Maggie Haberman:  Photos – Donald Trump Allegedly Dumped Documents into Toilet!

Dear Commons Community,

The New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman, who revealed earlier this year that White House staffers periodically found wadded papers clogging toilets during Trump’s presidency, yesterday tweeted photos she recently obtained showing ripped up papers bearing what looks like Trump’s distinctive handwriting.

The scraps were submerged in the bowls of two different toilets — one in the White House and one used by Trump during an overseas trip, she said, retweeting an Axios article that includes the photos and comments about her upcoming book “Confidence Man.”

Haberman revealed in February that sources for her book told her that White House residence staff periodically found papers clogging toilets. The staffers believed the then-president had ripped up documents that should have been preserved and attempted to flush them away.

Trump at the time denied the allegations as “another fake story.”

After the photos made a splash yesterday, Trump spokesperson Taylor Budowich tried to slam the lid on the story. “You have to be pretty desperate to sell books if pictures of paper in a toilet bowl is part of your promotional plan,” Budowich said.

Haberman, discussing the story Monday on CNN, emphasized that “gross and important” are “the two important words here.” She added that the document dump would still be a story if Trump was accused of tossing records into a fireplace instead of a toilet.

“The point is about the destruction of records, which are supposed to be preserved under the Presidential Records Act, which is a Watergate-era creation,” Haberman said.

Below is a video of Trump ranting about toilets and sinks in 2020.

Tony

General Mark Milley drafted scathing resignation letter to Donald Trump: “It is my belief that you were doing great and irreparable harm to my country.”

President Donald Trump walks across Lafayette Square with Attorney General William Barr, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on June 1, 2020.President Donald Trump walks across Lafayette Square with Attorney General William Barr, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley on June 1, 2020. (Patrick Semansky/AP File)

Dear Commons Community,

After he was seen walking dressed in combat fatigues behind then-President Donald Trump across Lafayette Square after it had been forcibly cleared of Black Lives Matter protesters in June 1, 2020, Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, drafted a resignation letter (see below) to inform Trump that he intended to step down.

The letter was published by the New Yorker yesterday in an excerpt of an upcoming book by Peter Baker and Susan Glasser, “The Divider: Trump in the White House.”  As reported by the Associated Press and Yahoo News.

“The events of the last couple weeks have caused me to do deep soul-searching,” Milley wrote, “and I can no longer faithfully support and execute your orders as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It is my belief that you were doing great and irreparable harm to my country. I believe that you have made a concerted effort over time to politicize the United States military. I thought that I could change that. I’ve come to the realization that I cannot, and I need to step aside and let someone else try to do that.”

Milley was widely criticized for participating in what critics saw as a staged photo op. Hours before their march across Lafayette Square, Trump had clashed with Milley, Attorney General William Barr and Defense Secretary Mark Esper, who objected to his demands for a militarized show of force to quell the protesters.

“You are all losers! You are all f***ing losers!” Trump said, according to the book. “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?” (Esper later recalled the discussion in an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes.”)

In his letter, Milley told Trump, “You are using the military to create fear in the minds of the people — and we are trying to protect the American people.”

“I cannot stand idly by and participate in that attack, verbally or otherwise, on the American people,” Milley wrote. “The American people trust their military and they trust us to protect them against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and our military will do just that. We will not turn our back on the American people.”

Milley said he swore an oath to the Constitution that “all men and women are created equal.”

“All men and women are created equal, no matter who you are, whether you are white or Black, Asian, Indian, no matter the color of your skin, no matter if you’re gay, straight or something in between,” he wrote. “It doesn’t matter if you’re Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jew, or choose not to believe. None of that matters. It doesn’t matter what country you came from, what your last name is — what matters is we’re Americans. We’re all Americans. That under these colors of red, white, and blue — the colors that my parents fought for in World War II — means something around the world. It’s obvious to me that you don’t think of those colors the same way I do. It’s obvious to me that you don’t hold those values dear and the cause that I serve.”

Milley added: “[I]t is my deeply held belief that you’re ruining the international order, and causing significant damage to our country overseas by kowtowing to the kinds of “fascism” and “extremism” that America fought against in World War II.

“You don’t understand what the war was all about,” Milley concluded. “In fact, you subscribe to many of the principles that we fought against. And I cannot be a party to that. It is with deep regret that I hereby submit my letter of resignation.”

But Milley never submitted his letter.

After consulting with current and former national security officials, including former Secretary of Defense and CIA chief Robert Gates, he decided to stay on, later telling his staff that he would instead “just fight [Trump] from the inside.”

Milley also issued a public apology for the Lafayette Square episode.

“I should not have been there,” he said in a commencement address at the National Defense University on June 11 — 10 days after the incident. “My presence in that moment, and in that environment, created a perception of the military involved in domestic politics.”

Thank God for the dedicated Milleys of the world!

