Julian Castro Endorses Elizabeth Warren

Julian Castro, who suspended his campaign for President last week, today announced via video he will endorse Elizabeth Warren.

There's one candidate I see who's unafraid to fight like hell to make sure America's promise will be there for everyone... That's why I'm proud to endorse Elizabeth Warren for President."

Castro will campaign with Warren this week in Brooklyn.

So, will we see a Warren-Castro ticket?

< Golden Globe Awards 2020 | Des Moines Debate: Six to Compete >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Yes! (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by leap on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 10:53:08 AM EST
     I would LOVE that ticket!

    That is a good (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 06, 2020 at 11:07:30 AM EST
    endorsement for her.

    For the win (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 07:55:02 AM EST
    Wow! (none / 0) (#83)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 11:37:31 AM EST
    I'm so old I can remember when billionaires buying elections was a bad thing.

    Those were the days (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 11:52:55 AM EST

    Pretty good stuff here (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 14, 2020 at 05:26:34 PM EST
    the LEV FILES

    What she said

    Natasha Bertrand
    Um holy sh*t. This certainly makes it sound like Parnas and co. were actively tracking Yovanovitch's movements

    I read (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 14, 2020 at 06:21:28 PM EST
    them. It sounds like some people are going to be in big trouble. The only disappointment in those was there was nothing on Devin Nunes.

    Who is... (none / 0) (#93)
    by desertswine on Tue Jan 14, 2020 at 09:56:51 PM EST
    Robert F. Hyde?

    More than (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 14, 2020 at 10:04:33 PM EST
    Surveillance, according to Malcolm Vance---maybe assassination.  

    writing a new thread on this now (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jan 15, 2020 at 01:29:43 AM EST
    I know there's no place else to post this, but please wait until I get my post up. Thanks!

    Oh my (none / 0) (#96)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 15, 2020 at 12:32:13 PM EST
    Lev and his lawyer on Rachel tonight.

    Cory Booker drops out. (4.67 / 3) (#82)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 09:59:39 AM EST
    Looks like the next Prez will be of the white persuasion.

    I was big on Booker a couple of years ago. However, his presidential campaign seemed lackluster and uninspiring.

    To honest, most of the current crop, are to me, lackluster and uninspiring. Not a single one of them has me excited. My only motivation is to get rid of orange jesus.

    I doubt we see a Warren anyone ticket (4.00 / 1) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 08:56:12 AM EST
    Warren is sinking.  Bernie is rising.   Biden also slipping a little.  Starting to see writing about how there is no front runner and the first 4 are unlikely to produce one.  And there could be an old fashioned contested convention.

    I won't point out who said that would happen a while ago.

    Or who said there is another candidate laying out there in the weeds of Super Tuesday like a hungry gator.

    I once said if it came down to Biden or the gator I was with the gator.  I feel the same about Bernie.  

    Not about policy.  It's about winning.

    Just remember who said it was coming.

    FTR (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 09:05:50 AM EST
    It would be nice to be wrong about that.

    Look who the youth demo supports (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 09:08:29 AM EST
    (Up to 45 actually.) They are huge behind Sanders. Needless to say, kids ARE the future of the party and nation, THEY are the ones who will truly suffer for our generation's squandering and waste. Also, more often than not, kids tend to be on the right side of history. Only older, richer, less progressive "Democratic" voters, by and large, are going to contest this younger, more diverse future. To everyone's detriment, IMO. Peace to all.  

    If one looks to (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 12:42:37 PM EST
    polls, only Biden consistently beats Trump.

    It has been that way for some time....

    Not sure many are happy with that, but there it is......


    Let's talk in.... (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 12:47:41 PM EST

    Sure (none / 0) (#10)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 02:01:27 PM EST
    But the Democrats will decide in the next few weeks who their candidate will be.

    Biden is a (none / 0) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 03:19:41 PM EST
    terrible candidate with a very good media shop. He probably could win but I don't think he's the only one. Every year we hear about the youth vote and every year it fails to materialize in enough numbers to make a win. There has to be a candidate that appeal to more than one age of voters to win.

    It is a difficult (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 03:59:06 PM EST
    set of candidates to evaluate.

    There are lot of theories of what might work.  But polling data, as flawed as it may be, is concrete information.  Perhaps only one data point, but still it is data.....The rest is opinion.....

