I'm Old Enough

In N.H., Bloomberg compares Warren’s ‘ultra millionaire tax’ to Venezuela https://t.co/Hp8MmcgK86 via @BostonGlobe #fitn #mapoli

— James Pindell (@JamesPindell) January 29, 2019

Bloomberg on Medicare for all (in NH): "I think you could never afford that. I think you can have Medicare for all for people that are uncovered... to replace the entire private system where companies provide health care for their employees would bankrupt us for a very long time" pic.twitter.com/NMz5WANtCH

— David Wright (@DavidWright_CNN) January 29, 2019

...to remember when then-Mayor Bloomberg was the great white hope of the Democratic party.

Ah, dem was de days!

Heart In The Deep Of

VOTER FRAUD ALERT: The @TXsecofstate discovered approx 95,000 individuals identified by DPS as non-U.S. citizens have a matching voter registration record in TX, approx 58,000 of whom have voted in TX elections. Any illegal vote deprives Americans of their voice.

— Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) January 25, 2019

Ken Paxton, Texas AG, is a political hack.  He's also still awaiting trial on felony charges, which is not a good look for the chief law enforcement officer of the state; but he got re-elected anyway.  So it goes.  But on the subject of these 58,000 "illegal votes," some clarity is required.

First, the Texas SOS (Secretary of State) used DPS (Department of Public Safety, basically Texas Highway Patrol) data "in connection with a motor vehicle record," meaning vehicle registration and/or a driver's license (DPS keeps all such records).  Is this data conclusive proof of non-citizenship status?  No; even the SOS admits that:

All records submitted through this process will need to be treated as WEAK [sic] matches, meaning that the county may choose to investigate the voter, pursuant to Section 16.033, Election Code, or take no action on the voter record if the voter registrar determines that there is no reason to believe the voter is ineligible.

When the POTUS capitalizes a word in a tweet, we all understand he means to emphasize it.  So where does the 58,000 number come from?

In an advisory released Friday afternoon, the office said it was flagging individuals who had provided the Texas Department of Public Safety with some form of documentation — including a work visa or a green card — that showed they were not a citizen when they were obtaining a driver’s license or an ID card. Among the individuals flagged, about 58,000 individuals cast a ballot in one or more elections from 1996 to 2018, the secretary of state's office said.

And what, aside from allowing grandstanding by Paxton (and Trump), does this mean?

That means counties may now choose to investigate the eligibility of the individuals who were flagged, which would require them to send a notice asking for proof of citizenship within 30 days, or take no action. By law, the counties aren't allowed to automatically revoke a voter's registration without sending out such a notice.

It's possible that individuals flagged by the state — who provided DPS with documentation that indicated they were authorized to be in the country — could have become naturalized citizens since they obtained their driver's license or ID card. A spokesman for the secretary of state said officials are "very confident" that the data received from DPS is "current."

I just looked at my Texas driver's license.  It was issued (re-issued) in 2017; it expires in 2023.  If I were not a citizen by birth, but had my application for naturalization in process in 2017, and it had come through by now, how "current" would DPS records be?  Citizenship doesn't affect my driver's license, I don't think I'd have a need to renew it or notify DPS of my changed status until 2023; so how "current" is DPS information?

That's why counties have to investigate these records themselves.  (Yes, power in Texas does devolve to the lowest level of government possible, usually the counties.  Yes, Texas does have a post-Reconstruction Constitution which really needs to be modernized.  Then again, a new Constitution might give Greg Abbott powers he can only dream of now.  Maybe best to leave well-enough alone.)  That's also one more reason this information isn't all that up to date.  The on-line form to renew a Texas DL does list "You are a U.S. Citizen" as a requirement for renewal, but the only information you have to supply is your current license number, a credit card, and your social security number.  It's safe to assume DPS checks your application against a federal database for citizenship information, but that doesn't mention anything about renewing your license because you have been naturalized during the term of your existing license.