Tony


Draft of Letter from Mark Milley to President Donald Trump Published by the New Yorker

In the days after the Lafayette Square incident, Milley sat in his office at the Pentagon, writing and rewriting drafts of a letter of resignation. There were short versions of the letter; there were long versions. His preferred version was the one that read in its entirety:

I regret to inform you that I intend to resign as your Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Thank you for the honor of appointing me as senior ranking officer. The events of the last couple weeks have caused me to do deep soul-searching, and I can no longer faithfully support and execute your orders as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It is my belief that you were doing great and irreparable harm to my country. I believe that you have made a concerted effort over time to politicize the United States military. I thought that I could change that. I’ve come to the realization that I cannot, and I need to step aside and let someone else try to do that.

Second, you are using the military to create fear in the minds of the people—and we are trying to protect the American people. I cannot stand idly by and participate in that attack, verbally or otherwise, on the American people. The American people trust their military and they trust us to protect them against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and our military will do just that. We will not turn our back on the American people.

Third, I swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States and embodied within that Constitution is the idea that says that all men and women are created equal. All men and women are created equal, no matter who you are, whether you are white or Black, Asian, Indian, no matter the color of your skin, no matter if you’re gay, straight or something in between. It doesn’t matter if you’re Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jew, or choose not to believe. None of that matters. It doesn’t matter what country you came from, what your last name is—what matters is we’re Americans. We’re all Americans. That under these colors of red, white, and blue—the colors that my parents fought for in World War II—means something around the world. It’s obvious to me that you don’t think of those colors the same way I do. It’s obvious to me that you don’t hold those values dear and the cause that I serve.

And lastly it is my deeply held belief that you’re ruining the international order, and causing significant damage to our country overseas, that was fought for so hard by the Greatest Generation that they instituted in 1945. Between 1914 and 1945, 150 million people were slaughtered in the conduct of war. They were slaughtered because of tyrannies and dictatorships. That generation, like every generation, has fought against that, has fought against fascism, has fought against Nazism, has fought against extremism. It’s now obvious to me that you don’t understand that world order. You don’t understand what the war was all about. In fact, you subscribe to many of the principles that we fought against. And I cannot be a party to that. It is with deep regret that I hereby submit my letter of resignation.

The letter was dated June 8th, one week after Lafayette Square.

 

 

Liz Cheney: “Restoring a very sick G.O.P. will take years if it can be healed.”

Liz Cheney just made an absolutely critical point about Donald Trump's  responsibility on January 6 - CNNPolitics

Dear Commons Community,

The New York Times has a featured article this morning entitled, “Liz Cheney Is Ready to Lose. But She’s Not Ready to Quit.”  Acknowledging that she might not win her primary battle in Wyoming, she says her crusade to stop Donald J. Trump will continue. Restoring a “very sick” G.O.P. will take years, she says, “if it can be healed.”  Here is an excerpt.

“It was just over a month before her primary, but Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming was nowhere near the voters weighing her future.

Ms. Cheney was instead huddled with fellow lawmakers and aides in the Capitol complex, bucking up her allies in a cause she believes is more important than her House seat: ridding American politics of former President Donald J. Trump and his influence.

“The nine of us have done more to prevent Trump from ever regaining power than any group to date,” she said to fellow members of the panel investigating Mr. Trump’s involvement in the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. “We can’t let up.”

The most closely watched primary of 2022 has not become much of a race at all. Polls show Ms. Cheney losing badly to her rival, Harriet Hageman, Mr. Trump’s vehicle for revenge, and the congresswoman has been all but driven out of her Trump-loving state, in part because of death threats, her office says.

Yet for Ms. Cheney, the race stopped being about political survival months ago. Instead, she has used the Aug. 16 contest as a sort of high-profile stage for her martyrdom — and a proving ground for her new crusade. She used the only debate to tell voters to “vote for somebody else” if they wanted a politician who would violate their oath of office. Last week, she enlisted her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, to cut an ad calling Mr. Trump a “coward” who represents the greatest threat to America in the history of the republic.

In a state where Mr. Trump won 70 percent of the vote two years ago, Ms. Cheney might as well be asking ranchers to go vegan.

“If the cost of standing up for the Constitution is losing the House seat, then that’s a price I’m willing to pay,” she said in an interview last week in the conference room of a Cheyenne bank.

The 56-year-old daughter of a politician who once had visions of rising to the top of the House leadership — but landed as vice president instead — has become arguably the most consequential rank-and-file member of Congress in modern times. Few others have so aggressively used the levers of the office to seek to reroute the course of American politics — but, in doing so, she has effectively sacrificed her own future in the institution she grew up to revere.

Ms. Cheney’s relentless focus on Mr. Trump has driven speculation — even among longtime family friends — that she is preparing to run for president. She has done little to dissuade such talk.”

Ms. Cheney will be a person to watch in the months and years to come regardless of what happens in next week’s primary.

Tony

Maureen Dowd Advises Joe Biden Not to Run for President in 2024!