    It is looking like Biden/Klobuchar....I think the Biden people would be really happy with Klobuchar.....unless Stacy Abrams is pushed hard by the African American community and the Left.

    But who knows, it could be Bernie, and for some reason Bernie polls much better against Trump than Elizabeth Warren.  Just chalk it up to sexism and the natural advantage a white candidate has, I suppose....

    I do know conservative Millennials like Bernie even though they might not vote for him.  They like his authenticity.  I think he is not a Democrat and his campaign people are not Democrats, and I do not like his ideas all that much.      


    If Biden's (none / 0) (#18)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:04:22 PM EST
    campaign is looking to Klobuchar as making for a really good ticket, it seems like another tin-eared mis-step.  Biden has sustained his national polling lead, in large measure, due to his AA support, especially, women, and those older.  

    And, turnout will be key to victory in the general.  If not Stacey Abrams, then Kamala Harris, would in my view, be a better choice.  Centrism would not be over-looked with Biden at the top of the ticket and Senator Klobuchar's presence would add little or no zest.  Although, in fairness, she is from the Midwest, you know.  And, she would be a counterweight to Joe's nice image---splitting it down the middle as advertised.


    Biden Harris (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Coral on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 08:47:41 PM EST
    I think Biden (alas) will be the nominee. If he picks Harris as his VP it will boost his support among women, among AA community that doesn't already support him, enthusiasm among those of us who want to see some change on the ticket.

    Plus, she will be replace by Democratic Senator. Klobuchar probably would, but not as certain.

    My preferred ticket is Warren-Castro, but I concede that it would be harder path to winning.


    i cant (none / 0) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:22:02 PM EST
    imagine Klobuchar being an asset to Biden unless he needs her spunk to liven things up. Abrams is not a good pick. He's going to pick someone who can't even win their own state? Harris would be crazy to take a VP spot when she could be AG instead. If Biden needs a POC woman then he should go with a Hispanic woman. That would be an American first.

    I know that (none / 0) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:24:35 PM EST
    is what the polls say but Biden also cannot control his mouth and shoots himself in the foot constantly. I don't think he really has the self discipline necessary to run for president and then there's his age. You know if he's the nominee and wins we're going to be doing another crappy primary in 4 years. I would rather have someone who could serve 2 terms and with Biden we're giving up the power of incumbency. Bernie would likely die in office. If you google life expectancy of 78 year old heart attack patients he's got 3 more years to live. He might not even make it to 2022 mid terms.

    McGovern. (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 08:02:56 PM EST
    Sure (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 09:13:10 AM EST
    Here's the thing.  In spite of that I do not believe Sanders can win.  I just don't.  

    One other thought.  Recently there was this reply to me

    I hate (none / 0) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 02, 2020 at 05:52:52 PM EST
    this stinking primary more every day? Are we going to be reduced to having to choose between two octogenarians? We sound like the GOP with the two elderly white guys leading the race. I hope I don't have to vote for Biden. Please don't make me vote for him. Please let me have another candidate to choose against Bernie.

    Parent | Reply to This |  1  2  3  4

    I suggest you are far from alone there.  Far.

    So skipping the whole silly thing could end up being brilliant as easily as it could end up anything else.


    Wn the general election (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 09:14:38 AM EST
    To be clear

    Our generation's squandering and waste (none / 0) (#11)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 02:04:37 PM EST
    Who is "our generation?" (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by MKS on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 04:00:38 PM EST
    Since he was talking ... (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 07:02:07 PM EST
    ... about US voters, I'm fairly certain he meant "our generation" in this country, not China, Indonesia, India, Pakistan and Vietnam - where most of the recent reduction in extreme poverty took place.

    But if you want to take credit by making it a worldwide generational thing, knock yourself out.  Trump's always taking credit for stuff he didn't do, too.


    BTW (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Yman on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 07:06:31 PM EST
    Sorry (none / 0) (#12)
    by jmacWA on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 02:46:05 PM EST
    But that's total garbage.  You can place the blame for this squarely on the shoulders of the GOP, and the GOP leaning Supreme court.

    Don't blame an entire generation for the sins of the 1% and their toadies


    A reduction in extreme poverty from 90% of the human population to 10% in the last hundred years is quite an accomplishment.

    link, please (none / 0) (#25)
    by leap on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:54:24 PM EST
    Where are you getting your information? (I shudder to think...)

