Mediaboss Marketing

WASHINGTON Senate Democrats on Thursday asked the White House and law enforcement agencies to preserve all materials related to contacts between Russians and individuals associated with President Donald Trump.

The nine Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a letter to White House counsel Donald McGahn, and wrote similar letters to the Justice Department and the FBI.

The letters ask for confirmation that the White House, FBI and Justice Department have instructed their employees to preserve all materials related to any contacts Trump's administration, campaign, transition team or anyone acting on their behalf have had with Russian government officials or its associates.

The letter to McGahn said the executive branch and Congress have been investigating Russia's efforts to interfere with the 2016 election. As a part of these investigations, there have been ongoing inquiries into communications or contacts between the Trump campaign or Trump transition team and associates or officials of the Russian government, including communications involving ousted national security adviser Mike Flynn.

Congressional staffers said they were not aware of any evidence that materials were not being preserved, but Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Thursday on the Senate floor: "There is real concern that some in the administration may try to cover up its ties to Russia by deleting emails, texts and other records that could shine a light on those connections. These records are likely to be the subject of executive branch as well as congressional investigations and must be preserved."

Continued here:
Democrats want documents preserved on any Russian contacts - Minneapolis Star Tribune

New York Times

The Democrats' Immigration Problem New York Times A diner patron in Erie, Penn., reading the post-election news. Credit Hilary Swift for The New York Times. Why is immigration such a problem for the Democratic Party? The issue splits traditional Democratic constituencies. It pits groups with competing ...

Continued here:
The Democrats' Immigration Problem - New York Times

Last April, working the rope line after a campaign visit to Pittsburgh, Hillary Clinton stretched out her hand to greet Yong Jung Cho. The Democratic presidential candidate was walking into a familiar ambush a shouted question from a climate change activist, with a camera set to record.

Will you reject money from registered fracking lobbyists? asked Cho, who was working with the anti-fracking group 350 Action.

Clinton laughed. Go read the articles! she said. Ive debunked all of that.

Clinton went on to win the Pennsylvania primary, and the Democratic nomination, and Cho went onto co-foundWe Will Replace You, a new PAC thats warning Democrats of primary challenges if they dont fightPresident Trump everywhere they can. Among the groupsdemands:opposing all Trump appointees and all of Trumps legislative priorities; sing Congressional processes and rules of order to systematically bring all business to a crawl; and publicly supporting impeachment if Trump is found to have broken the law or violated the Constitution.

We were not happy to see some Democrats vote for so many of Trumps appointees, said Claire Sandberg, a co-founder of the group and the digital organizing director for Sen. Bernie Sanderss (I-Vt.) 2016 presidential bid. Seeing two Democratic senators vote for Rex Tillerson was absolutely appalling. Seeing 14 vote for Mike Pompeo was absolutely appalling. It seemed that Democrats in Congress were not getting the message, Sandberg said, referring to Trumpssecretary of state and CIA chief.

[Democrats are cheering Andrew Puzders defeat. But its really just a consolation prize]

And since then, weve seen [Sens.] Jon Tester, Claire McCaskill and Dick Durbin express the opinion that Neil Gorsuch deserves a fair shake, after Republicans refused to do that much for Merrick Garland, she said in comparing Senate treatment of Trumps and former president Barack Obamas Supreme Court nominees.

We Will Replace You is the latest of several projects designed to warn Democrats of consequences in their primaries or in 2018s general elections if they make deals with Trump. Justice Democrats, launched last month by progressive commentator Cenk Uygur, issued a detailed progressive platform and hinted at primary challenges if Democrats ignored it. Last week, a small crew of Sanders campaign veterans launched Draft Bernie for a Peoples Party, arguing that progressives needed to give up on the Democrats altogether and break the two-party system.

Even the most progressive candidates for DNC chair do not oppose large campaign contributions to party politicians from billionaires and super PACs, Draft Bernie co-founder Nick Brana wrote in a Huffington Post op-ed. How can we free our government from the influence of the oligarchs without even challenging their mechanisms of political control? Our country was much more sharply divided over slavery than it is over present-day money in politics and inequality. Yet Lincolns Republicans replaced the Whig Party in four years.

[Conservative group pressures Democratic senator Tester on Trumps Supreme Court pick]

We Will Replace You, like Sanders himself, is more focused on changing the Democrats. In addition to 350 Actions Cho, the PACs co-founders include 350 Action Executive Director May Boeve, Sanderss 2016 digital director Kenneth Pennington, former U.S. Student Association president Alexandra Flores-Quilty and Communications Workers of America National Political Director Rafael Navar. The activists experience, Sandberg said, suggested that they could apply pressure on Democrats whether or not they were raising fundsto challenge them.

The most effective thing you can do to persuade voters is mobilize volunteers to talk to them one-on-one, door to door, Sandberg said. That doesnt cost much money.

Still, the recent record of progressive primary challenges is mixed, with some victories in House primaries but high-profile losses in Senate races.

[Priorities USA memo: Focus on what Trump hasnt delivered can help Democrats]

In 2006, the last year that Democrats took back Congress from Republicans, some left-wing energy was directed at a successful primary challenge of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), a supporter of the war in Iraq. Lieberman went on to win reelection as an independent. In 2010, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee waged a near-miss primary fight against Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.); Lincoln went on to lose reelection by a landslide.

So far in 2017, said PCCC co-founder Adam Green, the group has not talked to potential primary challengers of red state Democrats. It has, however, polled possible messaging against Trump nominees, to prove to wavering Democrats that theyd be in better shape politically if they cast no votes.

