The Last Democrat

Can’t deny that Donald Trump is being a bit sore about his election defeat. Such a strong believer in the United States legal system — he sues everybody — the poor man couldn’t get a single judge (Republican or Democrat) to side in his favor. Late at night, he cries hysterically.

Enjoy a coffee mug (for purchase on etsy) to commemorate the occasion. A warm cup of trump crying will keep you motivated at work.

Death smiles at us all, all a man can do is smile back.

Marcus Aurelius

Hostiles (2017) is a movie of blight.  Joe Blocker (Christian bale) is a salty army captain closing in on an eventful career in colonial America. As he comes to the crossroads in his life,  he is tormented by his decisions as an Army commander in the fog and ghosts of war against native Americans. His past and inner struggles come to a head when he has to shepherd an aging Cheyenne chief back to his homeland – an ostensible political effort by President Harrison to apologize for past war atrocities. Blocker begrudgingly follows the order,  but it becomes clear he has a history with this Chief. 

Failing to understand the workings of one’s own mind is bound to lead to unhappiness.

Marcus Aurelius

Bale carries the movie well. The audience is taken along on an eventful journey and the western ends as it should.  At some points,  I worried that the movie would fall into a white Jesus complex but thankfully, it did not. The movie captures the realities of the time period well and offers some brilliant insights on death, honor and tragedy. In spite of all the blight, again, the movie ends how it should. A critical decision on the success of a movie is how it ends, and this one ends well. Each character is developed and along with the insights,  I was satisfied with the suspense and closing.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/zvLKQKv_6JQ

February 2020

Dark mornings and short days in Washington are interrupted by a week of uncharacteristically warm weather, probably a result of the Constitution being burned in the basements of the Senate building.  Donald Trump is set to be acquitted by the United States Senate, something that everyone knew was going to occur. With all sycophant GOP Senators afraid of having their head on a pick from the White House, the question was less about guilt and more about whether a legitimate trial would occur. It did not.

For the first time in history, no witnesses were questioned and no new evidence was gathered.  Moscow Mitch fawned over his latest raping of Senate rules and procedures. Chief Justice John Roberts robotically read from a script, never offering an opinion of substance or encouraging actual deliberation – cementing his performance as a disgrace to the legal profession. The week feels like a 7-day funeral for the Constitution with Moscow Mitch chopping off the Senate’s own arm in the process.

Wednesday

A blessed shine of light comes from Utah to offer its condolences…. Mitt Romney, GOP Senator, is a fleeting semblance of hope for the week. In a gut-wrenching speech on the Senate floor, Romney votes to remove Trump from office. He provides a compelling and emotional explanation that historians will look back on as a dark time in United States history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppOri8UR9ck

“Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one’s oath of office that I can imagine,” said Romney. “With my vote, I will tell my children and their children that I did my duty to the best of my ability, believing that my country expected it of me. I will only be one name among many, no more, no less, to future generations of Americans who look at the record of this trial. They will note merely that I was among the senators who determined that what the president did was wrong, grievously wrong.”

Disagree with his politics, Romney chose the country and God over his party, and on this sad event brought tears to the eyes of many Americans. It would have been Democratic victory enough that no Democrats voted to acquit (Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Doug Jones of Alabama were very possible), but having a GOP turn is important for the country. Even with the death and destruction of institutions under President Trump, his impeachment marks the first time a Senator voted to remove a President of his own party. This data point is as good as any to show that this was far from a Democrat-orchestrated hoax, something the President will be ridiculed for saying.

Thursday

The buffoon attends the National Prayer Breakfast holding up newspaper headlines stating “Trump Acquitted” as if it were a celebration. As he did with Tuesday’s State of the Union, he turns a traditionally non-political event into a political one. He mocks House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (in attendance) and Senator Romney for using their faith to inform their decisions and pray for others. He takes time to personally recognize each co-conspirator on his team, sometimes the recognition turns into jarring quips or roasts. Steve Scalise, a congressman who was shot a few years earlier at a Congressional baseball game in Alexandria, he says was prettier after his injury. He takes credit for a governor’s election victory because of his endorsement.  The most awkward of his attempts at playful comments was a joke about wives.  When Scalise got shot, his wife “cried her eyes out” at the hospital and Trump joked that “not many wives would react that way … I know mine wouldn’t.”

