

But Lieberman fully deserves it, for being an integral part of the "No Labels" third party movement. This week the group announced it was going forward with its plans to name a presidential candidate, and they put together a small group to come up with someone, as well as a bigger group that would rubber-stamp the decision. But here's the part that qualifies Joe for yet another MDDOTW award:

[Joe] Lieberman said in an interview on Wednesday that the group would have the ability to stop a candidacy from moving forward after a few months if it failed to gain traction and appeared to be a possible spoiler that could help elect former president Donald Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee.

"We want to give the American people the third choice -- bipartisan, moderate -- that they say they want," Lieberman said. "But if for some reason after two or three months, they say they don't want it, we have got to be realistic and say, 'This is not the year.'"

This is meant to calm Democratic worries that they're really just working to elect Trump, of course. But it's utter nonsense. The group Third Way points out how it would be almost impossible for No Labels to "pull the plug" on a candidacy once it gets rolling (emphasis in original):

At a certain point, No Labels would be compelled to submit paperwork if they intend to go forward. Their CEO has suggested that even after that submission, they would still have the ability to pull the plug as late as August. But they would not, at least not where it matters most.

The crucial battleground states of Wisconsin and Michigan do not accept withdrawals after a minor party presidential candidate is nominated and paperwork is submitted. Nevada and New Hampshire do not accept withdrawals from the ballot after the filing deadline. And in other battleground states where this will matter most, withdrawal must happen almost immediately.

Let's play this one out: No Labels names a candidate in March but determines "the American people aren't coming out in droves" for their ticket in August or that their (mythical) "pathway to victory" has eroded. So, they decide to withdraw in states in which they've already submitted their candidates' names. But it would be too late, because as soon as No Labels submits nomination paperwork, they quickly lose the ability to withdraw. Regardless of the wishes of the No Labels Party or their nominee, those names would appear on the ballot in November. The off-ramps would be closed. Any claim that No Labels makes about having control of the ticket in this scenario is wildly fantastical.

No Labels played it cute by not registering as a political party but instead just some sort of advocacy group that happened to be working hard to get a presidential line on as many states' ballots as possible. By doing so, they avoided having to reveal who was funding the group. But now that they are going to launch a candidate, it means that once launched, the candidate will be in charge of the campaign, as a completely separate entity than No Labels itself. Meaning No Labels will have no control over anything after that point is reached.

For his attempt at fooling the public (or maybe he's just pulling the wool over his own eyes, we're not really sure), Joe Lieberman is easily the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week.

[Contact Joe Lieberman via the No Labels contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 743 (3/15/24)

We've got a varied bunch of talking points this week with no central theme (and more than one grim overtone). So let's just dive right in, shall we?

 

1
   End the both-sides-ism!

Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post wrote a great takedown of not just the mainstream media but all forms of "both-sides-ism" this week. Her launching point was the upcoming departure of Senator Kyrsten Sinema, but she really could have led into it with just about anything these days. So we present this (especially the second paragraph) as a handy retort for Democrats whenever they face inane questions about "extremism on both sides" (emphasis in original).

Oh, sure, it's fashionable, as departing Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) did, to blame both political parties. "Our democracy was weakened by government dysfunction and the constant pull to the extremes by both political parties.... The only political victories that matter these days are symbolic, attacking your opponents on cable news or social media. 'Compromise' is a dirty word. We've arrived at that crossroad, and we chose anger and division." Really?! Who is "we"?

The bipartisan border compromise -- her bipartisan bill -- was sunk by Republicans. Republicans in the House overwhelmingly opposed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, commonly known as the "Bipartisan" Infrastructure Bill (which President Biden modified to get bipartisan support); almost every Republican voted against the CHIPS Act, they all voted against the Inflation Reduction Act, and some even voted against the PACT Act, which would have helped veterans. House Republicans have launched phony, baseless impeachment hearings. Senate Republicans filibustered reenactment of a key part of the Voting Rights Act, blocked a bipartisan Jan. 6, 2021, commission and overwhelmingly refused to convict four-times-indicted former president Donald Trump. The assertion that hyper-partisanship, chaos and nihilism (e.g., threatening to shut down the government, egging on a default and refusing to even vote on Ukraine aide [sic]) is equally divided amounts to an outright fabrication -- or utter cluelessness.

 

2
   License to kill? Really?

Speaking of extremism....

