So I guess 2016 claimed its biggest victim yet - America

Because they have more guns and power than your city council could ever dream of and don’t ever have to see the people that voted for them if they don’t want to. If your mayor pulled this shit you could get about a hundred people and march on his office or his fucking house. He can’t hide from you, he lives there. These guys effectively live thousands of miles away from the people they represent and once elected hold office for 2-6 years and they can only be outed if they decide to let it happen.

And all that said, insanely shady shit happens at the local level all the time. Mayors and city councils get bought and sold regularly. They’re usually a lot more subtle about it, but they don’t have the FBI and Army on their side, they just got the local PD which is probably out numbered 500:1 and also has to live in said town and see said people every day. If they get real bad you can go over their head to the state level, where crushing them like an insect just scores those people political capital (we crushed corruption! vote for us!).

To that, the source said, Cook replied that the immigration approach by the administration also “needs more heart.” Cook cited the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which is under review by the Trump administration. He also said people in tech and their co-workers were nervous about their status, and added that it “would be great” if the president could “send them a signal.”

According to the source, Trump replied that he wants to see comprehensive immigration reform and urged the CEOs to call their senators and congressmen to push for it.

Er, what?! Isn’t suggesting his immigration agenda is not even under his control a massive ‘fuck you’ to the whole concept of gathering a bunch of industry big wigs in a room for discussion and input?

I’m sure by immigration reform, he means, “none”. And after all, if there is no immigration, kids will stop getting separated from their parents eventually.

“yeah, you guys should call congress or something.”
“WTF are we even here for?”

I’ve got a running theory that Cabinet members have basically been tasked with removing sharp objects and putting outlet protectors on to Trump-proof the Presidency as much as they can at this point. He still shows up for photo-ops and tweets, but that’s about it.

It’s clear that Trump doesn’t want to do anything except be praised. I don’t know if that’s good or bad.

It is just showing how corrupt the US system of government is, now they’re just not bothering to hide it any more.

I agree, and yet there also seem to be enforcers that Trump is sending into the various departments to make sure the appointees are staying loyal. It’s completely insane.

When the Trump administration announced its pick to run the $1.3 trillion federal student loan system on Tuesday, there was one notable thing about the candidate that wasn’t mentioned in the press release: he’s the CEO of a private student loan company.

The Education Department’s statement described A. Wayne Johnson as the “Founder, Chairman and former CEO” of a payments technology company called First Performance Corporation. It noted his Ph.D. in education leadership, and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, citing his dissertation, said he “actually wrote the book on student loan debt.”

But what wasn’t noted was Johnson is currently the CEO of Reunion Student Loan Services, a detail confirmed by a company representative reached by phone on Tuesday afternoon. Reunion originates and services private student loans, and offers refinancing and consolidation for existing loans.

If Democrats actually did better in the race that didn’t get national attention, I worry that it means Democrats struggle to overcome the relentless, 24/7/365 demonization of their party in the right-wing media, which is basically the mainstream media in much of white America. The South Carolina race was ignored by the rest of the country, which means that allegedly nasty nationwide Democrats were never a factor.

In Georgia, Handel voters weren’t voting against Ossoff – they were voting against evil coast-dwellers from New York and Massachusetts and California. They were voting against Nancy Pelosi, history’s greatest monster. Watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IJp8-BAT6Y

Ossoff was attacked for getting too much money from outside Georgia – as noted in the attack ad above, which was paid for by the Congressional Leadership Fund, which is, um, not Georgia-based. Neither are the National Republican Congressional Committee and the Republican National Committee, which contributed massive amounts of money to elect Handel (more than comparable national Democratic organizations).
[…]
Democrats don’t recognize this GOP propaganda tsunami as a problem. And no, Republicans don’t have an identical problem with Democratic voters, because certain Republicans can win in virtually any Democratic state: Governor Charlie Baker in Massachusetts (and many GOP governors before him, including Mitt Romney and Bill Weld). Mayors Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg in New York City. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in California not long ago. Governor Larry Hogan in Maryland. Most Democratic voters think these Republicans are … different. (See also Senator Susan Collins in Maine, or Governor John Kasich in Ohio.)

Democrats, by contrast, are nearly always seen to have liberalism cooties. It’s a problem that needs to be dealt with.

That’s a great piece.
Here’s Dave Weige with similar insightsl:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/06/20/georgias-lesson-all-politics-is-tribal/?utm_term=.4d140428b95f

And from the comments. I mean, can these people even read?

