Harry Reid just comes out and says that he is confident the Trump campaign was in on the Russian hacks. Update!

Courtesy of HuffPo: 

Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with WikiLeaks in the runup to the presidential election to damage Hillary Clinton, outgoing Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) charged on Monday. 

Reid, who has sharply criticized FBI Director James Comey for sitting on intelligence connecting Russian operatives and the Trump campaign, said he was unsure if Trump himself was aware of the activity. But he said people in Trump’s orbit certainly were. 

“Someone in the Trump campaign organization was in on the deal. I have no doubt. Now, whether they told [Trump] or not, I don’t know. I assume they did. But there is no question about that,” Reid said in an interview with The Huffington Post. “So there is collusion there, clearly.” 

“Don’t put blindfolds on,” he said. “Here is the deal: We have a situation where during the campaign, especially the last few months of the campaign, WikiLeaks was heavily involved in trying to hurt Hillary Clinton and it helped Trump. And you have Trump who said he likes Putin better than he likes Obama.”

You know considering that Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chairman, has deep ties with Russia, I concur with Reid that it is VERY likely that Trump's campaign coordinated with Russia on these hacks and how they were released.

And it is not as if Russia's ties to the Trump campaign were exactly secret even months ago.

Remember Trump himself once invited the Russians to hack Hillary while appearing on TV.

Personally I would like to see someone in the Clinton campaign, or "gasp Obama administration, make this same accusation.

Because I think they are completely justified in doing so.

Update: Well if you wish I guess you will receive.

I wrote this post late in the afternoon yesterday, and then late last night President Obama was on The Daily Show with Trevor Noah and essentially did exactly what I wished he would do.

Courtesy of the Daily Beast: 

Noah didn’t waste any time before asking Obama about the report. 

Obama then pointed to the Oct. 7 joint statement issued by the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which said: “The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations.”

“Well, it’s not a rush. Keep in mind, when the DNC got hacked, we immediately assigned our intelligence community—our law enforcement—to investigate what had happened. And we determined—and announced—in October that it was the consensus of all the intelligence agencies in law enforcement that organizations affiliated with Russian intelligence were responsible for the hacking of the DNC materials that were being leaked. That was a month before the election. This was not a secret,” the president said. 

“I will say this, though, Trevor: None of this should be a big surprise,” he continued. “This was reported on before the election. I don’t think there was any doubt among anybody in the media or among members of Congress as to who was being advantaged or disadvantaged by the political gossip that was being put out in drip-drip-drip fashion leading up to the election.” 

Then POTUS took things one step further, drawing a line between President-elect Donald Trump’s team and the Russians. 

“This was not a secret running up to the election!” exclaimed Obama. “The president-elect [Trump] in some of his political events specifically said to the Russians, ‘Hack Hillary’s emails so that we can finally find out what’s going on, and confirm our conspiracy theories.’ You had what was very clear relationships between members of the president-elect’s campaign team and Russians, and a professed shared view on a bunch of issues.”

And there you have it, in his own very careful way President Obama has essentially confirmed that the Russian government hacked American agencies and civilians in order to hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump get elected.

He did not go as far as to openly accuse the Trump campaign of collusion with the Russians, but he left little doubt that such was the case.

Harry Reid's letter to James Comey accuses him of sitting on "explosive" evidence of ties between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

Holy sh*t.
Harry Reid letter to Comey: you have explosive information about ties between Trump and the Russian govt pic.twitter.com/xJX45hzkpM

— Mark Elliott (@markmobility) October 30, 2016

Courtesy of CBS News: 

The pugilistic Reid, who plans to retire after finishing out this term in Congress, penned a blistering letter to Comey Sunday, accusing the FBI chief of holding back “explosive” information about Donald Trump’s close Russian ties while possibly violating the Hatch Act by reviving the Clinton email investigation. 

“Your actions in recent months have demonstrated a disturbing double standard for the treatment of sensitive information, with what appears to be a clear intent to aid one political party over another,” Reid wrote, adding that through Comey’s “partisan actions, you may have broken the law.” 

The Nevada Democrat went on to insinuate Comey’s violation of the Hatch Act, which prohibits “activity directed towards the success or failure” of a candidate by executive branch employees. 

“[Y]our highly selective approach to publicizing information, along with your timing, was intended for the success or failure of a partisan candidate or political group,” Reid wrote. 

Damn! You go get 'em Senator Reid!

If true that Comey has evidence of ties between Trump and Putin, ties that he has kept to himself, then it makes it much harder NOT to see him as a partisan operative.

And if that was not enough to make that case there is also his decision not to confirm the Russian hacks.

Courtesy of CNBC: 

FBI Director James Comey argued privately that it was too close to Election Day for the United States government to name Russia as meddling in the U.S. election and ultimately ensured that the FBI's name was not on the document that the U.S. government put out, a former FBI official tells CNBC.

In the end, the Department of Homeland Security and The Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued the statement on Oct. 7, saying "The U.S. intelligence community is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations…These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process." 

According to the former official, Comey agreed with the conclusion the intelligence community came to: "A foreign power was trying to undermine the election. He believed it to be true, but was against putting it out before the election." Comey's position, this official said, was "if it is said, it shouldn't come from the FBI, which as you'll recall it did not." 

That statement put out by the government, which  FBI Director James Comey refrained from participating with since it was so close to the election, came out on October 7th.

