Mediaboss Marketing

5. Here comes Mike...: With his campaign's TV ad spending soaring above $100 million, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is starting to see some return on his investment.

A Fox News poll released Sunday put Bloomberg at 5% nationally, putting him behind only the presumed top tier of former Vice President Joe Biden (30%), Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (20%), Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren (13%) and South Bend, Indiana, mayor Pete Buttigieg (7%). (Bloomberg is tied with Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar.)

Remember, too, that Bloomberg is running a national strategy as opposed to an early state one. Bloomberg is effectively skipping all four votes in February (Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina) in order to focus his time and money on Super Tuesday (March 3) and beyond, when the vast majority of Democratic delegates will be allocated. Given that approach, national polling may be more relevant right now to measure Bloomberg's growth and chances than early state data.

Even with Bloomberg's early gains, he still needs help to be viable come March. If a single candidate sweeps the first four states (or even wins three of the four), the race may be all but over when the calendar turns to March. The more chaos in February, then, the better for Bloomberg.

The coincidence of timing could make for one of Trump's most memorable rallies. While he has sought to shrug off the impeachment charges publicly, CNN reporting makes clear that he is privately quite agitated about the whole thing. And if there's ever a time and a place where Trump will let what he thinks on the inside come out, it's in a campaign rally -- surrounded by thousands of cheering faithful -- in the middle of the impeachment proceedings.

The juxtaposition of the rally and the likely vote also speak to another reality: Trump's unique ability to counter-program the news. While attendees of the Michigan rally will, no doubt, be aware of the impeachment drama, they will take the news (and analysis) of the whole thing from Trump himself. Ditto for hardcore Trump supporters, who either see highlights of the speech or watch it themselves online.

3. A rebellion against the DNC: On the eve of this week's sixth debate in California -- more on that below! -- there's already a fight over the debates scheduled for the new year.

For its part, the DNC seemed unmoved. "The DNC will not change the threshold for any one candidate and will not revert back to two consecutive nights with more than a dozen candidates," said a spokeswoman for the committee.

At issue is the DNC's criteria, which, for this December debate included more than 200,000 unique donors and four polls in national or early states in which a candidate gets 4% support or more. (A candidate could also qualify with two national or early state polls that show him or her at 6% or higher.)

It seems unlikely the DNC will budge -- at least based on this single letter. The committee's stated goal was to ensure the debate process was fair, yes, but also that as the votes got closer the field was winnowed down to candidates able to demonstrate clear support.

If the DNC holds firm, it is likely curtains for the likes of Booker and former San Antonio Mayor Julin Castro who didn't make this week's debate and seem very unlikely to meet the rising DNC criteria.

2. The sixth debate is coming (or is it??): On Thursday, the seven top Democratic candidates will be at Loyola Marymount University for the sixth Democratic debate. It's the smallest number of candidates to qualify for any of the six debates and should provide a better opportunity for the top candidates to engage with one another -- and draw clear contrasts on critical issues most notably health care.

Assuming the debate happens -- and there's too much riding on it for it to not -- expect Buttigieg to come under the scrutiny that everyone expected him to face in the last debate just before Thanksgiving. (Buttigieg largely got a pass in that debate because the moderators seemed entirely uninterested in allowing the candidates to actually, you know, debate one another.)

A strong showing by Biden would cement his late momentum -- although the former vice president has struggled to put together a single solid debate yet. Warren needs to re-find her spark in the race after two less-than-impressive debate over the last two months. And it's getting late for Klobuchar to make her move.

1. The biggest week of the Trump presidency is here: Assuming all goes according to plan, the Democratic-controlled House will impeach Trump on two articles -- abuse of power and obstruction of Congress -- sometime on Wednesday. At which point the articles will be sent to the Senate for a trial that will begin shortly after Congress returns in the new year. No matter what happens in the Senate trial, Trump will be, after this week, only the third president to be impeached by the House.

While there's little doubt that Democrats will pass both articles of impeachment, the vote will still be a telling indicator of party unity -- and nerves.

The question for Democrats is how many other members join that duo in opposing either one or both articles of impeachment. The key group to watch is the 31 Democrats (including Peterson and Van Drew) who represent seats that Trump won in 2016. So far, none of those Democrats have come out against either article of impeachment. But there's still 72 hours before the vote.

For Republicans, Trump is hoping to replicate the floor vote on formalizing the impeachment inquiry, when not a single GOPer voted "yes." And so far, no Republican has publicly announced plans to break ranks.