    See post #11 (none / 0) (#28)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 06:58:27 PM EST

    Link copied here.

    You can also google Extreme Poverty 10% for other sources.


    But Judge Judy... (4.00 / 1) (#16)
    by desertswine on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 04:23:14 PM EST
    endorses Bloomberg!  This changes everything.

    "He's a brilliant, self-made guy who runs and manages thousands of people, and has for 30 years."

    I am completely open (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 04:58:29 PM EST
    To the possibility Bloomberg never gets to 10%.  I suggest openness to the possibility he will.

    Mostly because I see no candidate who is likely to clearly lead the pack.   And because after skipping every "debate" and getting months and months of derision and comments like this he is consistently in the top 5.  Ahead of senators and others.

    Regular people are not paying attention to this.  Most couldn't pick a dem candidate out of a police lineup.  That's about to change.

    There has never been anything like what he plans to do.  

    The Real Power of Bloomberg's Money

    When people think about the political relevance of Michael Bloomberg's money, they tend to think about how his massive spending helps his campaigns: the record $261 million he spent on his three successful mayoral runs, the billions he could end up spending on his quest for the presidency. What people often miss is that Bloomberg actually spent more of his own money boosting his policy efforts in city hall than he did to get there.

    Part of Bloomberg's presidential sales pitch is that his personal wealth--he's worth an estimated $56 billion--makes him incorruptible. Not only is he unbribeable; being rich enough to never take political contributions, he can assume office unbeholden to donors. But Bloomberg is so rich that he shifts the direction of potential influence: Donors may not be able to buy influence, but he can use his wealth to push things in the directions he wants.

    Trump and Bloomberg to face off in dueling multi-million dollar Super Bowl ads

    Billionaire Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg and President Donald Trump's campaigns have purchased dueling multi-million dollar ads to air in high profile slots during the Super Bowl the campaigns, according to the campaigns.

    Bloomberg's campaign bought a 60-second ad that will air nationally during the game. While the campaign would not specify the price tag for that air time, they say they are paying "market rate," which Fox executives have described as "north of $5 million" for 30-second slots. That could put potentially Bloomberg's spending at upwards of $10 million.

    I have no idea what this approach will bring.  And I salute the confidence of any one who think they do.


    I do like (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:27:21 PM EST
    the fact that Bloomberg is running just based on the fact that he loathes Trump and knows where his bodies are buried.

    I (none / 0) (#23)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:38:11 PM EST
    agree, the early primaries are a joke, a handful of delegates likely carved up among 3 or 4 candidates who would have blown thru a significant wad.

    Bloomberg will flood the zone for super  Tuesday and surely pick up 15% in some of the bigger state and maybe outright steal a smaller state if he has good polling and a savvy strategy.

    So far the ads I have seen are pretty good and there are plenty of them, It would not surprise me to see Bernie, Biden and Bloomberg to be the last. It makes me want to puke.


    This (4.50 / 2) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:46:50 PM EST
    Bernie, Biden and Bloomberg to be the last. It makes me want to puke.

    It's not ideal.  That said of the three I vote for Bloomberg.  For several reasons.  Money being number 1 and 2.  As Ga said it seems personal.  I like that.  Also the man has been an authentic driving force for many things I care about from climate to guns.

    And as a bonus I actually think of all the possibilities Bloomberg is the one who might actually get some of those Trump voters.

    You could say the only thing worse than than another president as rich as Croesus would be another 4 years.  If it takes B to save us from that I am totally on board


    I know your money is on Bloomberg (none / 0) (#50)
    by CST on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 08:52:06 PM EST
    But did you see the polls with Steyer in 2nd in South Carolina and third in Nevada? He just qualified for the next debate and he's participated in the rest of them. He's on the ballot in Iowa, he's younger, he doesn't have people who hate him due to Stop and Frisk, and is more likely to bring in the progressives due to his environmental record and wealth tax stance, etc... without being "scary" like Bernie or Warren. He's got no government experience, but I'm not sure that matters anymore. If I were betting on a billionaire, he'd be the one. As for me, I vote on Super Tuesday so I'm going with what I want.

    Steyer (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 10:35:26 AM EST
    Would make a great Secretary of the Interior.