The letter that Comey sent to the Senators about the POSSIBILITY of emails on Huma Abedin's computer came out on October 28th, three weeks closer to election day.

You know if it walks like a partisan operative, and it talks like a partisan operative, well then you go ahead and draw your own conclusions.

Nooooooooooooooo!!!!!! Update!

Courtesy of Wonkette.

Courtesy of CNN:  

Donald Trump will receive his first classified national security briefing Wednesday in New York, two sources told CNN. 

The briefing, prepared by the director of national intelligence, will be the first in what could be several classified briefings Trump will receive as the Republican nominee for president. Trump has never before had access to classified national security information.

Jesus Christ, why would we do this?

I don't care if it is customary, I would not tell this lunatic my real middle name much less anything classified.  (By the way for the record my middle name is not "Asswipe." My mother just tells people that.)

I wonder how many nanoseconds it will take before Trump dials up his pal Putin and starts telling him about the handful of secrets we still have that he HASN'T already learned by hacking virtually every government agency in the country?

And by the way, whatever happened to Harry Reid's idea of giving Trump fake intelligence briefings?

That was a great plan!

Besides we already know that he will believe virtually any bullshit thing he is told.

'It's just a 2-point race, Clinton 38%, Trump 36%' https://t.co/EzDzJ4EzIN

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 16, 2016

See?

Update: Apparently Trump does not even trust intelligence briefings:

Hours before he is set to receive his first classified intelligence briefing, Donald Trump said he does not trust information coming out of U.S. intelligence agencies and indicated he would cease relying on the bulk of the intelligence community’s massive workforce. 

That's right Donald it's all a bunch of lies. Certainly not even worth your time to leak it to the press or slip to your pals in Russia.

You fucking moron. 

I guess we should assume that if Trump were to actually win the election that he would ignore the State Department briefings altogether, and go to what he considers legitimate sources of information.

World Net Daily and the Drudge Report.

So yeah it seems like there is a campaign going on to deny Donald Trump access to security briefings. Just tell me where to sign.

Courtesy of NBC News:  

Calls have increased for Republican nominee Donald Trump to be denied national security briefings offered to presidential nominees of major political parties after he said he hopes Russia is "able to find" Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton's discarded private emails. 

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said he hopes the candidate is given "fake intelligence briefings … because you can't trust him." 

And Democratic Rep. David Cicilline of Rhode Island has sent a letter to President Barack Obama saying Trump "is unfit to receive sensitive intelligence" and asks that he "withhold" Trump's expected intelligence briefing. 

A petition by the liberal group CREDO has amassed more than 80,000 signatories in less than 24 hours urging that Trump receive no security briefings.

You know I find is ironic that just a couple of weeks ago Paul Ryan was making a stink about denying Hillary Clinton access to security briefings due to her e-mail "scandal" and now this week there are far more legitimate concerns about the candidate representing his own party.

You know all partisanship and joking aside, I REALLY do think that giving Donald Trump access to anything deemed top secret is a very dangerous idea.

Democratic convention night three open thread. Update!

Tonight's speakers include Jesse Jackson, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Gavin Newsom, Martin O'Malley, Jerry Brown, Chris Murphy, actress Sigourney Weaver (I love her.), Gabby Giffords, Sherrod Brown, Michael Bloomberg, Tim Kaine, and of course President Obama to close out the night.

I am not expecting any huge surprises or disruptions tonight but it should be quite entertaining.

After all it features one of the greatest President's in our lifetime.

Jesse Jackson: "It's Hillary time!"

.@RevJJackson: "It's Hillary time" pic.twitter.com/w8eget6udi

— POLITICO (@politico) July 27, 2016

Apparently yesterday Andrew Sullivan, a longtime critic of Hillary Clinton, had already reached that decision as well:

Some readers think I’ve been too negative, even cynical, tonight. Believe me, I am utterly uncynical about this election. I’m worried sick. We need to put behind us any lingering beefs, any grudges, any memories from the past – and you know how I feel about the Clintons’ past – in order to save liberal democracy. The only thing between him and us is her. So – against all my previous emphatic denials – I’m with her now. As passionately as I ever was with Obama. For his legacy is at stake as well.

Now somebody needs to go tell those butt hurt Bernie supporters that.

Update: Powerful words from the mother of a victim from the Orlando shooting.

The mother of an #OrlandoShooting victim speaks to #DemsInPhilly https://t.co/TAG0SqRvbP https://t.co/A4n809GPCU

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) July 27, 2016

This is just one of the many pro-gun control speeches being delivered tonight.

Update 2: Here he comes.

HERE COMES BIDEN#DemsInPhilly pic.twitter.com/Ls5zxQmAwc

— Ellie Hall (@ellievhall) July 28, 2016

Everybody loves Joe.

Update 3: And finally the grand finale.

.@POTUS gushes: @MichelleObama hasn't aged a day, same cannot be said for me https://t.co/H9n7JJUntx #DemsInPhilly https://t.co/1J32zvG4in

— CBS News (@CBSNews) July 28, 2016

Best President ever!

Update 4: Does not require comment.

Hillary Clinton joins President Obama on DNC stage after his speech #DemsInPhilly pic.twitter.com/fQOhrPd2aT

— BuzzFeed (@BuzzFeed) July 28, 2016

Night Two of the Democratic Convention Open Thread. Update!

