All Politics Is Local (Some Senatorial Hypocrisy)

From The Washington Post:

The top Republican in the Senate is ready to formally dispense with a long-running practice that gives senators an early chance to block federal judicial nominees who would have jurisdiction over their states — at least at the appeals court level.

In an interview with the New York Times this week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he wants to get rid of individual senators’ power to block nominees to the appeals courts — the dozen powerful circuits just one notch below the Supreme Court — from being considered.

“My personal view is that the blue slip, with regard to circuit court appointments, ought to simply be a notification of how you’re going to vote, not the opportunity to blackball,” Mr. McConnell said on the Times’ “The New Washington” podcast, referring to the custom senators from affected states need to sign off on a physical blue slip before a nominee can formally start the congressional vetting process.

And from that NYTimes piece:

Now, with some Democrats refusing to consent as the Trump administration moves to fill scores of judicial vacancies, Senator Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and majority leader, is for the first time publicly advocating that the blue slip be made strictly advisory when it comes to appeals court nominees — the most powerful judges after those on the Supreme Court.

Guess what?

From the Post-Gazette a few years ago:

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday grilled four nominees for federal judgeships, but one Pennsylvania jurist isn’t on the confirmation agenda even though he appears to have wide support.

Judge L. Felipe Restrepo, who sits on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District, was nominated six months ago to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, but his confirmation hearing is being held up, and Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa. is at the center of the delay.

Mr. Toomey said he strongly supports Judge Restrepo, but he hasn’t formally endorsed by officially signing off on the nomination. On judicial confirmations, the Senate traditionally defers to home-state senators whose signatures on blue slips of paper allow confirmation hearings to move forward.

He finally did turn in the blue slip - 6 months after Restrepo's nomination.

The point here is that if McConnell's proposed rule was in place then, there would not have been any delay at all. Toomey's support would have presumably been reflected in his "notification of how...to vote" and it would have been over much sooner.

On the other hand, Toomey wouldn't have been able to make a passive aggressive protest against Obama's immigration policy. Now that the legislative shoe is on the other foot...

Yea I know. Surprising, huh?

My TWENTY-SEVENTH Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

Now that a few days have passed since Hurricanes Harvey and Irma have made landfall, I'd like to ask you about climate change. You're on record, by the way, denying that "human activity significantly contributes to climate change."

Time magazine recently reported that climate scientists have been citing global warming as having an impact on the severity of hurricanes - by making them worse.

Scott Pruitt, Donald Trump's climate denying head of the E.P.A., recently said, on the other hand, that now is not the time to discuss climate change.

Let me ask you a question: When is a good time to discuss climate change?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Nineteenth Letter - No response so far 
• Twentieth Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-first Letter - No response so far
• Twenty-second Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-third Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-fourth Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-fifth Letter - No Response so far 
• Twenty-sixth Letter - No Response so far

Today - 9/11 - Trump.

From ABC News:

To mark the 16th anniversary Monday of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump will attend a commemoration ceremony in the morning at the National 9/11 Pentagon Memorial.

Yes, this is the guy who said this:

Hey, I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering.

And then after being challenged on his assertion, he stuck with it:

There were people that were cheering on the other side of New Jersey, where you have large Arab populations. They were cheering as the World Trade Center came down. I know it might be not politically correct for you to talk about it, but there were people cheering as that building came down — as those buildings came down. And that tells you something. It was well covered at the time, George. Now, I know they don’t like to talk about it, but it was well covered at the time. There were people over in New Jersey that were watching it, a heavy Arab population, that were cheering as the buildings came down. Not good.

None of that was, in fact, true.

Then there's this:

Columbus, Ohio (CNN)Donald Trump said Monday that he witnessed people jumping out of the Twin Towers on 9/11 from the view in his apartment.

"Many people jumped and I witnessed it, I watched that. I have a view -- a view in my apartment that was specifically aimed at the World Trade Center," Trump said Monday during a rally in Columbus, Ohio.

"And I watched those people jump and I watched the second plane hit ... I saw the second plane hit the building and I said, 'Wow that's unbelievable,'" Trump continued.

CNN points out a few paragraphs later:

The Republican presidential contender lives in Trump Tower in midtown Manhattan, more than four miles away from where the World Trade Center towers once stood.

His eyes must be really good to be able to see that level of detail from that far away.

Either that or he's lying.

A few things to think about as you're watching the little-handed pussy-grabber talk about 9/11 today.

Know Your Hurricane Categories! Be Safe!

THIRTEEN YEARS!

2 Political Junkies is THIRTEEN YEARS OLD this week.

We're now the age of pimply adolescents whose hormones are just starting to drive them (and their parents) crazy.

Here is Maria's first blog post at 2PJ.

It was a Bushism:

Too many OB-GYN's are having to get out of the business. Too many OB-GYN's are unable to practice their love with women all across the country.

Here's my first blog post here. It was about how Bush skipped out on his military service. I quoted Salon:

In retrospect, it's doubtful that even White House aides understood all the information embedded in the records, specifically the payroll documents. It's also unlikely they realized how damaging the information could be when read in the proper context. Seven months later, the document dump is coming back to haunt the White House, thanks to researcher Paul Lukasiak, who has spent that time closely examining the paperwork, and more important, analyzing U.S. Statutory Law, Department of Defense regulations, and Air Force policies and procedures of the 1960s and 1970s. As a result, Lukasiak arrived at the overwhelming conclusion that not only did Bush walk away from his final two years of military obligation, coming dangerously close to desertion, but that he attempted to cover up his absenteeism through swindle and fraud.

Yea, you remember when BUSH was the worst president ever? When BUSH was the existential threat to our democracy and the world?

How I miss those carefree naive days of yesteryear.

Happy blog-Birthday, Maria!!

Hmmm...Congressman Murphy? There's A Disconnect Here, Isn't There?

