democrats
Karen Handels Ossoff, Dems’ Post Georgia Disarray, Holder Hints At 2020
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America celebrate Republican Karen Handel’s win over Democrat Jon Ossoff in Georgia’s special congressional election. They also enjoy watching Democrats fight publicly over what went wrong in a race that was supposedly a referendum on President Trump and a model for winning back the House in 2018. And they react to the news that former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder plans to be much more visible in his “resistance” to President Trump and might run for president in 2020.
Breaking Down the Budget Battle
President Trump’s budget proposal for the coming fiscal year is coming under fierce criticism from Democrats and the media but a House Budget Committee member who spent 20 years as a college economics professor is impressed by Trump’s goals while warning that the president will need to address entitlement spending at some point.
The Trump administration released it’s $4 trillion budget proposal while Trump himself was overseas. It calls for robust increases in national security spending while calling for considerable cuts to various government departments. Democrats have labeled the budget as cruel and likely to cause children to die. Republicans warn the final appropriations bills probably won’t look much like the Trump plan.
Rep. Dave Brat, R-Virginia, spent 20 years as an economics professor at Randolph Macon College. He believes Trump is generally on the right track.
“Overall, I’m impressed, It’s got the big pieces in the right place,” said Brat. “The major piece I like is the policy aimed at getting three percent growth. That will solve a lot of problems going forward,” said Brat, while praising the policies Trump is clearly emphasizing in the budget.
“It pluses up the military. It tries to clean out the swamp. It reduces some bureaucracy. It balances in 10 years. All of these are good conservative policies,” said Brat.
Brat says the Trump plan is a great improvement over what the Democrats are proposing. In fact, he says they have no solutions at all.
“As a visionary document, we’re moving in the right direction. Across the aisle on the Democrat side, they haven’t even ever put forward a budget that balances, not even in a 75-year window,” said Brat.
Brat and other Republicans admit getting what they want in the appropriations process won’t be easy since Senate rules require at least eight Democrats to approve any spending bills. But while Democrats can gum up the process, Brat is acutely aware that voters will not accept failure when it comes to fiscal discipline.
“We should compromise but we shouldn’t give away the store. In my view, the other side has given away the store too often. On our side, we need to clean up some of this, rearrange the (entitlement) programs so the kids get sustained benefits over their lifetimes. We’ve got to get the economy moving and some of that requires discipline,” said Brat.
“So our side gets hit hard but we need to step up to the plate and take it. That’s our job and the American people expect us to get it straight,” said Brat.
But what about Democrats alleging children will die as a result of the Trump budget? That allegation was especially targeted towards a proposed $800 billion in Medicaid cuts. Brat says that’s dishonest reporting of the facts.
“The Democrats call them cuts. They’re cuts from the baseline. Medicaid still keeps increasing. It just doesn’t increase at the pace it was going at, and that pace is bankrupting the country,” said Brat. “Lot of politics going on right now but not much substance offered by the other side. They’re great at hurling the insults but they’re short on the economic studies,” said Brat.
He also says White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney made it very clear how he want about finding places to cut in the Fiscal 2018 budget.
“He said, ‘Look, there’s no mystery. It’s just like running a business. You look at each of these programs one by one by one and you compare the benefits against the cost.’ He made it very clear the safety net is not in question,” said Brat.
Brat says Democrats and Republicans need to realize that calling for a trillion dollars in cuts is just the tip of the iceberg.
“Some on the left are giving us a hard time over trying to save a trillion dollars or so, but even if we save one trillion that leaves you with another hundred trillion dollar shortfall with Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, etc,” said Brat, who says failure to address the key entitlements will make 10-year spending cuts seem like loose change.
“Either you reform them and update them or else the kids get nothing. The left is acting like ‘draconian’ cuts are going to hurt people. Those cuts are nothing in comparison to the mandatory piece,” said Brat.
He says the clock is ticking loudly and time is short before entitlements engulf the entire budget.
“Those mandatory programs will account for 100 percent of all federal revenues in about 15 years. That’s not a typo. All federal revenues will be spent only on the mandatory. That means there’s no money for the military, transportation, running government,” said Brat.
With that kind of looming fiscal crisis, Brat says the only path forward is to get every able-bodied adult into the workforce, and that’s where tax reform and tax cuts come in. He says the demonizing of so-called supply side economics is bizarre.
“That term is used as a pejorative right now in D.C., supply-side tax cuts. I taught economics for 20 years. The demand side is all the people out there called consumers. The supply side is also everybody out there that works for a living in business. That’s the supply side,” said Brat.
He says it’s time for Washington to embrace the supply side again, since pumping up the demand side was a major flop.