I thought I better post this thread earlier today and a whole lot of interesting stuff happened before last night's open thread.

Here are some of the featured speakers for tonight: 

President Bill Clinton headlines the convention Tuesday.. 

Other featured speakers include mothers who lost their children to gun violence such as Eric Garner's mother, Gwen Carr; Trayvon Martin's mother, Sybrina Fulton; and Michael Brown's mother, Lezley McSpadden. 

Other speakers will include former Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who will speak about the Americans with Disabilities Act, which he helped craft and pass in Congress. 

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe will also address the convention. He served as chairman of President Bill Clinton's 1996 reelection campaign and chairman of Hillary Clinton's first presidential campaign in 2008. 

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, will be speaking as well as Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, who served with Clinton in the Senate and who's expected to succeed Harry Reid as the Democrats' next leader in the Senate. 

Former Attorney General Eric Holder is scheduled to speak as well as Planned Parenthood Action Fund President Cecile Richards and actors Tony Goldwyn, America Ferrara, and Lena Dunham. 

Madeleine Albright, the first woman to serve as secretary of state, will speak and former President Jimmy Carter is expected to make an appearance in a video message to the convention.

Damn! So you see why we need to post this early.

As promised here is my second favorite speech from last night:

I love Al Franken as a Senator, but Al Franken the comedian is pretty damn awesome as well.

There is also a rumor that Bernie Sanders will officially nominate Hillary Clinton tonight, so I imagine we will see more of this:

Oh joy.

Update: Hillary Clinton, the first female presidential candidate to represent a major party, has just officially hit the magic number of delegates to become the nominee.  Another history making day for the Democratic party.

Update 2: Sanders just officially named Hillary Clinton the nominee by acclimation.

And THAT makes it really official.

Update 3: Apparently this happened earlier tonight as well.

Bernie delegates have stormed media row and it's now locked down by police https://t.co/1CkTq8sX8P #DNCWalkOut pic.twitter.com/e48v9KhfkJ

— Cassandra Fairbanks (@CassandraRules) July 27, 2016

Didn't Frankenstein have to chase his creation into the farthest reaches of the north to finally end its existence?

Harry Reid sees the possibility of a brokered convention for Democrats. Oh swell.

Courtesy of CNN:  

In an interview with CNN, Reid said that the race between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton shows no signs of dying down, even as the former secretary of state had hoped the upcoming Nevada caucuses and South Carolina primary would be her launching pad to the Democratic nomination. 


"These races go on for a long long time," Reid said. When asked if that included a brokered convention, he responded "Sure, seriously some of the old conventions produced some good people." 

Reid also said, "It would be kind of fun." 

Reid's comments reflect the party establishment's growing uncertainty about Clinton's viability and lingering questions about whether she can hold off the Sanders surge. 

It would be kind of fun?

Yeah, for the Republicans. 

Speaking of the Republicans, there is also talk of a brokered convention to decide their candidate as well.

Could you imagine? Brokered conventions to decide presidential candidates for BOTH parties?

I don't know if I should stock up on popcorn to enjoy the Republican political throwdown, or Tums in order to settle my stomach during a Democratic cage match.

I wonder how they taste mixed together?

Ted Nugent discusses the idea of shooting Harry Reid during NRA conference in Nashville.

Courtesy of Media Matters:  

During remarks at the National Rifle Association annual meeting, NRA board member Ted Nugent shared an analogy that involved him shooting Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. 

Nugent, who is also a spokesperson for Outdoor Channel, referenced shooting Reid during an April 12 talk at the NRA's meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, at an event called, "Freedom is not Free and We the People Must Keep It Alive!" 

Nugent's comment came during a question and answer session where an audience member asked, "How and why did the NRA ever endorse Harry Reid to serve as the front man of Osama Obama?" 

The NRA never actually endorsed Reid, but in 2010 the gun group did donate $4,000 to his reelection efforts. Any goodwill between Reid and the NRA likely ended in 2013 with Reid's introduction of legislation to expand background checks on gun sales. 

In response to the question, Nugent called Reid a "lying prick," but described him as a necessary evil, stating, "If your child is dying and there is only one way to get to the doctor, would you get on Harry Reid's boat to get there? ... I'd get on the boat, get there, and then I'd shoot him."

Nugent went on to suggest that the NRA only supported Reid because the "deceptive bastard" was more pro-2nd amendment than his opponent.  (And as we all know the NRA cannot help but throw money at any politician who stands up and saluted the 2nd Amendment.)

You know I used to hold out at least some hope that the entire NRA membership was not made up of homicidal Ammosexuals like Ted Nugent, but after seeing the presenters that gave seminars at the NRA conference over the weekend, I have become convinced that the not one of them, not ONE of them, should ever be allowed to get their hands on anything more dangerous than Nerf gun.

This is usually where I call Nugent "batshit crazy" however I am beginning to think that is an insult to bat guano.

During interview with Harry Reid on Nevada radio, President Obama calls in to surprise the retiring Senator with heartfelt praise.

Courtesy of Politicususa:  

Sen. Reid was told that he had a surprise caller, and after a pause a voice came on the line and said, “Is this Harry Reid?” Reid answered, “It is.” The President said, “Harry, this is Barack.” Reid could only say, “Well, I’ll be damned.” Obama asked, “Are you allowed to say that on live radio?” Reid repeated, “Well, I’ll be damned. What a guy.” 