President Joe Biden answers a question during his first press briefing in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on March 25, 2021.

Dear Commons Community,

Maureen Down in her column yesterday advised Joe Biden not to seek a second term as president.  Entitled, Hey Joe, Don’t Give It a Go, she considers his age, but also the timing  and the fact that he is coming off several weeks of successes.   Here is an excerpt.

“The timing of your exit can determine your place in the history books.

This is something Joe Biden should keep in mind as he is riding the crest of success. His inner circle, irritated by stories about concerns over his age and unpopularity, will say this winning streak gives Biden the impetus to run again.

The opposite is true. It should give him the confidence to leave, secure in the knowledge that he has made his mark.

With the help of Chuck and Nancy, President Biden has had a cascade of legislative accomplishments on tech manufacturing, guns, infrastructure — and hopefully soon, climate and prescription drugs — that validate his promises when he ran. These are genuine achievements that Democrats have been chasing for decades, and they will affect generations to come. On Monday, from the balcony off the Blue Room, he crowed about the drone-killing of the evil Ayman al-Zawahri, Al Qaeda’s top leader, who helped plan the 9/11 massacres. On Friday, he came out again to brag about surprising job numbers.

Defying all expectations, the president has changed the narrative. Before, the riff was that he was too old school and reliant on his cross-party relationships in the Senate. Now old school is cool. The old dude in the aviators has shown he can get things done, often with bipartisan support.

But this is the moment for Biden to decide if all of this is fuel for a re-election campaign, when he will be 81 (82 on Inauguration Day), or a legacy on which to rest.

He could leave on a high, knowing that he has delivered on his promises for progress and restored decency to the White House. He did serve as a balm to the bombastic Donald Trump. Over the next two years he could get more of what he wants and then step aside. It would be self-effacing and patriotic, a stark contrast to the self-absorbed and treasonous Trump.

He offered himself up as an escape from Trump and Trumpism, a way to help us get our bearings after the thuggish and hallucinatory reign of a con man. Then he and his team got carried away and began unrealistically casting him as an F.D.R. with a grand vision to remake the social contract. Biden’s mission was not to be a visionary but to be a calming force for a country desperately in need of calming, and a bridge to the next generation. So he’s a logical one-termer, and that keeps him true to his high-minded point: What does the country really need?

The country really needs to dodge a comeback by Trump or the rise of the odious Ron DeSantis. There is a growing sense in the Democratic Party and in America that this will require new blood. If the president made his plans clear now, it would give Democrats a chance to sort through their meh field and leave time for a fresh, inspiring candidate to emerge.”

I  would vote for Biden again should he run but I think Dowd has the right advice for him.  Below is the entire column.

Tony

————————————

The New York Times

Hey, Joe, Don’t Give It a Go

Aug. 6, 2022Top of Form

By Maureen Dowd

WASHINGTON — Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a cautionary tale.

She missed the moment to leave the stage, ignoring friendly nudges from Democrats and entreaties from Obama allies. She fell in love with her late-in-life image as a hip cultural icon: “Notorious R.B.G.,” the octogenarian cancer survivor who could hold 30-second planks. She thought she was the indispensable person, and that ended in disaster. Her death opened the door to the most conservative court in nearly a century. Her successor, a religious zealot straight out of “The Handmaid’s Tale,” is erasing Justice Ginsburg’s achievements on women’s rights.

The timing of your exit can determine your place in the history books.

This is something Joe Biden should keep in mind as he is riding the crest of success. His inner circle, irritated by stories about concerns over his age and unpopularity, will say this winning streak gives Biden the impetus to run again.

The opposite is true. It should give him the confidence to leave, secure in the knowledge that he has made his mark.

With the help of Chuck and Nancy, President Biden has had a cascade of legislative accomplishments on tech manufacturing, guns, infrastructure — and hopefully soon, climate and prescription drugs — that validate his promises when he ran. These are genuine achievements that Democrats have been chasing for decades, and they will affect generations to come. On Monday, from the balcony off the Blue Room, he crowed about the drone-killing of the evil Ayman al-Zawahri, Al Qaeda’s top leader, who helped plan the 9/11 massacres. On Friday, he came out again to brag about surprising job numbers.

Defying all expectations, the president has changed the narrative. Before, the riff was that he was too old school and reliant on his cross-party relationships in the Senate. Now old school is cool. The old dude in the aviators has shown he can get things done, often with bipartisan support.

But this is the moment for Biden to decide if all of this is fuel for a re-election campaign, when he will be 81 (82 on Inauguration Day), or a legacy on which to rest.

He could leave on a high, knowing that he has delivered on his promises for progress and restored decency to the White House. He did serve as a balm to the bombastic Donald Trump. Over the next two years he could get more of what he wants and then step aside. It would be self-effacing and patriotic, a stark contrast to the self-absorbed and treasonous Trump.

