Mediaboss Marketing

Harvard Law School Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz is being prevented from offering powerful testimony to the House Judiciary Committee on behalf of President Trump because establishment Republicans are too fearful about his past work for Jeffrey Epstein to let him speak, Rep. Matt Gaetz said.

"I suggested we call Dershowitz. I think Dershowitz should have been on our list," the Florida Republican said during an appearance Monday on the pro-Trump podcast War Room: Impeachment, which is hosted by Steve Bannon

"There were some establishment Republicans who were, like, Oh no, we can't have Dershowitz because of these Epstein allegations." Gaetz said. Dershowitz helped arrange a 2008 plea deal for the convicted sex offender, who died in jail earlier this year after being arrested on separate charges.

Gaetz protested what he described as Democrat-leaning academics using scholarly voices, which Dershowitz could have contested, to give legitimacy to the hearings, which begin Wednesday.

"They are going to bring what I can only perceive as pious, condescending, law professor, 'act of omission'-types to talk down to the Congress and really talk down to the MAGA movement. You bring Dershowitz right in there and make Democrats look at a civil libertarian-style Democrat, and I think Dershowitz would have carved them up," Gaetz said. "But, because they are worried about the [Epstein] allegations, there was consternation about calling him.

I think that was a mistake, he said. I don't think there is anyone we could put in that chair better than Alan Dershowitz. There's a decent chance Dershowitz would have been the professor of some of the Democrat witnesses."

In a letter over the weekend to Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler of New York, ranking member Doug Collins of Georgia called for the panel to expand its list of witnesses and add more Republicans.

"To ensure fairness and restore integrity to the ongoing impeachment process, I request an expanded panel and a balanced composition of academic witnesses to opine on the subject matter at issue during the hearing," wrote Collins.

"The Committee will hear from only four academic witnesses during its consideration of the question of impeachment. This is less than a quarter of those called to testify during the Clinton impeachment," he said.

The four witnesses, all constitutional law scholars identified for the first time Monday, will appear Wednesday. Critics note an imbalance that privileges the Democrats.

Last week, a Republican aide reportedly said Nadler had not responded to four recent letters from Republicans with questions about the impeachment proceedings.

See the article here:
'Dershowitz would have carved them up': Matt Gaetz says fearful Republicans blew it by not letting Harvard professor testify - Washington Examiner

In the next phase of the impeachment inquiry, the House Judiciary Committee will hear from legal experts Wednesday on the nature of impeachment. Patrick Semansky/AP hide caption

In the next phase of the impeachment inquiry, the House Judiciary Committee will hear from legal experts Wednesday on the nature of impeachment.

Wednesday could bring the beginning of the end to House Democrats' efforts to impeach President Trump.

The House Intelligence Committee completed what it called the fact-finding portion of the impeachment inquiry on Tuesday with the release of a report about the Ukraine affair and the subsequent vote to adopt it.

Now the curtain opens on a new act, one in which House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., and his members must decide on how to proceed based on what their colleagues have uncovered.

The hearing is scheduled to convene at 10 a.m. ET Watch it live here.

Nadler, his compatriots and their leader, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., have said that impeachment isn't a foregone conclusion and that it depends on the outcome of their process.

Nadler has convened a hearing on Wednesday with a panel of four law professors because, he says, the members of the Judiciary Committee need to get a sense about the historic and legal context of impeachment and whether it may be merited in this case.

"This new phase of the inquiry will look different," said one staffer working on the impeachment inquiry. "With the transmittal of the report to the Judiciary Committee, this hearing will examine the constitutional framework put in place to address presidential misconduct."

To be sure, however, Democrats also are likely to restate, for TV audiences, the findings of the report unveiled on Tuesday by Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif. This case is as serious as it gets, Democratic staffers said ahead of Nadler's hearing.

"The president abused his power to advance his personal, political interests over our own national security interests," as another staffer said.

Republicans step up their defenses

The Judiciary Committee's ranking member, Doug Collins, R-Ga., and Trump's other Republican defenders have mocked and faulted Democrats' process thus far, calling it unfair and also groundless.

The Intelligence Committee's Republicans, led by Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., released a minority report on Monday defending Trump in the Ukraine matter and accusing Democrats of simple political animus.

The White House, meanwhile, said on Tuesday that Schiff was no better than a "basement blogger" trying to find facts to fit his theories.

The administration isn't sending an attorney to take part and Trump's campaign said on Tuesday that Nadler's witnesses are "just left-wing liberals who have been talking about impeachment since President Trump took office."