“We’ve tried demand side stuff. We’ve had bailouts, etc. that pumped money back into people’s pockets. It gives you an instantaneous jolt, but if you’re serious about getting the economy growing you better incentivize business. Trump probably won the election on that,” said Brat.
Brat believes doing tax cuts and tax reform right will set the stage for economic growth, which is the best hope for avoiding fiscal disaster in the near future. He says tax cuts give businesses reason to hire, thereby beefing up the labor participation rate and bringing in more federal revenues through taxes.
“If we solve that one it’s huge,” said Brat. “I think a lot of the worries go away if we get this economy rolling again.”
Voter ID Irony Nails Dems, Ossoff Takes the Lead, Right Response to Terrorism
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America enjoy watching California Democrats fight over who won the election to be the next state party chairman, with supporters of the losing candidate alleging lax voter identification enforcement. They also wince as Jon Ossoff moves to a seven-point lead over Karen Handel in the special House race in Georgia. And they sigh as the Manchester terrorism attack elicits more generic calls for unity rather than identifying the obvious motivation for such heinous attacks.
Trump’s Terrorism Speech, Virginia Looking Blue, Trump & the Sword Dance
After offering an alternative explanation for why some graduates walked out of Vice President Mike Pence’s commencement speech at Notre Dame, Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud President Trump’s speech imploring Middle East leaders to do their part to stamp out terrorists. They also grimace as polling shows either Democrat running for governor in Virginia winning the general election by double digits. And they wonder what the Secret Service was thinking when they gave the green light to the elaborate sword dance in Saudi Arabia involving President Trump and members of his cabinet.
Trump & Intel, Dem Wage Hypocrisy, Mad Dog’s Cell Number
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss reports that President Trump revealed very sensitive intelligence during his meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. They also get a kick out of a lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee, alleging staffers weren’t paid the current minimum wage for their work in 2016. And they have some fun with the news that a published photo of President Trump’s bodyguard revealed the personal cell phone number of Defense Sec. James Mattis.
Crooked Dems Convicted, Trump & Loyalty, Did Trump Tape Comey?
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss the conviction of former Florida Rep. Corrine Brown on 18 counts of fleecing her own charity to fund her own activities and how she is the second Democrat convicted of fraud in the past year. They also wince as Kellyanne Conway tells Fox News that Trump expects the FBI director to be loyal to the administration. And they sigh as Trump tweets out the suggestion that he may have secretly recorded his earlier conversations with James Comey.
Why Comey Had to Go
While the media and politicians from both parties look for deeper reasons for President Trump’s firing of FBI Director James B. Comey, a former Justice Department official says the decision was long overdue and needed for obvious reasons.
Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Victoria Toensing says she and others in the the justice and law enforcement community urged Trump to dismiss Comey from day one.
“It just came too late, 109 days too late. Those of us in the swamp knew who the alligators were in the swamp, and we all tried to warn the White House and they didn’t listen to us,” said Toensing, who also served as a federal prosecutor.
And why did they implore Trump to fire him?
“Comey was a narcissist. It was all about Comey and he delighted in wanting to bring down powerful people if they were Republicans,” said Comey.
Toensing also points to how Comey, during his days as deputy attorney general in the George W. Bush administration, tapped his close friend, Patrick Fitzgerald to investigate the alleged exposing of a covert CIA operative.
That probe resulted in a criminal conviction for Lewis “Scooter” Libby, former chief of staff to former Vice President Dick Cheney. But that’s not who Fitzgerald really wanted.
“Throughout that investigation, Scooter’s lawyer was told consistently by the Fitzgerald people, ‘If you give up Dick Cheney, this will all go away.’ They were trying to bring down Dick Cheney, and you can bet your bottom dollar that Comey was talking with Fitzgerald while he was doing this,” said Toensing, who represents Libby in his quest for a presidential pardon.
On Tuesday, the Trump administration released its rationale for the Comey firing, focusing on his public announcement that no charges should be filed against Hillary Clinton in the wake of the FBI probe into her use of a private, unsecured server through which she sent and received classified information while she served as Secretary of State.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein accused Comey of usurping the authority of the attorney general in making such a pronouncement and for exposing Clinton’s misdeeds when he was effectively closing the investigation.
But Toensing says Comey made far more mistakes, starting with his repeated misstating of the statute in question. Comey insisted that intent to break the law was required to bring charges, while gross negligence is the standard laid out in federal law. She also savaged Comey for refusing to impanel a grand jury to probe Clinton and for allowing the same attorney to represent multiple witnesses in the case.