He offered himself up as an escape from Trump and Trumpism, a way to help us get our bearings after the thuggish and hallucinatory reign of a con man. Then he and his team got carried away and began unrealistically casting him as an F.D.R. with a grand vision to remake the social contract. Biden’s mission was not to be a visionary but to be a calming force for a country desperately in need of calming, and a bridge to the next generation. So he’s a logical one-termer, and that keeps him true to his high-minded point: What does the country really need?

The country really needs to dodge a comeback by Trump or the rise of the odious Ron DeSantis. There is a growing sense in the Democratic Party and in America that this will require new blood. If the president made his plans clear now, it would give Democrats a chance to sort through their meh field and leave time for a fresh, inspiring candidate to emerge.

Usually, being a lame duck weakens you. But in Biden’s case, it could strengthen him. We live in a Washington where people too often put power over principle. So many Republicans have behaved grotesquely out of fear that Trump will turn on them. So the act of leaving could elevate Biden, freeing him from typical re-election pressures, so he and his team could do what they thought was right rather than what was politically expedient.

It would also take steam out of what are certain to be Republican attempts to impeach him should they regain the House and make him less of a target for their nasty attacks on his age and abilities. The next two years could be hellish, with Republicans tearing Biden down and refusing to do anything that could be seen as benefiting him.

Biden’s advisers think if you just ignore the age question, it will go away. But it is already a hot topic in focus groups and an undercurrent in Democratic circles, as lawmakers are pressed to answer whether they think Biden should run again or not. (Axios has started a running tally.)

These are dangerous times — with inflation hurting us, weather killing us, the Ukraine war grinding, China tensions boiling, women’s rights on the line, and election deniers at CPAC, where Viktor Orbán spews fascist bile to a wildly enthusiastic audience. It might be best to have a president unshackled from the usual political restraints.

Right-Wingers Going After Libraries!

Bill to ban books with descriptions of sex from Arizona schools moves  forward

Dear Commons Community,

There is a history of book-banning in the U.S. but right-wing groups are emboldened like never before, and they’re taking their mission to a new level. The Huffington Post had an article yesterday reviewing recent activities of ultra conservative attempts to limit what appears on public library shelves.  Here is an excerpt:

“In Jamestown, Michigan, the local public library has about six months until funding runs out and it may be forced to shut down.

Last week, residents voted against passing a millage, which raises property taxes, to fund the Patmos Public Library. What could make a town turn against its own library? Homophobic and hateful rhetoric — specifically, the false idea that kids books with LGBTQ characters are secretly about pornography or being used to abuse children, which has exploded in the conservative worldview over the last year.

“50% millage increase to groom our kids? Vote no on library,” read one sign seen around town before voters went to the polls.

Debbie Mikula, the executive director of the Michigan Library Association, said she believes the millage didn’t pass because the library has books with LGBTQ themes. “This is a full-out campaign against the library,” she said.

Two library directors at Patmos left this spring. One said it was because of online harassment and accusations of abusing children.

The library board has less than two weeks to get the millage back on the ballot for a vote in November. If they don’t, it’s likely the library will have to shut down permanently.

The people in Jamestown are “very, very conservative,” Mikula said, “and they are holding the library hostage.”

Conservatives’ scorn for most government institutions — like schools or public health agencies — is not a new phenomenon. Consider the way right-wingers treated government officials who attempted to blunt the impact of the coronavirus pandemic. But now, perhaps emboldened by openly right-wing extremist politicians, they’ve set their sights on our public libraries.

“I have seen Republicans try to take over school boards my entire lifetime, but this is totally different,” Alison Macrina, the director of Library Freedom Project, a nonprofit organization, said about the shift to public libraries.

In the same way that parents in the ’80s and ’90s fretted about their children being swept up in a satanic cult, suburban moms are now tossing and turning at night over the horrors of books that might depict anything but conservative Christian morals.

“In the last few years, public libraries have taken a stronger stance of racial justice and queer rights and representation,” Macrina said. “This is reactive to that, certainly.”

And it’s a reaction being seen around the U.S.

A public library in Vinton, Iowa — a small town with about 5,000 residents — temporarily shut down in July after most of the staff quit because of threats against its LGBTQ members. People in the town complained that there were not enough books about former President Donald Trump, that LGBTQ books were on display, and that members of the LGBTQ community worked there, according to the Iowa Starting Line. The library reopened with an all-volunteer staff.

In Llano County, Texas, the county commission made the public library system shut down for a few days in December in order to review the books available to children and remove any deemed questionable. They specifically targeted the 850 books that GOP state Rep. Matt Kruse had personally deemed inappropriate for kids earlier that year. He said his list of books included those that “might make students feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of their race or sex.”

Suzette Baker, a librarian in the county, reportedly refused to go along. She told local reporters in March that she had been fired from her job for not removing books, including a memoir by Jazz Jennings, a transgender teen. “It is her biography of her life growing up as a transgender teenager, and obviously this group thought that was too much for their children to read,” Baker said. “No one is forcing their kids to read anything.”