Besides, the GOP has been consistently winning elections from 1996 to 2018 in Texas.  Does this mean 22 years of elections are suspect, and the GOP has won based on illegal votes?  Inquiring minds want to know.....

This might be more consequential than the border wall fiasco

Never thought I’d say this but I think @johnrobertsFox and @GillianHTurner @FoxNews have even less understanding of the Wall negotiations than the folks at FAKE NEWS CNN & NBC! Look to final results! Don’t know how my poll numbers are so good, especially up 19% with Hispanics?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 28, 2019

@realDonaldTrump This is NOT right. I stand by my colleagues @johnrobertsFox and @GillianHTurner They don’t deserve this. No reporter does. They are doing their jobs and reporting the facts. They are not opinion journalists and deserve the respect from the @WhiteHouse they cover. https://t.co/ftRPauopjC

— Julie Banderas (@JulieBanderas) January 28, 2019

Ah. Now they care. https://t.co/Q8AwLZNryK

— Jared Holt (@jaredlholt) January 28, 2019

Pass the schadenfreude.

Wait, what?

Numerous states introducing Bible Literacy classes, giving students the option of studying the Bible. Starting to make a turn back? Great!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 28, 2019

How did I miss this?

First, this is in-line with the President's tweet about the "cost" of immigration in the U.S., or his rage about women 'gagged with duct tape' and smuggled across the border.  I don't give his "facts" much credence.

Second, I'm not opposed to this, as long as "Biblical literacy" doesn't mean "indoctrination into specific Christian doctrines.  I've found it rather difficult to teach literature to students who've never heard of Noah, Moses, Abraham, or Jonah, students who don't know who Lazarus is ("To say: “I am Lazarus, come from the dead,/Come back to tell you all, I shall tell you all”.  It ain't all just to understand Milton, is all I'm sayin'....).  I've even taught the Bible as literature, albeit in college courses; and I think it's a worthwhile endeavor, if only because of the importance of Christian scriptures in Western culture.

So if that's what "Biblical literacy" means, I'm all for it.  However, I doubt that's what it means.  To find out, I turned to Politico (sue me, I'm lazy; besides, you're not paying for this....):

A handful of states are making pushes to introduce elective courses in schools that lawmakers say would teach the Bible in terms of its historical context, and though none have passed, critics have pointed out that such bills could blur the constitutional line separating church and state.

USA Today reported that “Bible literacy” bills of some sort have been introduced in six state legislatures across the country that “would require or encourage public schools to offer elective classes on the Bible’s literary and historical significance.” And one state, Kentucky, recently passed a law creating a framework for such classes.

As I say, I've taught the Bible as literature in a public college, so there isn't necessarily a 1st Amendment issue here.  There could have been, if I'd tried to teach the Bible as sacred text, but I didn't.  Teaching the Bible in terms of its own historical context would be quite beyond the capacity of most high school English teachers (no offense), and certainly beyond the carrying capacity of most high school students and their parents (the church/state barrier wouldn't have to come up, or it would as they fought to protect their religious interests from state intrusion).  Teaching its literary and historical significance is not a bad idea, but too easily that turns into how Moses taught the U.S. the basis of law (there's a more direct connection to the Iroquois, when it comes to the form of our federal government, and to English common law, when it comes to our laws.  Moses is about as important as the Code of Hammurabi, and frankly Noah should be taught alongside The Epic of Gilgamesh, though again, that's probably more suited to a college level course.).  Teaching the Bible as a literary object (well, portions of it; the stories like Moses on Sinai, Abraham on Moriah, Jonah and the Whale, would obviate teaching Ecclesiastes or the Prophets or the Letter to the Romans), is not in itself a violation of the 1st Amendment.  But not teaching the Bible as sacred text would certainly violate the religious beliefs of many parents, not all of them evangelicals and fundamentalists.