The President said, “Well, I think when the stories has been written and when all is told, you’re going to have somebody who has done more for the Nevada for this country than anybody who has been in the Senate. I could not be prouder of him. He did an unbelievable job on a whole bunch of really tough issues. Saving this country from a depression, making sure millions of people had health care, making sure that young people were able to go to college. He’s been one of my best partners and best friends, and I’m really honored to have served him.”

Harry Reid was also quite effusive in his praise of the President, and ultimately it was a very nice moment where two battle scarred veterans of many political skirmishes expressed admiration for each others courage and tenacity.

After listening to this exchange all I could think is what will this country do without Barack Obama and Harry Reid at the helm of this nation steering us around and over Republican obstructionism and bad policy decisions?

You better bring your "A" game Hillary Clinton, because you are definitely going to need it.

Apparently Ted Cruz is inadvertently helping the Democrats right now. Update!

Courtesy of TPM: 

While Republican senators were fuming at Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) for holding up a $1.1 trillion spending bill aimed at preventing a government shutdown, Democrats saw a silver lining: the move by Cruz and Lee gave Democrats an opening to move a number of President Barack Obama's nominees for federal judgeships and the executive branch. 

What happened was that when Cruz and Lee scuttled a deal between Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that would have allowed lawmakers to leave Washington D.C. for the weekend and come back Monday they gave Democrats a chance to advance Obama's presidential appointees by having to stay in D.C. to deal with the spending bill. 

The extra time over the weekend gave Reid the opportunity to, through the Senate's executive session, file cloture on the nominations and move them sooner than they would have under the deal Reid and McConnell had planned on and that Cruz and Lee blocked. Under the original deal Reid would have had to schedule votes on the nominees later in the upcoming week, when Democrats may not have wanted to stick around to vote.

Was worried Dr. Vivek Murthy might not get confirmed but thanks to @TedCruz, looks like he will. #TopDocNow #SurgeonGeneral
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) December 13, 2014

Courtesy of Politico:

The nominations may take days of procedural votes and a lot energy but are likely to be a boon to the president’s hopes of winning approval of as many nominees as possible before his party loses the Senate. 

“A lot of these people have been sitting in the calendar for a long time. So if this prompts my leadership to stay a little longer to get a lot of nominations done, then I’m happy about that,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) of the unusual Saturday session. 

That's Ted Cruz for you. He always knows exactly where to find his foot. Right next to his molars.

Update: Well the bill passed.

Senator Elizabeth Warren receives new job, that illustrates her importance to the future of the Democratic party.

Courtesy of Politico: 

Senate Democrats have enlisted progressive firebrand Elizabeth Warren to be a member of their leadership team, giving a major platform to a liberal icon just a week after Democrats took a beating at the polls and lost control of the Senate. 

Harry Reid, the incoming Senate minority leader, had engaged in private talks with the Massachusetts freshman to create a special leadership post for the former Harvard professor, and the leadership elections Thursday solidified the new Democratic team.

The title will be strategic policy adviser to the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee — a specially created position that puts Warren into a much more prominent position in the Senate hierarchy. 

In the new position, Warren is expected to serve as a go-between to liberal groups to ensure their voice is part of the leadership’s private deliberations. She would be part of the messaging and policy team. 

Some see this appointment by Reid is a move away from bipartisanship,  but let's face it the Republicans are not really ever going to work with the Democrats anyhow. Unless of course the Democrats agree to acquiesce to every one of their demands.

However Warren's take no shit personality scares the bejeezus out of the Republicans, and that endears her to the liberal base which is only growing bigger everyday.

I think this might just be Harry Reid's way of sticking his thumb in the eye of the conservatives.

But do you know what would send them right over the edge?

Having Warren's name appear on the ballot alongside Hillary's in 2016.

Oh, that would be glorious.

Understanding the Tea Party, not as a political movement, but as a religious one.

I actually did not expect to agree with this article by Daily Beast writer Jack Schwartz, but he makes some valid points.

See for yourself: 

While a traditional political party may have a line that it won’t cross,the Tea Party has a stone-engraved set of principles, all of which are sacrosanct. This is not a political platform to be negotiated but a catechism with only a single answer. It is now a commonplace for Tea Party candidates to vow they won’t sacrifice an iota of their principles. In this light, shutting down the Government rather than bending on legislation becomes a moral imperative. While critics may decry such a tactic as “rule or ruin,” Tea Party brethren celebrate it, rather, as the act of a defiant Samson pulling down the pillars of the temple. For them, this is not demolition but reclamation, cleansing the sanctuary that has been profaned by liberals. They see themselves engaged in nothing less than a project of national salvation. The refusal to compromise is a watchword of their candidates who wear it as a badge of pride. This would seem disastrous in the give-and-take of politics but it is in keeping with sectarian religious doctrine. One doesn’t compromise on an article of faith. 

This explains why the Tea Party faithful often appear to be so bellicose. You and I can have a reasonable disagreement about fiscal policy or foreign policy but if I attack your religious beliefs you will become understandably outraged. And if I challenge the credibility of your doctrine you will respond with righteous indignation. To question the validity of Moses parting the Red Sea or the Virgin Birth or Mohammed ascending to heaven on a flying horse is to confront the basis of a believer’s deepest values. 