Now, residents are suing the county, saying book bans are censorship and violate their First and 14th Amendment rights.

Free speech advocates have noticed that the targeting of public libraries isn’t just confined to one or two states.

“It cannot be a coincidence that multiple people around the country are getting the same message,” Jonathan Friedman, the director of free expression and education programs at PEN America, told HuffPost. “They’re taking some of that ‘stolen election’ energy and directing it towards public schools and public libraries.”

But there isn’t really a singular group leading the charge — instead different groups, including Moms for Liberty or Catholic Vote, are pushing the same narratives.

“The nature of their organizing is that the ideas are bouncing from group to group on Facebook,” Macrina said.

Moms For Liberty is a right-wing group with an unassuming name that two former school board members launched in Florida in 2021 to fight for “parental rights,” including battles against mask mandates and “critical race theory.” The group now claims to have 160 chapters in 33 states.

As Media Matters reported, Moms For Liberty is partnering with conservative groups to flood public libraries with children’s books they approve of, like an anti-trans children book or a book that paints Rush Limbaugh as hero — with no regard for how parents of LGBTQ or Black children may feel.

For Pride Month, the conservative political advocacy group Catholic Vote launched a campaign dubbed “Hide the Pride.” In June, the group encouraged parents to go to their public libraries and check out any LGBTQ or other books conservatives don’t like — to prevent other people from reading them. “Do you see rainbow-trans-BLM flags everywhere? Including in your public, taxpayer-funded spaces? We do. And we are meeting the challenge head on,” read one online flier with instructions on how to “reclaim” the library.

The group encouraged people to go to their libraries in groups and record themselves checking out the books, then posted photos online of people doing just that. The group argued its campaign was fair because parents hadn’t been consulted before these books were put in their libraries.

The obvious solution for these parents is to just not allow their own children to read about LGBTQ issues or racial justice. But that’s not really why they’re targeting libraries.

“They’re not interested in compromising,” Friedman said. “Their aim is to shut them down and stop them entirely.”

There’s a long tradition of book-banning in the U.S. In the 1980s, the Moral Majority, the group founded by Jerry Falwell, was leading the charge in book banning. Thanks to the election of Ronald Reagan, Christian evangelicals’ influence was growing in public life — and they objected to any books that didn’t reflect their beliefs back at them.

But while the movements have echoes of each other, the new effort to ban books has definitely changed.

The right-wing culture warriors also have the support of elected officials. As they began their crusade, laws about book banning began showing up in state legislatures.

“I’ve never seen that kind of effort to change laws,” Macrina said. “You’re seeing that down to the really micro level now.”

Even Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) have spoken about book bans in speeches, making book censorship red meat for Republican voters.”

Book burning anyone!

Tony

Marina Amaral on Twitter: "The Nazi book burnings were a campaign conducted  by the German Student Union to ceremonially burn books in Nazi Germany and  Austria in the 1930s. The books targeted

New Book: “Why We Did It” by Tim Miller

Dear Commons Community,

I just finished reading  Why We Did It:  A Travelogue from the Republican Road to Hell by Tim Miller, a former public relations and communications director for Jeb Bush and the Republican National Committee.   Miller’s focus in this book is to study the “carcass of the party he used to love.”  He reflects on his own past work and exposes the snippets of the lives of other Republicans like himself who put party before country.  He criticizes those Republicans who support Trump’s big lie which Miller came to repudiate completely.  He reveals Reince Priebus’s neediness to be important, Sean Spicer’s desperation, and Elise Stefanik’s raw ambition and willingness to do anything to get ahead including kowtowing to Donald Trump.  I thought the chapter on Stefanik was most telling.  When Trump was running for the nomination in 2016, she lambasted him for his statements about women and Muslims. After he was elected, she became his biggest supporter in Congress and came to find out “that banning Muslims and fanny snatching” was exactly who Republican voters wanted.  Miller can also be quite cutting in his comments.  He described Corey Lewandowski as a “miasmic cretan …with no appreciable skills outside of recognizing the popularity of unrestrained Trumpism … who represented a bottom-basement appointee.”

I recommend Miller’s book for his insider views.  It is a quick read that says a lot about ambition and the loss of integrity among many Republicans.

Below is a review that appeared in  The New York Times.  Why We Did It  has been on the Times best-sellers list for four weeks.

Tony

————————————————————

The New York Times

Review of Books

The former political operative Tim Miller writes about why most of the Republican establishment learned to stop worrying and line up behind President Trump.

June 29, 2022

Too often, when straining to put some daylight between themselves and the Trump administration, regretful Republicans have reached for elaborate excuses and high-toned rhetoric. The former political operative Tim Miller knows better than to try.