Back to where we started:  is this tweet accurate?  Not really; as Politico notes, it follows from a story on Fox & Friends, and what's happening is that such classes are being proposed as electives in some states; but apparently, no such classes have been authorized by law.  I'd just speculate that in Texas, second most populous state in the country, there won't be any big push for this.  The GOP here realizes they are one election away from being voted out of office (did I mention the long-time incumbent state representative for my district won re-election by only 47 votes against a guy no one had ever heard of, whose campaign consisted primarily of visiting every house in the district?  He came to my house twice.).  Controversy like this is not something they want to court.  And if Texas isn't buying the textbook for this, who's publishing it?

(and there's this):

In case you're wondering about the president's sudden interest in the Bible.

Left, Fox & Friends, 7:53 am
Right, Trump, 8:21 am pic.twitter.com/VynQvYQTJQ

— Matthew Gertz (@MattGertz) January 28, 2019

Maps explain many things.

Does History Even Rhyme?

 The redoubtable Digby:

On Sunday, we got confirmation that yet another multibillionaire is seriously considering a run: Howard Schultz, the former CEO of Starbucks.

I will confess:  I'm a fairly "plugged in" person when it comes to national politics, and yet when I heard someone called "Howard Schultz" was thinking of running for President, and was considered a "spoiler" by Democrats, I thought of Lyndon Larouche.  This is, I thought this Schultz character must be some perennial candidate like Larouche whom I'd simply never heard of.  I finally had to Google the guy.

And my first thought is:  who is he kidding?

Am I the only one old enough to remember who much work it took for Ross Perot to get on the ballot in all 50 states, and he never did do it?  (Am I the only one old enough to remember Ross Perot running in 1988?)  Schultz has even less credibility than Michael Bloomberg, who had at least held public office; and he is another "business man" who wants to...run government like a business?

Like shutting down government as a legislative tool, haven't we learned the lesson on running government like a business, yet?  Besides, as I say, who is Howard Schultz?  The guy who ran Starbucks?  I think Elon Musk has more name recognition, and on that alone a better chance of running for President and actually taking some votes.  There's a reason Bernie Sanders suddenly decided he was a Democrat, and it's for precisely the same reason Ross Perot couldn't get his name on all the ballots in all 50 states.  There's also a reason no one is demanding another white billionaire who retired early save us from our political nightmare.

I know this has tout le internet abuzz with why Schultz shouldn't do this, but I'm honestly left thinking:  "Can he do it?"  As Magic 8 ball used to say, "Outlook not so good."

Literally just get up tomorrow morning and match Bill Gates contributions to vaccines and you'll do more for the world than this entire vanity project.

— pourmecoffee (@pourmecoffee) January 28, 2019

The Greatest Generalization

So here's what Grandpa said after getting up too early on Sunday morning:

“I would just say that we also need to adjust what we think of as America,” Alcindor said. “You’re talking about assimilation. I grew up in Miami, where people speak Spanish, but their kids speak English. And the idea that we think Americans can only speak English, as if Spanish and other languages wasn’t always part of America, is, in some ways, troubling.”

And here's how he tried to apologize for it:

i feel terrible a part of my comments on Hispanics  offended some members of that proud culture

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 27, 2019

from my days reporting on cesar chavez to documenting the many contributions of hispanics in all parts of our culture

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 27, 2019

???????????????

i’ve worked hard to knock down false stereo types. in my final comment in Meet i said ALL sides hv to work harder

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 27, 2019

So:  Yamaha?  Or Bang and Olufsen?  Or maybe something in English?

at finding common ground - which i strongly believe
dialogue not division

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 27, 2019

As long as we're all speaking English?

my twitter acct failed me at the worst time.
i am sorry, truly sorry, my comments were offensive to
many. the great enduring american tradition of diversity is to be celebrated and cherished. yamiche, thank u for your comments.
let’s go forward together.