Friday

In fallout after his Senate acquittal, Trump purges Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman and EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland from the White House. Vindman sat on the National Security Council and attended phone calls of Trump and Zelensky. His Congressional testimony revealed that Trump and Pence’s aides were not only concerned about Trump’s behavior with Ukraine, but actively worked to contain him.  Security escorted the purple heart recipient and Iraq war veteran out of the White House in an effort to shame him.

Ambassador Sondland was a Trump loyalist who got caught in a lie in his overzealous responses to house impeachment officials. He had to formally re-enter his testimony because of those lies and gave impish testimony before Congress that incriminated Trump.  In Trump’s eyes, the hotelier and million dollar donor violated his trust. In his skittish attempts to thread a needle and not incriminate himself before Congress, Sondland hit the trifecta of appearing disloyal, unreliable and aloof. Over twitter, he accepts his removal and thanks the President.

Both men are removed. One an appointee. The other an employee. The week is laid to rest. America looks forward to the weekend to cleanse us of this acrid Trump stench of failure and disgrace.

In a Senate impeachment trial, the idea that the Chief Justice’s presiding role as largely ceremonial is nonsense and a shirking of legal responsibility. The Chief Justice has a duty to ensure that the proceeding is a legitimate and fair trial through the perspective of an officer of the court – after all, he represents the highest ranking member in the judicial branch and presumably earned that rank because of his experience as a successful arbiter of justice.  The fact that the Trump Senate Impeachment trial is ending without witnesses and evidence gathering is more than enough reason for Chief Justice John Roberts to step in and assure that a trial, and not a farce, is actually held – as the Constitution requires.

In US history, there have been 18 Senate impeachment trials of Secretaries and Judges of the executive and judicial branches; respectively. Witnesses have testified in all trials except three: two cases in which the impeached official resigned prior to the trial reaching witness stages, and one situation in which the Senate decided that Congress cannot govern impeachment of its own members. These exceptions make sense. Not having witnesses would set a precedent Justice Roberts cannot sign off on with a healthy conscience. Doing so would be a disgrace to the judiciary branch, perhaps to a greater degree than the Senate has already disgraced itself.

A trial requires both sides the opportunity to present evidence and cross examine witnesses before it can conclude. It is Chief Justice Robert’s responsibility and duty to govern this playing field.  Otherwise, the proceeding fails on its essential purpose. Trump sycophants have hijacked the Senate to put party over country, ignorance over truth, and Justice Roberts must step into the fray. In fact, his judicial responsibility requires it.

It is a defection of American principals for Justice Roberts to stand idly by while a sham “trial” is presented before him. If Justice Roberts believes he hears a lie, he should feel an obligation to correct it. If he hears Trump impeachment lawyers deceptively claim that the House did not try to subpoena John Bolton, he should clarify this to the jury of Senators – if not for the fundamentals of the judicial branch as an institution, then for the assurance that proceedings have direction and findings of fact as it moves forward.

 “I will decide every case based on the record, according to the rule of law, without fear or favor, to the best of my ability. And I will remember that it’s my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat,” said Roberts during his 2005 Senate confirmation.

Justice Roberts, call balls and strikes. If you believe players are telegraphing pitches to batters, call it. If you believe Senators are making a mockery of your Court by shutting the American public out from testimony, call it. If you believe actions are being taken to delegitimize the process, you should be making every effort to legitimize it.

https://twitter.com/SherylNYT/status/1223062287927382016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1223062287927382016&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffpost.com%2Fentry%2Fjohn-warner-trump-trial-witnesses_n_5e33d989c5b611ac94d26bac

The argument that the claims against Trump don’t rise to the level of impeachment is fair. Reasonable minds could differ on whether Trump violated the national security of the United States and its ally Ukraine by doing what he did. However, the fact that the Senate is unwilling to further investigate the behavior is the true atrocity here. Such a failure of due process is precisely the situation that Chief Justice must control as Presiding Officer.

During the first day of starting arguments of the Senate Trump impeachment trial, Supreme Court Chief Justice admonished both the House impeachment managers and the defense team — probably the only time Chief Justice directly addressed the teams with some judicial direction.

