Hillary Clinton news

She gets some bad and some good.  Good news first.

-- jobsanger is cautioning everybody not to read too much into the numerous and massive public crowds Bernie Sanders is drawing, and read more into early polling.  Here's a poll we'll have to wait to see if Ted makes a bar graph of.

Sanders has eclipsed Clinton by a 44 to 37 percent margin, according to a new Franklin Pierce University/Boston Herald poll that was first reported by the Boston newspaper Tuesday evening.

The previous FPU/Herald poll taken in March had Sanders trailing Clinton 44 to 8.

Ted puts great emphasis on these six-months-out polling figures, blogging the latest one every single night and illustrating them with a bar graph tool.  He's smart enough to understand this is folly, but that doesn't stop him from spinning it out there every 24 hours.  Ted is your confidence man if you're a nervous Hillary supporter.

-- More on the bright side (and the most legitimate reason for not being concerned about Clinton's nomination prospects).

Black Americans view Hillary Clinton far more favorably than they do any other presidential contender, according to a Gallup survey released Monday.

Eighty percent of black adults have a favorable impression of the Democratic front-runner and former secretary of state. Even when taking into account the percentage who view Clinton unfavorably, she still has a 68 percent net favorability rating among black Americans, a group that analysts at the Cook Political Report have called the "overlooked key to 2016."

Charlie Cook is, of course, correct.

Clinton's favorability rating among black Americans eclipses those of the other Democratic hopefuls. The next highest rating belongs to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is running for president as a Democrat and has a net 23 percent favorability rating among black adults. Sanders' relationship with the black community has come under heightened scrutiny since the start of his presidential campaign. Black Lives Matters activists recently shut down a Seattle rally where the senator was scheduled to speak.

For her part, Clinton is attempting to stave off the circumstances Sanders is being forced to endure.  With her campaign appearances devoted to meeting with large donors behind closed doors and no media allowed, and with her Secret Service protection, she isn't likely to be interrupted anyway.  For his part, Sanders has moved quickly and effectively to address this most glaring shortcoming in his appeal to Democratic primary voters.  It just isn't -- won't be -- enough.

As long as BLM is stalking his rallies to disrupt, carried out by false flag operatives, improperly focused, and which they simply could not get away with at any other candidate's rallies, it's going to keep being a problem for him.  And without digressing too far into the whole BLM/Bernie issue, a lot of good analysis can be found here.  The executive summary: BLM says that Sanders and white progressives aren't progressive enough on black social justice.  White progressives taking offense to this (very accurate) criticism are telling BLM protesters and their sympathizers "you're doing it wrong", which pushes the whitesplaining button, and around we go again.

If you would prefer less abstract and more concrete, like an electoral math strategy for Bernie's uphill slog, here you go.  Everything there is too valuable to excerpt; read it all.

Now for the bad news for Clinton.

-- She capitulated to the screamers in Congress and gave up her e-mail server yesterday.  Conservatives are already yelling fire.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign casts her decision to turn over her personal email server to the Justice Department as cooperating with investigators. Her Republican critics suggest that the move and new revelations about classified information points to her malfeasance as secretary of state.

Two emails that traversed Clinton's personal system were subsequently given one of the government's highest classification ratings, a Republican lawmaker said.

Federal investigators have begun looking into the security of Clintons' email setup amid concerns from the inspector general for the intelligence community that classified information may have passed through the system. There is no evidence she used encryption to prevent prying eyes from accessing the emails or her personal server.

[...]

On Tuesday, Clinton attorney David Kendall gave to the Justice Department three thumb drives containing copies of work-related emails sent to and from her personal email addresses via her private server.

Kendall gave the thumb drives, containing copies of roughly 30,000 emails, to the FBI after the agency determined he could not remain in possession of the classified information contained in some of the emails, according to a U.S. official briefed on the matter who was not authorized to speak publicly. The State Department previously had said it was comfortable with Kendall keeping the emails at his Washington law office.

Also Tuesday, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa said two emails that traversed Clinton's personal system were deemed "Top Secret, Sensitive Compartmented Information" — a rating that is among the government's highest classifications. Grassley said the inspector general of the nation's intelligence community had reported the new details about the higher classification to Congress on Tuesday.