    Nothing against Steyer really (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 09:05:44 PM EST
    But the reason I think Bloomberg will outlast him is the massive organization he is building and his open ended commitment to spend whatever it takes.

    Plus Bloomberg has done it before.  In NY.  

    B has hired a lot of very smart behind the scenes people.  They have a plan and they are sticking to it.

    We shall see if any of it matters.


    Also (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 10:11:17 AM EST
    Steyer is running a pretty typical self financed campaign.  

    Bloomberg is not.  I doubt Steyers approach will deliver much more than similar past efforts.  I don't see him as a contender.  That said, we could do worse.

    Bloomberg apparently has something different in mind.  As I said, who knows.  What I do know is when he started as a mayoral candidate there was a similar hostility on the left.  In NYC, ok.

    About the Stop&Frisk thing.  Speaking purely politically I see this as a manageable primary problem.  Probably no worse than Biden's Iraq war, the crime bill, etc.  possibly a VP of color.  Perhaps a woman former prosecutor.  

    Sto&Frist is not, IMO, a general election problem politically speaking.

    In my experience many people underestimate the power of a "law & order" message.  Bloomberg's opponents did this in NYC and lost.

    Just sayin.


    PS (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 10:15:16 AM EST
    In the age of Trump

    Law and order

    I'm jus sayin.


    Stop and Frisk (none / 0) (#57)
    by CST on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 10:47:40 AM EST
    Will be a problem in the primary not the general.   But it will be problem.  It may not have hurt him as mayor but most of the data on blatant discrimination came out after he left office. Bloomberg doesn't have the Obama pass that Joe Biden gets.  There's not enough white moderates in the primary to win with just that group.  You need black moderates or white progressives too and I don't see how he gets either group.

    If not stop and frisk, (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 01:11:20 PM EST
    Bloomberg's support for the Iraq war and his endorsement of George W Bush's re-election at the 2004 Republican Convention may be a factor , particularly, in light of Trump's Iranian misadventure.   While Biden, as Senator, supported the 2003 war resolution, he may enjoy some Obama redemption.

    And, then there is the controversial extension of NYC mayoral term limits he signed permitting a third term.  A lot of money spent to achieve his victories, the third by a much thinner margin.  


    Purely speculation (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 10:55:35 AM EST
    I think the goal is to expand the voting base enough that this
    Bloomberg doesn't have the Obama pass that Joe Biden gets.  There's not enough white moderates in the primary to win with just that group.

    Is not necessarily true.  I believe that is the goal.


    I really think a contested convention is where they could pull it off.

    He hiring the vote counters just in case I guess.


    It worked (none / 0) (#59)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 11:01:40 AM EST
    In NYC

    3 times


    Probably alone here (none / 0) (#60)
    by CST on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 11:10:09 AM EST
    But I think a contested convention is actually Warren's best shot. I don't see the party rallying around someone who skipped the debates, skipped Iowa and NH, and doesn't have much support from the base and hasn't really been a Democrat.

    And again, Stop and Frisk wasn't a scandal until after he left office.


    Thing about a convention (none / 0) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 11:13:00 AM EST
    Is no one knows what happens.

    I am so hoping to see one.  It would be a great companion civics lesson to impeachment.

    I was one year old the last time.


    Well, Capt., the contested "dream" (none / 0) (#78)
    by christinep on Sun Jan 12, 2020 at 08:37:32 PM EST
    can turn into the kind of dream you might not want.  My early convention memories involved the JFK/LBJ dispute prior to the pushed agreement at the convention's outset.... A contested convention may well favor we so-called "establishment" or centrist types, because it has to do with personal calculations that necessarily involve relationships.  My take: No matter what happens in the first two outings (Iowa, N.H.), if Biden holds in Nevada and--esp.--if he keeps a sizable lead in South Carolina, I don't think that he will be stopped by Bloomberg or anyone else. The Why involves the math calculus of various voting blocs & cohorts.

    If polling (none / 0) (#80)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 12, 2020 at 09:59:42 PM EST
    is right Biden is going to come in 3rd or 4th in Iowa. What I wonder is how much that is going to affect the other races. I would think he would still win SC but it probably will affect his margins. Now Steyer has come up in polling in SC with none of the other candidates even making the delegate threshold it will be interesting to see if Steyer can make Biden's margins go down.