In one poll, the PCCC asked voters how theyd feel about now-Secretary of the Treasury Stephen Mnuchin if they learned that hed submitted inaccurate information to the U.S. Senate, and hid $100 million of his wealth from the committee charged with approving or denying his nomination. InOhio, Wisconsin, and Florida, close to 70 percent of voters said theyd oppose him.

Right now, in some states, weve found that voters think Trump is taking on special interests and Democrats are defending them, said Green. Ill just quote something P.T. Barnum said if you want people to look at what youre doing, start a fight.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, noted that fewer senators were voting to approve Trump nominees, and he said he was confident that would-be challengers would come to see the good that incumbents were doing.

Theyre going to recognize that when youve got a senator whose values are in the right place, and is also popular in their state, its a good thing, Van Hollen said. I think the people will recognize the importance of senators who stand up for their states and also embody the right values.

But Sandberg argued that Democrats were relying on outdated ideas about politics when they insisted that the partys red-state senators needed to cut deals with Trump.

We question the underlying assumption that Democrats need to move to the right or make concessions to Trump in order to beat him, Sandberg said. In many places where Trump won by double digits, Obama had won by double digits, and Bernie did very well in the primary.

Read the original here:
New progressive PACs warn Democrats to oppose Trump or get primaried - Washington Post

No is a word used too often by legislators. Faced with a tough vote, its easy to explain why youre holding out for a different, better, competing idea. Maybe you object to a single provision. Maybe you hope that a more perfect bill will emerge after the next election. A no today protects you from having to take responsibility for controversial decisions tomorrow.

The problem, of course, is that our form of governance requires give and take, and solving big problems necessarily requires leaders to take political risks. The Constitution guarantees that competing interests have a role in crafting legislation. And for more than two centuries except for the Civil War Americans have showed that collaboration works best in the service of perfecting the union. Ronald Reagan and Tip ONeill. Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich. Bipartisan cooperation has sustained American peace and prosperity.

That tradition, and with it our democracy, is now at risk. Were hardly the first to decry the rampant polarization and partisanship in Washington and across the country. But the anger and alienation that began under President George W. Bush and worsened under President Obama has reached a fever pitch early in the Trump administration, and has us both asking though from different parties the same question:

How can this possibly end well for the U.S.? Obstruction worked well enough for Republican politicians under Obama; they now control the executive and legislative branches. It may work well enough for Democratic politicians under Trump; perhaps theyll take back the executive and legislative branches. But what then? Wont the cycle just continue?

With every denunciation and caustic tweet from Capitol Hill and the White House, the possibility of substantive progress on critical issues like putting Americans to work, fixing our tax code or rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure grows more distant.

Both sides seem to believe that if they stand firm, yelling no with sufficient fervor, the opposition will eventually back down or lose so many seats that their opinions wont matter. Many voters, apparently, endorse this approach, taking to the streets and storming town halls to encourage ideological purity. At a moment of fantastic possibility, when technological, scientific and medical advances offer to make life better for everyone, our political system has degenerated into dysfunction.

There is one way out of this mess. Somehow, someway, leaders need to stand up and say,Enough.They need to confront the angriest and most intransigent voices in their own party and say: Your politics of division and anger is getting America nowhere. Either help find a solution or get out of the way.

We canttake our democracy for granted. We cant assume there is no cost to the bitter partisanship that is turning into tribalism.

Its both odd and heartening that, despite the bickering in Washington, the substantive challenges facing the United States are not unsolvable. Policy ideas abound that could help create jobs, balance the budget, secure retirements and achieve energy security ideas supported by majorities of the American people in nationwide polling.

Just for example, 74% of Americans want to enforce current tax laws to close the $400-billion annual gap between legally owed taxes and taxes paid. And 83% want to modernize the electric grid. There is common ground out there, if only our leaders would look for it.

Theres even a hopeful sign that some in Congress are ready to rise above the partisan mud and start focusing on doing the peoples business. Last week saw the formation of a Problem Solvers Caucus in the House with nearly 40 members from both sides of the aisle [who] will be fighting for common sense principles that impact all Americans.

One of the greatest accomplishments of American democracy, is that throughout our history, the nations leaders have usually risen to the occasion when it was absolutely necessary. Even when it wasnt politically expedient, courageous public servants have fought for their principles and reached across the aisle. When they realized that there were limits to what they could accomplish on their own, they sat down with their political opponents and compromised. They hardly ever loved the result in its entirety. But, for the sake of the greater good, they got themselves to yes.

Jon Huntsman is a former governor of Utah. Joe Lieberman is a former U.S. senator from Connecticut. They are national co-chairs of No Labels.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter@latimesopinionandFacebook

See the original post:
Democrats are copying Republican obstruction tactics. This won't end well for the US - Los Angeles Times

MSNBC

Democrats push creative maneuvers to obtain Trump's tax returns MSNBC Bill Pascrell, a Democrat who serves on the Ways and Means Committee, has asked the committee's chairman, Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas, to order the Treasury Department to provide tax returns to the committee. Brady's office did not respond to a request ... Just resisting Trump won't do enough for DemocratsWashington Post The Democrats' 2020 NightmareVanity Fair Democrats plan Tax Day anti-Trump protestsPolitico USA TODAY -Boston.com -Online Athens all 448 news articles »

Continue reading here:
Democrats push creative maneuvers to obtain Trump's tax returns - MSNBC