Representative Tim Murphy was endorsed by/given a 100% rating by:

• National Right-to-Life Committee
• Christian Coalition 

Yesterday, In the Post-Gazette:

Congressman Tim Murphy publicly admitted Wednesday to having an extramarital affair with a personal friend, issuing a statement about the relationship hours after the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette prevailed in a court motion to unseal a divorce action.

If you think this blog post unfair, just switch the party affiliations and imagine how our conservative friends and colleagues would be reacting right now to a pro-family Democrat caught having an affair with "a personal friend".

Reactions To Trump's DACA Decision

President Obama:

Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who we are as a people – and who we want to be.

What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation.

Vice-President Biden:

These people are all Americans. So let's be clear: throwing them out is cruel. It is inhumane. And it is not America. Congress and the American people now have an obligation to step up and show our neighbors that they're welcome here, in the only place they've ever called home.

The US Conference Of Catholic Bishops:

The cancellation of the DACA program is reprehensible. It causes unnecessary fear for DACA youth and their families. These youth entered the U.S. as minors and often know America as their only home. The Catholic Church has long watched with pride and admiration as DACA youth live out their daily lives with hope and a determination to flourish and contribute to society: continuing to work and provide for their families, continuing to serve in the military, and continuing to receive an education. Now, after months of anxiety and fear about their futures, these brave young people face deportation. This decision is unacceptable and does not reflect who we are as Americans.

Indecent, cruel, inhumane, and reprehensible - Donald J. Trump.

In Today's News

My TWENTY-SIXTH Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

I'd like to revisit this (unanswered) letter, if I may.

As you probably know the Department of Justice in papers filed in Federal Court last week reiterated that, "Both FBI and NSD confirm that they have no records related to wiretaps as described by the March 4, 2017 tweets."

Those would be the tweets where Donald J Trump claimed the Obama Administration had Trump's "wires tapped" before the November 2016 election. He then questioned the legality of that act. I'm no lawyer but I am guessing it's very illegal - probably a felony - to wire tap someone without a court order of some sort.

So basically a sitting president is accusing a former president of committing a very serious crime. However as the DOJ has confirmed in court On September 1, there is no evidence that this occurred.

Here is my question: Either Trump was lying in that he knew that what he was tweeting wasn't true but tweeted it anyway or he was negligent in that he fail to pick up the phone to confirm the story with the DOJ before tweeting. He's the leader of your party. You voted for him for in November. You're legislating his agenda in the Senate. How can you continue to support Donald J Trump?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Nineteenth Letter - No response so far 
• Twentieth Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-first Letter - No response so far
• Twenty-second Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-third Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-fourth Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-fifth Letter - No Response so far

Senator Pat Toomey Lies Right After His Recent "Town Hall" (His Superstorm Sandy Funding Vote)

First off, let me say that this was a "Town Hall" in name only (a THINO?).

Look at the set-up:

Of the 54 seats in the audience, 24 will be split between Democratic and Republican committees in the Lehigh Valley. The remaining 30 became available to the public at 9 a.m. this past Saturday – and according to DaWayne Cleckley, vice president of marketing at PBS39, they ran out at 9:06 a.m.

So he was guaranteed at least 12 republicans from Lehigh Valley Republican Committee.

You'll remember that before he was Senator, Pat Toomey was a member of the House of Representatives from Pennsylvania's 15th Congressional District - which includes the Lehigh Valley.

So this was very friendly territory for good old Pat.

I am guessing this is by design - keep your friends close and your enemies...on the other side of the studio door so you won't have to answer their questions on live TV.

But we all knew this was going to happen, didn't we?

But let's get to Pat's lie. The AP is reporting this bit of nonsense:

Speaking to reporters afterward, Toomey warned lawmakers against larding any relief bill with spending unrelated to the devastating storm, which dumped about 52 inches (132 centimeters) of rain on part of Texas and caused dozens of deaths. Toomey said that’s why he voted against a Superstorm Sandy aid package in 2013.

“If it becomes a Christmas tree where every member of Congress adds whatever his or her favorite pork barrel spending program, well, then, I’m going to fight that,” he said. “That’s what Sandy became.”

Currently the Texas Republicans, like Senator Ted Cruz, who voted against Sandy funding are now scrambling to explain why they want guv'ment funding now have the same problem as Pat.

This story (that Sandy funding was filled with political pork) simply isn't true:

From the Washington Post fact-checker:

Cruz is repeating a number of myths about the funding for Sandy disaster relief. The vast majority of the spending was for Hurricane Sandy, including elements (such as Smithsonian repairs) that some lawmakers incorrectly believed were unrelated to the storm. The slow rate of projected spending that Cruz had criticized at the time was actually based on how quickly the government had spent funds after previous major storms.

Cruz clearly misspoke about the “two-thirds” being pork. Still, it is wildly incorrect to claim that the bill was “filled with unrelated pork.” The bill was largely aimed at dealing with Sandy, along with relatively minor items to address other or future disasters. He earns Three Pinocchios.

In the piece there's also this:

The Congressional Research Service issued a comprehensive report on the provisions, and it’s clear that virtually all of it was related to the damage caused by Sandy. There may have been some pork in an earlier Senate version, but many of those items were removed before final passage. There were also some items that appear to have been misunderstood. [Emphasis added.]

As you can see here. Pat Toomey voted with Ted Cruz against that funding and he's using the same dishonest justification for it.

You lied, Pat. You lied about your Superstorm Sandy funding vote right after your so-called "Town Hall."

Donald Trump, In Houston. Comforting Americans Slammed By Hurricane Harvey

First, from the press pool:

He stood on a raised platform of some type. Couldn’t tell if it was a step ladder or not. But he was not on a truck. Spoke into a microphone.

“I love you, you are special, we’re here to take care of you. It’s going well.”

“What a crowd, what a turnout.”

Reporters heard no mention of the dead, dying or displaced Texans and no expression of sympathy for them. The message was services are coming and Texans will be OK.

“Texas can handle anything,” POTUS said.

“We are going to get you back and operating immediately,” he told the crowd (this contradicts the “Long haul” Sen. John Cornyn has publicly discussed and the caveat from FEMA administrator long moments earlier that it’s going to be a slow process).