Consequently, on the issues of government, economics, race, and sex, the Tea Party promulgates a doctrine to which the faithful must subscribe. Democrats and independents who oppose their dogma are infidels. Republicans who don’t obey all the tenants are heretics, who are primaried rather than burned at the stake. 

Like all revealed religions this one has its own Devil in the form of Barack Obama. This Antichrist in the White House is an illegitimate ruler who must be opposed at every turn, along with his lesser demons, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. They are responsible for everything that has gone wrong with the country in the last six years and indeed, they represent a liberal legacy that has betrayed America’s ideals for the better part of a century. Washington is seen in the same way Protestant fire-breathers once saw Rome: a seat of corruption that has betrayed the pillars of the faith. The only way to save America’s sanctity is to take control of Washington and undermine the federal government while affecting to repair it. Critical to this endeavor is the drumroll of hell-fire sermons from the tub-thumpers of talk radio and Fox News. This national revival tent not only exhorts the faithful but its radio preachers have ultimately become the arbiters of doctrinal legitimacy, determining which candidates are worthy of their anointment and which lack purity.

Not only does that make all kinds of crazy sense, it all explains Palin's attraction to the movement.

These are the new acolytes of a pseudo religious movement adorned in political camouflage, seeking a messianic leader to show them the path to salvation.

 Yeah, probably not going to be her.

Sarah Palin takes another swipe at Harry Reid. This time in defense of the Koch brothers.

Courtesy of the Kochsucker's Facebook page:  

First, kudos to the Louisiana GOP for filing a federal ethics complaint against Sen. Harry Reid for illegally using our tax dollars to play his “politics of personal destruction” including trying to humiliate and ruin reputations of good Americans for his radically liberal partisan purposes (including his ongoing jihad against private citizens David and Charles Koch, whom Reid hypocritically benefits from by having accepted their campaign donations through Koch-connected PACs). He unethically spends other people’s money (his addiction to O.P.M. is renown) to enrich family and friends. Reid gets away with his continual unethical behavior because no one pushes back. Finally someone is!

Personally I think that it is well within Senator Reid's right to use his website to call out the Koch brothers for hijacking our democracy.

If you want to see a REAL waste of taxpayers dollars then just refer back to the post right below this one.

I seriously doubt that the ethics complaint will go anywhere. And unlike Palin back in 2009, Harry Reid will not let a few ethics investigations drive him out of office.

However this post, and others like it on Right Wing media sites, makes me think that the Koch brothers are starting to worry that constantly being called out on MSNBC, on progressive blogs, and by Harry Reid himself might be causing them to worry that they will not be able to continue to hide behind the scenes while the bright light of public scrutiny is aimed in their direction.

The power of the Koch brothers to influence elections and public policy was aided partially by the fact that they were not well known, which allowed movements like the Tea Party to claim they were grass roots, when actually they were funded by Charles and David.

Remember with everybody looking it is much harder to stab Democrats in the back.

The second part of Palin's ghostwritten Facebook post is an almost Glenn Beck like diatribe that focuses on the wife of Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, and her possible nomination to the first circuit court of appeals.

There is no actual evidence that this might take place, but the mere thought of it is making the Right Wing apoplectic.

And if their are crazy conspiracies to fan, then how could Sarah Palin be far behind?

The Bundy Ranch standoff, a foreshadowing of things to come?

Cliven Buncy supporters take aim against BLM agents.

Courtesy of Reuters: 

The weekend showdown marked the latest resurgence of violent, anti-government sentiments that have existed in rural America for centuries, said Catherine Stock, a history professor at Connecticut College who specializes in rural militias. 

"The question is whether we're going to see sustained flame-up now. We could see more of that if they actually think that the federal government is going to stand down," she said. 

"It's not the groups, it's not their concerns, it's not their anger, all of that is old, but the federal government backing down? I was like, wow! Seriously?" 

Stock said the rise of right-wing media outlets and websites and the election of Republican politicians who have shifted the party further to the right have given a new legitimacy to groups that were once dismissed as being on the fringe. 

At least half a dozen state legislators from Nevada, Washington, Utah and Arizona attended protest rallies in Bunkerville at the weekend. 

Michele Fiore, a Republican Nevada assemblywoman from Las Vegas who said she joined the protesters daily after getting a torrent of supportive emails about Bundy from constituents, called the resistance "justified." 

"This is historic," she said. "This is the first time we went arm to arm with the federal government."

What happened last weekend could very likely be a seminal event which determines how these sovereign citizen types deal with law enforcement moving forward.

There were reportedly over a thousand armed men willing to engage the BLM and Federal agents in a firefight, over unpaid taxes.

Many of these men had no military training, or if they did it was decades earlier in their lives.

They had no consistent chain of command, and no clear idea of what would determine the right time to fire their weapons.

That means that those agents were in an incredibly dangerous situation, where one trigger happy moron could fire the bullet that resulted in one of the largest massacres in American history.

And that is EXACTLY what the Right Wing is waiting, and hoping for. They want somebody to die at the hands of the federal government, regardless of who fired the first shot, so that they can make them a martyr and essentially move this country toward a civil war.

Never before have the indications been this clear that the conservatives in this country are so angry that they are losing power, and that America is moving toward a more liberal viewpoint, that they are willing to rip the country in half in a desperate attempt to stop the inevitable.