    I (none / 0) (#67)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 03:35:53 PM EST
    I think Klobachar has a chance as a consensus pick. Biden is most likely to have the plurality of the delegates and they may be wary of Warren.

    For what it's worth here's Nate Silvers projected delegate count.

    Biden 1,522
    Sanders 1,029
    Warren 624
    Buttigieg 546

    No first ballot winner here (1990 to win)

    Sanders plus Warren do not win, Biden plus Buttigieg do. Also, there are 714 super delegates who can vote on the second ballot who would probably favor a more "centrist" pick.

    Bloomberg remains a wild card and IMO has a chance to go to the convention with several hundred delegates and he is no fan of Warren or Bernie.


    For sure (none / 0) (#69)
    by CST on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 03:48:11 PM EST
    Something would have to change in order for that to happen (also Klobacher or Bloomberg).

    Bug I do think someone who has been in the race near the top is more likely than someone who hasn't been.


    She (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jan 11, 2020 at 06:44:32 AM EST
    appears to be moving in that direction
    Elizabeth Warren is often portrayed in media as a figure of the left wing, locked in a battle with Bernie Sanders for the progressive base of the party. In fact, polling frequently shows she's the second choice not just of Sanders voters, but of Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg supporters, too.

    Seeking a spark heading into the Iowa caucuses, Warren and her allies are making a surprising closing argument: That she's best positioned to unite and excite the party -- and is therefore the most electable.

    That is an average projected count by Silvers (none / 0) (#79)
    by christinep on Sun Jan 12, 2020 at 08:46:56 PM EST
    If so, consider: The easiest & most compelling solution is a Biden & Buttigieg agreement (with a little more chip-in from others such as Klobuchar) wherein young B encourages his delegates to follow his lead and support Biden.  That is how these things worked in the past and how it would be sensible even now. That way, young B is not left out in the cold with a decent number of delegates hanging out there ... in such a political agreement (aka "deal") Buttigieg surely would find a nice placement within the Administration to get some seasoning for the next time around.

    Interesting (none / 0) (#56)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 10:39:30 AM EST
    poll numbers for Steyer, but in a way good news for Bloomberg.

    For one it shows that large amounts of money can buy support.

    It also has the possibility of further muddying up the water before super Tuesday. If Steyer is able to reach the 15% threshold in any of the four early states there will probably be five candidates with a delegate count heading into the big day.

    It also increases the probability of a contested convention.


    I can see Steyer (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 05:36:15 PM EST
    picking up votes in the Atlanta metro area in the vote rich suburbs. Biden doesn't have a whole lot of appeal. If Biden stays where he is now which is basically part of the African American voting base he's not going to win. I would expect Steyer to do much better than Bloomberg in Georgia. Super Tuesday is going to be rough for Warren and Bernie both of which have limited appeal in most of the Super Tuesday states.

    And this (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 05:58:13 PM EST
    My (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 06:12:43 PM EST
    point being he has the resources go after every state with a chance to steal an outright majority or at least a convincing plurality in a state  everyone else is forced to neglect.  It won't do much for his delegate count but it will create valuable media buzz to his possible delegate earning 3rd or fourth places in some of the more contested states.

    Maybe he (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 07, 2020 at 07:36:51 PM EST
    wants to play kingmaker and is playing the opposite game of what Bernie is purported to be doing which is take his delegates to the convention and demand a hearing. Bloomberg may be able to completely take out Bernie.

    DiFi & Joe need to STFU (4.00 / 1) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 09:01:28 AM EST
    Feinstein, Manchin join Democrats pressuring Pelosi to send impeachment articles to Senate

    The media is of course milking and whipping this because .... democrats in disarray

    Manchin, Feinstein, Coons, (none / 0) (#33)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 09:14:53 AM EST
    and Tester,  oh well.   But why Blumenthal and Chris Murphy?

    All waking it back (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 11:46:56 AM EST
    Don't cross Pelosi Blvd.



    I suspect (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 09:22:21 AM EST
    They know that this "just get it started" face saving thing fir Mitch will not prevent witnesses.  

    As smoothly as this has run so far the "conflict" seems a tiny bit staged.  Especially with the likes of the latter you mentioned.

    I suspect she will remit soon.  "Bowing to pressure"

    But who really knows.