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 28, 2019

We'd have also accepted "I blame the intern."

finally, i am sorry - i never intended to disparage any segment of our rich, diverse society which defines who we are.

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 28, 2019

You just meant to be sure we know who to blame?

finally,i am sorry I failed to convey my strong belief that diversity - dynamic and inclusive is what makes America

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 28, 2019

That speaks English?

my tweet portal is whack
i hv been trying to say i am sorry i offended
and i so appreciate my colleague

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 28, 2019

great
Yamiche is a wonderful colleague and an important voice

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 28, 2019

it worked!

i got your attention.

‘night

— Tom Brokaw (@tombrokaw) January 28, 2019

Yes, like Trump, you won.  And, like Trump, at no time did you actually acknowledge you were completely wrong, even though you were.

Pass the Popcorn

White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney says "um, yeah!" Trump would shut down the government again in three weeks. pic.twitter.com/acn32Z65E2

— Matt Shuham (@mattshuham) January 27, 2019

And TSA agents and air traffic controllers may find they aren't feeling all that well on February 16, and need to stay home for awhile.

What's that adage about the second kick from the mule?  Maybe Trump is uneducable.  As for the national emergency, Marco Rubio got that one right:

I don't think it's a good idea. I think it'll be a terrible idea. I hope he doesn't do it. I don't think it's leverage --

CHUCK TODD:

But would you fight him on it?

SEN. MARCO RUBIO:

-- either. Sure. Because I think that it's important. Look, I don't think we'll have to fight because I'm not sure they'll end up doing that. I know it's an option they've looked at. But now you're at the mercy of a district court somewhere and ultimately an appellate court. So it really may not even withstand if you look at some of the other rulings we've seen. The other is the precedent that it sets. And it's just not a good precedent to set in terms of action. It doesn't mean that I don't want border security. I do. I just think that's the wrong way to achieve it. It doesn't provide certainty. And you could very well wind up in sort of a theatric victory at the front end and then not getting it done. I think the best way to do it is to have a law passed that funds border security so we know it's going to happen.

A district court is sure to follow Youngstown, and the appellate court might agree.  The Supremes will not fast-track it for a final decision, but by the time the Supremes have ruled on it (if they do),  Congress will have taken its balls out of hock and decided to act as a co-equal branch of government.  Even "Little Marco" is making those noises, and Roy Blount almost agrees with him.

During the shutdown Sen. Ron Johnson reportedly yelled at McConnell about the pressure Johnson was under.  By the next shutdown Senators will probably figure out the keys to their jail cell are not held by Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell, but by them, and that whatever Trump does, they will be responsible for it in 2020.  It will only take a few to decide there is no education in the second kick of that mule, and there isn't much support now for government shutdown as a legislative tool (the last persons to try it were Ted Cruz and Ron Paul, respectively; and how powerful are they now, hmmm?).

So those TSA workers and air traffic controllers may not have to get sick after all.

ADDING:

Meanwhile, sort of behind the scenes:

Lamar! calls for Trump and Pelosi to step away from talks over border security to avert shutdown. Also told me that negotiators should tie bill to prevent future shutdowns to a conference agreement - an idea picking up bipartisan support https://t.co/spivdIgeu0

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 28, 2019

The trend is moving away from Mulvaney's tough talk.

Old Man Shouts Like a Racist

So Tom Brokaw just told the MTP panel that Spanish speaking residents of America won't "assimilate" ("Resistance Is Futile") because they won't learn English. It was so bad Yamiche Alcindor pushed back on it, and Chuck Todd joined her.  (When the transcript or episode goes up, I'll link to it and amend.)  UPDATE:  okay, here it is, though Brokaw's comments are at the very end of the show.

Time for Grandpa to join the rest of "The Greatest Generation" and leave the stage.

And apparently...

58,000 non-citizens voted in Texas, with 95,000 non-citizens registered to vote. These numbers are just the tip of the iceberg. All over the country, especially in California, voter fraud is rampant. Must be stopped. Strong voter ID! @foxandfriends

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 27, 2019

...they're voting GOP, so is the remedy to undo recent elections?