If Trump can hold all House Republicans in line, it makes it much, much easier for the President and his allies to make the case that this is a purely partisan and political endeavor by Democrats. And it would also send a clear message to on-the-fence Republican senators about which way the wind is blowing.

No matter what happens next, this week is history.

Read more here:
The biggest week of Donald Trump's presidency - CNN

Since the day of Donald Trumps inauguration, there has always been a strain of aspirational thinking within the Resistance that maybe, just maybe, his vague and mostly fictional populist sensibilities could be harnessed for good. The man is a deranged fascist, yes, the thinking goes, but perhaps he will do something nice for all the laid-off manufacturing workers and such purely to spite the Republican establishment that made fun of him. Trump offers just enough unpredictability that forces whose most fervent desire is for things to just get back to normal can imagine that his racist rightwing populism might be nudged over into progressive populism, without him noticing. Hope springs eternal, for those willing to ignore reality indefinitely.

Some would call this maintaining a positive attitude. Others would call it, more accurately, maintaining a gullible attitude. Either way, this brand of thought has preoccupied certain Democratic constituencies enough to make their opposition to this administration perfunctory, rather than passionate. It is hard to maintain an appropriately obsessive focus on throwing the bastard out if you are always harboring the dream of striking a deal with him.

Nothing embodies this better than the newly agreed-upon USMCA the Trump administrations updated Nafta trade deal that has already become a receptacle of both Republican and Democratic political fantasies. The actual text of the deal has not yet been released, but from what we know so far, it seems to be rather meh on substance. It contains provisions that are unduly favorable to big tech, but Democrats succeeded in axing a handout to big pharma; it improves on labor conditions for Mexican workers, but fails to address the fundamental cross-border inequalities that have sucked millions of manufacturing jobs out of America since the original Nafta was passed a quarter-century ago; environmentalists have branded the deal a failure; the highest praise that the labor-friendly Economic Policy Center could muster was to say that the USMCA is the best of a set of bad choices; and for all of the crowing from the White House, the real macroeconomic impact of the deal is expected to be close to nil. It is fair to say that the deal is better than the original Nafta, which was bad, and is better than having our nihilist president simply tear up our trade agreements with little alternative, which is also bad, but it is not, you know, good, if were being honest. That fact has not prevented Nancy Pelosi from swaggering about like a conquering hero, swaddled in the wacky fantasy that there are actual living, breathing Americans who will now decide to vote Democratic because the party has proven that it can govern during impeachment. (Sadly, the last American swing voter concerned with bipartisan trade deal negotiating ability died in 2001, at the age of 99.)

The most disturbing aspect of this entire saga is not even the content of the deal. It is the political capital expended on it by those who are supposed to be protecting us from the predations of the Republicans. In particular, organized labor a group that is engaged in a bitter existential struggle for survival due to a decades-long assault by the Republican party, and that should be the spearhead of powerful resistance to Trump and his priorities has spent a frightful amount of time and energy securing this deal. Richard Trumka, the head of the 12.5 million-member AFL-CIO, has long made the USMCA his top public priority, and his support was vital to the agreements success, notwithstanding the mixed feelings of several individual unions. Ask yourself: is the renegotiation of this trade deal the most important thing for the United States labor movement, at a time when union membership has declined to only one in 10 workers, and the billionaires are hoarding all of the economic gains, and the white nationalists are running the White House? The problem is not that Trumka was involved in a trade deal; nor is it that Democrats did not get every last thing they wanted in the trade deal; the problem is that we are living in a time of incipient fascism and grotesque inequality when the millions of working people who most desperately need the protection of unions are being everywhere underpaid, disempowered and deported, and the person who represents the movement that should be kicking down doors and rushing to their rescue is, instead, focused on cutting a trade deal with Donald Trump.

We dont need clever little bureaucrats pursuing minor policy tweaks in an effort to recapture the good old days

Perspective: it is important to have it.

The Democratic establishments wrongest and most dearly held belief about the 2016 election is that all we need to do is to win back some of those mythical White Working Class Voters who defected to Trump, and all will be well again. It is this view one that ignores the deep, structural inequalities that led us here and the deep shit we are now in that drives leaders like Nancy Pelosi and Richard Trumka to prize the USMCA so much. It is a flag that they can wave to that single demographic group that they believe holds the key to regaining power. Unfortunately for them, their thesis is all wrong. We dont need clever little bureaucrats pursuing minor policy tweaks in an effort to recapture the good old days. We need fire-breathing warriors, rallying those who have been bulldozed by the plutocracy. The future of the labor movement is not Trump-voting midwestern whites, but young people and immigrants and women and minorities, all of whom are being constantly oppressed by those in power today. And the future of the Democratic party is not going to be secured by ostentatiously finding common ground with the current president. If you think this trade deal is good, imagine what we might get if we waited a year or two, and negotiated it under President Bernie Sanders.

More here:
Cutting a deal with Trump on free trade will not win a single vote for Democrats - The Guardian

Alexander Heffner, Opinion contributor Published 3:15 a.m. ET Dec. 16, 2019 | Updated 10:51 a.m. ET Dec. 16, 2019

Presidents have been impeached, but none have been removed from office due to impeachment. Confusing? Here's how. Just the FAQs, USA TODAY

The Trump impeachment is spotlighting the Founders' fears of foreign influence on US security and leaders, and turning liberals into originalists.

There is one indisputable fact about the impeachment of President Donald Trump that should be clear to all Americans: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is making the Constitution great again. Furthermore, she is charting a path forward for the Democratic Party to once again be the guardians of civil society and democracy and to make the liberals on the Supreme Court, and on the streets of America, the true originalists.

Last week Pelosi told the public and her congressional colleagues that she would not be trying to corral House votes on impeachment. "People have to come to their own conclusions," she said. "They've seen the facts as presented in the Intelligence Committee.They've seen the Constitution.They know it. They take an oath to protect and defend it.

That is the point. Abuse of power and obstruction are the cumulative law breaking and corrupt actions of the Trump years, from the Russian and Ukrainian affairs to Trump's violations of the emoluments clauses,relentless attacks on the First Amendment and authoritarian fantasyabouttearing up the Constitution and serving for 29 years.If you think these are Trumps jokes on the media, "Demagoguery and Democracy" author PatriciaRoberts-Miller reminds us that World War II Axis villains started their wars against humanity masking autocratic dystopian dreams in comedy.

By contrast, Pelosi has revived the Founders original intent, their established textual concern about foreign interference, bribery and influence adversely affecting the welfare of American citizens. Trumps violations are unbecoming a president of the United States.

Not only was this concern about foreign powers fortified constitutionally, Americas first president, George Washington, reiterated in his Farewell Address that his successors must never become subjected to the dictates of foreign governments. Had Washington, Alexander Hamilton, James Madisonor any of the framers heard an American presidential candidate and then president implore adversaries to hack our own American institutions, they would have considered that treason.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at the Capitol in Washington, D.C. on Dec. 10, 2019.(Photo: J. Scott Applewhite, AP)

There has been a bogus contention over too many years that the textualist view of the Constitution is only the 18th century ratified document instead of the text as it organically and authentically matured. This has always been a false choice. You are an originalist by reading the document, in its entire meaning and its entire body of precedent over decades and centuries.

This is what Pelosi has done, and her timing is preempting what could well be partisan Supreme Court decisions that deny the authority of Congress to subpoena witnesses and shield the presidents taxes from congressional and public scrutiny.The impeachment articles defend both federalism and the separation of powers, in which the Republicans believed until Trumps authoritarianism cannibalized them.

Impeach and remove: An election is no solution when Trump, Russia and Republicans are determined to steal it

Now there is reason for Pelosi to fear these faux textualists will ignore the original document of which they have feigned infatuation and rule in Trumps favor.This fear is justified.In the Senate, McConnell's decision to coordinate an impeachment defense with the White House and Graham's refusal to be an impartial juror are, like Trump's conduct, the opposite of the checks and balances the Founders envisioned.

Trump appointees to the bench have been proven retrograde, refusing to acknowledge many historicalconstitutional protections, and even the legal authority of Brown v. Board of Education. Roberts and company have also ruled against the centerpiece of American life: Voting. After deciding that Ohio can remove citizens from the rolls for not voting, the Supreme Court has emboldened disenfranchisement in Wisconsin, Georgia and elsewhere. The framers would laugh that anti-democratic outcome out of town. And theyd be appalled at the ruling to uphold a Muslim travel banthat excluded Saudi Arabia, the country that deployed the hijackers against us on 9/11 and to whichTrump has business ties.

Too serious to ignore:USA TODAY's Editorial Board: Impeach President Trump

Pelosi and her new originalists know it is past time for jurists and elected representatives to assert this basic truth: The Constitution, with the Bill of Rights, 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments, reflects the norms and laws by which we live. It is Trump and Attorney General William Barr who behave like third-world autocrats and want to undermine the literal meaning of the Constitution of the United States. But Pelosi is determined not to let them.

A republic if you can keep it, Pelosi said, quoting Benjamin Franklin,when she opened the impeachment inquiry in September. Thats also the title of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuchs book. But the mantle of the Founders does not belong to Gorsuch, or to Chief Justice John Roberts, or those farcically pretending to be textualists.Pelosi is rightfully reclaiming it for the American people, a majority of whom voted against Trumpin 2016, and half of whom nowfavor his removal from office.

Impeachment is the beginning of liberal originalism to safeguard law and order in America. And we'll haveSpeaker Pelosi to thank for it.

Alexander Heffner is host of "The Open Mind" on PBSand coauthor of A Documentary History of the United States.Follow him on Twitter: @heffnera

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/12/16/trump-impeachment-nancy-pelosi-revives-constitution-column/2657025001/

See original here:
Trump impeachment: Pelosi reclaims the Constitution for liberals and today's America - USA TODAY

Share This Story!

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Rendon just signed a seven-year, $245 million contract with the Los Angeles Angels.

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

What I'm Hearing: The hot stove was on fire during the Winter Meetings in San Diego, and as Bob Nightengale details, Scott Boras was the center of attention. USA TODAY

During his introduction Saturday as the newest member of the Los Angeles Angels, third baseman Anthony Rendon explained why he missed the Washington Nationals' controversial White House visitwith President Donald Trump after winning the World Series.

"I wanted to go so bad," Rendon said."Obviously being from Texas, I think you guys know which views we lean towards."

"I was actually told that the White House visit wasn't supposed to be until Wednesday ... I was already packing up the house, my wife was already back home in Houston, so I was going to fly back up Wednesday morning.

"Then the day of the parade (Sunday) they go 'Oh the White House visit has been changed to Monday.' Ihad something planned."

Rendon during his introductory news conference on Saturday.(Photo: Alex Gallardo, AP)

Rendon added that he was supposed to golf with Trump and teammates Ryan Zimmerman and Stephen Strasburg in Florida during spring training, butthe president didn't make it.

"He actually bailed on Strasburg and Zim and I in spring training," Rendon said."We were supposed to golf together, and he didn't show up. So that was a little (payback)for him. We were supposed to play at Trump International."

The 29-year-old third baseman was one of the top free agents available this winter and he signed a seven-year, $245 million deal with the Angels after spending his first seven seasons with the Nationals.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

See the article here:
Anthony Rendon wanted to go to White House 'so bad', says Trump 'bailed' on golf with Nationals stars - USA TODAY

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told CNNs Jake Tapper that President Donald Trump should not be impeached because Trump is dedicated to rooting out corruption, and his motives for holding up the military funding to Ukraine were centered around those concerns. In his response, however, Tapper schooled the congressman in the facts.

Tapper asked Paul, So youre saying that you think that President Trump was actually doing this because he was combating corruption?

Paul replied, Well, yes, there are all kinds of accusations that Burisma and Hunter Biden and the company were corrupt and the founder of the company was corrupt.

Tapper then went in hard on the senator, listing the absurd amount of corrupt former aides and associates that the president seemingly had no problem surrounding himself with.

But this is a president whose former personal attorney Michael Cohen, former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn, former campaign adviser Roger Stone, former deputy campaign chair Rick Gates, former associate George Papadopoulos, all of them have been convicted of federal crimes, Tapper said.

The host continued by citing a corrupt business and charity that donned the Trump name, In addition, last year, Trump University settled a $25 million fraud lawsuit. Last month, President Trump admitted misusing his own charitable foundations money, was ordered to pay $2 million.

Tapper then drove home his point, asking, You really think President Trump is concerned about rooting out corruption?

Instead of answering the question, Paul pivoted and spoke about former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Republicans have seized upon this argument in defense of the president since the Justice Departments Inspector General report, released last week, concluded that the FBI made significant errors when surveilling Page in 2016.

So, Tapper put the focus back on his point and said, It was the Trump Justice Department that put all those people in prison or sentenced all those people. Its not me.

Again, Paul returned to Page, but Tapper replied, That doesnt absolve Paul Manafort of money laundering.

Tapper added, Im asking you about President Trump and corruption. I just listed a number of close associates of President Trumps who are either in prison or facing sentencing.

Paul replied by sounding a familiar note in our current political environment where seemingly everyone chooses their own facts, Right. But I think its based on opinion, Paul said.

Link:
Rand Pauls Defense of Trump on Corruption Goes Down in Flames During Contentious Interview - Rolling Stone