Etiquette



DP Etiquette

First rule: Don't be a jackass.

Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.

Thursday, April 20, 2023

From the Democrats Failing to Defend Democracy Files

Senate Democrats need to play hardball

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) seems spectacularly ill-suited for an era when democracy is at risk, when Republicans observe no rules of decorum and when the federal judiciary’s credibility is crumbling.

Far too restrained and deferential, Durbin has refused to alter practices such as the “blue slip,” which allows home-state senators to nix the president’s judicial nominees, although he has beseeched Republicans not to abuse the practice. Durbin also hasn’t yet conducted hearings on the disastrous effects of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and related abortion bans, nor has he held hearings on a mandatory ethics code for judges — although he has promised hearings on revelations about Justice Clarence Thomas’s failure to disclose luxurious travel gifts and real estate sales. Then again, Senate Democrats as a whole haven’t pushed Durbin, so one cannot blame him alone for his timidity.

Caroline Fredrickson and Alan Neff recently wrote about blue slips for Just Security:

“The blue slip is an opaque — and inherently obstructionist — Senate tradition that allows a single Senator in any State to block a presidential nominee to the District Courts in their electoral patch merely by withholding their consent to consideration of the nominee in Committee. Like the filibuster, the blue slip allows Senators to halt Senate action without ever having to explain themselves to their Senate colleagues, their constituents, or the public, even if it means more criminal and civil cases languish unresolved on federal trial-court dockets for longer periods.”

Durbin could end this practice at any time, removing another abuse of minority-party power in the Senate. It’s one that has been spectacularly abused by Republicans, who have pushed through grossly unqualified, unfit nominees nominated by Republican presidents and yet nixed perfectly acceptable judges nominated by Democratic presidents.
In January, Durbin wrote a letter to colleagues essentially begging them to be more bipartisan and cooperative. (This Republican Party?) “Democratic Senators returned 130 blue slips for President Trump’s district court nominees. This enabled 84 district court nominees to be confirmed — nearly 50 percent of all district court confirmations under President Trump,” he wrote. However, “To date, my Republican colleagues have returned only 10 blue slips on district court nominees.”

Nothing changed, unsurprisingly.

Last week, Carl Hulse wrote for the New York Times:

Then last week, Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, Republican of Mississippi, served notice to the Judiciary Committee that she would not allow the nomination of Scott Colom, a candidate for a court vacancy in the state, to move forward, citing his past political support from the left, among other reasons. Her stance endangered the confirmation of Mr. Colom, a popular Black Democratic state prosecutor who had the backing of Roger Wicker, the other Republican senator from the state, as well as leading Mississippi Republicans including two former governors, Haley Barbour and Phil Bryant.
Durbin had previously promised he would respect blue slips unless the decision to withhold the blue slip was based not on the nominee’s qualifications but on race, gender or sexual orientation. Apparently, this didn’t qualify in his eyes.  
Committee Democrats can, if they choose, push Durbin to end the blue slip practice. They also could demand a hearing on Supreme Court ethics, on book banning, and on the effects of Dobbs and abortion bans. They might even hold hearings on corruption in the prior administration or on domestic terrorism. They could hold hearings on nationwide injunctions and single judge divisions, which allowed for Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk’s abysmal ruling on the abortion drug mifepristone.
This is what the fall of democracy, inconvenient truth and civil liberties looks like when their defenders do not fight as hard as they can. One can reasonably ask the question, which side is the Democratic Party on? Arguably, it's quietly on the side of the corrupt authoritarians or it's on no side at all.

News bits: GOP witch hunt update; No Labels subverted by the radical right?

Sad note: I will probably be on jury duty today, tomorrow, Monday, Tuesday and maybe Wednesday, so I will have limited blogging time those days. ☹️

House Oversight & Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer admitted in an interview with CNN that the committee he leads has yet to find any criminal activity on behalf of President Joe Biden’s family.

CNN host Pamela Brown asked Mr Comer in an interview whether he had learned if Mr Biden had conducted any potential criminal activity when he was in office.

“Well, we’ve found a lot that’s certainly unethical, we’ve found a lot that should be illegal, though the line is blurry as to what is legal with respect to family influence-peddling,” he said in response. “I think people in both parties have argued for many years that family members of both Republicans and Democrats – especially family members of presidents – have benefited from our adversaries around the world.”
A Republican complaining about ethics? In January 2023, Newsweek wrote:
The House voted to approve a new rules package on Monday, days after electing California Republican Kevin McCarthy as speaker following a protracted series of negotiations with the party's right wing and a nearly unprecedented 15 rounds of voting.

"As the Republican House Majority's first move, they voted to gut the Office of Congressional Ethics, which holds Members of Congress accountable for abuses of power," tweeted Democratic Representative John Sarbanes of Maryland. "Decreasing transparency and accountability in government is the last thing we need."
Family influence peddling? Ivanka and Jared weren't family and didn't curry favors? In February 2023, Bloomberg wrote:
House Democrats are renewing calls for information from former President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, on his business dealings with Saudi Arabia, countering Republican accusations of influence-peddling by President Joe Biden’s family.