Ariel Poems: Epiphany 2018

Quis hic locus, quae regio, quae mundi plaga?

What seas what shores what grey rocks and what islands
What water lapping the bow
And scent of pine and the woodthrush singing through the fog
What images return
O my daughter.

Those who sharpen the tooth of the dog, meaning
Death
Those who glitter with the glory of the hummingbird, meaning
Death
Those who sit in the sty of contentment, meaning
Death
Those who suffer the ecstasy of the animals, meaning
Death

Are become insubstantial, reduced by a wind,
A breath of pine, and the woodsong fog
By this grace dissolved in place

What is this face, less clear and clearer
The pulse in the arm, less strong and stronger—
Given or lent? more distant than stars and nearer than the eye
Whispers and small laughter between leaves and hurrying feet
Under sleep, where all the waters meet.

Bowsprit cracked with ice and paint cracked with heat.
I made this, I have forgotten
And remember.
The rigging weak and the canvas rotten
Between one June and another September.
Made this unknowing, half conscious, unknown, my own.
The garboard strake leaks, the seams need caulking.
This form, this face, this life
Living to live in a world of time beyond me; let me
Resign my life for this life, my speech for that unspoken,
The awakened, lips parted, the hope, the new ships.

What seas what shores what granite islands towards my timbers
And woodthrush calling through the fog
My daughter.

--T.S. Eliot

Flowers on the border

I wish people would read or listen to my words on the Border Wall. This was in no way a concession. It was taking care of millions of people who were getting badly hurt by the Shutdown with the understanding that in 21 days, if no deal is done, it’s off to the races!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 26, 2019

John Cornyn is no. 2 in the Senate. He represents Texas, second most populous state in the union, and a bastion (still?)of Trump supporters. Cornyn put a knife in the suggestion that Trump could declare a national emergency, and Trump backed away from the idea.  Despite what he said repeatedly today, he won't return to it soon.

Trump has two modes: belligerent bellower, and coward. Remember when Trump discovered his pardon power, and threatened to use it to undo whatever Mueller might do? Trump pardoned Arpaio of a criminal contempt charge, and Dinesh D'Souza of a criminal charge most people didn't know he had served. Very low risk, in other words, and pleasing to his small base, but no more.  He hasn't pardoned anyone since. Roger Stone would do well to remember that.

Remember when Trump thundered that there were red lines Mueller dare not cross? Does anyone still think Trump is going to fire Mueller? Does anyone think he's going to pardon those Mueller has convicted?

Trump's entire reputation is built in lies. He tells us he know the "art of the deal, " and despite two years of proof he knows nothing about negotiations, the myth prevails and we expect Trump to prove his strategy. But all he has is lies, and we shouldn't be fooled by them anymore.  He won't do anything that leaves him with responsibility. He never has before, he won't start now. All he has done since capitulating on the shutdown is to deny he did it, so he can't be blamed for it.

Trump knows declaring a national emergency would cost him in the Senate, and probably in the House, too.  He has no idea how to work with Congress, but he has learned he is not a king. Bluster about circumventing Congress is just a desperate jab at saving face.  Even Ann Coulter can't force him into it, because there would be immediate consequences and no one else to blame for it. He can still blame the shutdown on Democrats; he alone would be responsible for creating a true Constitutional crisis that would cost him dearly and, once again, gain him nothing.

Even Trump is not dumb enough to welcome the second kick from the mule.

And why did Trump fold?

"Yesterday all the past"

Nancy just said she “just doesn’t understand why?” Very simply, without a Wall it all doesn’t work. Our Country has a chance to greatly reduce Crime, Human Trafficking, Gangs and Drugs. Should have been done for decades. We will not Cave!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 24, 2019

Today, he knows where LaGuardia airport is.

