It is so bracing with respect to the filibuster to be reminded that we have been here before, especially with that fine quote my MLK himself. Thank you also for reminding me that there are very fine journalists like Maddow and Tribe—the only two of the four you mention that I follow when I can—in an era of news-as-entertainment. It is indeed time for the government to act governmental and prosecute criminal conspiracy. And finally, Robert, thank you for emphasizing the importance of young voters. That is where our main hope should reside.
Mr. Garland's plate is getting very full of what appear to be very straightforward cases. One wonders if he lacks the full facts needed to act or simply the fortitude.
That is a question that we will know the answer to in a year. If he hasn't prosecuted the leaders of the coup, it will be because of lack of fortitude.
The question then arises - Do we have a year to wait? It occurs to me that an elegant, if partial, solution to both this issue and the Supreme Court imbalance would be for senior Democrats not currently serving in elected office to put gentle but unmistakable pressure on Justice Breyer to take the honorable retirement he deserves, appoint Mr. Garland in his place and get a serious prosecutor like Preet Bharara or Sally Yates as AG. That would at least answer the question of courage in the office.
All good ideas except Mitch still has ways to keep D appointments out, I fear. And, look how long it has taken to get through many of the nominees to the DOJ in the past year. I think rebuilding the department has been a big, big issue.
Your newsletter today and HCR's are a summary I hadn't heard (we don't get Maddow) so succinctly. I think the case of Election Fraud vs Voter Fraud is condensed enough to be front page news. So distressing. Along with voter rights crashing, covid surging and the planet warming, I am going back to my seed catalogues until we can actually have friends over for dinner again.
Hi, Carole. If you have had the chance, I recommend reading Philip Rotner's article. Most statutes are written to prohibit "voting fraud", i.e. involving ballots. Prosecuting "election fraud" is more challenging, but not impossible. But the fake electors certificates did involve the falsification of ballots, so the acts are likely felonies that can be prosecuted by state and federal authorities.
Carole- a way you can watch Rachel Maddow is to routinely check You Tube. Excerpts of most of her programs are regularly posted there. You don't need to sign into access them, just check the playlists.
Yes, I have to retreat into seed catalogs as well for some portion of each day, especially since politicians have decided to take us back to the Gilded Age, which was only gilded for the wealthy.
Thank you as always for you important call to action.
With regard to the terrorist who entered a Texas Synagogue in Colleyville, Texas and held four individuals including its rabbi hostage for many hours before the hostages escaped, here are my own comments shared with a group of almost 600 progressives.
The real story on unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. -
One of my contacts called a report to my attention that the terrorist who held four people hostage at a Synagogue in Colleyville, Texas had entered the U.S. by crossing southern border illegally. That information is incorrect as FBI released information shows Malik Faisal Akram, the terrorist in this attack, a U.K. citizen and resident, landed in the U.S. at JFK airport in NY on December 29th. This attempt to use misinformation to attribute this latest terrorist incident to further inflame conservative sentiments against current border enforcement efforts at our southern border is shameful.
Without spending time recounting the tragic stories of so many presenting themselves legally for inspection at our southern border it is important to know the real facts about the size of unauthorized immigrant population in the U.S., how it has changed over time, continues to change, and how those included in this population arrived. If you wish to know the real facts you are unlikely to get them from Republican politicians, right-wing media, anyone’s podcast, or Facebook.
Here are the real facts courtesy of a non-partisan, reliable source, the Pew Research Center:
Please note that the information shown in and used to develop this report is footnoted showing it came from a non-partisan, authoritative source, the U.S. Census Bureau.
Real information and facts on virtually any topic is available with careful internet searches. However, it is very important you understand the relative authority and reliability of the information you select, the underlying source of that information, and the bias if any of those sources. If you ask a friend or family member where a particular story or piece of information came from and the answer is Facebook, Tik Tok, Instagram, or simply an unspecific reference to “the internet,” you can be pretty certain it is not a reliable or authoritative source. Those sources may be great for watching pet videos or cute stories tugging at your heartstrings from family and friends but they are unlikely to present authoritative information on anything else that matters in the real world here on earth one.
Exactly right, Robert, and not for the first time. Here in New England, it’s the time when it seems as if spring will never come. We just need to keep on going, day by day. And in the affairs of the nation, too, we need to keep on keepin’ on.