Some more info from a TV station in Kansas City:

President Donald Trump gave what was described by a White House pool reporter as an "impromptu rally" after meeting with Texas officials on Tuesday about the government response response to Hurricane Harvey.

According to a White House pool report prepared by a reporter from the Dallas Morning News, a group of hundreds of Trump supporters managed to know where Trump was meeting with officials. The group stood outside of a fire station near Corpus Christi.

And now some commentary from the Washington Post:

As rescuers continued their exhausting and heartbreaking work in southeastern Texas on Tuesday afternoon, as the rain continued to fall and a reservoir near Houston spilled over, President Trump grabbed a microphone to address hundreds of supporters who had gathered outside a firehouse near Corpus Christi and were chanting: “USA! USA! USA!”

‘Thank you, everybody,” the president said, sporting one of the white “USA” caps that are being sold on his campaign website for $40. “I just want to say: We love you. You are special. . . . What a crowd. What a turnout.”

Yet again, Trump managed to turn attention on himself.

I'll just leave it at that.

My TWENTY-FIFTH Open Letter to Senator Pat Toomey (UPDATED)

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

I'd like to ask you about Donald Trump's pardon of former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

As you may know, Arpaio was found guilty of criminal contempt for willfully violating a judge's order to stop "detaining persons for further investigation without reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or is being committed."

He was violating their constitutional rights. He was told to stop by a federal judge. He disregarded that order and then bragged about it.

Donald Trump, the man you voted for for president and the leader of your political party, pardoned him.

Is this OK with you? That a man convicted of "flagrantly disregarding" a federal judge's direct order not to violate anyone's constitutional rights gets a pardon for it?

Do you agree with your Senate colleague, John McCain, when he said that "The President has the authority to make this pardon, but doing so at this time undermines his claim for the respect of rule of law as Mr. Arpaio has shown no remorse for his actions.”?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

UPDATE: Senator Toomey responds to this letter here.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Nineteenth Letter - No response so far 
• Twentieth Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-first Letter - No response so far
• Twenty-second Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-third Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-fourth Letter - No response so far

Heard on HBO Last Night

There was a line spoken last night on HBO that got my attention. It was something about how if enough people lie often enough then "the truth" doesn't matter anymore. Jon Snow said it when he was being chided for not lying to Cersei Lannister.

It's been stuck in my ear ever since and I'm not the only one who heard it.

The Mooch even tweeted it!

"When enough ppl make false promises words stop meaning anything and then there are no more answers only better and better lies" --Jon Snow

— Anthony Scaramucci (@Scaramucci) August 28, 2017

Tell me he (either the once and future King of the North or the always nauseating Tony Mooch) wasn't talking about Donald J Trump and his enablers in the GOP.

Well maybe not - I might just be connecting un-connected dots.

I'm Not Sure The Faithful In North Huntington Get The Irony Of Their Actions

From Joe Napsha at The Trib, resurrecting a long dead story:

To Shawn Teamann, posting a sign of the Ten Commandments in the front yard of his North Huntingdon home is an affirmation of his faith and his stance against what he sees as an erosion of religious freedom in America.

“It's just standing up for what you believe in. We feel religious freedom is being taken away,” said Teamann, a member of the Immaculate Conception Church of Irwin.

I can not and will not question the sincerity of Mr. Teamann for standing up for his beliefs. Saying that however, I am not sure that Mr Teamann realizes that he's actually exercising a remarkable level of religious freedom by posting The Decalogue on his own front lawn. I can disagree with the commandments but in the end, since it's his sign and his lawn whatever disagreements I might have are meaningless.

He has every right to do what he's doing. It's a right that's protected and it is fundamental to our society's freedoms.

He's even entitled to do this:

Having a sign in his Herold Street yard is a reaction to the removal of the Ten Commandments from publicly owned buildings, Teamann said.

Again. His lawn, his sign, his right to post The Decalogue. If you're offended by seeing them there, you're out of luck, pal.

But look at what he and his pastor, the Rev. John Moineau, are protesting:

Moineau, a Lower Burrell native, said he was prompted to get Ten Commandments signs for parishioners because officials at Valley Junior-Senior High School in New Kensington this year removed a monument etched with the Ten Commandments. The monument on school grounds was removed under the terms of an out-of-court settlement in February with the Freedom From Religion Foundation in Madison, Wis. An atheist had filed a lawsuit in 2012, claiming the school district violated the constitutionally required separation of church and state.

Turns out, it was constitutional.  Constitutional as far back as 1980:

A Kentucky statute requiring the posting of a copy of the Ten Commandments, purchased with private contributions, on the wall of each public school classroom in the State has no secular legislative purpose, and therefore is unconstitutional as violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

So, Mr. Teamann and Father Moineau, removing the commandments from the public school grounds is not an example of a "religious freedom being taken away" but an example of everyone's religious freedom being protected - including your own.

Father Moineau, your freedom to write about the Ten Commandments is protected.

Shawn Teamann, your freedom to post them on your front lawn is protected.

What you can't do is post them in a public school and in a way so as to force anyone else to read and/or live by them - if you think that you have that right, you're completely (and unconstitutionally) wrong.

It's a sad state of affairs that we still have to have this discussion.

Senator Toomey Responds - Kinda, Sorta, But YES! (But NO!)

I got another email response from Senator Pat Toomey Thursday afternoon.

It begins with this:

Thank you for contacting me about Russian actions during the 2016 election. I appreciate hearing from you.

Waitagoshdernminnut!

Haven't we seen this sentence before?

Why yes, Dayvoe. Yes, we have.

Here - on June 28, 2017 and I remember it like it was only 59 days ago.

Well, let's see how the two letters compare, shall we? We already know the first paragraphs match.  How about the second? This is from June:

Former FBI Director James Comey recently testified before Congress that an investigation into potential coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government is still ongoing. While the former director did not say whether any coordination has been found, he confirmed there is no evidence of vote tampering. President Trump recently fired Mr. Comey, and has nominated Christopher Wray as the next FBI director. It is now up to the Senate to vet and confirm this nomination.