This is still a stupid and completely unnecessary way to run a government.  Especially if we're all back here in 3 weeks.

Final nail in the coffin

TRUMP: "I am very proud to announce today that we have reached a deal to end the shutdown & reopen the federal govt. As everyone knows, I have a very powerful alternative, but I didn't want to use it at this time."

Says deal will open govt until Feb 15. pic.twitter.com/fFlPngjqyM

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 25, 2019

Trump closes by threatening to declare a natl emergency: "We really have no choice but to build a powerful wall or steel barrier. If we don't get a fair deal from Congress, the government will either shut down or on February 15, again, or I will use the powers afforded to me." pic.twitter.com/qGBXFvfljF

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 25, 2019

"I'll do it! Don't think I won't do it!"

Which is how you know he won't do it.  "Stop, or I'll shoot!" "Shoot, and I will stop!"

He didn't pull the trigger the first time. He never will. 

That silence

Is the sound of Trump's presidency pushing up the daisies.

He didn't try to negotiate, doesn't know how to negotiate, hasn't even the first clue how government operates.  He doesn't understand how facts support an argument for a government expenditure, he thinks it simply works by commands.  He doesn't even understand investigating a proposal in order to know why it is needed or how it will work. He only knows:  "Build wall, crime fall."  That is not a government policy, it's not even a statement of reality.

Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats just taught Trump how government works, and that he is surplus to needs.

While waiting for word on the shutdown...

Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Roger Stone indictment: This has "nothing" to do with Trump pic.twitter.com/vhwVbAFB4U

— TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) January 25, 2019

and:  Look!  Over there!  Reporters!

Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Roger Stone indictment: This has "nothing" to do with Trump pic.twitter.com/vhwVbAFB4U

— TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) January 25, 2019

But this has nothing to do with the White House, right, Mr. President?

(And no, Dershowitz's argument doesn't make sense to me.  A criminal indictment rests on facts.  Obstruction of justice and witness tampering rests on the larger narrative, not just the specific facts of the alleged crime.  The distinction between facts and "narrative" and criminality is a completely false one.  This indictment doesn't prove a conspiracy beyond what is charged against Stone; but it doesn't stand apart from any conspiracy charges, either.)

Context is all.

Really?

Greatest Witch Hunt in the History of our Country! NO COLLUSION! Border Coyotes, Drug Dealers and Human Traffickers are treated better. Who alerted CNN to be there?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 25, 2019

Keep reminding yourself this is the POTUS, not some guy at the end of the bar, or sitting on the couch at Fox & Friends.  Or Alan Dershowitz, for that matter.

Cave!

Nancy just said she “just doesn’t understand why?” Very simply, without a Wall it all doesn’t work. Our Country has a chance to greatly reduce Crime, Human Trafficking, Gangs and Drugs. Should have been done for decades. We will not Cave!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 24, 2019

That whole business of "Let's Make A Deal!" still sounds like the last time Trump was in the room with Pelosi:

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and a bipartisan group of senators talked up a new potential agreement to fund the government for a few weeks so they could negotiate around the wall and other immigration measures. Graham said he talked to Trump, who didn’t rule out the measure. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) huddled in McConnell’s office to try and break the logjam. Schumer was tight-lipped as he exited the meeting with McConnell, repeating “we’re talking” with a smile roughly a dozen times as he walked back to his own office. And for the first time in weeks, it seemed like some progress was being made.

Then the White House chimed in.

“As was made clear to Senator Lindsay Graham, the 3 week CR [continuing resolution] would only work if there is a large down payment on the wall,” White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement as McConnell and Schumer met.

That was met with an icy stare from Democrats.

Sen. Angus King (I-ME), a moderate who caucuses with Democrats, talked up the new potential compromise to reporters after exiting the Senate floor Thursday afternoon. A reporter then read him Sanders’ statement.