“I think it is appropriate at this point for me to admonish both the House managers and president’s counsel in equal terms to remember that they are addressing the world’s greatest deliberative body,” Roberts said. “Those addressing the Senate should remember where they are.”

Let’s do as what Chief Justice Roberts asked and remember where we are at this presidential impeachment. There has been nearly zero cross party deliberation during this trial. The Senate sits quiet while lawyers launch didactic diatribes to one another. During breaks, Senators retreat to their party bunkers, eating separately, or occasionally breaking away in partisan groups to speak their own diatribes to the press. No witnesses are heard or cross examined during this “trial.”

The definition of deliberation is “long and careful consideration and discussion.” Juries deliberate. There has been none here.

It’s clear that Chief Justice Roberts admonished them in an effort to set the tone, but also to stifle, setting the stage for a truly kangaroo court – one with no deliberation. With enduring pain, true fear and loathing, I hope I’m wrong about Justice Roberts, but doubt I am. If he doesn’t require legitimacy to this trial, he will go down as a willing facilitator in neuteuring the Senate for generations to come (along with Mitch McConnel). Democratic government stands in front of a noose today and dictatorship is holding the switch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqa0MrzGYTw

In the history of the Republic, every Senate impeachment trial has required witnesses and new evidence. Even one for a guy who was on trial for lying about a marital affair.

During the Senate impeachment trial, the White house defense lawyers are repeatedly and condescendingly referring to the house impeachment managers as “the Democrats.” The goons can say that because the House team only consists of members of the Democratic party. However, this house impeachment vote has not been truly partisan. Justin Amash, a five-term card-holding Republican Congressman until 2019, voted for Trump’s impeachment.

Amash has taken the stand that no other Republican-seeking re-election has done during this current two year legislative session. He was a gift to Democrats and should have played a central role to the Senate impeachment trial. He would have been a bold choice for a house impeachment manager. On that footing, Pelosi and the Democrats could have represented the impeachment team to America as a bi-partisan committee.

It would have been the astute political move that Democrats needed to make. Further, Amash should have voted for impeachment as a Republican, then switched parties. Republicans did something similar with Steve Van Drew, a NJ congressman who voted against impeachment as a Democrat, then turned Republican the following day.

https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1220898731073196032?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

We’ll see what happens to both in their 2020 re-election campaigns, but hopefully Amash’s courage is rewarded and Democrats can reach across the aisle and leverage him. They will need him to truly convince a weathered, apathetic America who sees the federal government as a hollowed out, silo-ed enterprise.

Early, early morning. A time to sleep and avoid sleep, moving from room to room in the house with a phone in hand. As I wipe the sleep from one eye, I arrive upon a non story that should be called out for what it is.

Axios reported a story (and Rolling Stones later followed) in which Trump said the f-word when talking with his Health secretary, Alex Azar, about the administration’s position on vaping. “I should never have done that fucking vaping thing” is the headline. Come on now.

This is precisely the type of treacherous non-story that distracts voters. President Trump curses like most people do (even in business settings). Non-story. Trump, like all politicians, may hide or obfuscate a position on an issue out of fear of losing votes from his base. Non-story. Trump’s been a hack his whole career, why stop after becoming president.

Perhaps the right move politically is to defer to the FDA on the matter. His decision to ban all flavors except nicotine and menthol seems overly broad and infringes liberty. Again, where’s the story here? I’m sitting here in pajamas waiting to be enlightened.

The lazy, piggy backing Rolling Stones article is click bait and a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Sometimes the desire to know the internal dialogue of the executive lead us to be disappointed and distract us from substance.

The real information lie hidden in the original Axios article. In the same conversation, Trump pushed HHS Secretary Azar to draft regulations permitting import of cheaper prescription drugs from Canada. Introducing foreign competition to the market is interesting, but need more than just Canada and it’s a questionable long term strategy. Canada’s drug prices may just slowly get pulled up over time. It’s ironic that the United States would rely on the Canadian Governments socialist healthcare system to lower drug prices. The US should be building price controls itself not exploit Canada’s.

Time to switch rooms.