The most honorable parts of “Why We Did It,” Miller’s darkly funny (if also profoundly dispiriting) post-mortem/mea culpa, are the ones that dispense with pious pretense. Miller, a millennial who started working in Republican politics when he was 16, depicts himself as someone who was so preoccupied with “the Game” that for years he gave little thought to the degraded culture that his bare-knuckle tactics helped perpetuate. He liked the excitement, the money, the mischief. There was a “bizarre type of fame” that came with “D.C. celebrification,” he writes. He got addicted to the “horse race.” He was in it to win.

His fixation on victory was so consuming that it could often override his personal interests. “Why We Did It” recalls a moment when Miller panicked after John McCain made a stray comment in 2006 that was barely, just barely, pro-gay marriage. (McCain later clarified that he was only talking about private ceremonies; he did “not believe that gay marriages should be legal.”) Miller was planning to work on McCain’s presidential campaign. Miller is also gay. He was upset that McCain might hurt his chances with Republican voters, rather than excited at the prospect of working for someone who didn’t “want to deny me the ability to have a totally chill, off-the-books, man-man ceremony.”

Miller says it’s precisely this warped response — his own “championship-level compartmentalization” — that makes him especially suited to understanding why most of the Republican establishment learned to stop worrying and line up behind Trump.

The episode with McCain was just the beginning. Miller later went on to do P.R. work for social conservatives who virulently opposed same-sex marriage. “As a gay man who contorted himself into defending homophobes,” he writes, “I am more than capable of inhabiting the mind of the enabler.”

The first half of the book describes Miller’s political coming-of-age — from closeted young Republican who grew up in a devout Catholic family to a spokesman for Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign to one of the loudest Never Trumpers during the 2016 election. The second half of “Why We Did It” is a taxonomy of the kind of Republicans who went MAGA, based on Miller’s conversations with them and his firsthand knowledge of what makes the most opportunistic D.C. creatures tick.

In between the two halves is an awkward chapter titled “Inertia,” in which Miller owns up to going from denouncing Trump before he was elected to working for Scott Pruitt, Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency administrator. (“It was a trying time and I was desperate.”) Miller later got a contract for media-monitoring services from the E.P.A. (“icky,” he concedes). Oh, and Miller also conducted opposition research for Facebook that happened to dovetail with conspiracy theories, casting the liberal financier and philanthropist George Soros as the shadowy force behind an anti-Facebook movement. (Miller insists that this newspaper’s reporting on what happened was “overheated.”)

“I was favor-trading with people who were causing real-world harm so I could get a pat on the head from some client who wanted self-serving scuttlebutt fed to the rubes,” he writes of his career. But as a self-described P.R. flack, Miller knows how to spin such ugly straw into shiny gold. Who better to identify why his fellow Republicans got sucked under than someone who kept getting pulled back in?

The hardcore Trumpists who loved their candidate from the beginning don’t interest Miller. His subjects include colleagues who worked with him nearly a decade ago on the Growth and Opportunity Project, known as the Republican “autopsy,” organized after Mitt Romney lost to Barack Obama in 2012. The report called for moderation, for outreach, for immigration reform. But one by one, the people working on the project went from abhorring Trump to embracing him.

There was “the Striver,” Elise Stefanik, the Harvard-educated representative from upstate New York who “was doing what was required to get the next buzz,” Miller writes. There was “the Little Mix,” Reince Priebus, who liked “feeling important” and tried “to stay in everyone’s good graces while the world around him unraveled.” Miller calls Trump’s former press secretary Sean Spicer “the Nerd-Revenging Team Player” who gamely thought that obtaining some status in the White House might make up for some “negative charisma.” There was a coterie of “Cartel-Cashing, Team-Playing, Tribalist Trolls,” always on the lookout for the next gravy train.

Some of these former colleagues will talk to Miller; others won’t. “Why We Did It” begins and ends with the story of his friendship with the Republican fund-raiser Caroline Wren, a fellow “socially liberal millennial,” who worked with Miller on McCain’s 2008 campaign but more recently made a star turn as a Trump adviser subpoenaed by the panel investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

Wren’s motivations don’t turn out to be particularly complex; she herself admits that her politics have always had less to do with the finer details of governing than the more cultish aspects of personality. “She had come to worship John McCain,” Miller writes, and she was soon “obsessed with Sarah Palin.” When pushed to explain what drew her to Trump, whose policies she says repulsed her, Wren rails against smug progressives driving around in their Priuses and forcing everyone to drink out of paper straws. She felt intensely annoyed by their self-satisfaction and hypocrisy. She liked Trump because of what she calls his “scorch-the-earth mode.”

This “animus,” Miller says, seems to have been the necessary condition for converting his “reluctant peers” into Trump supporters. I recommend reading “Why We Did It” alongside “It Was All a Lie” (2020), by Stuart Stevens, another “what happened” book by a former Republican operative. Stevens comes across as thoughtful, deliberative, reflective; Miller comes across as clever, a little bit mean, extremely profane. Stevens captures how the Republican Party spent decades cultivating grievances that it didn’t plan to do anything about, while Miller captures the consequent emotional valence, with its “unseriousness and cruelty.” Both books are absorbing; neither is particularly hopeful.