This e-mail server thing is going to be a boil on her ass for some time to come.  Hope she's using the right ointment to get rid of it.

Rick Perry's army goes from mercenary to volunteer overnight

This is my favorite fundraising story of the 2016 campaign (and maybe ever).  The lawyers, guns, and money have all moved on.

Updated at 10:32 p.m.: The Rick Perry presidential campaign has stopped paying his staff at the national headquarters in Austin as well as in the early caucus and primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, The Washington Post and The Texas Tribune reported late Monday. The report cited a Republican familiar with the Perry campaign who demanded anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

Original post: In a clear sign of financial woes, the Rick Perry presidential campaign is no longer issuing pay checks to his staff in South Carolina.

The development was first reported by the National Journal.

South Carolina state director Katon Dawson told the Journal, “Pay is only one reason people do this. We’ll be able to live off the land for a while.”

The last pay checks were issued two weeks ago, Dawson said.

Once again, our glorious-haired, shaded-by-indictment former governor will be among the early exits in the presidential primary.  He had a good run for a long time, but karma is catching up its ledger with him now.

Update: This piece from the CSM suggests he's going to be abe to hold out a while longer.

In Perry’s case, two wealthy Texans – retired data company founder Darwin Deason and pipeline company executive Kelcy L. Warren – are largely responsible for backing his two super PACs, Opportunity and Freedom and Opportunity and Freedom I, Politico reports. Between them, Mr. Deason and Mr. Warren contributed $11 million of the $12.8 million the two groups raised in the first half of the year.

A third super PAC, created in July, collected another $4 million from a single donor, according to CNN.

“Here are the facts: We have plenty of money to put him in position to finish in the top three or even win Iowa,” (the senior adviser to Perry's super PACs, Mr. Austin) Barbour told the Times.  

So if we indeed have him to kick around some more, that's not all bad, either.

Paxton's federal contempt hearing will not occur

The Statesman says 'canceled', and the Express News says 'postponed'.

Wednesday’s contempt of court hearing for Attorney General Ken Paxton and a state health official was canceled Monday after state officials agreed to allow death certificates to acknowledge same-sex marriages, a lawyer involved in the case said.

The state also agreed to issue new guidelines allowing same-sex couples to be listed as parents on a child’s birth certificate, said Neel Lane, the lawyer for a Conroe man who sued Texas to be listed as the husband on his male spouse’s death certificate.

That's called a second chance, which is something Sandra Bland and a whole lot of other folks of a darker shade of pale have never gotten in their scrapes with criminal justice.

Hold off on the chains and shackles — for now.

This week’s contempt hearing for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and another top official was put on hold Monday after the state agreed to put guidelines in place to try to comply with same-sex marriage rulings.

During a telephone conference, lawyers for the state agreed to have a policy on death certificates ready by Thursday and one in place for birth certificates within two to three days, said Neel Lane, one of the San Antonio lawyers handling the litigation against the state.

U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia told Lane to confer with the state to review the policies and procedures to ensure that they do not discriminate against married same-sex couples. If Lane feels they are not adequate, he should inform Garcia, the judge ordered.

The roach gets away from la chancla again.  This time. More from Kuff.

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance thinks that big GOP candidate debate needed more balloon animals and seltzer bottles as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff gives his campaign strategy for defending Houston's Equal Rights Ordinance.  And Texas Leftist reports on the latest lawsuit filed by HERO's opponents.

Harold Cook presents the GOP Presidential Debate Drinking Game, which will come in handy for the next debate, if you ever recover from the first one.  And Dos Centavos wonders if the poll reflecting 25% of Latinos as Trump supporters is really accurate.

Socratic Gadfly looks at the hoo-hah over Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments and his eventual $70,000 salary for employees, and has a mix of cautious applause and skeptical concerns.

A blogger started a petition to have the NFL relocate the 2017 Super Bowl away from Houston if the HERO is defeated by the voters in November. And then a Houston television station picked up the story. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs is in wonderment at how things can snowball -- or go viral, as the kids say these days -- so quickly.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wants everyone to know that Texas Republicans are denying birth certificates for Hispanic babies born in Texas.