As San Diegans grow further away from the Chargers since their move from America’s finest city in 2016, a distant humming on the offseason horizon has the football gods praying. Drew Brees, the cannon from Purdue, is a newly minted free agent. If Chargers management had sense, they would re-sign Brees. Not only to roll the dice on a championship, but to reignite the fanbase for one last swan song of sorts. A storyline so bright with a hollywood ending.

In 2005, the Chargers cast Drew Brees away and for legitimate reasons. He was recovering from a shoulder surgery that many doctors believed there was no coming back from. He had Phillip Rivers waiting in the wings, something Brees was well aware of when he left. “A.J. didn’t draft me,” Brees said in a parting shot to A.J. Smith, who had succeeded John Butler as general manager after his untimely death.

Since Drew Brees’ departure, the what ifs have always circulated. Brees reminisced endearingly of his times in San Diego while he set records and won a super bowl. The Chargers had their share of success but never claimed the ultimate prize. Let me be clear. Now is the time to bring Brees back. Dean Spanos rise to the occasion and have one last run at glory and forgiveness.

The move is perfect, but the Chargers brass probably won’t deliver. They don’t make bold moves. They fumble their superstars and fan base in the name of frugality. Odds have it Tyrod Taylor is more likely to start in LA next season than Philip Rivers (or Tom Brady for that matter). A dribble rather than a splash awaits us for the inaugural season in a brand new stadium.

Should Chargers management come to their senses and sign Drew Brees this offseason, it would be a wise gambit in a long history of shortcomings. The team would be what it should have been in 2016: The Southern California Chargers — preferbly San Diego, but market forces being what they are.

https://youtu.be/vGE6ePpitHI

Just when we believe a disaster is averted with the US-Iran chest pounding, a real tragedy occurs. It’s gut wrenching to think that Iran mistakenly shot down a commercial airliner jet out of fears it was in retaliation to their air strikes on US bases 2 hours earlier. Imagine the look on Iranian soldiers’ faces after realizing of this blunder — hopefully the shot of piercing humanity that sobers this tension between the two countries. Humanity lost today, folks. May they rest in peace and God bless these 176 innocent victims of a bufoon and a paranoid idiot.

• 82 Iranians,
• 63 Canadians,
• 11 Ukrainians,
• 10 Swedes,
• Four Afghans,
• Three Germans,
• Three British Nationals.

Today’s vote of the Iraqi parliament to move to dispel American troops from the country is another sign that Trump is leading us into a boondoggle with Iran. Their decision was the result of President Trump’s order to kill top ranking Iranian General Soleimani and such fallout creates the impression that there was tenuous plan or coordination behind Trump’s decision to assassinate (if any).

The fact that Iraq, one of our closest allies in the region was unaware of Trump’s decision and saw it as a threat to sovereignty is a sign that Trump does not trust others and cannot be trusted himself. Iraq is a nation that we have invested billions of American taxpayer money in; we have put in considerable effort propping them up — their military, their democracy, their nation — and the fact that they are unilaterally moving to cast us out is embarrassing. The optics are shameful and a failure in diplomacy. Trump not only had a responsibility to develop a coalition within Iraq and with our allies in the region, he also had a responsibility to coordinate with Congress and the Democratic party was not apprised of his plans for Soleimani.

So here we are. A nation we once “liberated” wants us out and our executive branch did not seek full advice from Congress when on the precipice of moving to assassinating the General of a recognized nation. From a political perspective, the Democrats need to exploit Trump’s failure. If in fact, Iraq asks America to remove its troop presence in the country, it is not a win for President Trump. He may want to get out of “endless wars” but a good leader would leave under his own volition, plan and timeline. It is definitely not a good look if he is unilaterally asked to leave the country — especially after all of the years of goodwill we have invested in Iraq. The irony is thick and rich if Iraq “fires” America because of Trump’s mistake (has he ever heard those words?).

There is minimal information about the event that triggered where we are. It started with the killing of an American contractor (and other Iraqi soldiers) around December 27, 2019. As of this writing, their identities or purpose in Iraq have not been disclosed. Additionally, Soleimani fought against the ISIS caliphate, but politicians on both sides of the aisle agree he has the blood of Americans on his hands. Nonetheless, the fact is that Soleimani is being mourned by many and the Iraqis themselves are outraged at the United States unilateral action. For these reasons, the intended purpose of this writing is not to examine whether the assassination was justified, rather it is critique of Trump’s recklessness in carrying out an order that was loaded with political and military landmines.