"With witnesses like these, the Democrats' impeachment hearing will be nothing more than political theater," Trump's campaign said. "It's all part of their transparent attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and stop President Trump in 2020."

Collins also already has complained about how headlong and reckless he says Nadler has been moving ahead of Wednesday's session. Collins and Republicans are likely to use it to continue to try to undercut the process and mock what they've called Democrats' patchwork case.

In a fiery press conference Tuesday evening, House Republican leaders slammed Schiff and mocked him for not testifying.

The indictment

House rules give Nadler and the Judiciary Committee the responsibility for assessing what, if any, articles of impeachment to draft against Trump.

Democrats could then use their majority on the panel to advance them to the floor of the full House, where, if a sufficient number of Democrats lent their support, Trump could become just the third sitting president in history to be impeached.

That is the equivalent of an indictment by a grand jury a statement by the House that it considers there to be enough evidence for Trump to stand trial in the Senate.

Republicans, led by Trump ally Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., control the upper chamber and are expected to acquit the president, permitting him to retain his office.

Nadler and Democrats can see what's ahead for this process the same as anyone. But impeachment is worth doing, they've argued, because it sends a message about what Congress will not tolerate and it forces senators to go on the record defending Trump's actions in the Ukraine affair.

Democrats' dilemma

Impeachment is a quasi-legal but mostly political process. Pelosi, Nadler and their compatriots are balancing this as they decide what kind of case to make against Trump

Should it be narrowly constructed around the facts of the House Ukraine investigation? Or should it be a broader case that reflects more about what Democrats argue has been improper behavior by Trump?

Given that House Democrats likely cannot remove Trump, the question they must ask themselves is what will do him the most political damage and themselves the least damage, mindful about the election next year.

Pelosi and Nadler may have answered these questions already for themselves, but the public aspect of that process, at least, is what is scheduled to get underway on Wednesday.

The hearing also will mark Nadler's return to the spotlight after months in center stage for Schiff and the House Intelligence Committee. But Nadler was an early convert on impeachment and insisted earlier this year that his committee was pursuing an impeachment case even before the imprimatur given by the vote of most other Democrats in November.

In that earlier phase, Nadler sought to exploit some of the findings of former Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller, including those that Democrats have said amount to obstruction of justice by Trump.

The chairman's interest in that thread, which also has involved litigation by the House against Trump and the Justice Department involving evidence from Mueller and other matters, may mean the question isn't settled as to whether Nadler might favor a broad indictment of Trump that takes elements from the Russia investigation or focuses closely on Schiff's report.

NPR congressional reporter Claudia Grisales contributed to this report.

Read the original here:
Judiciary Hearing To Open Final Act Of Democrats' Trump Impeachment Saga - NPR

The 2020 Democratic field is going back to school sort of.

Teachers unions, students, parents and civil rights groups are expected to grill Democratic hopefuls on public education issues at MSNBC's "Public Education Forum 2020: Equity and Justice for All" on Dec. 14 in Pittsburgh, it was announced Tuesday.

The candidates who are expected to attend include: Former Vice President Joe Biden; Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana; billionaire businessman Tom Steyer; and Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. The network said that presidential candidates who either previously qualified for the October debate or currently hold statewide office were invited to attend.

Many of the 2020 candidates have released ambitious proposals to reshape the American education system from free public college to erasing student debt to addressing segregation in schools but have squabbled over the best way to implement their proposals.

MSNBC will moderate and exclusively livestream the forum. Ali Velshi, host of "MSNBC Live," and Rehema Ellis, an NBC News education correspondent, will serve as the forum's moderators. Topics will include early childhood education, school investment, student debt and disparities in public education, among other issues.

The event will be streamed live on NBC News Now, MSNBC.com and NBC News Learn, and will be featured across MSNBC programming.

Dartunorro Clark is a political reporter for NBC News.

Read the rest here:
MSNBC to host December forum on education issues with 2020 Democrats - NBC News

Over the past week, two ads have blanketed the television airwaves, introducing Americans to Democrats newest presidential candidate, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. From Saturday, November 23 through Sunday, December 1, those ads aired 19,006 times for an estimated $23.7 million, according to data from Kantar/Campaign Media Analysis Group.

During that same time frame, all the other Democratic presidential candidates ads aired a combined 10,337 times, costing an estimated $7.6 million. In fact, in just over a week, Bloomberg spent more than one-third of what the rest of the Democratic field has spent all year long. Only fellow billionaire-turned-candidate Tom Steyer has spent more than Bloomberg.