WCNews at Eye on Williamson sees more GOP mug shots coming this week: That Ken Paxton is Attorney General proves our political system has failed and Wilco DA Jana Duty.

Egberto Willies gathers some responses to critiques of Bernie Sanders and Black Lives Matters protesters.

Neil at All People Have Value spent the past week in Chicago and the Chicago area. Neil's blog has interesting pictures of that great American city.

=================

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

Texas Clean Air Matters urges state leaders to meet the Clean Power Plan with innovation and not resistance.

The TSTA Blog reminds us that long before he was indicted on felony charges, Ken Paxton was bad news for public education.

Juanita Jean watched the Republicans debate each other and then made the observation that the fellow who spoke the least was voted the winner.  Silence really is golden. And The Rag Blog makes the point that if one of those kooky conservatives manages to get elected, your best investment is body bags.

Ted at jobsanger charts the proof that Planned Parenthood supporters outnumber those who oppose their existence.

Media Matters captures video of Houston LGBT activist Noel Freeman shooting down lies about the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance.  And Moni at Transgriot reported from the scene of the HGLBT Caucus endorsement meeting.

Lone Star Ma celebrates World Breastfeeding Week 2015.

Kevin Walker says Dallas needs a 21st-century blueprint for building a better city.

The Texas Election Law Blog noted the fifty year anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, and the conflict and mourning surrounding it.

Rafael McDonnell reports on a training program he attended for LGBTQ people running for political office.

The Houston Justice Coalition lays out its goals for addressing police brutality at the root.

Honorary Texan The Slactkivist advises Texas politicians on the best way to pose for their future mug shot.

And Fascist Dyke Motors made a cool .gif of the inside of her head.

Sanders interrupted by Black Lives Matter protesters again

Way back in June, I said that if Bernie didn't start to attract people of color to his campaign, he was going to be dead in the water as a Democratic primary presidential hopeful.  That was three weeks before the Netroots Nation matter, and trust me when I say that almost nobody was talking about Sanders' troubles reaching people of color prior to Independence Day.

More recent events don't seem to indicate he is making progress.  For the second time in thirty days, he was targeted by Black Lives Matter protesters at a rally in Seattle...where he left before it began.  From the Seattle P-I:

 ...Sanders was just starting to address several thousand people gathered shoulder to shoulder at Westlake Park when two women took over the microphone. Organizers couldn't persuade the two to wait and agreed to give them a few minutes. As Sanders stepped back, the women spoke about Ferguson and the killing of Michael Brown and held a four minute moment of silence.

When the crowd asked the activists to allow Sanders to speak, one activist called the crowd "white supremacist liberals," according to event participants.

After waiting about 20 minutes, Sanders himself was pushed away when he tried to take the microphone back. Instead, he waved goodbye, left the stage with a raised fist salute and waded into the crowd. He shook hands and posed for photos with supporters for about 15 minutes, and then left.

More from the Seattle Times:

“If you do not listen … your event will be shut down,” one of the protesters told organizers, who offered to let them speak after Sanders. After a back and forth with the screaming protesters, organizers relented and said the demonstrators could go first.

Some in the largely white audience booed and chanted for protesters to let the senator talk. A few yelled for police to make arrests.

Marissa Johnson, one of the protesters, shot back, “I was going to tell Bernie how racist this city is, filled with its progressives, but you did it for me,” accusing the audience of “white supremacist liberalism.” She cited Seattle’s own police problems, including an ongoing Justice Department consent decree over use of force.

Update: Video from the rally yesterday.  Before we get to the commentary, let's excerpt how the rest of Bernie's day got a little better.

Sanders later issued a statement on his website expressing his disappointment about the interruption.

In a written statement addressing the Westlake protest, Sanders said he was “disappointed that two people disrupted a rally attended by thousands … I was especially disappointed because on criminal-justice reform and the need to fight racism there is no other candidate for president who will fight harder than me.”

In a news release posted on social media, local Black Lives Matter activists said they were holding Sanders and other white progressives accountable for failing to support their movement.