In a letter to Kushner on Wednesday, Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Oversight and Accountability Committee, asked that Kushner supply details about a more-than-$2 billion Saudi investment in his private equity firm just months after Kushner left the White House.
As usual, GOP hypocrisy is beyond off the charts.


_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________

Last week immediately after becoming aware that No Labels (NL) was planning to run a third party candidate for president in all 50 states, I wrote to them and strongly warned against doing that because it could tip the race to Trump. The NL leadership was making public statements that there was no way that NL could tip the election to Trump. 

NL ignorance and hubris on this point was obvious. NL advisor Benjamin Chavis Jr., a former executive director of the NAACP said: “I just wanted to emphasize on the spoiler question: I would not be involved if I thought in any account that we would do something to spoil the election in favor of Donald Trump. That’s just not going to happen.” I pointed out that no one could predict that with confidence. I then pointed them to the political prediction research by Philip Tetlock, which makes it clear that most experts, pundits and politicians are basically no better at predicting things like this than random guessing. To me, what NL was doing was beyond dangerous and thus incomprehensible.

New reporting suggests that NL has been subverted by the radical right, just like the original Tea Party appears to have been subverted by radical Christian nationalists years ago. The New Republic reports:
No Labels Took More Than $100,000 From 
Clarence Thomas Buddy Harlan Crow

The “nonpartisan” group also relied on Crow—whom it dubbed one of its “whales”—to reel in nearly two dozen other donors from 2019 to 2021

Officially, No Labels’ mission is to create a space for moderates on both the left and the right to come together and find solutions above the partisan fray. But the group has managed to anger Democrats at times by endorsing conservative candidates such as then-Representative Cory Gardner in Colorado, who was running for Senate against moderate Democrat Mark Udall in 2014. No Labels also labeled Donald Trump a “problem solver” in the early days of the 2016 campaign because he signed a piece of paper No Labels circulated supposedly committing to enacting certain reforms if elected.  
Years before megadonor Harlan Crow was reading ProPublica stories about his close ties with Clarence Thomas, often seen as maybe the most partisan justice on the Supreme Court, he was doling out donations and referring friends to No Labels, the outside group that claims to offer an avowedly nonpartisan approach to politics.

If some might see a contradiction there, it’s one that doesn’t seem to matter to either Crow or No Labels.

The New Republic obtained a document with figures showing that between 2019 and 2021, Crow donated over $130,000 to No Labels. Crow was considered a “whale”-level donor by the organization—an august status reserved for only the most generous donors. Crow referred other donors to No Labels, ones who earned the “whale,” “dolphin,” and lesser “minnow” status. By 2021, Crow had steered nearly two dozen other donors to No Labels, the information provided to The New Republic shows.  
This year, No Labels has been looking to set up a launching pad for a third-party presidential ticket with one Republican and one Democrat on it. But the focus of these efforts will more likely help a Republican—the way things are looking, Trump—win a matchup against Joe Biden. No Labels has been torched by Democrats and Democratic-leaning groups, including the moderate Third Way, for mounting an effort that’s almost bound to hurt Biden.
Despite his claims** to be a compromiser and not an extremist, Harlan Crow is no compromiser or moderate. He's a radical right fascist. Based on TNR reporting and the NL's naivety and/or obliviousness, it looks like NL has been subverted by the radical right. 

** For example, he told TNR: “America is in trouble if we keep going down the path of letting the two extremes dictate our politics. I support No Labels because our government should be about what’s best for America, not what’s best for either political party. That’s also why I’ve supported candidates from both sides of the aisle who are willing to engage in civil discussions to move our country forward.” Business Insider comments:
  • GOP megadonor Harlan Crow has been secretly funding lavish vacations for Justice Clarence Thomas.
  • But he's also given thousands to Democrats who've stymied the party's agenda at various times.
  • They include Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, as well as Reps. Josh Gottheimer and Henry Cuellar.
Texas billionaire Harlan Crow's largesse goes far beyond yacht trips and resort stays with the top conservative jurist. It also includes thousands of dollars in contributions to congressional Democrats known for bucking their party.
_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________

From the American Theocracy files: The NYT writes
Supreme Court Delays Decision on Abortion Pill, Preserving Access for Now

The Supreme Court on Wednesday extended for two days a pause on a lower-court ruling that had sought to limit access to the abortion pill mifepristone, ensuring that the drug would continue to remain widely available for now.

In a brief order, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. announced that the pause would lapse on Friday at midnight, giving the court more time to consider the case, though it could act before then.
Along with No Labels, it looks to me like the NYT has been subverted by radical right authoritarians . Why? The Supreme Court took a blatantly invalid, obviously theocratic lower court decision and extended it two days. The title of the article is propaganda. Access was not “preserved for now.” It was preserved two puny days, which is amounts to not preserving it at all for real world purposes. A more accurate title is: Supreme Court Supports Illegal Lower Court Decision on Abortion Pill


Truth??