I would like to propose an "exercise", "test" whatever you want to call it for you to initiate and give the results to your readers. Ask your readers to comment on: Re current writers in the public media are they engaged in a business or a profession? If the public answer is "business" should it be pushed into being a "profession" under my definition below? If the public answer is "a profession" what is being done or should be done to hold the "unprofessionals" to a higher standard?
To me a "profession" involves acting under a standard of conduct established by the senior and most experienced members of the activity regarding accuracy, honesty and a strong eye to the public well being. There can be enforcement powers, such as lawyers can be disbarred, not by the government but by their fellow attorneys and the Courts, but such enforcement is not necessary for an activity to be a "profession". The comments of professors of journalism should be specially sought.
My own view in proposing this is: I think that Journalism has been and still has strong elements of a "profession" but on the whole is currently practiced by the media writers, their headline writers and editors as a business to "get in print and get readers, whatever it takes". I am fully aware that editors and headline writers have a powerful voice in pushing readers as they pursue a "business". What if anything can be done about that?
I find it bracing to consider that in a time when the scared old white men in power are poised to hit "delete" with regard to Roe v Wade and the voting rights bills, they have completely missed the voters who will absolutely finish them off...our young people. Now, how does one go after this rising threat to those old dudes?
President Biden's vision for his administration has been compared to FDR's New Deal. Throughout the Great Depression and the war years, FDR frequently addressed the nation through "fireside chats." President Biden needs to do something similar, only more often. People need to hear from him what he has already accomplished, what he hopes to accomplish and how we can help. He has to energize his base which will help enormously to get out the vote. I don't understand why he isn't already doing this, but if the White House were deluged with requests perhaps it would happen.
It is so bracing with respect to the filibuster to be reminded that we have been here before, especially with that fine quote my MLK himself. Thank you also for reminding me that there are very fine journalists like Maddow and Tribe—the only two of the four you mention that I follow when I can—in an era of news-as-entertainment. It is indeed time for the government to act governmental and prosecute criminal conspiracy. And finally, Robert, thank you for emphasizing the importance of young voters. That is where our main hope should reside.
MLK's statements are chilling because nothing has changed in sixty years. We have deferred to Senate procedure for far too long.
Does anyone think that the Republicans would hesitate to change the filibuster in any way that was to their advantage?
It did change, but then, reverted. The villains are still villains. We used to be able to trust the Senate, but now, no.
Mr. Garland's plate is getting very full of what appear to be very straightforward cases. One wonders if he lacks the full facts needed to act or simply the fortitude.
That is a question that we will know the answer to in a year. If he hasn't prosecuted the leaders of the coup, it will be because of lack of fortitude.
The question then arises - Do we have a year to wait? It occurs to me that an elegant, if partial, solution to both this issue and the Supreme Court imbalance would be for senior Democrats not currently serving in elected office to put gentle but unmistakable pressure on Justice Breyer to take the honorable retirement he deserves, appoint Mr. Garland in his place and get a serious prosecutor like Preet Bharara or Sally Yates as AG. That would at least answer the question of courage in the office.
All good ideas except Mitch still has ways to keep D appointments out, I fear. And, look how long it has taken to get through many of the nominees to the DOJ in the past year. I think rebuilding the department has been a big, big issue.
Might not work but, if it's not tried, it definitely won't.
THAT suggestion sounds like an idea whose time has come.
As a former judge, does Garland not think these fake elector slates are prosecutable.
Your newsletter today and HCR's are a summary I hadn't heard (we don't get Maddow) so succinctly. I think the case of Election Fraud vs Voter Fraud is condensed enough to be front page news. So distressing. Along with voter rights crashing, covid surging and the planet warming, I am going back to my seed catalogues until we can actually have friends over for dinner again.
Hi, Carole. If you have had the chance, I recommend reading Philip Rotner's article. Most statutes are written to prohibit "voting fraud", i.e. involving ballots. Prosecuting "election fraud" is more challenging, but not impossible. But the fake electors certificates did involve the falsification of ballots, so the acts are likely felonies that can be prosecuted by state and federal authorities.
Thanks. Just sent the article to WI friends to nail on the AG to prosecute.
THAT is a happy answer: prosecutable.
Carole- a way you can watch Rachel Maddow is to routinely check You Tube. Excerpts of most of her programs are regularly posted there. You don't need to sign into access them, just check the playlists.