Think I'm exaggerating? I only wish that I were: 

A Tea Party Facebook page called Overpasses for America, clinching just over 79,000 supporters, is calling for a “Shot Heard Around the United States” day on April 19th. The post, showing a picture of a large group of men firing rifles in the air simultaneously in front of a barn, calls on every gun owner to fire into the air at the same time: 

“April 19th, 2014… 12 NOON Eastern Standard Time Every gun owner in the USA is asked to fire their weapon at the same time. Spread the word, share everywhere.” 

April 19th is also the day, in 1775, when the start of the Revolutionary War began. This is the same page who posted a status calling for Harry Reid to be imprisoned for his “deal with Communist China that led to the stand off at Bundy Ranch.” The page, in the last few days, has been riddled with many pictures and articles detailing the fiasco at the Bundy Ranch, calling Bundy and his supporters ‘Patriots’ and seeking to end the ‘bogus lies’ about the stand-off.

Courtesy of Facebook

 Mark my words, there will be a first shot fired into an actual person at some point in the near future.

And when that happens, the only question remaining is for how long after will the gunfire continue.

When people angrily ask me why I am so against American citizens having access to military style weapons, I often think that in due time they will become too shocked by the violence to ever ask me again.

The Washington Times gushes over Palin's new show on the Sportsman Channel, seems impressed that she could get a reality show while somebody like Harry Reid could not.

The picture that has the Sea O'Pee wetting their panties.

Courtesy of The Washington Times: 

Sarah Palin is hitting the road with her guns, fishing rods and “Mama Grizzly” persona. 

The former Alaska governor is returning to reality TV as host of “Amazing America,” a weekly series on the Sportsman Channel set to begin in April. 

According to its billing, Mrs. Palin “takes viewers coast-to-coast where the American spirit and the great outdoors are celebrated in equal measure.” 

“It takes a certain kind of pizzazz for a politician to make the move into reality television,” said Jeffrey McCall, professor of communication at DePauw University. “Harry Reid, for example, could never find a reality television platform that would catch on. The Sportsman Channel, however, has found a great fit with Sarah Palin. Palin has a special attraction for her fans, many of whom are likely viewers for Sportsman Channel.” 

Okay let's stop right there.

These people DO realize that the goal of most politicians is not to move from public service into a realm of entertainment dominated by the likes of Honey Boo Boo and the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills right?

Since when does anybody believe that successful politicians are actually jealous of a half term governor, who has lost all political credibility, and is now appearing at the opening of carpet stores and calling into low rated radio talks shows in a desperate attempt to stay relevant?

Answer: Never.

At least the Washington Times got this part right:  

The show is Mrs. Palin’s second direct attempt at reality television. In 2010, she and her family were the focus of TLC’s “Sarah Palin’s Alaska.” The series premiere was the network’s most-watched with nearly 5 million viewers, though the show lost roughly half of that audience after four episodes.

Yep, much like everything Plain does the curious showed up to check the show out and then were driven away by the inherent stupidity and lack of entertainment value. 

Source

And I will be willing to bet my house that THIS time out will be even LESS successful.

Republicans final tactic to punish Democrats is to throw a 30 hour long tantrum at the tax payers expense.

Courtesy of The Hill:

Senate Republicans made plans Wednesday to stage a more than 30-hour talkathon on the chamber floor to protest Democrats’ triggering of the “nuclear option” last month. 

The GOP protest, which could extend into the weekend, will throw a wrench in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) hopes of wrapping up legislative business for 2013 as soon as possible. 

The Republicans aimed to push a final vote on Nina Pillard, one of President Obama’s picks for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, until the wee hours of the morning. 

Senate Republicans planned to hold the floor throughout the night, speaking out against Reid’s use of the nuclear option. Reid invoked the controversial tactic before Thanksgiving to strip the minority party’s power to filibuster judicial and executive branch nominees. The change did not affect Supreme Court picks. 

“When you blow up the Senate rules, there has to be a consequence,” one Republican senator said. 

“We’ll stretch this into the weekend if need be,” the lawmaker added. 

A GOP source said that so far 36 senators had signed up for hourlong speaking slots on the floor, which would tie up business until early Friday morning.

Seriously?

So a bunch of old guys are going to stay up way past there bedtimes, while spending taxpayer money to keep the lights on in the Senate, so that they can stamp their feet and bitch about the fact that Harry Reid and the Democrats took away their right to sabotage the government?

They did this to themselves by being obstructionists, refused to accept the possibility that the Democrats would reach their limit with GOP shenanigans, and now are acting like three year olds ins response to the fact that they lost their leverage.

And all this does is to illustrate the point that the Democrats and the President were making that these assholes are unreasonable and irresponsible when it comes to doing their jobs.

Okay is there anybody who has ANY respect for these idiots anymore?

Why the Religious Right is excited about 2014, and YOU should be encouraging everybody you know to get out and vote.

Courtesy of Salon:  

Last week, the Senate voted 52-48 to eliminate the ability of the minority party in the Senate to filibuster executive branch nominees and any judgeship below the Supreme Court by changing the requirements for passage to a simple majority vote. It was a historic move made because there was no other alternative, given the GOP’s unprecedented abuse of the filibuster. In the history of the United States, 168 presidential nominees have been filibustered. Half occurred under all presidents from Washington through to Bush. Remarkably, the other half has taken place under just one president: Obama. 