From Thursday:

Former FBI Director James Comey recently testified before Congress that an investigation into potential coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government is still ongoing. While the former director did not say whether any coordination has been found, he confirmed there is no evidence of vote tampering. President Trump fired Mr. Comey, and nominated Christopher Wray as the next FBI director. On August 1, 2017, the Senate voted 92 - 5 with my support to confirm Wray's nomination.

I'd say that's a very close match, wouldn't you? (Note: The yellowed text in each is the material not found in the other letter.)

The third paragraph? This is from June:

In the interim, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel to continue the investigation into any links between Russia and individuals associated with the Trump campaign, and any matters that arose from such investigation - an assignment that encompasses the recent allegations surrounding Michael Flynn and Mr. Comey. I have every confidence that Robert Mueller will execute these responsibilities with integrity and professionalism.

From Thursday:

Meanwhile, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel to continue the investigation into any links between Russia and individuals associated with the Trump campaign, and any matters that arose from such investigation - an assignment that encompasses the recent allegations surrounding Michael Flynn and Mr. Comey. I have every confidence that Robert Mueller will execute these responsibilities with integrity and professionalism.

I am so glad they changed "In the interim" to "Meanwhile." It was just so necessary.

Fourth paragraph? This is from June:

I look forward to reviewing the findings of Special Counsel Mueller and the findings by the various House and Senate Committees investigating these issues. If the Russian government or its agents meddled in our election, they should face serious consequences. Towards that end, I was pleased to support legislation (S. 722) that codified and strengthened existing sanctions on Russia. If the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government in an attempt to influence the election, then that should be disclosed and acted upon, too. Russia remains a dangerous threat, and Congress must remain vigilant against our adversaries' attempts to expand their influence and undermine trust in our government.

From Thursday:

I look forward to reviewing the findings of Special Counsel Mueller and the findings by the various House and Senate Committees investigating these issues. If the Russian government or its agents meddled in our election, they should face serious consequences. Towards that end, I was pleased to support legislation (Public Law 115-44) that codified and strengthened existing sanctions on Russia. If the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government in an attempt to influence the election, then that should be disclosed and acted upon, too. Russia remains a dangerous threat, and Congress must remain vigilant against our adversaries' attempts to expand their influence and undermine trust in our government.

Now this part is somewhat interesting. Without looking into the matter, one might be tempted to assume that S.722 was simply signed into law as Public Law 115-44.

But my children, pray that ye enter not into such temptation (Luke 22:40) for you'd have an incomplete picture of the whole. S.722 was incorporated into a House bill (H.R. 3364) that also included sanctions against North Korea. Not a big deal either way. I'm just showing off.

Finally the fifth and last paragraph - This is from June:

While I am not a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, please be assured I understand your concerns and will keep your thoughts in mind moving forward. Thank you again for your correspondence. Do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.

And Thursday:

While I am not a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, please be assured I understand your concerns and will keep your thoughts in mind moving forward. Thank you again for your correspondence. Do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.

No changes.

The funny thing is that, if you remember the June 28 response, I wasn't actually able to establish exactly which letter of mine Senator Toomey was answering. It looks like it's the same story here.

Since then, the only letter that's even close is the Twenty-second. Here is the question from that letter:

Yesterday, the Washington Post published a story asserting that Donald J Trump himself "personally dictated" the initial, and misleading, statement describing his son's meeting in Trump Tower - a meeting Donald Jr took after being promised in an email damaging information on the Clinton Campaign from the Russian government.

That statement said the meeting was primarily about Russian adoption and it has since been shown to be misleading, at best. Dishonest, at worst. By any reckoning, it was a personally dictated presidential deception about Russian meddling with our election.

So, here's my question: How comfortable are you with the President of the United States misleading the American people on such an important matter?

How damaging is it to assume that's the case? I ask if Senator Toomey is comfortable with the President of the United States misleading the American people and he responds by sending me (AGAIN) an answer to a question I didn't ask.

Maybe I should just tailor a question to fit his answer. Maybe then I'll get a straight answer about Trump's dishonesty.

Heckuva Job, Donnie!

As #HurricaneHarvey intensifies - remember to #PlanAhead.
☑️https://t.co/FMdmvohypy
☑️https://t.co/YL56ldeqoW
☑️https://t.co/t1s4AL3B47 pic.twitter.com/tpXmOK70ug

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 24, 2017

The text reads:

With Hurricane Harvey approaching landfall, remember – the U.S.A is the most resilient NATION on earth, because we PLAN AHEAD. Preparedness is an investment in our future! – President Donald J. Trump.

So, if someone is in the path of the hurricane right now and, maybe, needs some help to prepare or to evacuate...you'll do what? You'll send them some MAGA swag once the water recedes and the Post Office starts to deliver the mail again?

The guv'ment certainly shouldn't help em! That's socialism!

MAGA!

Exxon Knew. And Lied About Knowing. (Climate Denial Worth Billions)

A paper just published in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

From the Abstract:

This paper assesses whether ExxonMobil Corporation has in the past misled the general public about climate change. We present an empirical document-by-document textual content analysis and comparison of 187 climate change communications from ExxonMobil, including peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed publications, internal company documents, and paid, editorial-style advertisements ('advertorials') in The New York Times. We examine whether these communications sent consistent messages about the state of climate science and its implications—specifically, we compare their positions on climate change as real, human-caused, serious, and solvable. In all four cases, we find that as documents become more publicly accessible, they increasingly communicate doubt.

So as Exxon was "talking to itself" it was acknowledging something Donald Trump has yet to: that climate change is real. And yet as it was talking to the public Exxon was saying something very different:

For example, accounting for expressions of reasonable doubt, 83% of peer-reviewed papers and 80% of internal documents acknowledge that climate change is real and human-caused, yet only 12% of advertorials do so, with 81% instead expressing doubt. We conclude that ExxonMobil contributed to advancing climate science—by way of its scientists' academic publications—but promoted doubt about it in advertorials.

