From bad to worse for Democrats

Before we run down the Donkeys' latest self-inflicted wounds, let's review the newest plates and stemware in the Cabinet.

-- We've covered Beauregard, Mad Dog, Flynn, Pompeo, and Mnuchin already; some of the other appointees, like Nikki Haley, aren't really worthy of their own post (a fuller list of Trumpeteers, picked and rumored, is here).  The last big one, Secretary of State, is still being juggled by President-elect Barking Yam, with Mitt Romney, David Petraeus, and Rudy Giuliani starring as the bowling pins (although there is at least one more).  There's a poll you can take here, and Cypher Lewandowski, Trump's former mole at CNN, floated Jon Huntsman and refloated John Bolton.

-- As if Democrats weren't in deep enough shit of their own excretion as it is ...

Senator Heidi Heitkamp, Democrat of North Dakota, is paying a visit to Trump Tower on Friday, and Senator Chuck E. Schumer of New York, the incoming minority leader, is having heart palpitations.

“I appreciate the president-elect inviting me for a meeting. ... Whatever job I do, I hope to work with the president-elect and all of my colleagues in Congress on both sides of the aisle to best support my state.”

To Democrats, that last line can mean two things, neither of them good. If she is in line for an administration job, her Senate seat would turn Republican. If not, she seems to be indicating she is a possible vote for the Trump agenda.

And no matter what, her seat is up in 2018 — in a state that went to Trump with 62 percent of the vote.

... and ...

The decision by Gov. Jerry Brown of California to name Representative Xavier Becerra to be the state’s attorney general has set off another round of finger-pointing among Democrats — and opened a crucial post in the Trump era.

Becerra, like Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland before him and former Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois (now the mayor of Chicago) before them, had risen as far as he could in the House leadership. Becerra faced a blockade of older members of Congress, like Representatives Nancy Pelosi, Steny H. Hoyer, and James E. Clyburn, in the top ranks.

Unlike Van Hollen, who was elected to the Senate last month, Becerra opted against running for his state’s open Senate seat, but he has found his own way to statewide office.

Becerra was in line for a huge consolation prize in the House, however. The veteran Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan had just stepped aside as the ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee — and he recommended the telegenic Californian for the post.

That would have put Becerra on the front lines as Trump tries to repeal the Affordable Care Act, cut taxes, overhaul the tax code and possibly convert Medicare into a system that offers fixed sums to seniors to buy private health plans.

Instead, it looks as if that role will go to Representative Richard E. Neal of Massachusetts, who may be less camera ready but is actually better versed on the intricacies of tax policy.

This is the problem associated with re-electing Pelosi minority leader; there is a blockage that exists because the Old Guard won't give way to the Young Turks, and so ego fills another vacuum elsewhere.  That's no way to build a bench.

-- In another signal to progressives that they should just go away, there's a smear campaign being waged against Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison, who is -- despite the puzzling and incorrect first sentence below -- in a real battle with Howard Dean for the right to chair the DNC.  Update (12/3): Dean's sudden pullout only makes the contest murkier.  Update II (12/4): Glenn Greenwald explains precisely how the smear makes the DC inside game so repugnant.

So far Representative Keith Ellison’s drive to be the next Democratic National Committee chairman has gone swimmingly, with no strong competition in sight.

But CNN went where other outlets have feared to tread, printing old writings of Mr. Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, in defense of the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam and other contentious black activists.

[...]

Ellison long ago renounced his associations with the Nation of Islam, and has had Jewish groups defend him. But the report could prove troublesome, to say the least.

The Anti-Defamation League, which has been mildly supportive, reacted strongly.

“Ellison’s remarks are both deeply disturbing and disqualifying. His words imply that U.S. foreign policy is based on religiously or national origin-based special interests rather than simply on America’s best interests. Additionally, whether intentional or not, his words raise the specter of age-old stereotypes about Jewish control of our government, a poisonous myth that may persist in parts of the world where intolerance thrives, but that has no place in open societies like the U.S. These comments sharply contrast with the Democratic National Committee platform position, which states: ‘A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States because we share overarching strategic interests and the common values of democracy, equality, tolerance and pluralism.’ ”

Shades of the over-reaction to Bernie Sanders' writing about rape.  This is a 'damned if they do or don't' conundrum with respect to Ellison's bid for chair: it will be "Muzlins eevil" all day and all night from the right if they pick him, and f'n Dean and his corporate lobbyist baggage killing them with whatever is left of the left base if they don't.  Perhaps there will be room for a consolidation candidate like SC Dem party chairman Jamie Harrison to break through, but we won't know for sure until next year, when the election is held.