“Before you drift off, don’t forget, which is to say remember, because remembering is so much more a psychotic activity than forgetting.”

Waking Life

Let’s remember back to June 2019  — 6 short months ago. At the time, the Mueller investigation just came to a close and in an interview with George Stephanopolous (ABC), Trump said another gaffe that outraged the country and he had to walk back. After it was determined that his 2016 campaign team invited Russian government interference, Stephanopolous asked Trump whether in the 2020 election, he would again invite such interference from a foreign country.

“If somebody called from a country, Norway, [and said] ‘we have information on your opponent’ — oh, I think I’d want to hear it,” Trump responded. What ostensibly was a slip up that he had to fix immediately perhaps was a foreshadowing of his plans to abuse the President of Ukraine. Just a month following the interview, Trump had a now infamous July 25 phone call, requesting the Ukraine President dig up dirt on former USA VP Joe Biden (except this time it was in exchange for the release of close to $400 million in security aid). Imagine if Trump had referenced Ukraine instead of Norway when talking to Stephanopolous – even he wouldn’t be so brazen.

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1138936855573999616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1138936855573999616&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2Fpolicy-and-politics%2F2019%2F6%2F17%2F18682144%2Ftrumps-george-stephanopoulos-interview-explained

After saying this, the media had a frenzy of outrage. Politicians from his own party admonished Trump and distanced themselves from the statements. The next day, Trump is on Fox and Friends tail between his legs and walking back his words.

“Of course, you give it to the F.B.I. or report it to the attorney general or somebody like that,” Mr. Trump said in a phone interview, “ ..You couldn’t have that happen with our country.”

The thought that he could endure this gaffe on one day, then the next day expend personal and government resources to bribe Ukraine government officials is egregious. What’s even more egregious is he might be getting away with it.

Ironically in this same Stephanopolous interview, Trump called out polling reports of Biden beating him “fake news,” so it was apparent that Trump was feeling the heat.

Trump has uncanny ability to win at failing. He has been a hack his entire career so what’s new if he succeeds in pulling the wool over America’s eyes once more. Trump gained notoriety for being some sort of glitch in society, a caricature of the American dream. More on this later.

Trump did not commit a crime.

Legal scholars debate the issue of whether impeachment requires a crime be committed, but the consensus opinion is that a crime need not be committed. In fact, Trump’s staunchest defenders, including hi own impeachment defense counsel, have previously argued a crime not need be committed for a president to be impeached. Nonetheless, credible sources have publicly stated that there was a crime.

The Government Accounting Office issued a formal decision stating that Trump’s actions to freeze $390 million dollars in government aid to Ukraine violated the Impoundment Control Act. “Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law.” If Trump wanted to defer the funding, he was required to notify Congress. The GAO has historically been considered a bipartisan government entity.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1191043857636581376?s=20

Trump has admitted to delaying the government aid, not delaying the aid and even said they don’t know.

Trump has never testified under Oath, and the crime that Clinton committed during his impeachment was perjuring himself about the Lewinsky affair. There would be a treasure trove of lies to pick from if Trump testified under Oath. Even Trump himself has feared he would lie as a reason not to testify — during the Mueller investigation. Clinton’s downfall was his decision to testify — a consequence of his own bravado that all future presidents will learn from.

the witnesses that have testified to congress do not have firsthand knowledge of trump’s conversations

The following White House officials have firsthand knowledge of conversations regarding President Trump and Ukraine President Zelensky.

• Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman
• Ambassador Gordon Sondland
• Jennifer Williams, adviser to VP Pence

Each have testified before the House about Trump’s conversations related to a quid pro quo that were unusual or inappropriate in nature.

ukraine president zelensky was not concerned about security aid being WITHHELD

In a December 2019 Time magazine interview, Zelensky stated, “If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us.” Given Zelensky is a newly minted politician and needs to project strength in his political relationships, there may more to this than Zelensky is letting on.

54 percent support impeachment — a SURPRISING statistic in light of gop/white house efforts to undermine the investigation.