Exxon was lying to the public.

Something to ponder: the researchers looked at Exxon documents dated between 1977 and 2014 and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was CEO of Exxon from 2006-2016. (He joined the company in 1975 as engineer.)

I wonder if someone will be asking him (or his president) about this Harvard study that:

conclude[d] that ExxonMobil misled the public.

I wonder.

My TWENTY-FOURTH Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey (UPDATED)

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

I have to ask you another question about Donald Trump's responses to the violence in Charlottesville.

At a little before 2pm on August 12, a 20-something Nazi-sympathizer drove his car into a group of counter-protesters, killing one and injuring almost 2 dozen others. That day, Trump made his first statement regarding the violence in which he condemned the violence "on many sides." This statement was almost universally criticized for appearing to blame the counter-protesters for the violence done to them. Two days later he declared (reluctantly, it was reported) that racism was evil and declared the KKK, neo-Nazis and so on to be "criminals and thugs". That same day, you updated your Facebook page to read:

I am disgusted by white nationalists, white supremacists, and neo-Nazis and believe the racism and hate spewed by these groups have no place in our society.

The very next day Trump reverted to his "blame both sides" argument at a news conference in Trump tower. It was so bad that even conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer called it a "moral disgrace."

So here's my question: Given your statement of the 14th, when you asserted your unambiguous disgust with white supremacists (et al) and Trump's departure from his statement and re-embrace of "blame both sides", has your support for Donald Trump, the leader of your political party and the man you voted for for president, wavered in any way?

And if not, why not?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

Senator Toomey has responded to this letter. You can read it here.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Nineteenth Letter - No response so far 
• Twentieth Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-first Letter - No response so far
• Twenty-second Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-third Letter - No response so far

Meanwhile, Outside (UPDATE)

While our collective national attention is currently focused on the assault on decency and equality by white supremacists and their enabler/apologist in the White House, NOAA continues to provide a monthly assessment of the state of the global climate (SPOILERS: The Earth is getting warmer and it's all our fault).

Take a look:

The average global land and ocean surface temperature for July 2017 was the second highest for the month at 0.83°C (1.49°F) above the 20th century average of 15.8°C (60.4°F), behind the record year 2016 by 0.05°C (0.09°F). Nine of the 10 warmest Julys on record have occurred during the 21st century (since 2005), with only one year from the 20th century (1998) among the top 10 warmest Julys on record. July 2017 also marks the 41st consecutive July and the 391st consecutive month with a global temperature at least nominally above the 20th century average.

The guv'ment bureaucrats even included some art work:

Of course the science deniers in Washington continue to deny the science. From Politico:

Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt said his staff will gauge the “accuracy” of a major federal science report that blames human activity for climate change — just days after researchers voiced their fears to The New York Times that the Trump administration would alter or suppress its findings.

A few paragraphs later:

Scientists called his remarks troubling, especially because the report — part of a broader, congressionally mandated National Climate Assessment — has already undergone “rigorous” peer-review by a 14-person committee at the National Academies. The reviewing scientists backed the report’s conclusion from researchers at 13 federal agencies that humans are causing climate change by putting more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, leading to a clear increase in global temperatures.

How much of that last sentence, do you think, will make it past Pruitt's (and Trump's) EPA?

It's still getting warmer, human activity is still to blame and there are no good Nazis.

UPDATE: I found this in this morning's Washington Post.

The Trump administration has decided to disband the federal advisory panel for the National Climate Assessment, a group aimed at helping policymakers and private-sector officials incorporate the government’s climate analysis into long-term planning.

The charter for the 15-person Advisory Committee for the Sustained National Climate Assessment — which includes academics as well as local officials and corporate representatives — expires Sunday. On Friday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s acting administrator, Ben Friedman, informed the committee’s chair that the agency would not renew the panel.

Of course they did.

Tina Fey, Last Night

You'll want to watch this a few times.

Moral equivalence? Who drove the car into the crowd, Hillary's emails?

Men Of Honor

The Navy:

Events in Charlottesville unacceptable & musnt be tolerated @USNavy forever stands against intolerance & hatred...https://t.co/tg0cETibaq

— Adm. John Richardson (@CNORichardson) August 13, 2017

The Army:

The Army doesn't tolerate racism, extremism, or hatred in our ranks. It's against our Values and everything we've stood for since 1775.

— GEN Mark A. Milley (@ArmyChiefStaff) August 16, 2017

The Marines:

No place for racial hatred or extremism in @USMC. Our core values of Honor, Courage, and Commitment frame the way Marines live and act.

— Robert B. Neller (@GenRobertNeller) August 15, 2017

The Air Force:

I stand with my fellow service chiefs in saying we're always stronger together-it's who we are as #Airmen pic.twitter.com/9XxOry93nf

— Gen. Dave Goldfein (@GenDaveGoldfein) August 16, 2017

And let's not forget:

"No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin or his background or his religion..." pic.twitter.com/InZ58zkoAm

— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) August 13, 2017

In contrast, look at anything said by the current Commander-in-Chief at his most recent news conference.

Even conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer said Trump's comments were "a moral disgrace."

I've Looked At Covfefe From Both Sides Now

This weekend a woman was killed by a white supremacist/neo-nazi/alt.right supporter who drove his Chevy Challenger into the crowd she was in. He also injured 19 other people with his car. The woman, Heather Heyer was protesting the white supremacists/neo-nazis/alt.right supporters who had descended onto Charlottesville, Virginia to protest the removal of a statue of a man, Robert E. Lee, who defended the "states' right" to enslave other human beings. He was a traitor for levying war against the United States.

And yet, Donald J Trump said there was blame on "both sides" for the violence.

He also said that there were some "very fine people" among the white supremacists/neo-nazis/alt.right supporters.

David Duke liked what Donald J Trump said.

When you get a hearty thumbs up from a racist for imposing a false moral equivalence onto, as Senator McCain tweeted, "racists & Americans standing up to defy hate& bigotry," you're doing something very very wrong.