Part of the liberal electorate's continuing angst has to be the slow realization that it is a tremendous waste of time to keep holding on with a decrepit political party that cannot figure out how to beat the sorriest lot of Republicans since Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Abu Gonzalez, etc., ad nauseum.  Future episodes of The Blame Game aren't going to improve this.

Remember all those people who said the GOP was imploding?  They must be miserable.

And starring Steve Mnuchin as Hank Paulson

The FNG at the Treasury Department does not seem to be very good at math (or perhaps it's speaking truth he's bad at).

Newly designated for Treasury secretary, Steve Mnuchin told CNBC on Wednesday that Donald Trump's tax plan would contain "no reduction" in taxes for the rich. Yet an independent analysis of the president-elect's plan suggests that most of the benefits would, in fact, go to the top earners.

Shortly after confirming that he had been chosen for the role of Treasury secretary, Mnuchin told CNBC that the president-elect's cap on itemized deductions would offset all the other cuts high earners would receive.

"There will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class," Mnuchin said. "Any tax cuts we have for the upper class will be offset by less deductions that pay for it. "

But the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center said Mnuchin's comments don't square with Trump's plan. In an analysis that included the deduction caps, which include benefits from charitable giving and mortgages, the center found that those changes aren't large enough to offset lower income tax and capital gains rates for the top earners.

A dive into the numbers follows, and then this.

That's not to say that Trump's plan won't stimulate the economy or investment. And there is no doubt that Trump's plan lowers taxes for almost every type of taxpayer in America.

But Mnuchin may have overstepped the law of numbers when he said the wealthy will get no tax break.

Let's overlook that 'draining the swamp' campaign promise; I thought rich guys were supposed to be smart?  Since CNBC isn't on the WaPo list of fake news sites, and certainly can't be condemned as 'librul mediuh", I wonder when the Republicans will re-start the whining about budget deficits.  I'd put the over/under at somewhere between two years and four years, depending on how the 2018 midterms go for them.

Seeking Alpha also references the across-the-board tax cuts, as well as "killing many aspects" of Dodd-Frank and a maximum corporate tax rate of 15%.  I'm no economist but that scenario is a guaranteed money-loser.  Mnuchin made a shitpile of profit cleaning up after the Great Recession of 2008, specifically with his purchase of a California bank that earned the moniker 'foreclosure machine', so it stands to reason that he's the kind of guy who wants to go back to the days of the arbitrage gunslingers.

Let's schedule a watch party for Trump, Mnuchin, and some of their sycophants among the Wall Street gang to see Too Big to Fail and The Big Short.  I'll pop the corn.

Update: This is that guy.

The president-elect is a Twitter troll, and other shattershots

-- In this post-truth environment we're now living in, it helps to find something to keep you grounded and centered.  Even if that happens to be, you know, a bottle of Scotch.  I have to limit myself personally to about one or two drinks weekly because of my sundry health conditions, but drinking to forget how the world is changing for the worse, and so rapidly, is not something I'm going to criticize anyone over.  I tend to look for solutions to problems as a first reaction to their presenting themselves, and this sounds like a good one to me.

This week, in a volley of angry tweets, Donald Trump ridiculed the “badly defeated ... Dems,” claimed he “won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally,” and said anyone who burned the American flag should lose their citizenship or spend a year in jail. Trump’s outbursts set off alarms. How could he believe such nonsense about voter fraud? Why would a man who had just been elected president gloat, threaten protesters, and insult half the country? What’s going on in his messed-up head?

To understand Trump, you have to set aside the scripted speeches he gave before his election and the canned videos he has released since. You also have to set aside the caricature of him as a Klan-loving, Nazi-sympathizing woman hater who will deport every immigrant he can find. Instead, look at the four interviews he has given since his election: to the Wall Street Journal, 60 Minutes, the New York Times, and a group of TV anchors and executives. In these exchanges, all of them conducted outside the behavior-warping context of the campaign, you’ll see how squishy he is. Trump did run a despicable campaign, and he’s a menace to the country and the world. But it’s not because he’s a strongman. It’s because he’s a weakling.

