THIS is why Nancy Pelosi wanted vote-by-mail in the coronavirus recovery bill.
"The things they had in there were crazy. They had things, levels of voting that if you'd ever agreed to it, you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again," Donald Trump complained to Sean Hannity about Democrats' proposals to ensure voter access in the coronavirus stimulus bill. Just saying the quiet part out loud about Republican vote suppression, as is his habit. HURR DURR, blarped the MAGAts in unison, LOOKIT CRAZY NANCY LARDIN' THE BILL UP WITH DEMOCRAT PORK.
Well ... meet Wisconsin, AKA Exhibit A in the "WUT DOES VOTIN' HAVE TO DO WITH THE 'RONA?" derpsplainer. Thanks to the indefatigable Ben Wikler, chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, who tweeted out all the good links.
It started back in 2018, when Democrat Tony Evers beat then-GOP Governor Scott Walker in the November election, and the gerrymandered Wisconsin legislature raced to enact a bunch of laws during the lame duck session to curtail Evers's powers. Because, like Trump, the Wisconsin GOP knows that when people vote, they lose.
Wisconsin's primary is scheduled for next Tuesday, April 7, and while the presidential primaries are more or less a foregone conclusion, they're not the most important issue on the Wisconsin ballot. Control of the state's highest court is at stake, with Dane County Judge Jill Karofsky, a progressive champion of domestic violence victims, vying to unseat Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Daniel Kelly, a Republican hatchet man.
This is just a very good lawsuit.
On Wednesday, the Trump 2020 campaign filed a libel lawsuit against the New York Times, whining that an opinion piece about Russia and Donald Trump being BFFs wasn't very nice to the Trump campaign.
And yes, it's just as dumb as it sounds.
Donald Trump and his buddy, lawyer Charles Harder, are big fans of using bullshit lawsuits like this to intimidate journalists and use as press releases. They believe they are entitled to abuse the legal system by suing over news they don't like and using their money to silence people who disagree with them. Lawsuits like this one, styled Donald Trump for President v. New York Times, are no more than attempts to use American courts to frighten dissenters into silence.
The op-ed in question, titled "The Real Trump-Russia Quid Pro Quo," was written by Max Frankel, former Times executive editor, in March of last year. The first paragraph of the piece sets the tone:
Collusion — or a lack of it — turns out to have been the rhetorical trap that ensnared President Trump's pursuers. There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin's oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration's burdensome economic sanctions. The Trumpites knew about the quid and held out the prospect of the quo.
I mean ... seems pretty accurate thus far.
It's the Sunday Shows Rundown!
A few days ago, it was reported that it seems the Russians are meddling in the 2020 elections, like they did in 2016, favoring Donald Trump. This (of course) pissed off our Authoritarian-In-Chief and he fired acting (aren't they all) Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire and replaced him with an idiot loyalist, Ambassador to Germany Ric Grenell. Trump also did one of his White House lawn presser shout interviews denying the intelligence while blaming Democrats like House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who rightfully criticized him. So this week on the Sunday shows, we got multiple appearances from Trump officials Robert O'Brien and Marc Short, telling America what they really want us to hear about that so-called intelligence.
A Republic, if you can -- wait, whar it go?
Bill Barr isn't even trying to hide the corruption any more. Yesterday his own US attorney for the District of Columbia recommended 87-108 months (seven to nine years) of jail time for Roger Stone, a sentence squarely within the recommended sentencing guidelines, and now Barr is forcing those prosecutors to walk it back in the face of a Trump tweet.
In a 26-page sentencing memo detailing the seven counts for which Stone was convicted by a jury of his peers, his threats of violence to a witness, and his multiple attempts to tamper with the jury using social media during the trial, federal prosecutors made their case to Judge Amy Berman Jackson that Stone deserves substantial jail time. But according to Fox News, higher-ups at the DOJ were "shocked" to see Stone going to prison for simply lying to federal investigators and Congress and threatening a witness in a federal case. It's not like he committed dastardly EMAIL CRIMES!