JustOneMinute

Saturday Morning

I'm all in for Nadal but Federer fans have some valid points too.

Send Better Investigators. Or Newer Clowns.

Why is Adam Schiff appearing anywhere near a camera or microphone to discuss his "investigation"? This is the guy who couldn't find anything wrong with the FBI FISA application to surveil Carter Page. That FBI bellyflop was back in the news today, but let me hand the mic to Matt Taibbi in the Rolling Stone with his thoughts on the Horowitz report and the media meltdown.

No City For Old Men

The coronavirus seems to be deadliest to frail old men. No more Chinese take-out for me!

I Hope Kamala Takes A Bus To The Event

Kamala Harris angling for a VP slot?

Kamala Harris Is Said to Be Weighing an Endorsement of Joe Biden

The move, which would be unlikely to happen until after the Senate impeachment trial, could enhance her chances of becoming vice president but could also anger liberals in California.

So an annoying bid for relevance, just like her campaign.

Don't Know Much About History

The NY Times "1619 Project", devoted to the notion that the US was founded to preserve slavery, may be a highwater mark in agenda-driven woke journalism. Or so we hope.

Trial Of The Millenium

I'm not seriously expected to watch this, am I?

However, I am curious whether Chief Justice Roberts would endorse this view about Senate trials and super-subpoenas:

“With the backing of a subpoena authorized by the chief justice of the United States, you can end President Trump’s obstruction,” said Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, the first woman in history to speak on the Senate floor as an impeachment manager.

Awkward, since the role of the chief justice has been presented as ceremonial. If Roberts rules the motion for a subpoena to be in order does that mean that, if an executive privilege claim reaches the Supreme Court he has already taken a position?

Or... does it mean that the subpoena applies to a person but does not automatically over-ride all privilege claims? For example, suppose Rudy Giuliani is a subpoenaed Senate witness. I presume he could answer some questions, cite attorney-client on some, and perhaps his Fifth Amendment non-incrimination right on others. That would represent compliance with the subpoena, unless the Senate wanted to take his privilege claims to court and get a ruing that he is in contempt of the Senate for failing to answer some questions. I think.

I am highly confident that CJ Roberts does not intend to get sucked into this foodfight.

BONUS FANTASY: If there is a merciful G*d in Heaven, or if the showrunners and scriptwriters have some character, we will have a moment where Rudy is asked by one of the House managers if he is trying to show contempt for Congress. PLEASE, let Rudy channel his inner Mae West and reply, "Sir, I'm trying to hide it."

I should live so long.

 

When You Come To The Fork In The Road, Take It

At the moment of decision the NY Times editors boldly endorse not one but TWO Democrats for President.

OK, who cares? In 2008 the Times editors backed their hometown honey Hillary over the young Barack Obama,which alienated a big part of their newsroom. In 2016 they may have experienced a similar dynamic by backing Hillary over the darling of young socialists everywhere, Bernie. So in this moment of tension and fraught decision making the Times sends out the punting team on third and long.

Getting Ready For Some Football!

I'd like to see Kansas City and Green Bay advance so we can spend two weeks re-hashing Super Bowl I. However, my Bold Prediction is that we get KC and San Francisco.

Saturday Morning!

Enjoy the MLK weekend!

How Did THIS Make The Times?

The NY Times runs a piece on immigration from a self-declared "liberal restrictionist". Guess what? In his time as a reporter he learned that Big Business liked the availability of cheap labor AND leftists liked the prospect of new union members and (one day) voters. Who knew?!?

I’m a Liberal Who Thinks Immigration Must Be Restricted

Immigration can invigorate the country. But when it is poorly managed, it can cause social division — just as it’s doing right now.

By Jerry Kammer

His intro:

In 2001, when I was the new Washington correspondent for The Arizona Republic, I attended the annual awards dinner of the National Immigration Forum. The forum is a left-right coalition that lobbies for unauthorized immigrants and expansive immigration policies. Its board has included officials of the National Council of La Raza, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, as well as the United States Chamber of Commerce, the National Restaurant Association and the American Nursery and Landscape Association.

After dinner, the group’s executive director, Frank Sharry, made a pitch to business allies who wanted Congress to allow them unfettered access to foreign workers. “You guys in business get all the workers you want, whenever you want them,” he proposed. “No bureaucracy.”

“Sold!” yelled John Gay, a lobbyist for the American Hotel and Lodging Association. Mr. Sharry quickly added that the deal must include advocacy for “three little, tiny pieces of paper: a green card, a union card and a voter registration card” for unauthorized immigrants.

For me, a reporter who had long covered immigration in the Southwest and Mexico, the exchange was a revelation about the politics of immigration in Washington. Business lobbyists like Mr. Gay — conservatives who seek loose labor markets so employers can keep wages down — align themselves with liberal activists like Frank Sharry to pursue policies that serve their groups.

OK, that was 2001, but really? The Chamber of Commerce Republicans have been in an unholy immigration alliance with the Emerging Democratic Majority people for decades.

Who, I wondered, was lobbying for the American workers competing with the new arrivals? The answer, I learned, was no one. As the former labor secretary Robert Reich once put it, “There’s no National Association of Working Poor.”

This mismatch of political influence, combined with the social and fiscal consequences of a wave of low-skilled immigrants, led me to believe that immigration should be restricted so that its power to invigorate our country is not eclipsed by its potential to harm workers. I think immigration, like capitalism itself, should be regulated in the national interest, not shaped to serve the free-market libertarianism of the right or the post-national humanitarianism of the left.

That’s why I call myself a liberal restrictionist.

This might be Mickey Kaus' moment.

Hacking Our Way To The Mainstream

Sen. McSally told a CNN journalist what she really thought of him. Awkward!

Begun They Have, The Prog Wars

OK, this was neither conciliatory nor well-planned by Warren:

Warren Told Sanders After Debate, ‘I Think You Called Me a Liar on National TV’

Bernie did NOT respond with "If the moccasin fits...", and mores the pity.

I don't think Warren will win a pissing match about credibility. Gail Heriot takes us back to Warren's medical bankruptcy "study", which at most revealed a crisis of disability insurance (and when a progressive has lost FactCheck...).

Warren's Fauxcahontas story is well known, as is her brilliantly planned Big Reveal that she might be 1/1024 Native American, so take that, Trump.

Let's not even mention Medicare For All, her "I was for it before I was for it but later" own goal.

And more recently, the WaPo took a look at her conveniently evolving standards on big dollar donations.

Warren is fighting the wrong battle with the wrong guy. Yet another display of poor judgment on her part.

 

Those Sexist Democrats

The big news from the Dem debate came when it was over.

Hard to see the Sanders and Warren loyalists kissing and making up after this.

DO LET ME ADD: The Thirty Years Skirmish was funny, by which I mean stupid and pointless. Bernie beat a Republican incumbent in November 1990, 29 years and 2 months ago. Was that within Warren's parameter of "the past thirty years"? Progressive mathematicians are still sorting it out. 

Cory Booker Out And Bernie Surging

The vegan bows out. Nice guy but it never threatened to happen for him.

Meanwhile, its all about authenticity - as the faux-socialist fades the real one gathers the flock. And yes, we'll all be flocked if Bernie is the nominee.