Mwahahahaha.  Will Saletan, a writer I've enjoyed for decades, goes on to list twelve shadetree-psychology points to make when influencing the f'n new guy in the White House.

That’s how you move Trump. You don’t talk about ethics. You play the toughness card. You appeal to the art of the deal. You make him feel smart, powerful, and loved. You don’t forget how unmoored and volatile he is, but you set aside your fear and your anger. You thank God that you’re dealing with a narcissist, not a cold-blooded killer. And until you can get him safely out of the White House, you work with what you have. People in other countries have dealt with presidents like Trump for a long time. Can we handle it?

Yes, we can.

There will be ample time for protests that make a difference over the next four years -- such as turning Dump Tower into a living hell and thus forcing his neighbors to sell at below-market and move out -- but for now, don't give up your Twitter account, no matter how cesspoolish it may get.

-- There's differing opinions as to whether Trump is indeed an infantile narcissist who should be ignored every time he cries out for attention, or whether he should be taken deadly seriously (this is the "normalizing' quarrel).  I believe he is conducting a distraction for the most part, especially when it burps out on Twitter at 4:30 in the morning, like a colicky baby might.  But as to which avenue of pushback to choose: pick one and get going.  (There's nothing that limits you to one of those directions permanently, either.)

For example, today's "ha ha, look what Twitter says" is about Trump's having Mitt Romney over for dinner last night, despite the fact that Kellyanne Cryptkeeper went public last Sunday with the 'Bagger base's irritation over Romney being considered for anything beyond the main course of the meal.  This distraction has been going on for a week already.

-- The corporate media is still addicted to fake news.  Liberals still love it, too.  (The critique at the Slate link of Jill Stein and #Recount2016 hopefully can mollify my pal Gadfly, as he is just a bit too angry about ... well, everything it seems, regarding the recount.)

-- This is a good explainer about whether, and how, Medicare lives or dies over the next two and maybe four years.  I was reminded as I read it that that the Affordable Care Act was birthed the very same way, with the Republicans and Democrats having traded places.

Put me down for an early bet that Medicare survives much as it currently exists due to the shifting and shiftless nature of our fascist overlords.

#Recount2016: The latest *Updates below

A technician prepares voting machines to be used in the presidential election 

in Philadelphia. Courtesy AP/Philly.com

Pennsylvania will have to be sued in order to recount their votes, and the situation is something more than a little complicated.

“Petitioners have grave concerns about the integrity of electronic voting machines used in their districts,” the suit stated.

Though Monday’s petition was filed by 100 Pennsylvania voters, as required by the state’s election law, it is part of Stein’s effort to challenge results in three states that were critical to deciding the presidential election.

Stein’s camp filed a recount petition last week in Wisconsin, and is expected to do so this week Michigan. Clinton lost each of the state by fewer than 100,000 votes. She lost Pennsylvania by about 71,300 votes.

NYT:

(Pennsylvania), where Mr. Trump holds a lead of 70,638 votes, or 1.1 percent, allows any three voters to petition to recount their local precinct. But despite a call on Sunday from Ms. Stein on Facebook for thousands of Pennsylvanians to file the paperwork, in many cases the deadlines have come and gone, according to the Pennsylvania Department of State.

There are more than 9,000 voting precincts in Pennsylvania. Wanda Murren, a spokeswoman for the State Department, said she was aware of petitions in only a handful of the state’s 67 counties.

The Stein campaign said that as of Monday, voters had filed recount petitions in 120 precincts, including more than 70 in Philadelphia, where the county has not yet certified the vote and petitions can still be accepted, according to Ilann Maazel, a lawyer for the campaign.

The Wolverine State seems a little cleaner ...

In Michigan, a candidate can request a recount by citing fraud or errors, said Fred Woodhams, a spokesman for the Michigan secretary of state. But other candidates, like Mr. Trump, could potentially object to such a request by appealing to the Board of State Canvassers.