“That presupposes the outcome of the discussions. The down payment for me is my expression of good faith, entering into this in a good-faith way,” King said, accusing Trump of “short-circuiting the process” once again.

“I wish the President would quit thinking of the shutdown as a weapon. He’s basically saying ‘give me what I want,’ or in this case ‘give me a part of what I want, or I’ll shut the government down.’ That’s what we’re trying to get away from here,” King continued. “I don’t like rewarding shutdown politics.”

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), another dealmaker, was even more frustrated by the White House’s latest stance.

“So we hold people’s wages hostage for a large down payment on a wall that the majority of Americans don’t believe is the most effective thing? So then what does he hold their wages hostage for next?” she asked incredulously. “How many times will he continue to hold federal employees’ wages hostage if he is able to feel that this is a successful strategy? It’s just plain wrong. He’s got to stop it.”

And yeah, the "national emergency" is still out there:

“The massive amount of aliens who unlawfully enter the United States each day is a direct threat to the safety and security of our nation and constitutes a national emergency,” a draft of a presidential proclamation said according to CNN.

In addition the draft says, “Now, therefore, I, Donald J. Trump, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C 1601, et seq.), hereby declare that a national emergency exists at the southern border of the United States.”

The presidential proclamation is also seeking more than $7 billion to fund Trump’s wall at the US-Mexico border.

That would prompt the real "Constitutional crisis," putting the problems of the shutdown (which it wouldn't necessarily end) in the shade.  Because what we need now is a new challenge to the separation of powers powers, with the third leg of the triad required once again limit the overreach of the first.

I especially like the touch of declaring an emergency and asking for still more money. Because that's the way you make deals: keep increasing your demands.

Yeah, this is all about the Democrats not trying hard enough.

The Chronicle Trudges On

Trump offers delusional interpretation of Senate vote: "I see a lot of Democrats, almost all of them breaking & saying 'walls are good! Walls are good!' Big difference from what you had 2 or 3 weeks ago...Our bill won 50-47."

No Dems are saying that & 50 votes isn't a "win." pic.twitter.com/xuUauGlhU4

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 24, 2019

There are 53 Republicans in the Senate, 45 Democrats, and 2 Independents.  Trump lost 3 votes, with no evidence any Democratic Senator is "breaking" (if one did, then so did 1 Republican).

As FoxNews (!) reported:

Doocy showed video of Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) saying that the one good thing the vote did is show the president that his idea is not a popular one, even among his own party.

Well, it would have; except you can't fix stupid.

I do wonder about the color of the sky on Trump's world.

A Chronicle of Our Times, Sort of

We begin the day with Wilber Ross, millionaire and Secretary of Commerce, commenting on the unemployed federal employees going to food pantries for food:

Well, I know they are, and I don’t really quite understand why,” he said. “[T]he obligations that they would undertake—say borrowing from a bank or a credit union—are in effect federally guaranteed, so the 30 days of pay that some people will be out is no real reason why they shouldn’t be able to get a loan against it.”

And why shouldn't that happen?

“[T]he idea that it’s paycheck or zero is not a really valid idea,” he said.

I'm only surprised he didn't say "Don't they have credit cards?"  Then again, he probably doesn't use one.

It got worse with Larry Kudlow, White House economic advisor:

And you know what else, with respect to people who do have financial hardships as some were asking, they are coming to work and giving the same 24/7 work they always did. And I will say to you, whatever semantic game you think you’re going to play with me—and I’m usually an easy going guy–give them credit, OK? They honor us. They honor us by their service, I don’t care whether you’re Republican or Democrat, I mean that sincerely. They honor us. Democrats have shut government down, it’s a—you know what I’m saying. They honor us. And they do it because of their love for the country and the office of the presidency and presumably their allegiance to President Trump, but whatever, they’re doing it. … You know, there’s a lot of wonderful people in this country. … I’ve become a great fan of the millenials. Thank you.