Why such aggressive judicial obstructionism by the GOP? 

Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. writes, “This era’s conservatives will use any means at their disposal to win control of the courts. Their goal is to do all they can to limit Congress’s ability to enact social reforms.” 

The Christian Right, which is the GOP’s most reliable and agitated voting bloc, is obsessed with the courts, and the Court of Appeals for the D.C. circuit is the nation’s second most important judicial body, which is why Republicans “gave the game away when all but a few of them opposed Obama’s three most recent appointments.” 

Now that Democrats were forced into limiting the filibuster, the Christian Right has its incentive to mobilize for 2014. A simple majority control of the Senate gives it an opportunity to pack the courts with judges straight out of the Justice Scalia mold, who once said that separation of church and state would come under scrutiny under a Supreme Court with a Scalia majority. If the Christian Right sweeps Republicans to control the Senate in next year’s midterms, the anti-secularists will take a big step forward toward their stated ideological goals.

So is it possible that the Right Wing lured Harry Reid and the Democrats into a trap?

Well if they did it is only a trap that works if the progressives turn out in the low numbers that are traditional for us in non-Presidential election cycles. 

They are essentially counting on the fact that due to the Edward Snowden revelations, the Healthcare.gov glitches, and the usual mid-term election malaise that we will be uninspired, unmotivated, and uninterested in going to the polls.

Well I say screw them! I think we WILL turn out in big numbers and fight to hold onto what we have, and even push to gain more.

We know we can do it, the demographic numbers are on our side, the energy is on our side, and the ideas are on our side, so let's get fired up, and ready to go!

Sarah Palin has her very own nuclear meltdown over the Democrat's decision to return to simple majority votes to confirm judges and approve executive office appointments.

Courtesy of Facebook.

From the poisoned pen of Palin's personal ghostwrtiter:

May this day honor the late President John F. Kennedy. In his honor, and to protect our republic, Americans implore today's elected leaders to exercise virtuous truth and integrity in office. (Not to put too find of a point on it, but does ANYBODY really believe that Sarah Palin has ANY respect for John F. Kennedy? No, her hero is Ronald Reagan was the very antithesis to JFK.)

Shockingly to some, the White House and Senate Democrats, desperate for a winning political talking point before Congress’s Thanksgiving vacation, just did the opposite. 

Liberals just changed 230 years of enduring Senate rules by enacting the “Nuclear Option” that will now let just 51 votes approve the President’s nominees, and thus prevent dissenting Senators from filibustering controversial appointees who’ll be charged with decision making that affects our lives. (And they were forced to do so by who exactly?)

This is significant as further proof that our government is so broken. (And the Teabaggers you supported broke it.) When politicians can’t get anything to work, they change rules and hope we’ll just get distracted. The hugely divisive, dysfunctional “Nuclear Option” sets a terrible precedent. (It might make Palin feel better if she realizes that many refer to his rule change as the "constitutional option." After all she so LOVES the Constitution. But then again probably not.) Mark Levin appropriately calls it “the latest act of leftist tyranny.” It’s also leftist hypocrisy. Back under Republican control of the Senate, Democrats blocked President Bush’s judicial appointees. You should have heard Harry Reid and then-Senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden freak out in railing against the “danger... arrogance... poison” of the Republican majority even considering enacting such a rule change. To ensure cooperation and unity in balancing power for We the People, Republicans wisely did not change the rules. (Yes but that was before this happened.)

But that was then. Now this makes for a nice Thanksgiving distraction for the left, but Americans are awake today – we’re not easily distracted with turkeys like this. (Turkeys, oh that reminds me, I have a video to put up next Thursday morning.)

Do these far leftists realize Americans will not be chatting cheerfully around our Thanksgiving tables about how Obama and Reid nuked Senate rules? No, if political speak befalls dinner, we’ll no doubt vent about losing health insurance, seeing premiums skyrocket, not being able to afford unworkable Obamacare plans, and still wanting socialized healthcare scrapped altogether. We'll discuss disappointment in the President and his Party for lying to us. (Don't worry we liberals are ready for that.)

But don’t let this distraction ruin your Thanksgiving, America! Be thankful for at least one thing revealed in this latest radical act of the far left: more Americans are now stirred from slumber! (Yes we are, and the majority of us are liberals.) Only a Butterball’s serotonin-induced sleepiness after dinner will lull us back in; Senate power grabbing distractions won’t do it. (Update: I think she meant Tryptophan-induced sleepiness, NOT serotonin.)

- Sarah Palin

This was not a power grab, this was simply a repair of a broken system that the Republicans had taken advantage of in order to nullify the election of Barack Obama.  They do not consider him a legitimate President so they have refused to treat him like a legitimate President.

Harry Reid is on record for not wanting to change this rule, and in fact has resisted incredible pressure from the liberals to do something to fix this broken system for quite a long time. He did not change his mind, the Republicans changed it for him.

Sarah Palin and her conservative buddies were counting on the Democrats to continue playing by the rules forever even as the Republicans tied their shoelaces together, peed in their Gatorade, and hid home plate repeatedly in order to win by any means possible, what they could not win fairly.

Well, if I may be so blunt, fuck them!