At a meeting on Monday, where the canvassers certified the election results, a representative for Ms. Stein said her campaign planned to request a complete hand recount by a deadline on Wednesday. The campaign would need to pay estimated costs of $800,000, and a recount could start as early as Friday.

... and the Badger State proceeds apace.

To begin the recount in Wisconsin, the state must receive payment of $3.5 million by Tuesday afternoon to cover the estimated costs, the Wisconsin Elections Commission said on Monday. The commission approved a schedule, which includes county clerks and canvass members being briefed on procedures on Wednesday morning, with the recount beginning Thursday and being completed by Dec. 12 and certified on Dec. 13. The Electoral College votes on Dec. 19.

Ms. Stein asked that the recount of ballots be done entirely by hand, but the elections commission rejected that request. It instead allowed counties to determine whether the ballots should be counted manually or with tabulating equipment. Ms. Stein said on Monday that she would sue to demand the hand count.

Rather then mention Trump's false and inflammatory Tweet, which as usual got more media attention that it deserved -- though thankfully most called it what it is: a lie -- let me point out that the recount effort has produced its own divisions in the Green Party, starting with this statement by Stein's running mate, Ajamu Baraka.

I believe that Dr. Stein sincerely believed that she had an obligation, grounded in her commitment to the principle of election integrity, to mount a challenge to the results in those three states. And while I don’t share that position for reasons that I am not going to try and elaborate on here on Facebook, the notion that her decision was made for any other reason than that is a position that I cannot support. There are many in and outside of the Green Party who support the campaign’s decision to call for a recount. But there are also many Green Party activists and supporters who are opposed to that decision.

It is unfortunate that after waging a courageous campaign to build an independent, principled political opposition to the two racist, capitalist/imperialist parties, the recount effort has resulted in serious questions regarding the motivations of the recount that threatens to damage the standing and reputation of the Green party, its supporters, and activists.

A statement released by several long-time Greens also objected to the recount.  A portion:

There are significant electoral reforms needed to make elections more democratic and more representative of the people. While we support electoral reforms, including how the vote is counted, we do not support the current recount being undertaken by Jill Stein.

The decision to pursue a recount was not made in a democratic or a strategic way, nor did it respect the established decision making processes and structures of the Green Party of the United States (GPUS).  The recount has created confusion about the relationship between the Green and Democratic parties because the states chosen for the recount are only states in which Hillary Clinton lost. There were close races in other states such as New Hampshire and Minnesota where Clinton won, but which were not part of the recount. And this recount does not address the disenfranchisement of voters; it recounts votes that were already counted rather than restoring the suffrage of voters who were prevented from voting.

As a candidate, Dr. Stein has the right to call for a recount. However, we urge the GPUS to distance itself from any appearance of support for either Democrats or Republicans. We are well aware of the undemocratic actions taken during the primaries by the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Greens cannot be perceived to be allied with such a party.

Signatories included Chris Hedges, Cindy Sheehan, Cynthia McKinney, Rosa Clemente, and even Stein's field director for her 2016 campaign, Adrian Boutureira Sansberro.

So to be clear, Stein (and David Cobb, her campaign manager and 2004 presidential nominee, along with other GP leaders like Ben Manski) took the initiative -- in defiance of a GPUS steering committee vote that went against them -- to pursue the recount, beginning with its stunningly successful fundraising appeal.  What all this means for Green unity going forward is an open question, particularly if Stein pursues elective office again, and a story likely to be reported almost exclusively in this space.

More from Brad Friedman's podcast yesterday and his interview with Richard Hayes Phillips, an author and election fraud investigator of long-standing repute.  Here's an excerpt:

... (Hayes Phillips' detailed report concerns) the unusually large apparent voter turnout numbers in many rural WI municipalities and the difficulty citizens have in verifying and overseeing those numbers. As Phillips explains, there are horrible public reporting requirements for both results and for same-day voter registration provisions in the state.

"At a minimum, the problem is a lack of transparency ... We have no way of knowing how many registered voters there are [in WI]. If you don't know how many registered voters there are, you don't know if too many ballots were cast." His report finds that, based on the latest state-reported voter registration numbers, there were "193 towns with turnout of 90% or better, 25 towns with turnout of 95% or better, and 7 towns with turnout of 100% or better." Those exceedingly high turnout numbers are likely lower in reality, due to same-day registration in WI, but the lack of reporting requirements for those numbers is "unacceptable".