“AHHHHHHH,” an exasperated Miller writes, remembering how he stayed in politics because of his own thirst for fame and fortune. For all the reluctant Trump supporters’ torturous rationales, maybe the reasons for why they did it don’t get much more complicated than that.

US Added 528,000 Jobs Month: What Recession?

A 'Now Hiring' sign is posted at a Verizon store on July 26, 2022 in Los Angeles, California. As the Federal Reserve continues to increase interest rates, the labor market is starting to show signs of slowing down.

A ‘Now Hiring’ sign is posted at a Verizon store on July 26, 2022 in Los Angeles, CA.. Mario Tama via Getty Images

 

Dear Commons Community,

America’s employers added a stunning 528,000 jobs last month, restoring all the jobs lost in the coronavirus recession. Unemployment fell to 3.5%, lowest since the pandemic struck in early 2020.   July’s job creation was up from 398,000 in June and the most since February.

The red-hot jobs numbers from the Labor Department on Friday arrive amid a growing consensus that the U.S. economy is losing momentum. The U.S. economy shrank in the first two quarters of 2022 — an informal definition of recession. But most economists believe the strong jobs market has kept the economy from slipping into a downturn.  As reported by the Associated Press.

“Recession – what recession?’’ wrote Brian Coulton, chief economist at Fitch Ratings, wrote after the numbers came out. “The U.S. economy is creating new jobs at an annual rate of 6 million – that’s three times faster than what we normally see historically in a good year.”

Economists had expected only 250,000 new jobs this month.

The Labor Department also revised May and June hiring, saying an extra 28,000 jobs were created in those months. Job growth was especially strong last month in the healthcare industry and at hotels and restaurants.

Hourly earnings posted a healthy 0.5% gain last month and are up 5.2% over the past year — still not enough to keep up with inflation.

The jobless rate fell as the number of Americans saying they had jobs rose by 179,000 and the number saying they were unemployed dropped by 242,000. But 61,000 Americans dropped out of the labor force in July, trimming the share of those working or looking for work to 62.1% last month from 62.2% in June.

The strong job numbers are likely to encourage the Federal Reserve to continue raising interest rates to cool the economy and combat resurgent inflation. “The strength of the labor market in the face of … rate tightening from the Fed already this year clearly shows that the Fed has more work to do,′ said Charlie Ripley, senior investment strategist at Allianz Investment Management. “Overall, today’s report should put the notion of a near-term recession on the back-burner for now.″

There are, of course, political implications in the numbers being released yesterday: Voters have been worried about rising prices and the risk of recession ahead of November’s midterm elections as President Joe Biden’s Democrats seek to maintain control of Congress. The unexpectedly strong hiring number will be welcomed at the White House.

The economic backdrop has been troubling: Gross domestic product — the broadest measure of economic output — fell in both the first and second quarters; consecutive GDP drops is one definition of a recession. And inflation is roaring at a 40-year high.

The resiliency of the current labor market, especially the low jobless rate — is the biggest reason most economists don’t believe a recession has started yet, though they increasingly fear that one is on the way.

Economies have been on a wild ride since COVID-19 hit in early 2020.

The pandemic brought economic life to a near standstill as companies shut down and consumers stayed home. In March and April 2020, American employers slashed a staggering 22 million jobs and the economy plunged into a deep, two-month recession.

But massive government aid — and the Feds decision to slash interest rates and pour money into financial markets — fueled a surprisingly quick recovery. Caught off guard by the strength of the rebound, factories, shops, ports and freight yards were overwhelmed with orders and scrambled to bring back the workers they furloughed when COVID hit.

The result has been shortages of workers and supplies, delayed shipments ― and rising prices. In the United States, inflation has been rising steadily for more than a year. In June, consumer prices jumped 9.1% from a year earlier — the biggest increase since 1981.

The Fed underestimated inflation’s resurgence, thinking prices were rising because of temporary supply chain bottlenecks. It has since acknowledged that the current spate of inflation is not, as it was once referred to, “ transitory.”

Before yesterday’s hiring report, the labor market had shown other signs of wobbliness.

The Labor Department reported Tuesday that employers posted 10.7 million job openings in June — a healthy number but the lowest since September.

And the four-week average number of Americans signing up for unemployment benefits — a proxy for layoffs that smooths out week-to-week swings — rose last week to the highest level since November, though the numbers may have been exaggerated by seasonal factors.

“Underestimate the U.S. labor market at your own peril,″ said Nick Bunker, head of economic research at the Indeed Hiring Lab. “Yes, output growth might be slowing and the economic outlook has some clouds on the horizon. But employers are still champing at the bit to hire more workers. That demand may fade, but it’s still red hot right now.″

Tony

Dick Cheney Video Ad: “Trump is a coward. A real man wouldn’t lie to his supporters.”