    Nancy killing it live (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 10:03:34 AM EST
    Right now

    Part of me believes (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 10:06:00 AM EST
    She will be interim president before the election.

    She just said (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 10:15:12 AM EST
    With a shrug "probably soon"

    Yes, I wondered (none / 0) (#38)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 10:26:16 AM EST
    If this was being orchestrated.  But, Feinstein's comment (if urgent send it over, if not don't) seems too harsh. House Armed Services Chair Adam Smith (D. WA), apparently taken to the woodshed, walked back his opinion this morning that the Articles should be sent over to the Senate.

    Of course, the media revels in Democrats in disarray and puts pressure on Pelosi rather than on Moscow Mitch to set forth the rules.  In any event, not the time for anything but Democratic solidarity.  Republican Senators Paul and Lee are fuming about the Intel briefing, more email information is available, and Bolton's new-found willingness to testify (if Mitch continues to say no, the House can subpoena him so as to bolster the Articles).

    And, a favorite. The NYC Bar Assoc. has asked Congress to investigate AG Barr, saying his recent actions and statements have positioned the DOJ and it's prosecutors as political partisans willing to use the levers of government to empower certain groups over others.  The first time any Bar Assoc, has asked for investigation of a sitting AG.

    And, Trump's wag the dog scheme is unlikely to move the needle for him.  World War III just does not have that much appeal if you are not Pence or Pompeo, hoping for the Rapture.


    Trump's wag the dog (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 03:00:36 PM EST
    scenario likely is going to make it worse for him if it does anything at all. People are sick of wars in the middle east and the whole "imminent threat" thing came off as Iraq-y Bush-y Lie-y.

    Pinning down the (none / 0) (#52)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 09:28:38 PM EST
    reason is like nailing jello to a tree.  The reason du jour is not so much about being imminent as for past acts---planting road side bombs.  As Trump told reporters today, because of Soleimani "there are a lot of people walking around without legs".

    Talk about a tin ear (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Peter G on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 01:56:32 PM EST
    and no sense of how to express yourself. Walking around "without legs"? Call rewrite.

    {{Sigh}} (none / 0) (#68)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 03:37:39 PM EST
    He's getting worse and worse with his speech.
    He never was a great orator, but in his younger days, he did at least speak more lucidly.
    It makes me increasingly alarmed with each passing day that he has his finger on the nuclear button.

    I was hoping you could talk some sense (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by vml68 on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 11:12:22 PM EST
    into Tr*mp. Apparently, he knows you :-)
    LINK.  Skip to the 5:45 mark.

    Bwahaha! (none / 0) (#74)
    by Zorba on Sat Jan 11, 2020 at 12:47:39 PM EST
    Nope, if I had ever met him, I would not have been polite. ;-)
    He's from Queens originally; I bet he's never even been to one of the many Greek restaurants in Astoria, much less met most of us 3 million Greek-Americans.

    What a great neighborhood, is Astoria (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by Peter G on Sat Jan 11, 2020 at 06:36:39 PM EST
    Our oldest daughter and her soon-to-be husband got an apartment there when they first moved to NYC, several years ago. Terrific Greek immigrant landlord. Brazilian, Greek and Palestinian places to eat all around. Amazing grocery stores. Vibrant, diverse and welcoming.  A few years later, they moved to a bigger apartment in Woodside, not far away. Similar vibe, although more Filipino and Chinese, along with Arab neighbors and food. Omigod, the food. Most recently, they bought a coop apartment in Jackson Heights, large enough for the baby (our grandson). Again, ethnically diverse, lots of Indian, middle-eastern and Central American neighbors. Queens is an amazing, exciting place.

    Slapdash Case (none / 0) (#63)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 12:06:41 PM EST
    The WSJ is reporting that Trump was under pressure from some GOP senators to assassinate Soleimani. So he acted to shore up support frp, these Senators ahead of the impeachment trial.

    She just spent several minutes (none / 0) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 10:34:31 AM EST
    Getting laughs talking about football

    A nation turns its lonely eyes to you Nancy.


    Cheeto on now. I'm on a commercial skipping (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 10:56:09 AM EST
    Delay, so, a few minutes ago, about the adderall thing, today is a recent non-time release 20 mg.

    Yesterday was three or more hours after a non-time release 20mg.