Molly Pitcher
6/20/2017 12:29 PM EDT
Let’s have a conversation about the millions of dollars pumped into the campaign by liberal super pacs & Hollywierd elites. The people of Ga. do not like outsiders sticking their nose in our elections. Carpetbaggers get out & stay out!

This is why I’m convinced we’re headed to Civil War as a country- this is just a recipe for a country breaking with the right trigger.

I missed this earlier.
This weekend on Meet the Press, David Brooks floated the idea that he’s “bothered” that there are no leaks pointing to Russian collusion*, dismissed or ignored the flagrant abuse of power and (probable) obstruction of justice, or the pattern of lying about Russian contacts with people involved in the trump campaign. The other panelists (except WaPo’s Eugene Robinson) nodded sagely. He then has an op-ed in NYT making the same argument that Charles Pierce nicely dismantles:

(Edit: Personally I doubt there’s outward collusion either. The Russians would be stupid to directly enroll trump (see - trump behavior about anything) and direct collusion with surrogates would be easy to catch. However, there is probably shady financial dealings, some of which might very well be illegal)

(italics Brooks, bold Pierce.)

From The New York Times:

I was the op-ed editor at The Wall Street Journal at the peak of the Whitewater scandal. We ran a series of investigative pieces “raising serious questions” (as we say in the scandal business) about the nefarious things the Clintons were thought to have done back in Arkansas. Now I confess I couldn’t follow all the actual allegations made in those essays. They were six jungles deep in the weeds. But I do remember the intense atmosphere that the scandal created. A series of bombshell revelations came out in the media, which seemed monumental at the time. A special prosecutor was appointed and indictments were expected. Speculation became the national sport. In retrospect Whitewater seems overblown. And yet it has to be confessed that, at least so far, the Whitewater scandal was far more substantive than the Russia-collusion scandal now gripping Washington.

This may be the most shameless passage of political journalism I have ever read. It contains more of the elements of passive-aggression, self-absolution, historical amnesia, and outright falsehood in the same place than any other single location this side of the author’s own frontal lobes.

Return with us now to those thrilling days of yesteryear. Note the shabby, silly alibi that leads us off.

Now I confess I couldn’t follow all the actual allegations made in those essays.

You were the editor, fool. It was your job to follow the actual allegations, because a lot of them were crazy tales from Arkansas con-men who looked at the national press and saw a battalion of easy marks.

They were six jungles deep in the weeds.

And hip-deep in pure bullshit, but do go on.

A series of bombshell revelations came out in the media, which seemed monumental at the time.

Some of those were contained in a series of “investigative essays” that helped drive Vince Foster to kill himself. We know this because the WSJ was specifically mentioned in his suicide note. I’m surprised a copy of it isn’t hanging in the editorial department.

A special prosecutor was appointed and indictments were expected.

Actually, two special prosecutors were appointed. The first one, Robert Fiske, concluded that there was no crime involving the Clintons in regard to Whitewater and its attendant fiscal shenanigans. That’s why Republican judges fired Fiske and we ended up with Ken Starr.

In retrospect Whitewater seems overblown. And yet it has to be confessed that, at least so far, the Whitewater scandal was far more substantive than the Russia-collusion scandal now gripping Washington.

This is a masterpiece of intellectual cowardice. I didn’t understand it, even though it was my job to do so, and now that I’m a thought leader, I think one of the major boosts to my career may have been a crock of beans, but, hey, we had a real scandal there, unlike the current moment, which has revealed that my entire career has been devoted to building a fairy tale castle in which every ogre and troll of the lunatic right can find refuge.

There was nothing “substantive” about “the Whitewater scandal,” at least as regards the Clintons. We know this because Ken Starr told the House Judiciary Committee that very thing. The real damage it did was to give ambitious conservative coatholders a leg up in our national discourse so that, now, they can deny the forces that created them. What a bunch of ingrates.

I could read Charlie Pierce go after David Brooks every day.

The NYT should have hired Pierce instead of another WSJ Republican. :/

Anyway Josh Marshall piles on that inane Brooks op-ed:

These billboards are great.

Is Hardee’s owned by Carl’s Jr., or vice versa? Logos look almost identical.

Yes, some years back Carls bought Hardee’s. They have moved closer, menu wise, over time. But they are regionally separated, rarely do you see both in the same place.

Yeah, they’re owned by the same company.

DAMMIT Craig.