Thank you! I think of YouTube for how-to-fix-the-dryer and never fully understood that it records most things. I will watch her now.
Yes, I have to retreat into seed catalogs as well for some portion of each day, especially since politicians have decided to take us back to the Gilded Age, which was only gilded for the wealthy.
Thank you as always for you important call to action.
With regard to the terrorist who entered a Texas Synagogue in Colleyville, Texas and held four individuals including its rabbi hostage for many hours before the hostages escaped, here are my own comments shared with a group of almost 600 progressives.
The real story on unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. -
One of my contacts called a report to my attention that the terrorist who held four people hostage at a Synagogue in Colleyville, Texas had entered the U.S. by crossing southern border illegally. That information is incorrect as FBI released information shows Malik Faisal Akram, the terrorist in this attack, a U.K. citizen and resident, landed in the U.S. at JFK airport in NY on December 29th. This attempt to use misinformation to attribute this latest terrorist incident to further inflame conservative sentiments against current border enforcement efforts at our southern border is shameful.
Without spending time recounting the tragic stories of so many presenting themselves legally for inspection at our southern border it is important to know the real facts about the size of unauthorized immigrant population in the U.S., how it has changed over time, continues to change, and how those included in this population arrived. If you wish to know the real facts you are unlikely to get them from Republican politicians, right-wing media, anyone’s podcast, or Facebook.
Here are the real facts courtesy of a non-partisan, reliable source, the Pew Research Center:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/04/13/key-facts-about-the-changing-u-s-unauthorized-immigrant-population/
Please note that the information shown in and used to develop this report is footnoted showing it came from a non-partisan, authoritative source, the U.S. Census Bureau.
Real information and facts on virtually any topic is available with careful internet searches. However, it is very important you understand the relative authority and reliability of the information you select, the underlying source of that information, and the bias if any of those sources. If you ask a friend or family member where a particular story or piece of information came from and the answer is Facebook, Tik Tok, Instagram, or simply an unspecific reference to “the internet,” you can be pretty certain it is not a reliable or authoritative source. Those sources may be great for watching pet videos or cute stories tugging at your heartstrings from family and friends but they are unlikely to present authoritative information on anything else that matters in the real world here on earth one.
Exactly right, Robert, and not for the first time. Here in New England, it’s the time when it seems as if spring will never come. We just need to keep on going, day by day. And in the affairs of the nation, too, we need to keep on keepin’ on.
I would like to propose an "exercise", "test" whatever you want to call it for you to initiate and give the results to your readers. Ask your readers to comment on: Re current writers in the public media are they engaged in a business or a profession? If the public answer is "business" should it be pushed into being a "profession" under my definition below? If the public answer is "a profession" what is being done or should be done to hold the "unprofessionals" to a higher standard?
To me a "profession" involves acting under a standard of conduct established by the senior and most experienced members of the activity regarding accuracy, honesty and a strong eye to the public well being. There can be enforcement powers, such as lawyers can be disbarred, not by the government but by their fellow attorneys and the Courts, but such enforcement is not necessary for an activity to be a "profession". The comments of professors of journalism should be specially sought.
My own view in proposing this is: I think that Journalism has been and still has strong elements of a "profession" but on the whole is currently practiced by the media writers, their headline writers and editors as a business to "get in print and get readers, whatever it takes". I am fully aware that editors and headline writers have a powerful voice in pushing readers as they pursue a "business". What if anything can be done about that?
I find it bracing to consider that in a time when the scared old white men in power are poised to hit "delete" with regard to Roe v Wade and the voting rights bills, they have completely missed the voters who will absolutely finish them off...our young people. Now, how does one go after this rising threat to those old dudes?
President Biden's vision for his administration has been compared to FDR's New Deal. Throughout the Great Depression and the war years, FDR frequently addressed the nation through "fireside chats." President Biden needs to do something similar, only more often. People need to hear from him what he has already accomplished, what he hopes to accomplish and how we can help. He has to energize his base which will help enormously to get out the vote. I don't understand why he isn't already doing this, but if the White House were deluged with requests perhaps it would happen.
From Judd Legum at Popular Information, a list of Republicans who voted against voting rights but proclaimed admiration for Dr. King.
https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1483095412642881537 (copy and paste