They have NOBODY to blame except themselves. And as Rachel Maddow pointed out last night, all the Republicans had to do to avoid this outcome, was to simply allow the President to appoint three more judges to the federal court. The Republicans refused to let that happen, and the Democrats had had enough.

And as for this biting the Democrats in the butt the next time there is a Republican President and Republican majority in the Senate, not really. Number one, considering how the GOP is viewed these days, we may all be dead before that happens. And number two as a rule the Democrats don't pull this filibuster crap nearly as often as the Republicans, and not having the option will have very little effect on how we govern.

After all Democrats are actually interested in governing, NOT breaking the government so that it no longer functions.

In biggest news of the day Harry Reid and Democrats trigger "nuclear option" in order to stop Republican obstructionism.

Courtesy of the Washington Post: 

The partisan battles that have paralyzed Washington in recent years took a historic turn Thursday, as Senate Democrats eliminated filibusters for most presidential nominations, severely curtailing the political leverage of the Republican minority in the Senate and assuring an escalation of partisan warfare. 

Saying that “enough is enough,” President Obama welcomed the end of what he called the abuse of the Senate’s advise and consent function, which he said had turned into “a reckless and relentless tool” to grind the gears of government to a halt. 

While “neither party has been blameless for these tactics,” Obama said in a statement to reporters at the White House, “today’s pattern of obstruction . . . just isn’t normal; it’s not what our founders envisioned.” He cited filibusters against executive branch appointments and judicial nominees on grounds that he said were based simply on opposition to “the policies that the American people voted for in the last election.” 

“This isn’t obstruction on substance, on qualifications,” he said. “It’s just to gum up the works.” 

The rule change means that federal judge nominees and executive-office appointments can advance to confirmation votes by a simple majority of senators, rather than the 60-vote supermajority that has long been required to end debate and proceed to an up-or-down majority vote to confirm or reject the nomination. 

The change does not apply to Supreme Court nominations. But the vote, mostly along party lines, dramatically alters the landscape for both Democratic and Republican presidents, especially if their own political party holds a majority of, but fewer than 60, Senate seats.

As much as this rule change bothers me, I have to say that I don't think the Democrats had much choice. 

The Republicans have been blocking just about everything this President has tried to do simply because they can, and have been unwilling to compromise on anything.

So as much and I dislike this, and worry what it means going forward when the Dems are no longer in control, I don't see what other options were left.

Any other opinions?

Democratic darling Wendy Davis takes on Tea Party terrorist Ted Cruz.

Courtesy of Keye TV:  

State Sen. Wendy Davis, the Democratic candidate for Texas governor, criticized Republican U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz on Monday for his role in the recent federal government shutdown, saying he harmed average citizens just to score political points. 

"I think he demonstrated that being the loudest person in the room isn’t necessarily equivalent to being a leader,” Davis said. "I was disappointed to see that he was willing to put so many thousands of Texas families in harm’s way for purposes of making a political statement.” 

Davis’ remarks, made outside an early voting location for the constitutional amendment election, amounted to her harshest assessment yet of the Tea Party-backed Republican. During her appearance at the Texas Tribune Festival last month, before the shutdown and debt ceiling brinkmanship roiled Washington, Davis noted that she and Cruz "agree on some things” and said politicians shouldn’t be afraid to say that. 

Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier fired back, saying the senator's efforts to stop the Affordable Care Act were justified. She also favorably compared what Cruz did with Davis' summer filibuster of a restrictive abortion bill. The legislation, which eventually passed, includes a ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. 

"I think most Texans would agree that fighting to give them relief from a law that’s killing their health plans and hiking their insurance rates is a statement worth fighting for, as opposed to platforms centered on killing unborn babies after 20 weeks,” Frazier said. 

Davis rejected comparisons between her actions and those of Cruz and other Republicans who tried to gain concessions on Obamacare by withholding funding for the government and opposing an extension of the nation’s debt limit. 

"I was attempting to block a bill that would have harmed thousands of women across the state of Texas,” she said. "Never once, of course, did I threaten to literally shut down the state government for that purpose, and I certainly would never use the budget in the state of Texas for purposes of making a political statement.” 

In the shutdown fight, Davis said thousands of Texans were harmed, and she called for a more bipartisan approach in budgetary negotiations. 

"The concern is that we literally got to the brink of financial disaster. Political gamemanship overtook common sense,” she said. 

You know my all time favorite fantasy for a debate between to individuals would be Rachel Maddow VS Sarah Palin, which would be akin to a bug hitting a car windshield at 60 mph, however I have to admit that the idea of a Wendy Davis using her pink sneakers to kick the crap out of Ted Cruz is also pretty tantalizing.

I don't think that Cruz would stand much of a chance, and I also think that every time Davis takes him on she demonstrates her integrity and will attract more support from those infamous hard to motivate liberal voters in Texas.

My hope is that she will continue to goad him into these little back and forths, and use them to get national media attention, while also showing the people of Texas that they don't have to keep electing under-evolved Neanderthals, like Rick Perry, to lead their state.

By the way Harry Reid actually, kind of, endorsed the idea of Ted Cruz as the GOP nominee in 2016:

“If I didn’t care so much about our country, I would hope he would get the Republican nomination for president, because that would mean the end of the Republican Party.”

Maybe if we keep our fingers crossed, this will be the reality.