Eye-popping though it was, Bloombergs ad buy still fell well short of constituting the biggest weeklong TV ad buy in the history of presidential campaigns. According to CMAG, that record still belongs to Hillary Clinton, who aired 52,997 spots for an estimated $33.7 million (in 2016 dollars today that would be about $36 million) in the final week of the 2016 campaign. Bloomberg also doesnt even crack the top 10 in terms of most ad airings by a candidate in a single week. Then-President Barack Obama alone had eight weeks in the 2012 cycle when his ads ran at least 26,000 times.

That said, Bloombergs buy still represents the most prolific week of political television advertising so far in the 2020 cycle. And according to CMAG, it probably is the most money any candidate has ever spent on TV in a single week in a primary election. Simply put, we have no idea how Bloombergs spending will affect the primary because we have no precedent for it.

Also unusual is where Bloomberg is airing his ads. In keeping with his plan not to contest the first four states on the primary calendar, hes only aired 151 spots so far in media markets based in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina. Instead, his ads have aired most often in Florida (1,796 times), California (1,753 times) and Texas (1,326 times). It is probably not a coincidence that those are also the three most delegate-rich states with March primaries. In case it wasnt already clear, it looks like Bloombergs plan is to dwarf other candidates early-state delegate hauls by doing well on Super Tuesday and beyond.

Its worth remembering, however, that presidential campaigns arent decided, or even predominantly waged, on TV. Political scientists who have studied the question have found that television advertising has only modest effects on peoples vote choice. Heavy campaign spending also yields diminishing returns; Bloomberg may rise, say, 5 points in the polls after last week, but if he spent another $23.7 million next week, it might not buy him another 5 points, as his ads may have reached everyone they are going to reach (and voters who saw them but still dont support Bloomberg may be hard to pry away from their current candidate choice). Finally, researchers have persistently found that the effect of political TV advertising is short-lived so any polling bump Bloomberg gets today may not matter if it doesnt survive until the primaries. Perhaps the real question is whether Bloomberg is planning on, or is even capable of, sustaining this level of spending for the next three months. Keep an eye on our TV ad tracker to find out.

See the original post:
Michael Bloomberg Outspent The Entire Democratic Field In TV Ads Last Week - FiveThirtyEight

A month after ending his presidential campaign, Democrat Beto ORourke has turned his attention to state politics namely, an effort to help flip the Texas House of Representatives from Republican control to the Democrats.

With Texas Democrats nine seats away from retaking the majority of seats in the Texas House, ORourke is trying to convince his donor base to send money to an organization called Flip The Texas House, which has targeted 17 House Districts in which Republican candidates won by fewer than 10 percentage points last year. More than half are districts in which ORourke won the majority of votes as he ran for U.S. Senate.

In 2018, I carried nine of the 17 districts now represented by Republicans. So we know that we can do this, ORourke said in the email. We just need your help to make sure that we make the most of this opportunity.

For subscribers: Houston gets hotter in 2020 with up to 11 competitive Texas House races

Ten of the targeted districts are in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and five are in and around Houston. One is in San Antonio and one is in Killeen.

The push follows a 2018 cycle in which Democrats flipped 12 Texas House seats from Republican control. Texas Democrats have not had the majority of seats in the Texas House since 2001.

ORourke, a former congressman from El Paso, said if Democrats retake the majority in the Texas House, it would mean an end to racist gerrymandering, and a chance to address gun violence, reproductive rights, Medicaid expansion, criminal justice and climate change in Texas.

Texas Take: Get political headlines from across the state sent directly to your inbox

Targeted Districts

Nine State House Districts held by Republicans where Beto ORourke won in 2018.

Houston area:

HD 138 - Dwyane Bohac (not seeking re-election)

HD 134 - Sarah Davis

HD 26 - Rick Miller

San Antonio area

HD 121 - Steve Allison

Dallas-Fort Worth area

HD 64 - Lynn Stucky

HD 66 - Matt Shaheen

HD 67 - Jeff Leach

HD 112 - Angie Chen Button

HD 108 - Morgan Meyer

When the Legislature next meets in regular session 2021, it will take up redistricting, the process by which every congressional district and every state legislative district is redrawn to account for population shifts.

In his 2018 campaign, ORourke was a fundraising powerhouse, raising almost $79 million, more than any Congressional candidate in the nation. ORourke lost his race against U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz but came within 2.6 percent of winning the closest a Democrat has come to winning a statewide office in Texas since the 1990s.

The rest is here:
Democrat Beto ORourke turns his attention to flipping the Texas House - Houston Chronicle