Even though there are many Republicans who denounced Trump for this, he still is leader of the GOP, he still is the (orange) face of American conservatism right now.

If you voted for Trump, this is yours. You made this happen.

What are you going to do about it?

It's Tuesday - But It's DIFFERENT This Tuesday

For the past twenty some odd Tuesdays, I've been posting open letters to my Senator, Pat Toomey. He's answered a few, ignored most and pivoted and dodged when he did respond.

Considering the events of this past weekend, however, I've decided to take a break from the Tuesday letters to Toomey - I'll be back next week.

To his credit, the Senator did post this on his Facebook page - but only two days after the racist violence:

I am disgusted by white nationalists, white supremacists, and neo-Nazis and believe the racism and hate spewed by these groups have no place in our society.

It's good that he's finally there, I suppose.

But condemning Nazis and White Supremacists and the KKK is easy.

Watch:

How The Local Politicians Responded To The White Supremacists UPDATE - ANOTHER UPDATE

As the man said "All politics is local," it might be a good idea to see how some local elected officia

ls reacted to the violence of this weekend in Charlottesville, specifically whether they denounce or even mention the white supremacists at the heart of it.

First the Governor. In a series of tweets, he got it right. Including this:

Violence and racism have no place in America. I join @GovernorVA and condemn the hatred and bigotry of these white supremacists.

— Governor Tom Wolf (@GovernorTomWolf) August 12, 2017

Then Senator Casey:

Those marching to promote "white nationalism" are promoting a blatantly racist ideology.

— Senator Bob Casey (@SenBobCasey) August 12, 2017

And:

Our nation must stand together and condemn this racism and those who promote it.

— Senator Bob Casey (@SenBobCasey) August 12, 2017

And now Senator Toomey:

The racism, hate and violence seen in #Charlottesville are vile and unacceptable.

— Senator Pat Toomey (@SenToomey) August 12, 2017

Sadly, you'll note that he fails to take that last big step to mention "white supremacy" or "Nazis" or anything more specific than "racism, hate and violence" in his tweet. I mean it's great to see racism as vile, but just as I can imagine the alt.right folks in Pennsylvania concluding that those opposing them are "the real racists," I can imagine a lot of them actually agreeing with Toomey's tweet. At the very least, a clarification is in order, doncha think?

Representative Tim Murphy does the job without explicitly calling out the white supremacists or Nazis by name:

Saturday's violence in Charlottesville was an exhibition of racist hate masquerading as political dissent. There is no "other side" to the debate over racial equality and common decency. The racist extremists who sought and invited this violence should be driven from all venues of public life. Hate is hate, and there is no antidote for it but universal rejection.

His "other side" is probably a reference to this tweet from former Vice President Joe Biden:

There is only one side. #charlottesville

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) August 12, 2017

Which is itself a repudiation of Donald Trump's offensive "On many sides." moral equivalence. And in doing so Murphy does in fact, though in a round about way, denounce those who stand against racial equality (that is to say, those promoting white supremacy).

Representative Mike Doyle's response was short and to the point, while not specifically denouncing the white supremacists at the center of the protests:

I condemn the hate, bigotry, and racism on display in #Charlottesville. It has no place in this country.

— Mike Doyle (@USRepMikeDoyle) August 12, 2017

This is almost exactly Pat Toomey's reaction. However, as I can't imagine very many alt.right folks among Doyle's constituency (or indeed looking at Doyle's twitter feed for political reinforcement), the context is different. Still, perhaps a clarification might be in order.

Take a look, for example, at what Senator Lindsey Graham had to say this weekend:

“[Donald Trump] missed an opportunity to be very explicit here,” said Graham on Fox News Sunday. “These groups seem to believe they have a friend in Donald Trump in the White House. I don’t know why they believe that, but they don’t see me as a friend in the Senate and I would urge the president to dissuade these groups that he’s their friend.”

Dissuade these groups that they are your friends. They're white supremacists, they're Nazis and they should be re-fringed to political impotence.

UPDATE: Senator Toomey just posted this on Facebook:

I am disgusted by white nationalists, white supremacists, and neo-Nazis and believe the racism and hate spewed by these groups have no place in our society.

SECOND UPDATE: Representative Mike Doyle updated his Facebook page with this:

On Many Sides - Donald Trump Refuses To Condemn Neo-Nazis/White Supremecists

Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history.

Only yesterday:

We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence, on many sides.

On many sides.

That's what he said. That is what Donald J. Trump said.

He said it a few hours after this happened in Charlottesville, Virginia:

Video recorded at the scene of the car crash shows a 2010 gray Dodge Challenger accelerating into crowds on a pedestrian mall, sending bodies flying — and then reversing at high speed, hitting yet more people. Witnesses said the street was filled with people opposed to the white nationalists who had come to town bearing Confederate flags and anti-Semitic epithets.

So far one person dead and 19 injured. The dead and injured were among those opposing the Neo-Nazis and white supremacists protesting the removal of this statue from Emancipation Park. Formerly known as Lee Park, it was named after the Confederate General who committed treason by levying war against the United States of America in order to protect the institution of slavery.

As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy.

At the tiki-torched prelude-protest the night before, this is what happened:

Hundreds of white nationalists marched and rallied at the University of Virginia Friday night. They carried torches and chanted, "You will not replace us and "Jews will not replace us."

The day of the protest Joe Heim, staff writer for the Washington Post tweeted this:

Now chanting "go the fuck back to Africa"and "nigger" at black woman across the street pic.twitter.com/zOxUlYIpOQ

— Joe Heim (@JoeHeim) August 12, 2017

This is who invaded Charlottesville this weekend. Racists and bigots of various seasonings and at least one white domestic terrorist - the guy driving the gray Dodge Challenger.

And yet Trump took it upon himself to condemn the "egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence, on many sides."