“That’s called a conflict of interest, because that lawyer can get all of her clients together and they can all read from the same music. You never do that,” said Toensing.
Toensing is also dismissing the intense reaction from Democrats, who she says are now appalled after calling for Comey’s head for months. She says the idea that Trump fired Comey because of the ongoing Russia investigation is ridiculous and so are any comparisons to Richard Nixon’s “Saturday Night Massacre.”
“In Watergate, there was a crime. There was a burglary. There was a break-in. What’s the crime here? What’s the crime? Do we have a crime? No, there’s no crime,” said Toensing, noting that Russian involvement in U.S. elections is nothing new.
“That’s been going on since Richard Nixon. Why is it all of a sudden an issue this time, just because Hillary lost? If Hillary had won, there would not be any inquiry into whatever the Russians did regarding this election process,” said Toensing.
Toensing is also upset with congressional Republicans, both for not doing more at recent hearings to point out that Russian interference in elections is not the same as collusion with the Trump campaign. She also says the past 24 hours show Democrats are far better at messaging than the GOP.
Finally, Toensing believes former New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly would be an ideal successor to Comey at the FBI and is someone who has worked for Republicans and Democrats.
“He is a lifetime career cop. That’s what we need at the FBI now to gain confidence,” said Toensing.
Democrat Disunity, Dean’s Free Speech Delusion, Honoring O’Beirne
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America get a kick out of the disunity on full display during the Democrats’ “Unity Tour,” as Bernie Sanders focuses on big government economic policies and the party leadership is still about identity politics. They also hammer Howard Dean for incorrectly citing three Supreme Court cases in arguing Ann Coulter’s speeches are not protected by the Constitution. And Jim pays tribute to his late National Review colleague, Kate O’Beirne.
Tea Party Cheers Nuking of Unprecedented “Partisan Filibuster”
Senate Republicans voted to end the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees Thursday after Democrats refused to advance the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to a final vote, a move grassroots conservatives say had to happen out of respect for the Constitution.
Republicans cited the precedent of Democrats from November 2013, when then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid led a rules change to kill the filibuster for lower court judicial nominees and executive branch personnel requiring confirmation.
The move came after a 55-45 vote to end debate on Gorsuch, five votes short of the 60 votes needed. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell then moved to consider the Gorsuch nomination under the rule change instituted by Democrats. His motion was denied, but McConnell then appealed the ruling of the chair and the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees was killed in a party line vote.
While Democrats call the move an attack on democracy, Tea Party Patriots Founder Jenny Beth Martin says it’s the Democrats who took an extreme position with their filibuster.
“When it comes to Supreme Court nominees, never in the history of our entire country have we had a partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee. It just hasn’t been done. What the Democrats are doing right now is breaking the tradition and the practice that we’ve had in this country for over 200 years,” said Martin, whose group has been aligned with the Judicial Crisis Network in pushing for the confirmation of Gorsuch.
The Tea Party Patriots are best known for advocating smaller government and lower taxes, but Martin says the Supreme Court fight is very much in her organization’s interest.
“We understand it is critically important that if we want to have constitutionally-limited government, then we have to have a Supreme Court that upholds the law and judges laws based on the Constitution,” said Martin.
She is convinced the Democrats don’t really have a case against Gorsuch but are still bitter over 2016.
“They are just frustrated that it’s not their person, that they lost the election in November, that it is President Trump who won the election and therefore won the ability to nominate Judge Gorsuch and they are doing all they can to resist what President Trump was elected to do,” said Martin.
Martin says the public is engaged on this issue and overwhelmingly in support of Gorsuch, but she says Democrats aren’t listening to all of their constituents.
“Democrat senators are listening to their base. They’re not listening to the whole of the American people, but they are listening to their base. So they are doing what they think their base wants them to do,” said Martin.
She believes the effort to filibuster Gorsuch will backfire on red state Democrats like Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., in 2018.
“She has said that this would be a very political maneuver if they filibustered Gorsuch. That’s what she’s doing and she’s doing it out of pure politics, not out of what’s best for the country,” said Martin.
“I know that it is a political job and the things the elected officials do they are going to look at things through the prism of politics. Sometimes you need to do what’s best for the country because you have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution for your country,” said Martin.
And Martin is firmly convinced fidelity to the Constitution will be a hallmark of Gorsuch’s time on the Supreme Court.
“He looks at the law and he respects the law as it’s written. He doesn’t intend to make law and create law out of whole cloth from the bench with his decisions, and he is going to look at the law through the prism of the Constitution,” said Martin.
With the filibuster nuked, a final Senate vote on Gorsuch is expected Friday evening.