"This is the period of time during which we must analyze those numbers to decide whether or not to challenge the election, and we don't have reliable numbers to use!" Philips, who personally examined tens of thousands of ballots and poll books and much more in Ohio after the disputed 2004 election there, resulting in his book Witness to a Crime: A Citizens' Audit of an American Election, says WI's turnout numbers remind him of a number of counties where he found fraud in Ohio, where there was some 80% turnout reported.

(Hayes Phillips observes) that there are almost no ballots to actually count in PA. "The five biggest cities in Pennsylvania that have no paper record of anybody's vote, except for absentee ballots, which only amount to 1 or 2% of the ballots," he says. "My God, if Wisconsin and Michigan which are very close were to actually flip and fall to Hillary Clinton's column, we will face a constitutional crisis, because this whole election will come down to Pennsylvania and the vote cannot be verified. I want America to know this."

Also hearkening back to Ohio in 2004, Phillips notes that there are tens of thousands of ballots with no vote at all for President in MI --- even near Detroit --- according to the state's unverified optical-scan tabulators. It's impossible to know how people voted, unless paper ballots are actually counted by human beings, he confirms. "Who knows who these ballots are actually marked for?"

"I'm not a shill for Hillary Clinton. I didn't even vote for her. But I want everyone's vote to count," he argues. "I want the winner to win and the loser to lose."

I'm not a purist, and I have no interest in seeing Hillary Clinton prevail, and I don't think she will.  Simply put, the integrity of our elections must be able to withstand scrutiny, or the United States is just another banana republic.  Or Christian caliphate, if you prefer.

Update (11/30): More from Bradblog.  And Rocky de La Fuente has paid for a small sample recount in Nevada.  If that sampling shows some inaccuracies, then the state will order a full recount.  And here's a more recent interview with Bonifaz detailing the mechanics of the recount.

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance is more familiar with the word "emolument" than ever before as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff looks at statewide judicial race results by State Rep district in Harris County.

Libby Shaw at Daily Kos agrees with Donald Trump. The election is rigged. On his behalf. Thanks to the Electoral College. Why I refuse to sit down, shut up and get over it.

Ted at jobsanger also joins the cacophony of whining about the EC.

Socratic Gadfly takes a critical look at Jill Stein's vote recount push, and while noting it's noble, finds a number of problems, mainly with the likely Clinton-loving professor who pushed for it in the first place.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme is appalled that Henry Cuellar is one of 18 Democrats in the US House refusing to denounce Stephen Bannon, the white nationalist who is Trump's pick for chief strategist.

Texas Vox invites everyone to the ninth annual Austin Green Holiday Party, sponsored by 17 environmental groups, on December 8 at Barr Mansion.

The Lewisville High School theatre department will present "The Laramie Project", a retelling of the life and death of Matthew Shepard, December 1-3, according to the Texan-Journal.

The death of Fidel Castro was the latest of seminal 2016 moments, but no more so than for Mrs. Diddie, whose stories of leaving Cuba in the arms of her parents in 1962 were retold for another generation by PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.

Neil at All People Have Value went to Galveston on Thanksgiving Day and posted a nice picture of the beach. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

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

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

Kevin Diaz at the SAEN, via Sayfie Review Texas, reports that US Rep. Kevin Brady will be Congress' and the Trump administration's point man in replacing the Affordable Care Act.

The Rivard Report calls our attention to a few more education bills filed in the Texas Senate for next year's legislative session.

Space City Weather remembers the November 1992 tornado outbreak in Southeast Texas.

The Bloggess explains her strategy for surviving family get-togethers.

The Texas Election Law Blog reviews the case for a presidential recount.

Grits for Breakfast marvels anew at the way some members of our Court of Criminal Appeals operate.

The TSTA Blog calls the A-F campus grading system "shameful".

In her first-ever concert in Texas, CultureMap Houston heard Barbra Streisand mix in some thoughts on barbecue and politics between songs.

And returning after a year-long hiatus, Fascist Dyke Motors reveals that she shot William Burroughs.