As if both sides, the racists and those opposing them, held something even remotely resembling equal responsibility for the violence brought to Charlottesville by the racists protesting the removal of the Confederate statue of the guy defending the institution of slavery.

The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves and then we will save our country.

And then:

The president ignored several questions, shouted by reporters after his remarks, about white nationalists who support his presidency and whether he has denounced them in strong enough terms. While leading politicians from both parties specifically denounced the white-nationalist cause of the protesters, Trump seemed careful to avoid doing the same.

Gee, I wonder why.

Could this be the answer? From Think Progress:

The popular white supremacist site Daily Stormer called Trump’s remarks “really good,” noting that he “didn’t attack us.” They were also pleased he ignored a question about white supremacists after making his statement.

And:

Some commentators on the white nationalist message board Stormfront also praised Trump, with one noting that the president’s comments could just as easily be read as a criticism of Black Lives Matter.

Which I think is entirely the point.

This is the world we now inhabit.

My fellow citizens. We can not escape history. - That is what he said. That is what Abraham Lincoln said.

Ah, Those Guardians Of Democracy, Those Fact-Drenched Trump Voters

From The Washington Post:

Nearly half of Republicans (47 percent) believe that Trump won the popular vote, which is similar to this finding. Larger fractions believe that millions of illegal immigrants voted (68 percent) and that voter fraud happens somewhat or very often (73 percent). Again, this is similar to previous polls.

Moreover, 52 percent said that they would support postponing the 2020 election, and 56 percent said they would do so if both Trump and Republicans in Congress proposed this.

But wait a minute. Aren't these folks the same scared jitter-ers who thought that Obama was going to claim a third term?

Jitter-ers like Joseph Farah at WND:

The question this harsh, unprecedented attack by a sitting president on a major-party nominee to succeed him raises should be obvious: What happens if Donald Trump wins the election in November?

Given what Obama has said about Trump, would he not have an obligation to prevent Trump from assuming office? And what would that mean to the peaceful process America has enjoyed for more than two centuries of transitions of power?

Rush Limbaugh in 2009:


A partial transcript from Rush Limbaugh's own website:

I think he has natural sympathies toward authoritarians. He has sympathy for dictators. He relates to them. He inherited his father’s Marxism. It’s not me saying this. It’s somebody from the American Thinker, the Nigerian woman writing last week referring to Obama as average African colonel. You have to wonder if Obama is just trying to lay a foundation for not being a hypocrite when he tries to serve beyond 2016. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if in the next number of years there is a move on the 22nd Amendment, which term limits the president of the United States. He may not do it that way, he may not openly try to change the Constitution, but there might be this movement in the country from his cultlike followers to support the notion that a democratically elected leader, who is loved and adored has carte blanche, once elected, just serve as long as he wants because the people demand it, the people want it, the people love it. I wouldn’t put it past Obama to be plotting right now how to serve beyond 2016.

And that's straight out of Rush's mouth.

So they'd support the Republican president doing the same thing that they got so skeert-they-crapped-their-pants when they thought the previous Kenyan-born Democrat president was planning on doing the same thing - even though he wasn't.  (It's just another factual error on their parts, just like the 47% who thought Trump won the popular vote and the 68% who thought that millions of "illegal aliens" voted for Clinton.)

Yea, that's a consistent, fact-based coalition over there, supporting the little-handed pussy-grabber who might just get us all killed.

Ok, So We're Still Here. Going To Have To Take Things Day-By-Day, I Suppose, From Now On

I remember a time where you could go to bed without worrying about what the president might do to start a nuclear war before morning.

— Jared Yates Sexton (@JYSexton) August 9, 2017

With that in mind, I am wondering if, say, Bernie Sanders supporter Susan Sarandon (and all those Sanders folks who agreed with her) still believes that Hillary Clinton is "in a way, more dangerous" than Donald Trump.

More dangerous, of course, because Trump's policies are so implausible.

Implausible? They're right before our eyes. Every day. Every hour. Every tweet.

So far today, no nukular war.

But the day is still young.

My TWENTY-THIRD Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

A week or so ago, Donald J Trump told the Wall Street Journal that, after his controversial speech at this year's Boy Scout Jamboree, "I got a call from the head of the Boy Scouts saying it was the greatest speech that was ever made to them, and they were very thankful."

As we all know by now, that was a lie.

Not only did Donald J Trump lie about the Boy Scouts but that speech, as you probably know by now, triggered an apology from the Scouts to anyone offended by the "political rhetoric injected into the jamboree."

Senator Toomey, you were a Boy Scout (an Eagle Scout, in fact). So here's this week's question: How and why do you continue to support such a man who would blatantly politicize the Boy Scouts and then lie about it later?

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Nineteenth Letter - No response so far 
• Twentieth Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-first Letter - No response so far
• Twenty-second Letter - No response so far

Senator Pat Toomey, Americans United For Freedom, And One Particular Address In Alexandria

It's a Saturday morning and I'm still a week away from Premier League Football so I decided to rummage around in Senator Pat Toomey's campaign contributions to see what I could find.

Being a rank amateur in such things I found nothing but questions.

Let's begin.

According to this FEC page Senator Pat Toomey's largest single donor in the 2016 election cycle was an organization called "Americans United For Freedom" and they gave him a total of $151,357.55.

And according to this FEC page Senator Pat Toomey was the largest recipient of "Americans United for Freedom" campaign disbursements for that cycle.

And according to this FEC page, "Americans United For Freedom" raised $733,905 during that cycle (and that means, if my math is correct, that Toomey received a little more than 20% of the amount raised).

And finally, according to this FEC page, none of that money actually came from Pennsylvania.

I'd say that's an interesting relationship, wouldn't you? But then again, I'm just a rank amateur at such things.

Granted, he had way more than $150 grand to spend and way more than just one donor. But his largest single donor was that committee and the largest recipient of that committee's money was Pat Toomey. And let me say it again, none of that money came from Toomey's home state.

So who is "Americans United For Freedom" anyway?

