While plenty of others have plenty of other things to say today about Robert Mueller's testimony in front of two House committees, what struck me the most was a rather large unanswered question. Indeed, it was hard to actually avoid thinking about the concept, because in the first hearing most of the Democrats finished their five minutes with some form of the following declaration: "No one is above the law," sometimes adding: "...not even a president" and sometimes just leaving it implied. But does this phrase have any real-world meaning or is it just so much sanctimonious nonsense?

There are two reasons I ask this rather fundamental question, one technical and one purely political. First, the technical legal problem, which was touched upon by one of the Democratic questioners in the second hearing, but was largely left unanswered by Mueller (and then the questioner either moved on or ran out of time). Since the Justice Department believes that no sitting president can be indicted, does that mean that all crimes with a statute of limitations shorter than the president's term in office can be freely committed if the president is not impeached?

Continue Reading »

It's one of those rare weeks where things may actually get done in Congress, as they all prepare to flee Washington for their usual monthlong August vacation. While Bob Mueller's made-for-TV testimony tomorrow is currently dominating the news, behind the scenes a rather momentous deal was just cut between Nancy Pelosi and the White House. A budget deal has been reached which will last until well after the 2020 election cycle is done. This two-year agreement will avoid defaulting on the national debt by raising the debt ceiling until 2021, and will also provide the framework not only for this year's budget bills but also for next year's as well. This will hopefully avoid most of the usual histrionics surrounding the budget, because nobody really wants a fiscal cliff or a government shutdown during an election year.

Being a compromise between Democrats and Republicans, there is something in the new budget for just about everyone to hate. Such is the way of sausage-making, I suppose. On the left, there is a whole lot more money for the Pentagon, but the days of Democrats making a big deal over the increasing size of the military budget are mostly over, so this will likely not be all that contentious in the end. The bigger problem, for progressives, is that Nancy Pelosi entered into an agreement over all the budget bills that Congress will have to individually pass to keep the government funded. These are must-pass bills, since without them the government shuts down. As such, they are sometimes used to push agenda items that the other side doesn't like. The leverage of having to pass the budget bills means certain demands can be made and then hashed out between the parties. But not this time, as Pelosi has agreed to not propose any "poison pill" amendments to any of the budget bills. It is unclear whether this agreement is actually written into this week's deal or just a handshake agreement between her and the White House, but if she sticks to it, it will mean she has given away any leverage progressives might have used to advance their agenda for the next two years. Some on the left are already howling about this rather large restriction.

Continue Reading »

I realize that we are still in the midst of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary race, but today I'd like to leap forward to present a very simple (and, to me, obvious) strategy for whomever secures the Democratic nomination and has to take on Donald Trump in next year's general election. Because I think I've come up with an all-encompassing campaign slogan that will stand the test of both time and Trump. It cuts to the very heart of the argument that a Democrat -- any Democrat, in fact -- would be miles better than what we've got now. Picture the presidential nominee repeating at every rally next summer the following line: "Do we really want this for the next four years?!?"

Its generic nature is its strength. You can either spell out in great detail what "this" refers to, or you can just let it hang and allow the voters to fill in that blank. Either way, it asks voters a very basic question -- do they want to spend the next four years the way we've all spent the past two and a half?

Continue Reading »

Obviously, Donald Trump dominated the news this week, by going full-on racist. The Republican Party's reliance on "dog whistles" on racial issues is now no longer necessary, since the leader of the party has given everyone a green light to just go right ahead and publicly scream racist invective as loudly as possible. That was such a big story that it swamped all the other political news.

We're going to address the new love both Trump and the Republican Party have for blatant racism in the talking points this week, in an extended screed on exactly where Trump is leading his party and the country. We felt such a disgusting turn of events deserved being addressed in longer fashion than just a few paragraphs. But before we get to that, though, we've got the other news of the week to cover and some awards to hand out.

It's actually been two weeks since we last wrote one of these columns, as we were away at Netroots Nation last week. While there, we were amused to see Donald Trump being forced to give up his plans for adding a citizenship question to the Census, while ranting and raving about Democrats and trying to spin his backing down as some sort of political victory. Good times!

Continue Reading »

The draw for the second round of Democratic debates is happening soon (by the time you read this it may have already happened, in fact). CNN has hyped this event almost as much as the debates themselves, and it certainly will (quite literally) set the stage for both nights of debate, as the 20 candidates who have qualified are somehow quasi-randomly divided up. The lineups will be important for all the candidates' chances of standing out from the crowd, but it is important even in this fairly early stage of the nomination race to keep our focus on the main goal: beating Donald Trump next November. And that -- as over 16 failed Republican candidates can attest to -- will be no easy feat. How do you beat Trump on the playing field he has chosen to run his campaign from?

Continue Reading »

Attending the breakout sessions on marijuana legal reform at Netroots Nation has only gotten better and better over the years. Each year's panel is unique, of course, but I'm speaking of a larger picture here, because over the past decade or so the question of legalizing marijuana for recreational adult use has gone from a literal pipe dream to an aspiration to a solid plan to (in state after state) a triumphant reality. And now there is an aura of inevitability about legalization for the entire country -- an concept which would have seemed wildly unrealistic just ten or twelve years ago. We're winning this battle, and we're going to win this whole war in the very near future. This lends a spirit of optimism to the discussion that just wasn't present a decade ago.