    OK, considering (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 11:03:20 AM EST

    possibly more than 20 mg


    Holy hell (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 11:10:09 AM EST
    "I spent a lot of money on money"

    You know, we are under a flash flood watch.  I just walked outside and you can do feel something is coming.

    I'm getting the same feeling watching MSNBC

    I don't know what.  But it freakin coming.


    Whatever (none / 0) (#44)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 12:04:51 PM EST
    Dr. Harold Bornstein and Dr. Ronny Jackson have given Trump, he is not well titrated.  Also, Trump issued a tweet bragging about the stock market and how we should all be thankful to him for our robust. "409K's.  Our 401K's gained eight.  That is good.

    A Good Strategy Might be (none / 0) (#45)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 01:00:40 PM EST
    to withhold sending the articles to the Senate while the House goes to court to demand that the missing witnesses testify before House committees. This would be a good stance to be in as the election gets closer because they can argue that they won't send the articles over because the Republicans are trying to prevent the truth from coming out by running a sham trial.

    Wait for Mitch to set the rules! (none / 0) (#47)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Jan 09, 2020 at 06:06:22 PM EST
    No point to waste the time.  For all we know Pelosi may never transmit the articles to the Senate.  

    Speaker Pelosi (4.00 / 1) (#62)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 11:29:37 AM EST
    Indicated that the Articles of Impeachment will be transmitted to the Senate next week and that the House Managers will also be appointed next week.

    Perhaps (none / 0) (#64)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 10, 2020 at 12:39:04 PM EST
    there will be another bombshell to hit in the interim.
    Parnas' files, including the contents of his iPhone 11, are being delivered to Congress -- perhaps just days before Trump's impeachment trial kicks off in the Senate.

    Hillary Clinton/Julian Castro. (4.00 / 1) (#73)
    by KeysDan on Sat Jan 11, 2020 at 12:05:19 PM EST
    Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, at the demand of Trump and Congressional right wingers, appointed John Huber, US Attorney for Utah, over two years ago, to investigate that the FBI did not fully pursue cases of corruption at the Clinton Foundation and during Hillary's term as Secretary of State, when the government decided not to block the sale of a company called Uranium One.  And, emails.

    The WaPo and other reporting indicates that Mr. Huber found nothing. The investigation effectively ended without material results.

    We can now wait for the NYTimes to report on Mr Huber's findings, and for their public face-washing to remove egg.  It was the NYTimes front page reporting of the Uranium One story that helped stoke the right wingers---a collaborative operation with a friend of Steve Bannon. The long story implied it had found misconduct/conflicts in its introduction, while presenting exonerating information deep in the article.  Enough to rile the lock her up crowd.

    So with this Trump-initiated investigation unsurprisingly a bust, maybe Hillary can step in to the Democratic primary. Everyone will apologize and offer her support as reparation.  Right?  Clinton/Castro 2020.

    We all (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 11, 2020 at 06:30:46 PM EST
    told everybody there was nothing there. We screamed it and said if it is coming from a Neo-Nazi webzine shouldn't we question the information but no, it continued.

    NY Times (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by jmacWA on Sun Jan 12, 2020 at 05:01:50 AM EST
    has turned to crap.

    I rarely read anything there anymore, having switched to the Washington Post


    Clinton/Castro was my favorite (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jan 14, 2020 at 08:00:06 PM EST
    combo in 2016. Wish it happened. Tim Kaine was a bland, poor choice.

    Here we go (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 05:25:34 PM EST
    3 to go (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 05:26:34 PM EST
    He mentioned Bolton specifically

    I think one possibility (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 05:45:16 PM EST
    Not often mentioned is Lamar Alexander.  He is retiring.

    They (none / 0) (#88)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 06:06:51 PM EST
    all know he is totally unfit for office, most of them always knew.

    Unfortunately they are all cowards or craven power mongers. They are looking for an off ramp but don't know to get off the tiger.

    If they really believe in their religion I bet all of them are beseeching the Lord to come and take the "chosen one" home. Have another Big Mac, sir.


    You know with the (none / 0) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 13, 2020 at 09:20:16 PM EST
    Bernie Liz thing happening right now I have seen people mention the story about the scorpion and the frog. Truly these guys are all a bunch of frogs sitting around waiting to be killed by the scorpion but somehow think they are going to be the one that is not killed by the scorpion.