According to this FEC page, the mailing address for "Americans United For Freedom" is:

228 S WASHINGTON ST
STE 115
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314

That's also the mailing address for Huckaby Davis Lisker, Inc. Which is where we find someone named Lisa Lisker.

She's the treasurer for "Americans United For Freedom" and here's a secret surprise for you - she also happens to be the treasurer for Toomey's leadership PAC, Citizens for Prosperity in America!

So when AUF gave all that money to Toomey's leadership PAC the paperwork didn't even have to leave one desk? Am I getting this right?

And what else can be found at that address?

Did you know as of January 2017, it was the mailing address for not one but two US Senators: John McCain and Lamar Alexander?

You can check for yourself this FEC page to see what other committees call this address home. There's lots and lots. And lots.

It must be a very important address. I don't know what any of this means except that it, perhaps, illustrates how tightly the ties that bind money and politics in our nation's capital.

Before It's Too Late - Some Great American Culture

Reports are in that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has been busy:

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III began using a grand jury in federal court in Washington several weeks ago as part of his investigation of possible coordination between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign, according to two people familiar with the inquiry.

The development is a sign that investigators continue to aggressively gather evidence in the case, and that Mueller is taking full control of a probe that predated him.

In recent weeks and months, Mueller has been expanding the legal team working on the matter, and recently added Greg Andres, a longtime white-collar lawyer specializing in foreign bribery who previously worked in the Justice Department’s criminal division.

Mueller’s investigation now includes a look at whether President Trump obstructed justice by firing FBI Director James B. Comey, as well as deep dives into financial and other dealings of former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

And he may be getting (if he needs it) some Congressional cover:

Two bipartisan pairs of senators unveiled legislation Thursday to prevent President Trump from firing special counsel Robert S. Mueller III without cause — or at least a reason good enough to convince a panel of federal judges.

Senators have raised concerns that the president might try to rearrange his administration to get rid of Mueller, who is spearheading a probe of Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election and any possible collusion between the Kremlin and members of the Trump campaign and transition teams.

Let's just hope he doesn't need that cover and that the rule of law will prevail.

Let's just hope it's not all crashing down around us in slow motion.

Let's try to remember some good parts about the America-That-Was.  And for that, we'll celebrate a birthday today - Louis Armstrong, American musician, born today (yes today) in 1900:


And here he is a few decades later:


Oh, yea. And Barack Obama was born today, too (in 1961 - in Hawaii).


Do you remember when presidents were, uh, presidential?

When they weren't such an insult to decency and honesty? When they weren't under investigation for selling the country out to the Russians? When they weren't a threat to the rule of law and democracy itself?

Yea, good times.

Trumpian Greeting Cards

Vote for me (call it a lifetime achievement award)

So this is a thing I'm nominated for (thanks to Sue Kerr who's nominated in multiple categories -- vote for her!). 

You can find me under BEST LOCAL BLOGGER. 

To be honest, David DeAngelo does all the heavy lifting here these days, but maybe I'll blog more if yinz all vote for me. LOL

You can vote daily until the 18th.

http://citypaper.secondstreetapp.com/CP-Best-Of-Pgh-Voting-Ballot/gallery/?category=1124356

Dump Trump

What A Dump!

Hey, remember when this happened?

Vanity Fair has posted photos of President Obama with his feet up on his Oval Office desk. But it's not just any desk. This desk was a gift from Britain's Queen Victoria to President Rutherford B. Hayes in 1880. Known as the Resolute desk, it was built from the timbers of an Arctic exploration ship of the same name. Nothing like disrespecting history.

Much like the rest of the right wing echo chamber, my good friends on the Tribune-Review editorial board were outraged? disappointed? annoyed? (it's hard to tell) by Obama's obvious disrespect of history.

I wrote about why that's bullshit here.

But they are on the record defending the dignity of the White House and its history - that's not in dispute.

So I wonder how this is gonna play with the MAGA crowd:

During election season, [Trump National Golf Club] Bedminster morphed into a kind of permanent campaign rally site. Trump posters and bumper stickers were plastered across the property, and an anti-Hillary shrine was built in a bar in the men's locker room. The club held a Ryder Cup–style competition in which the teams wore either red or black Make America Great Again hats. At most other golf courses in America the TV is tuned to Golf Channel, on mute, but throughout last summer and fall, the television in Trump Bedminster's shop was on Fox News, with the sound blaring. As President, Trump has already made four visits to the club. He has his own cottage adjacent to the pool; it was recently given a secure perimeter by the Secret Service, leading to the inevitable joke that it's the only wall Trump has successfully built. Chatting with some members before a recent round of golf, he explained his frequent appearances: "That White House is a real dump." (A White House spokesperson denies this occurred.) [Emphasis added.]

With all the rampant, out-of-control, honesty oozing out of the Trump Administration every day, every hour, I am absolutely nay resolutely sure that that White House spokesperson's denial is 1000% true. Believe me.

Who's disrespecting the White House?

My TWENTY-SECOND Open Letter To Senator Pat Toomey

I'll be dropping this letter to Senator Pat Toomey in the mail today:

Dear Senator Toomey:

It's me, again. Your constituent who also writes for the local Pittsburgh-based political blog, "2 Political Junkies."

Yesterday, the Washington Post published a story asserting that Donald J Trump himself "personally dictated" the initial, and misleading, statement describing his son's meeting in Trump Tower - a meeting Donald Jr took after being promised in an email damaging information on the Clinton Campaign from the Russian government.

That statement said the meeting was primarily about Russian adoption and it has since been shown to be misleading, at best. Dishonest, at worst. By any reckoning, it was a personally dictated presidential deception about Russian meddling with our election.

So, here's my question: How comfortable are you with the President of the United States misleading the American people on such an important matter?

You voted for him, you have to have an opinion about this. I'd like to know what it is.

I await your response.

And I will be posting whatever response I get from him or his office.

Follow-up:

• Round-up Volume 1
• Round-up Volume 2
• Nineteenth Letter - No response so far 
• Twentieth Letter - No response so far 
• Twenty-first Letter - No response so far