Continue Reading »

As I continue to recover from my Netroots Nation trip, I thought I'd ease back into writing columns with another look at the Democratic horserace. Enough time has now passed from the first debate round that the polling has caught up to people's reactions, and the candidates have all just announced their second-quarter fundraising totals, so it seems like a good time to check in once again.

Campaign News

Astonishingly, since the last time we wrote a full rundown of the field (over a month ago), we've had some more movement into the race and the movement out of the race has also now begun.

Continue Reading »

[Note: This is just going to be a very quick post, as I'm still recovering from Netroots Nation and spent most of today sleeping.]

Once again, Donald Trump has successfully united Democrats right when they were in danger of falling apart. The intraparty bickering between Nancy Pelosi and "the Squad" of four progressive members of the House was threatening to get rather ugly, when Trump trumped the Democratic ugliness with his own unique and virulent brand of ugly. Trump's racist "go back to where you came from" tweets over the weekend not only completely distracted everyone from the Democratic squabble, it also caused the entire Democratic Party to close ranks and denounce the president with one unified voice. What could have been a schism turned into a reason to stand shoulder to shoulder against Trump's obvious hatred. Trump was so disgusting in his comments that he's now got a schism of his own within the Republican ranks, since his comments were so completely indefensible. Republicans are now lining up to denounce him, although most are treading rather timidly while doing so. What it all means is that instead of the media running with another "Democrats In Disarray" headline, they are now pointing out the discord within the Republican Party.

Continue Reading »

[Program Note: While I am away this week attending Netroots Nation, I thought a blast from the past would be entertaining for my readers. In 2007, also while away on vacation, I conducted a journalistic experiment. I contacted the campaigns of all eight Democratic candidates for president and asked them for permission to reprint a transcript of the speech of their choice from their candidate. All responded, although Dennis Kucinich's campaign was unable to provide me with a transcript because he always spoke without notes (I ran one of his white papers instead).

The introduction to this series explained everything, and it is still kind of interesting to read for the inside-baseball points that it made. I should mention that as internet bandwidth improved by leaps and bounds, such an experiment was never necessary again, because by the next contested Democratic nomination, the campaign websites had not only transcripts but videos of each candidates' speeches, for everyone to see.

Anyway, this week I am reprinting five of these speeches, one each day, for your amusement. I begin with the two candidates who are also running again this year, Joe Biden and Mike Gravel. Then I'll move on to the two who lasted until the bitter end, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, as well as the candidate that I personally supported in the race, John Edwards.

What's interesting about reading these speeches again is how times have changed (all Democrats were running against George W. Bush's record, at the time) as well as how things have remained the same (the same themes used today pop up in more than one speech). So sit back and enjoy this nostalgic trip into presidential politics from 12 years ago. I may also be able to post live columns throughout the week, but make no promises on that score (time is a serious constraint during these conferences).

Originally published November 16, 2007

John Edwards

The Moral Test of Our Generation

Saint Anselm College, Manchester, New Hampshire
10/29/07

Many of you know that I am the son of a mill worker -- that I rose from modest means and have been blessed in so many ways in life. Elizabeth and I have so much to be grateful for.

And all of you know about some of the challenges we have faced in my family. But there came a time, a few months ago, when Elizabeth and I had to decide, in the quiet of a hospital room, after many hours of tests and getting pretty bad news -- what we were going to do with our lives.

And we made our decision. That we were not going to go quietly into the night -- that we were going to stand and fight for what we believe in.

As Elizabeth and I have campaigned across America, I've come to a better understanding of what that decision really meant -- and why we made it.

Continue Reading »

[Program Note: While I am away this week attending Netroots Nation, I thought a blast from the past would be entertaining for my readers. In 2007, also while away on vacation, I conducted a journalistic experiment. I contacted the campaigns of all eight Democratic candidates for president and asked them for permission to reprint a transcript of the speech of their choice from their candidate. All responded, although Dennis Kucinich's campaign was unable to provide me with a transcript because he always spoke without notes (I ran one of his white papers instead).

The introduction to this series explained everything, and it is still kind of interesting to read for the inside-baseball points that it made. I should mention that as internet bandwidth improved by leaps and bounds, such an experiment was never necessary again, because by the next contested Democratic nomination, the campaign websites had not only transcripts but videos of each candidates' speeches, for everyone to see.

Anyway, this week I am reprinting five of these speeches, one each day, for your amusement. I begin with the two candidates who are also running again this year, Joe Biden and Mike Gravel. Then I'll move on to the two who lasted until the bitter end, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, as well as the candidate that I personally supported in the race, John Edwards.

What's interesting about reading these speeches again is how times have changed (all Democrats were running against George W. Bush's record, at the time) as well as how things have remained the same (the same themes used today pop up in more than one speech). So sit back and enjoy this nostalgic trip into presidential politics from 12 years ago. I may also be able to post live columns throughout the week, but make no promises on that score (time is a serious constraint during these conferences).

Originally published November 19, 2007

Barack Obama

A Change We Can Believe In

Spartanburg, South Carolina
11/3/07

One year from now, you will have the chance to walk into a voting booth, pull back the curtain, and choose the next President of the United States.

Here's the good news -- for the first time in a long time, the name George Bush will not appear on the ballot. The name Dick Cheney will not appear on the ballot. The era of Scooter Libby justice, and Brownie incompetence, and the Karl Rove politics of fear and cynicism will be over.

But the question you will have to ask yourselves when you pick up your ballot a year from today is, "What next?" How do we repair the enormous damage of these dismal years and recapture that sense of common purpose that has seen America through our toughest times?

Continue Reading »