I'm sure none of those furloughed employees are thinking they either show up as 'essential employees' or they show up on the unemployment line.

Sec. Ross' comment prompted a response from Speaker Pelosi:

NANCY PELOSI: They have Wilbur Ross saying he doesn't understand why, when he was asked about people going to food lines and pantries and the rest, he says he doesn't understand why they have to do that. I don't know if it's a "let them eat cake" kind of attitude, or "call your father for money," or this is character building for you, it is all going to end well. Just as long as you don't get your paychecks. I don't quite understand why, as hundreds of thousands of men and women are about to miss a second paycheck tomorrow.

Which, in a normal Administration, would have at least meant the President would stay out of this no-win situation.  We do not, of course, have a normal Administration:

“That’s what happens at a time like this, they know the people, they’ve been working with them for years, and they work along. The grocery stores work along,” Trump claimed.

I've been going to the same shipping store to ship out Xmas presents for years now, so much so that some of the employees there know who I am.  I still get a discount at the bookstore I used to work for, if some of the old employees are there and recognize me (I don't ask for it, so I don't always get it).  I've been shopping at the same grocery store for so long I recognize some of the regular employees there.  But I've never "worked with them" to pay for my groceries, and they wouldn't know me from Adam if I suddenly had to go without a paycheck for a month.  Although I did get that nice e-mail (above) from a chocolate company in Pennsylvania (they have a store in D.C.) I sometimes order from.

It's a lovely thing to do; but it's also a single piece of candy.  I doubt this is what Trump imagines, but it's a bit above and beyond for any company.  Which nicely puts Trump's clueless comment in perspective.

And Marie Antoinette wants to know when she can get her reputation cleared by the living replacements.

Shutdown Follies

Nancy just said she “just doesn’t understand why?” Very simply, without a Wall it all doesn’t work. Our Country has a chance to greatly reduce Crime, Human Trafficking, Gangs and Drugs. Should have been done for decades. We will not Cave!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 24, 2019

It is the President who doesn't understand why.  The quote from Pelosi needs to be put into context:

.@SpeakerPelosi addresses Ross's comments: "They have Wilbur Ross saying he doesn't understand why they have to [go to food pantries]. Is this the 'let them eat cake' kind of attitude? Or call your father for money?" 🔥 pic.twitter.com/JZ9wlaytsa

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 24, 2019

Pelosi was speaking of Ross's remarks, not of Trump's continued demand for a border wall.  In related news:

During an interview on NPR’s Morning Edition, host Steve Inskeep noted that the Air Traffic Controllers Association has expressed concern about how the government shutdown is impacting airplane safety.

“If a plane crashes and people are killed because of this shutdown, is the wall worth that?” Inskeep wondered.

Schlapp, however, deflected the question.

“What the president wants to do is have the Democrats come to the table,” Schlapp said.

“The president is the one who is making the demand,” Inskeep interrupted. “Is the wall worth people getting killed?”

“The Democrats’ demand is not going to work,” Schlapp replied, ignoring the query. “They don’t even want to have a discussion with the to come to a compromise. So we want to open the government, we want the Democrats to come to the table.”

Inskeep pressed: “If the shutdown leads to a terror attack that gets Americans killed is the wall worth that?”

“Yes or no?” the NPR host demanded to know.

“Again, I’m going to say that the Democrats need to come to the table,” Schlapp repeated. “We are ready to open the government.”

“Why are you uncomfortable answering yes or no to that question?” Inskeep asked.

“I — I think at the end of the day,” Schlapp stuttered, “not any American thinks that, you know, we want to [create] any safety concerns. And that is why the president wants to open up the government, secure our border, have the Democrats come to the table.”

And as if on cue (or Pelosi listens to NPR):

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Thursday she was ready to meet with President Donald Trump in person any time to discuss an end to the ongoing partial government shutdown.

If Democrats come to the table, will Trump slap it again and walk out of the room, again? Because that worked so well before.....