In these sad days of Americans retreating to their bunkers of partisan news information, a good sign of whether a story is “newsworthy” is when those bunkers fail. For example, if an article appears egregious on CNN, it’s usually a good idea to look to how FoxNews reports on the same event. A sad state of affairs today — oh how objective journalism is a dying breed. A recent Fox News poll is providing such calibration.

The story is buried, but the FoxNews poll reports an increase in American support of impeachment. It’s an even higher majority than what was previously reported in late October. Of course, President Trump quickly took to twitter to repudiate the poll of the leading news organization that has it’s highest loyalty to him.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1206289904470233088?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1206289904470233088&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2F2019%2F12%2F16%2F21024071%2Ftrump-fox-news-impeachment-poll-biden

The bigger question, what degree of public support of impeachment is needed for GOP members of Congress to start standing up for investigating the truth? The White House has made every effort to undermine the House impeachment inquiry, yet GOP Congressman and Senators cling to the notion that the facts aren’t there — but what is fueling such a narrative? The White House has directed fact witness not to cooperate and testify. Although a handful of such witnesses disobeyed the White House’s direction, such a precedent will virtually preclude future Congresses of investigating the President.

Some would think if a witness refuses to testify at the direction of their accused boss, it would weaken the case of the accused, but the GOP is leveraging such subversion from the White House to poke holes in the House impeachment inquiry. GOP members of Congress have argued that witnesses of the July 25 Zelenskey call were not firsthand. On it’s face, this is not true — Amb. Gordon Sondland, Jennifer Williams and Lt. Colonal Vindman all were on the call and testified.

https://youtu.be/WF9TlRDQXPk

“If you don’t like hearsay, release the documents; if you don’t like hearsay, let people testify!” said Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.). “They’re afraid of the testimony they have already seen, and there’s a reason that they don’t want the rest of this to get out.”

Even with such a shameful disregard of congressional oversight, effectively neutering the branch of government, public support of impeachment remains close to or over a majority of voters. This is a far more compelling statistic in light of the Clinton impeachment, which had significantly lower public support — additionally, Clinton’s approval rating was 70 percent at the time.

Donald Trump and his band of sycophants repeatedly campaigned on a promise that he would run America like a business. It’s an appealing thought. A billionaire leverages his experience from the private sector to bring billions in cost cutting efficiencies to government. If only it were true. Too bad Donald Trump is a hack.

The fact is Trump has no qualms pushing an initiative to the doldrums of Congress even if he is public about wanting it (which makes me think he doesn’t really want it).  DACA is a great example. Trump has stated he will deal with DACA “with heart”, but then proceeded to repeal it on grounds that it is an unconstitutional executive order that Congress should have passed. Trump signs executive orders all of the time. DACA was signed into law in 2012 and having “heart” does not mean repealing laws without a replacement on scholarly constitutional grounds — this is hardly the case study to fight that fight. The prudent move would have been to amend Obama’s 2012 executive order.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/908276308265795585?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E908276308265795585&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2Fpolicy-and-politics%2F2017%2F9%2F14%2F16306658%2Ftrump-daca-deal-tweets

The goals of DACA have received bipartisan recognition, even Trump himself has showed support. Shortly after sending the Keebler Elf out to announce its repeal, Trump punted the issue to the back of the line, tweeting “Congress now has 6 months to legalize DACA (something the Obama Administration was unable to do).”

Like a business, the government has limited resources and budget. Trump shouldn’t focus them on laws he ostensibly supports (and that have bipartisan support). There have to be some ulterior motives here. The stink of this hack wafts up to the White House attic and out into the Pennsylvania avenue sewers.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1194219655717642240?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1194219655717642240&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2Fpolicy-and-politics%2F2019%2F11%2F12%2F20961139%2Ftrump-daca-tweet-hardened-criminals-scotus

The following is a running list of editorial boards for longstanding news organizations that have formally and publicly announced support of President Donald Trump’s impeachment. Being persuaded by this data point requires faith in objective journalism, freedom of press and information.

• New York Times
• Los Angeles Times
• Washington Post
• Boston Globe
• New York Daily News
• Chicago Sun Times
• USA Today
• Orlando Sentinal
• San Francisco Chronicle
• Philadelphia Inquirer

Notable news organization missing from the list is the Wall Street Journal.