Citing the anniversary of Brown’s death, they said, “We honor black lives by doing the unthinkable, the unapologetic, and the unrespectable.”

That's actually the best explanation of their actions I have read.

As an old white progressive myself, I have to admit to the same curmudgeonly discontent with the BLM protests that Sanders is feeling.  Maybe that's just my white privilege talking.  There are plenty of African American voices noting the mission fail of BLM, but it still doesn't make their protest against the only person who has walked the walk (and not just talked the talk) more comprehensible.  My well-renowned empathy of ten men is falling short here.  Dave Atkins at Political Animal says it best, at least for now.

In that vein, it’s reasonable to ask if forcing Bernie Sanders off consecutive stages is a useful strategy for bringing issues of police violence and structural racism to the foreground. On the one hand, doing so provides an opportunity for activists to make headlines and gain an audience among individuals who are supposedly allies but may not be doing as much as activists might like on their issue of choice. Certainly, climate activists and anti-war activists (among others) could leverage the same complaints. On the other, there is such a thing as bad publicity. And there’s a fine line between disrupting the activities of one’s allies to bring more attention to one’s issues, and being so aggressive with them that they actually become hostile to one’s interests.

That said, if these actions have done more damage than good, the fault lies not with the protesters so much as the event coordinators who have handed the disruptive agents the microphone at these events. No matter how righteous the disrupters’ cause may be, giving away the microphone to any non-scheduled element loses control of the event, altering the power dynamic in such a way that the candidate is forced to either adopt an apologetic and submissive position agreeing with everything being said by the upstaging individuals (certainly undesirable for many reasons), or to argue with them (even less desirable), or simply to walk away from the stage (the best of a series of bad choices.)

But giving away the microphone to protesters in this way isn’t just harmful to the candidate. It’s also harmful to the event organizers and ultimately to the protesters themselves as well.

The Black Lives Matter effort is headed down the same road as the Occupy movement.  Which is to say, marginalized and irrelevant.  And it would be a terrible shame if that happened, because what they are angry about is what Bernie Sanders, and I, and a host of other people who look like us are also angry about.

They're simply channeling their outrage in the wrong direction.

If the group engaging in civil disobedience is willingly granted the microphone at a managed event by the supposed oppressor, it’s nearly impossible for the disruptors to maintain the audience sympathy required to forgive the chaos and upset caused by the disruption itself. This is, of course, doubly true when the supposed oppressor is not an enemy but an ally within the tent. In order for an action of civil disobedience by an oppressed group to work, the oppressed group must actually remain oppressed in the context of the event. If they’re treated as equals with underdog outsider presidential candidates on stage, it simply looks like a circular firing squad of fractious activists rather than a civil rights movement speaking for the dispossessed without a voice. Once you have the stage and a microphone with a presidential candidate standing behind you (and you’re registered to vote!), it’s hard to gain sympathy for the claim that you don’t have a voice in the process.

That, of course, leads to a key question: why aren’t BLM protesters staging these disruptions at Hillary Clinton or Republican candidate events? The simplest answer is that they would be unlikely to be invited to the stage and given a microphone. But that is precisely why those are the events that BLM should be protesting.

The people who are handing over the microphone and helping them onto the stage aren’t the ones protesters should be taking advantage of for a cheap media opportunity. And event organizers should be mindful that providing such an opportunity for protesters doesn’t do them any favors, either.

Rosa Parks didn’t pick a bus in Berkeley; she picked one in Selma. If civil disobedience is the weapon of choice, it’s probably time to take that weapon to the real enemy.

Let's watch and see if Secretary Clinton -- or any GOP hopeful, for that matter; how about Ben Carson as a start? -- starts drawing some BLM folks to their events who want to take the stage.  Their success in doing so will convince me that they have a real movement focused on the agents who need to change -- and who will more likely be in the place to effect changes.

But I really don't expect Hillary Clinton or a single Republican candidate -- or any of their staff, supporters, or members of the audience on hand -- to react as calmly as Bernie Sanders.  We should find out if I'm right or wrong about that soon enough -- again, if BLM is properly organized.