"Republicans are falling all over themselves trying to square what appears to be an unsquarable circle on in-vitro fertilization. They desperately want to appear supportive of I.V.F. -- because they know how popular the concept is to the vast majority of the American people -- but at the same time their previous moral-high-road stance demands they outlaw I.V.F. as soon as possible. The extreme anti-abortion organizations are already calling pro-I.V.F. laws -- like the one they had to hastily pass in Alabama -- giving doctors a 'license to kill,' and accused the lawmakers of approving 'thousands of dead human beings.' If life truly does begin at conception, then embryos can never be discarded or destroyed, period. That is extremism, folks, and yet that is exactly what some Republicans want to do at a nationwide level. Vote Democratic to show your support for sane I.V.F. laws instead of religious extremism."

 

3
   Enjoying the purge

Everyone got their popcorn? Are we all ready for the next clownshow?

"I see that Donald Trump's daughter-in-law has been installed to run things after his purge of the Republican National Committee, and that the first order of business was to sweep out all the people with any experience running a national party organization. I would heartily applaud this purge, since Trump obviously needs to be surrounded by people who are so loyal to him they will never tell him 'No.' In fact, I'd encourage Lara Trump to go even further and fire everyone left at the R.N.C. and replace them with people Trump already knows well -- like the staff at Mar-a-Lago. All the bartenders and waitresses and pool cleaners are (one assumes) fully loyal to Trump and they should be given the chance to run the Republican Party because what could possibly go wrong with that scheme?"

 

4
   Republicans in disarray

This one's just embarrassing (so point it out!).

"I see that Speaker of the House Mike Johnson held his annual retreat for all his fellow Republicans last week. What a fiasco! Not even half of his members showed up. There were supposed to be panels held on the second day to discuss policy and how to expand their majority, but they had to be cancelled due to lack of interest. Sounds about right -- that's par for the Republican course, these days, folks."

 

5
   How many more does Trump still have?

After hearing testimony this week from the special counsel who investigated Joe Biden's retention of classified documents, it's good to remind everyone of the differences between what he did and what Trump did.

"When the question of having classified documents arose, Joe Biden immediately informed the authorities and consented to a search of every possible place there could be more classified documents. But that only raises the question -- does Donald Trump still have classified documents he's not supposed to? The F.B.I. searched only one of Trump's residences, in Florida, and when they found a locked closet they didn't even bother demanding it be unlocked or forcing the lock themselves. They just believed 'oh, there's nothing in there.' Even if there wasn't, Trump wasn't in Florida at the time, he was at his other golf club up in New Jersey. This week one of the witnesses in the classified documents case came forward on his own and told an interviewer that he had personally helped load '10 or 15' boxes full of documents onto Trump's plane, right before he flew off to New Jersey. So how many boxes of documents were in New Jersey while the F.B.I. was searching in Florida? Nobody knows. Why didn't the F.B.I. also get a search warrant for Trump's second residence? I have no idea. But it seems very likely that they missed some stuff and now I just wonder how many more classified documents does Trump still have?"

 

6
   "So let me get this straight..."

This one is a talking point for President Joe Biden to use. Biden has, so far, not talked much about Donald Trump's legal problems, because doing so would be politically risky. Biden has decided to stay mostly mum on the issue, which is probably a good thing, but there's one part of it in particular that he could actually use out on the campaign trail. It comes from the appeal Trump is making to the Supreme Court on the subject of presidential immunity, and Biden could avoid talking about the underlying case and instead focus on what Trump's lawyers actually argued in court instead:

"Folks... do you think I should be able to order Seal Team Six to assassinate Donald Trump? And should I be able to escape all legal consequences for doing so by resigning just before a Senate impeachment trial begins? Because that is exactly what Donald Trump is arguing in court that I should be able to do right now. It makes no sense. It is abhorrent to American democracy and the rule of law, but that's exactly what Trump's legal team argued. Now, don't worry folks, I'm not going to do that -- because I am not insane -- but that's what Trump thinks I should be able to do, which is an absolutely frightening thought."

 

7
   I demand satisfaction!

Hoo boy. Just when you thought politics couldn't get any stupider....

"A Republican in the Missouri statehouse has introduced a proposal to improve their state's politics by letting politicians challenge each other to a duel. No, really! Here's the actual text of the proposal:"

If a senator's honor is impugned by another senator to the point that it is beyond repair and in order for the offended senator to gain satisfaction, such senator may rectify the perceived insult to the senator's honor by challenging the offending senator to a duel.... The duel shall take place in the well of the senate at the hour of high noon on the date agreed to by the parties to the duel.

"Got that? Not only are we going back to the 1800s, but as one historian pointed out, at least back then they had the sense to perform such idiocy outside. I think Democrats should wholly support this measure, with just one small edit. Make the law only applicable to Republicans. As long as they give us enough time to clear the building before they try to shoot each other, we're good with it. I'd also suggest they allow television cameras to cover such duels -- just think of the ratings!"

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground