Mediaboss Marketing

The election is just five days away, and something truly frightening is happening, something with far-reaching implications for the immediate future of American politics. Republicans, led by Donald Trump but by no means limited to him, are engaging in kind of termite-level assault on American democracy, one that looks on the surface as though its just aimed at Hillary Clinton, but in fact is undermining our entire system.

I know, my conservative friends will say that this kind of talk is just fear-mongering and exaggeration. But there is something deeply troubling happening right now, and it goes beyond the ordinary trading of blows in a campaign season. Consider these recent developments:

[The only way Trump can win]

It is important to understand that is not normal. This is not just bare-knuckle politics. Something extraordinary is happening.

The Post's Rosalind Helderman breaks down the latest developments of the controversies involving the FBI less than a week from Election Day. (Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

Lets take the FBI case as just one example. You have a situation where a group of FBI agents is in direct conflict with prosecutors who believe the agents have a weak case in their attempt to find evidence of corruption that can be used against Clinton. The agents, in an atrocious violation of FBI policy against injecting the Bureau into an election, begin leaking dark innuendo to reporters. That convinces the FBI director that he has no choice but to go public with the fact that the Bureau is looking at some emails that might or might not have something to do with Clinton, though no one has actually read them. That news lands like a bombshell, despite its complete lack of substance.

And then it turns out that these agents are basing their investigation on a book called Clinton Cash by Peter Schweizer. Schweizer is the president of the Government Accountability Institute, an organization co-founded and chaired by Steve Bannon. Who is the CEO of the Trump campaign.

While the imagine if the other side was doing this argument can sometimes sound trite, in this case its more than apt. Imagine if a group of FBI agents were leaking damaging information on Donald Trump in violation of longstanding departmental policy, and it turned out that they were basing their innuendo on a book published by the Center for American Progress, which Clinton campaign chair John Podesta founded and used to run. Republicans would be crying bloody murder, and Im pretty sure the entire news media would be backing them up every step of the way.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump believes there's a global conspiracy to stop him from becoming president but it's not the first time he's pushed unfounded theories. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

[Former CIA chief: Trump is Russias useful fool]

Its not that this kind of thing is completely unprecedented. When Bill Clinton was impeached, people talked about the criminalization of politics the idea that Republicans were trying to use the levers of the justice system as a means to prevail in what should be just ordinary political competition. George W. Bushs administration fired a group of U.S. Attorneys because they were unwilling to pursue bogus voter fraud cases against Democrats or were too willing to investigate genuine corruption among Republican officials. There are cases like the absurd prosecution of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman, who has been in jail for years because he reappointed to a state health care board a man who had donated money to a lottery initiative Siegelman favored. And there was this guy named J. Edgar Hoover.

But as he has in so many ways, Donald Trump takes every ugly impulse Republicans have and turns it up to 11, and just about the entire party follows him down. So now they are making it very clear that from literally the day Hillary Clinton is inaugurated, they will wage total war on her. There will be no rule or norm or standard of decency they wont flout if it gets them a step closer to destroying her, no matter what the collateral damage.

Its important to understand that strong institutions are what separate strong democracies from weak ones. In a strong democracy, one party cant come into power and just lock up its opponents. It cant turn the countrys law enforcement agencies into a partisan tool to destroy the other party. It cant say that the courts will function only at its pleasure. We have the worlds most stable system not just because there arent tanks in the streets on election day, but because we have institutions that are strong enough to restrain the venality of individual men and women. And now, Republicans are not even pretending that those institutions should be impartial and transcend partisanship. Theyre saying, if we can use them to destroy our opponents, we will. Something is seriously breaking down.

[Heres how you destroy a democratic republic]

And please, spare me any explanations for this phenomenon that rely on how divided Americans are. Are we divided? Sure. But theres only one party that is so vigorously undermining core democratic institutions in this way. You may not like what Democrats stand for, but they arent engaging in widespread official vote suppression, chanting that should their candidate win her opponent should be tossed in jail, promising to prevent any Republican president from filling vacancies on the Supreme Court, suggesting that theyll try to impeach their opponent as soon as he takes office, cheering when a hostile foreign power hacks into American electronic systems, and trying to use the FBI to win the election.

Only one party is doing all of that. And we should all be very worried about what Republicans will do after November 8, whether they win or lose.

The rest is here:
Republicans are now vowing Total War. And the consequences ...

Senate Republicans don't necessarily need Donald Trump to win for them to hold onto their majority. (In fact, some of them are campaigning on a Trump loss.) They just need him to avoid a blowout loss.

And on Monday, as the presidential race tightens, we have even more evidence that even if Trump loses to Hillary Clinton by roughly 3 to 5 points, Senate Republicans could hang on. The Fix's Philip Bump pulled the latest polling averages from RealClearPolitics and found that of the 13 most competitive Senate races this cycle, Republicans are outperforming Trump in nine. Sometimes by a lot.

One of the most impressive performances by a Senate Republican comes in one of the Senate's biggest battles. Even though Clinton is up by more than 5 points over Trump in New Hampshire, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R) is leading her Democratic challenger by 2.7 points. That means Ayotte is outperforming her party's nominee by almost 8 points and this is after twisting herself into a virtually unrecognizable pretzel to kind of sort of support Trump.

It isn't all that unusual for an incumbent senator to be polling ahead of their party's presidential nominee by a few points. But to be ahead of the nominee by 8 or 13 points is almost unheard of in modern-day politics. Modern-day votershave been abandoningthe practice of split-ticket voting, where they might mark the ballot for Democrat for president then vote for the Republican for Senate.

In 2012, almost no Republican Senate candidate outperformed Mitt Romney. (The outlier was Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.), who outperformed Romney by almost 8 points.) In that election, only 4 percent of voters voted for both Barack Obama and a Republican congressional candidate.

But Senate Republicans are consistently defying the odds this election cycle. In mid-September, we found that on average, Senate Republicans were polling 4 percentage points better than Trump. A month and a half later, they're outperforming Trump by an average 3.3 points.

It's also helpful for Senate Republicans that the presidential race is tightening: Clinton is ahead by just 2.5 points, according to a RealClearPolitics average.

Speaking of Ayotte and pretzel-twisting, the reason Senate Republicans are hanging on likely comes down to this: They're doing what they need to do to distance themselves from Trump. Almost all of the Republicans on this list have distanced themselves from Trump in one way or another; several ditched Trump right after The Tape, and a handful are campaigning as if Clinton is already president, promising to be a check and balance on her.

The four outliers, where Trump is outperforming his party's Senate candidate (Missouri, Indiana, Wisconsin and Colorado) can mostly be explained by struggling Senate Republican candidates. Most political observers already have Wisconsin and Colorado in Democrats' column; Indiana is a toss-up thanks to a strong Democratic challenger in former senator Evan Bayh.

Missouri is likely the most troubling for Senate Republicans. Sen. Roy Blunt (R) was not expecting a strong race, and yet Trump is outperforming him by more than 6 points.

To be clear, Democrats are still the favored party to take back the Senate. They effectively need to win just four seats; they have a real chance in five to seven. And just because a candidate like Kirk is outperforming Trump doesn't mean he'll win Kirk isstill down by an average 7 points, after all.

Democrats may still be poised to retake the Senate majority. But Republicans aren't making it easy.

See original here:
Senate Republicans keep defying gravity and Donald Trump ...

The FBI announcement Friday that the agency would restart its investigation into Hillary Clintons email has the potential to change the outcome of her presidential race with Republican rival Donald Trump.

But even Republicans eager to retake the White House question the impact of the so-called October surprise, with Election Day just 10 days away.

Most voters have decided they are ignoring her criminal-type activity and are voting for her, California Rep. Darrell Issa said Saturday on Fox News Fox and Friends.

Issa made the comments a day after FBI Director James Comey announced the investigation into Clintons emails, which she sent and received on a private server system while secretary of state, would be reopened as a result of an investigation into former New York Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner sexting on a laptop he shared with wife and Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

Issa said the other segment of voters, who appears equally entrenched, are those who think Trump is too gruff and unconventional for a presidential candidate and they dont want Clinton profiting from running the country like she and other family members apparently did through their charitable Clinton Foundation.

Issa said such voters likely think the Clintons are in it for the money and saying, Lets not have them in the White House getting billions while selling out America.

He pointed out that 50 percent of voters in strongly-Democratic California have already voted.

Trump -- consistently trailing Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, in most major polls by about 5 percentage points -- on Friday immediately tried to seize on the news.

The investigation is the biggest political scandal since Watergate. And its everybody's hope that justice at last can be delivered, Trump said in battleground Iowa, where he remains in a tight race with Clinton.

Clinton, while also in Iowa on Friday, hastily called a press conference to tell the FBI to release the "full and complete facts" about its review.

"Voting is underway, so the American people deserve to get the full and complete facts immediately," she said.

Republican strategist Rob Carter on Friday suggested the revelations will have little impact on incumbent Republicans senators trying to keep their seats and control of the Senate.

While this seems very significant and is being met with great eagerness on the right and some trepidation on the left, I am hard-pressed to get my hopes up that this will help down-ballot Republicans being hurt by Trump in Florida, Missouri, North Carolina and other states, he said.

Republican strategist and Fox News contributor Karl Rove suggested Saturday that the new email review could in fact impact undecided voters and those who had planned not to vote.

It is going to cause some of them to say, This is why I dont like Hillary Clinton, and vote for Trump, he said on Fox News.

Continued here:
Republicans have only guarded optimism about FBI probe ...

SOUTH JORDAN, Utah Jason Chaffetz, the Utah congressman wrapping up his first term atop the powerful House Oversight Committee, unendorsed Donald Trump weeks ago. That freed him up to prepare for something else: spending years, come January, probing the record of a President Hillary Clinton.

Its a target-rich environment, the Republican said in an interview in Salt Lake Citys suburbs. Even before we get to Day One, weve got two years worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it aint good.

In a tweet Wednesday night, Chaffetz reaffirmed his distaste for Clinton and his refusal to endorse Trump but reversed his plans not to vote for the Republican nominee.

If Republicans retain control of the House, something that GOP-friendly maps make possible even in the event of a Trump loss, Clinton will become the first president since George H.W. Bush to immediately face a House Oversight Committee controlled by the opposition party. (Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama lost Congress later in their presidencies.)

[House wave still looking more like a ripple for Democrats]

And other Republican leaders say they support Chaffetzs efforts raising the specter of more partisan acrimony between them and the White House for the next four years.

The rigorous oversight conducted by House Republicans has already brought to light troubling developments in the [Hillary] Clinton email scandal, the office of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) said in a statement to The Washington Post. The speaker supports [Oversights] investigative efforts following where the evidence leads, especially where it shows the need for changes in the law.

And the Oversight Committee may not be the only House panel ready for partisan battle. While the Select Committee on Benghazi appears to have finished its work, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), a committee member who says Clinton might have perjured herself on questions about her email, said recently that he wants the committee to continue.

On the campaign trail, Republicans running for every office confidently talk about Clinton facing criminal charges one day.

Lady Justice doesnt see black or white, Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) said Wednesday at a rally in Loveland. She doesnt see male or female. She doest see rich or poor. But soon, lady Justice will see Hillary Clinton.

If she wins, Clinton would enter office with low favorability ratings and only one-third of voters considering her honest and trustworthy. As a result, Republicans are not inclined to give her a political honeymoon. To many of them, a Clinton victory would mean that Trump threw away an election that anyone else could have won.

This should have been a slam dunk for the GOP, party consultant Frank Luntz said Sunday on CBS Newss Face the Nation.

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told Republican lawmakers on Oct. 10 that he would no longer support presidential nominee Donald Trumpthe start of a messy breakup that will go on through Election Day. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

That analysis stems from the investigations Republicans have led or asked for into Clintons tenure at the State Department. Clinton has been dogged by investigations into the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, and for the better part of two years, shes reeled from questions about the private email server she used while secretary of state. Chaffetz, too, views Clinton as a lucky candidate whose past will catch up with her after the polls close.

Shes not getting a clean slate, he said. Its not like the State Department was bending over backwards to help us understand what was going on. Weve got document destruction. Weve got their own rogue system. Weve got classified information out the door. Weve got their foundation doing who knows what. I mean, it took them four years just to release her schedule.

Several Clinton allies recoiled when asked about Chaffetzs plans for 2017. Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon said Chaffetz threatened to ignore the publics clear desire for the two parties to work together, and he and others accused Chaffetz of wasting taxpayer money chasing old stories.

Its clear Congressman Chaffetz is ready to spend resources on additional worthless political investigations that will, again, come up with nothing, said David Brock, a former Clinton foe who now runs the pro-Clinton political action committee American Bridge and its affiliates.

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (Md.), the ranking Democrat on the Oversight Committee and the Select Committee on Benghazi, said that new Clinton investigations based on the scandals vetted since 2013 would amount to waste.

Republicans are pretending like they havent been investigating Secretary Clinton for years ever since she announced that she was running for president, including everything from Benghazi to emails to the Clinton Foundation, Cummings said in a statement. Its no exaggeration to say that on the first day Secretary Clinton walks into the White House, Republicans will have already investigated her more than any other president in history.

Chaffetz, elected in 2008 after beating a congressman in a primary, rose quickly in the House. After John A. Boehners surprise retirement, Chaffetz briefly ran for speaker of the House. Today, he says hes supportive of Ryan and has no plan to chase his job though he does not rule out supporting someone else. Oversight, he explained, is where the action is.

Chaffetz emphasized that the questions raised since he took over the committee in 2015 have not all been answered.

We still have tens of thousands of missing documents, he said. That ranges from everything from the missing boxes [of subpoenaed emails] to the David Petraeus emails, to [State Department Undersecretary] Patrick Kennedys communications.

Chaffetz also suggested that coming Clinton hearings would touch on issues that had not been vetted. He had sent the committees investigators a weekend article from the Wall Street Journal that asked whether Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) had slanted the FBIs probe of Clinton by helping outside groups put $467,500 into the campaign of Virginia senate candidate Jill McCabe, whose husband, Andrew, later became deputy director of the FBI.

It seems like an obscene amount of money for a losing race, Chaffetz said. The ties between the governor and the Clintons are well-known. He raises money for a lot of people, but why so much for this one person?

In addition, Chaffetz previously said in an interview with CNN, an FBI agents suggestion that Kennedy had tried to get Clintons emails declassified deserved a hard look. I honestly dont believe they act in the best interests of our country, he said of the State Department. Future Oversight Committee investigations, he said, might depend on whether Clinton tries to put people ensnared by previous probes into her administration.

It depends on who stays and who goes, Chaffetz said. If Hillary Clinton brings in the same gang Loretta Lynch, Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin, Jake Sullivan she has her cast of characters. If they put on the same play, shes not going to get good reviews from the critics. Every single time we turn around, this puzzle gets more complicated with more pieces to it. That story about the $12 million from Morocco to the Clinton Foundation? You could take any one of these stories and have a years worth of investigations.

But the Morocco story also points to a potential problem for Chaffetz. The embarrassing 2015 emails from Clinton staffers, debating whether the future candidate should go to Morocco to collect a large charitable donation, came from hacked exchanges published by WikiLeaks. Chaffetz was inclined to steer away from them and had told Oversight Committee investigators to avoid poking through the websites cache. You dont want to be dealing with stolen documents, he said.

[WikiLeaks reveals fears and frustrations inside Clinton world]

Few Republicans share that caution. At his rallies, Trump has cited several WikiLeaks-based stories and accused the media of covering them up sometimes before leading chants of lock her up, directed at Clinton. He has also drawn attention to women who have accused Bill Clinton of unwanted sexual advances, and to videos produced by conservative sting artist James OKeefe that purport to show Democratic strategists plotting violence at Trump rallies.

Rep. Tim Murphy (R-Pa.), who chairs the investigative subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, tweeted that he was stunned by the OKeefe videos. Chaffetz did not mention them. While Democrats blanch at what he might investigate, Clintons longtime critics worry that the Oversight Committee will not go far enough.

In the past, Republicans have used scandal investigations to keep their political opponents off kilter, as opposed to using them for serious accountability, said Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, which has filed dozens of ongoing Clinton suits. They made noise about Clinton lying to Congress, when, if they were really concerned about it, they could have passed a contempt resolution.

The negative feelings toward Clinton the certainty, in conservative media, that she is crooked could put pressure on Republicans from the first moments of Clintons presidency. Asked whether investigations could lead to extended political crises, with echoes of Watergate, Chaffetz said it would depend on Clinton and her team.

It depends on how cooperative they are, how seriously they take it, Chaffetz said. If they continue to erect walls and shore up the turrets, then, yeah, its going to be a battle. But if they act like theyre supposed to, if they comply with subpoenas and actually respond to requests from Congress, well, our republic requires that.

The one thing Chaffetz will not consider is an election that goes badly against the GOP. He sees the Oversight Committee as the tip of the spear, with a valuable role to play in challenging the executive. If Republicans lose the majority, Chaffetz has no Plan B.

Heaven help us! said Chaffetz, laughing. Please, no! Im not even going to think about that one. I cant even utter the sentence out loud.

Original post:
The Washington Post: House Republicans Are Already ...

Here's a list of categories to determine where some of them stand.

Some party members who were lukewarm on Trump ran away from the nominee shortly after the comments came to light.

Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, who is up for reelection, on Saturday became the first sitting Republican senator to back away from Trump following the incendiary comments. "This is not a decision that I have reached lightly, but his pattern of behavior has left me no choice. His repeated actions and comments toward women have been disrespectful, profane and demeaning."

Arizona Sen. and former Republican Party nominee John McCain, who is up for reelection, said Trump's behavior "make it impossible to continue to offer even conditional support for his candidacy."

Maine Sen. Susan Collins, who had said after the Republican National Convention that she would not support Trump, reiterated her stance that she is "still not voting for Hillary, and still plans to write in someone."

In the House, Alabama Rep. Martha Roby said Saturday she will not vote for him and that he should step aside. Roby is from a safe district and is often featuring in GOP family friendly initiatives.

Ohio Sen. Rob Portman issued a statement Saturday night in which he pulled his support and said he would instead vote for Pence.

House Speaker Paul Ryan told Republicans Monday he will no longer defend Trump -- and will instead use the next 29 days to focus on preserving his party's hold on Congress. "The speaker is going to spend the next month focused entirely on protecting our congressional majorities," Ryan's spokeswoman, AshLee Strong, said in a statement.

Rep. Mike Bishop, R-Michigan, said in a statement Monday that Trump was neither his first nor second choice during the Republican primary, and going forward would stop answering questions about Trump. He said in the statement: "Our families deserve a campaign that is focused on the issues, something our 2016 discussions are solely lacking this close to Election Day."

Many Republicans, beginning on Friday night and into Saturday, slammed Trump over the remarks but either said he was preferable over Democrat Hillary Clinton or didn't address their support for him at all.

Pence said he does not "condone" Trump's remarks and "cannot defend them" but is "grateful that he has expressed remorse and apologized."

Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Senate Republican, tweeted he is "disgusted by Mr Trump's words" and is "profoundly disappointed by the race to the bottom this presidential campaign has become."

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said "there is absolutely no place" for Trump's language in American society and that he "must" make a "full and unqualified apology."

Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise said "women deserve to be treated with respect. Period," and that Trump should make "a direct apology."

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul called Trump's comments "offensive and unacceptable" -- but a spokesman didn't respond when asked if Paul was still going to vote for Trump.

Several Republicans said Pence should lead the ticket.

South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 3 Senate Republican and a member of Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's inner circle, wants Trump to "withdraw," saying, "Mike Pence should be our nominee effective immediately."

Nevada Rep. Joe Heck -- who is running for Democratic leader Harry Reid's Senate seat -- said Trump should "step down and allow Republicans the opportunity to elect someone who will provide us with the strong leadership so desperately needed."

Rep. Barbara Comstock, R-Virginia, said Trump's comments were "disgusting, vile and disqualifying" and called for Pence "or another appropriate nominee" to replace him.

Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Missouri, wrote, "I withdraw my endorsement and call for Governor Pence to take the lead so we can defeat Hillary Clinton."

Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner said if Trump wishes to defeat Clinton, he must "step aside," adding, "I will not vote for Donald Trump."

Utah Sen. Mike Lee posted a Facebook video asking Trump to step down: "Your conduct, sir, is the distraction."

Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk tweeted that Trump should drop out and that Republican Party leaders should engage rules for an emergency replacement.

South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard is backing Pence tweeting that "enough is enough" and "this election is too important" to keep backing Trump.

First Ted Cruz made a big show of not endorsing Donald Trump at the Republican National Convention because Trump had insulted his wife and suggested his father helped kill JFK (not true). Then, Ted Cruz ultimately endorsed Trump, although not wholeheartedly. Now, a source close to Cruz confirms he is considering withdrawing that endorsement. But he has not yet.

Republicans who have opposed Trump for months were only too happy to once again declare their opposition to him.

Former presidential candidate Jeb Bush said that "no apology can excuse away Donald Trump's reprehensible comments degrading women."

Ohio Gov. John Kasich on Saturday made it clear he would not vote for Trump, adding, "Nothing that has happened in the last 48 hours is surprising to me or many others."

Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse tweeted, "character matters" and said Trump should "make an honorable move" and "step aside & let Mike Pence try."

CNN's Manu Raju, Dana Bash, Daniella Diaz and Ashley Killough contributed to this report.

See the original post here:
List: Which Republicans are abandoning Trump and which are ...