 

Dear Commons Community,

Dick Cheney released a campaign ad (above) for Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), his daughter, that condemned former President Donald Trump.

″Trump is a coward. A real man wouldn’t lie to his supporters. He lost his election, and he lost big. I know it, he knows it and deep down I think most Republicans know it.”

Trump supporter Harriet Hageman is 22 percentage points ahead of Liz Cheney a month before the primary, according to a poll from The Casper Star-Tribune.

Dick Cheney is not one of my favorite politicians but what he says about Trump is right-on!

Tony

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema Backs New Bill – Democrats say they’ve reached agreement on economic package!

What drives Sinema? A different view of politics

Kyrsten Sinema

Dear Commons Community,

Senate Democrats have reached an accord on changes to their marquee economic legislation, they announced late night, clearing the major hurdle to pushing one of President Joe Biden’s leading election-year priorities through the chamber in coming days.  As reported by the Associated Press.

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., a centrist who was seen as the pivotal vote, said in a statement that she had agreed to changes in the measure’s tax and energy provisions and was ready to “move forward” on the bill.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said lawmakers had achieved a compromise “that I believe will receive the support” of all Democrats in the chamber. His party needs unanimity to move the measure through the 50-50 Senate, along with Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote.

Schumer has said he hopes the Senate can begin voting on the energy, environment, health and tax measure on Saturday. Passage by the House, which Democrats control narrowly, could come next week.

Final congressional approval of the election-year measure would complete an astounding, eleventh-hour salvation of Biden’s wide-ranging domestic goals, though in more modest form. Democratic infighting had embarrassed Biden and forced him to pare down a far larger and more ambitious $3.5 trillion, 10-year version, and then a $2 trillion alternative, leaving the effort all but dead.

This bill, negotiated by Schumer and Sen. Joe Manchin, the conservative maverick Democrat from West Virginia, would raise $739 billion in revenue. That would come from tax boosts on high earners and some huge corporations, beefed up IRS tax collections and curbs on drug prices, which would save money for the government and patients.

It would spend much of that on energy, climate and health care initiatives, still leaving over $300 billion for deficit reduction.

Sinema said Democrats had agreed to remove a provision raising taxes on “carried interest,” or profits that go to executives of private equity firms. That’s been a proposal she has long opposed, though it is a favorite of Manchin and many progressives.

The carried interest provision was estimated to produce $13 billion for the government over the coming decade, a small portion of the measure’s $739 billion in total revenue.

It will be replaced by a new excise tax on stock buybacks which will bring in more revenue than that, said one Democrat familiar with the agreement who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the deal publicly. The official provided no other detail.

Though providing no detail, Sinema said she had also agreed to provisions to “protect advanced manufacturing and boost our clean energy economy.”

She noted that Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough is still reviewing the measure to make sure no provisions must be removed for violating the chamber’s procedures. “Subject to the parliamentarian’s review, I’ll move forward,” Sinema said.

Schumer said the measure retained the bill’s language on prescription drug pricing, climate change, “closing tax loopholes exploited by big corporations and the wealthy” and reducing federal deficits.

He said that in talks with fellow Democrats, the party “addressed a number of important issues they have raised.” He added that the final measure “will reflect this work and put us one step closer to enacting this historic legislation into law.”

Good news for President Biden and the Democrats!

Tony

 

Kansas Result on Tuesday Suggests 4 Out of 5 States Would Back Abortion Rights in Similar Vote!

Dear Commons Community,

Tuesday’s resounding victory for abortion rights supporters in Kansas offered some of the most concrete evidence yet that the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade has shifted the political landscape. The victory, by a 59-41 margin in a Republican stronghold, suggests Democrats will be the energized party on an issue where Republicans have usually had an enthusiasm advantage. The New York Times has an article this morning analyzing the possible implications of the Kansas vote nationally.  Here is an excerpt.

“The Kansas vote implies that around 65 percent of voters nationwide would reject a similar initiative to roll back abortion rights, including in more than 40 of the 50 states (see map – a few states on each side are very close to 50-50). This is a rough estimate, based on how demographic characteristics predicted the results of recent abortion referendums. But it is an evidence-based way of arriving at a fairly obvious conclusion: If abortion rights wins 59 percent support in Kansas, it’s doing even better than that nationwide.

It’s a tally that’s in line with recent national surveys that showed greater support for legal abortion after the court’s decision. And the high turnout, especially among Democrats, confirms that abortion is not just some wedge issue of importance to political activists. The stakes of abortion policy have become high enough that it can drive a high midterm-like turnout on its own.

None of this proves that the issue will help Democrats in the midterm elections. And there are limits to what can be gleaned from the Kansas data. But the lopsided margin makes one thing clear: The political winds are now at the backs of abortion rights supporters.”

Interesting analysis that gives the Democrats some hope for the midterm elections in November.

Tony