A few graphs to illustrate how well the American justice system works (cough cough)

 



Mississippi has an incarceration rate of 1,031 per 100,000 people

Oklahoma has an incarceration rate of 993 per 100,000 people
Georgia has an incarceration rate of 968 per 100,000 people
Arkansas has an incarceration rate of 942 per 100,000 people
Kentucky has an incarceration rate of 930 per 100,000 people

Arizona has an incarceration rate of 868 per 100,000 people
Wyoming has an incarceration rate of 850 per 100,000 people
Texas has an incarceration rate of 840 per 100,000 people
Tennessee has an incarceration rate of 838 per 100,000 people
South Dakota has an incarceration rate of 824 per 100,000 people

Connecticut has an incarceration rate of 394 per 100,000 people
New York has an incarceration rate of 376 per 100,000
New Jersey has an incarceration rate of 341 per 100,000 people
New Hampshire has an incarceration rate of 328 per 100,000 people
Maine has an incarceration rate of 328 per 100,000 people
Rhode Island has an incarceration rate of 289 per 100,000 people
Vermont has an incarceration rate of 288 per 100,000 people
Massachusetts has an incarceration rate of 275 per 100,000 people




So, here is the million dollar question:
 

Republicans like to talk tough on crime — but they're the ones with a real crime problem

Crime is much worse in "red states" — and that's been true for years. Why don't Democrats ever just say it?





Tuesday, April 18, 2023

Brazen shameless lies: Dominion settles defamation lawsuit against Faux News

From the Beyond Outrageous Lies Files: The AP reports
Fox and Dominion Voting Systems reached a settlement Tuesday in the voting machine company’s defamation lawsuit, averting a trial in a case that exposed how the top-rated network chased viewers by promoting lies about the 2020 presidential election.

The terms of the settlement were not immediately clear.

The settlement was announced by the judge in the case, who allowed the case to go to trial while emphasizing that it was “CRYSTAL clear” that none of the allegations about Dominion aired on Fox by allies of former President Donald Trump were true.

A statement from Fox said the settlement reflected the network’s “continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. We are hopeful that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of the acrimony of a divisive trial, allows the country to move forward from these issues.”
As I expected in the case of a settlement (post yesterday), the terms of the agreement are secret. Faux gets to proudly and brazenly lie about how great it and its “highest journalistic standards” are. Faux could not care less about allowing “the country to move forward from these issues.” The only acrimony that was relevant was that between Dominion and the fascist Faux trying to protect its revenues, profits and fascist, democracy-crushing agenda. 

Update: Oops, I stand corrected. The Hill is reporting that Faux paid Dominion $787.5 million. I thought that would be kept secret.

Thoughts about normalizing people shooting people

Standing his ground
he feels threatened

I was going to ignore this, but it popped up again today. Now I'm wondering if shooting people for no reason is going to be, or already is, a new norm. In some states, the shooters are protected by stand your ground laws. In other states, shooters are protected by radical fascist Republican politicians hell bent on God only knows what, probably corrupt plutocracy-Christian theocracy. In blue states, maybe the shooters will face jail at least sometimes. Maybe.

The NYT reports on the most recent shooting:
A man in upstate New York was charged with murder on Monday in the killing of a woman who was in a car that mistakenly drove into his driveway, officials said.

The woman and the three friends she was with never got out of the car on Saturday night, Jeffrey J. Murphy, the Washington County sheriff, said at a news conference. They were turning around after realizing their error when the man, Kevin Monahan, 65, stepped out of his house, in Hebron, N.Y., and fired at least two shots at the car, the sheriff said. 
“There was no reason for Mr. Monahan to feel threatened,” Sheriff Murphy said, “especially as it appears the vehicle was leaving.”
What I wanted to ignore was another recent shooting and an older shooting where the shooter will get pardoned. The recent shooting was in Kansas City.
A White 84-year-old homeowner who allegedly shot and wounded Ralph Yarl, a Black teen, after the 16-year-old went to the wrong home to pick up his siblings will face two felony charges, Clay County Prosecuting Attorney Zachary Thompson announced early Monday evening.
The fate of an Army sergeant Daniel Perry, who was found guilty of fatally shooting a protester at a Black Lives Matter demonstration in 2020, is up in the air as the Texas pardon board reviews the conviction for a possible pardon at the governor’s request and Perry’s attorney pushes for a retrial.

On April 7th, Perry, a 35-year-old active duty sergeant at Fort Hood, was convicted of murder in connection with the death of Garrett Foster, 27, who was killed after Perry shot him during a protest in Austin, Texas, in July 2020. Perry claims he acted in self-defense because he feared for his life after Foster, who was carrying an assault rifle under Florida’s open carry law, allegedly made him feel threatened.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott believes that Perry should be exonerated based on Texas’ stand your ground law, which allows using deadly force to defend yourself if you feel you’re in danger.  
Abbott called for an expedited review of Perry’s conviction on Saturday. “I am working as swiftly as Texas law allows regarding the pardon of Sgt. Perry,” Abbott tweeted. “I look forward to approving the Board’s pardon recommendation as soon as it hits my desk.”
Q: Is it just me, or is people shooting people being normalized, even in blue states?


Useful instructional video: What gunfights are like