I Hope You Know That This Too Will Go Down On Your Permanent Record

Link

Our Elise really has become one of the brighter stars in the Trump universe. I really can’t wait to see how it all shakes out.

U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-Schuylerville, has been named to President Donald Trump’s Impeachment Defense Team, according to a news release issued on the eve of the start of the Senate trial.

I Hope You Know That This Will Go Down On Your Permanent Record

Link

U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik is one of six New Yorkers, including four members of Congress, who have been selected honorary state chairs for President Donald Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign.

We'll see how well that ages.

Stefanik on Barr

Because my rep values my opinion so much. 

Link

Awhile back, Rep. Stefanik signed off on a letter to Rep. Schiff that, "your actions ... are incompatible with your duty of Chairman of this committee" and "we have no faith in your ability to discharge your duties in a manner consistent with your Constitutional responsibility and urge your immediate resignation as Chairman."

More recently, she released a statement on the Mueller report, "AG Barr was clear that the process was completed with a high degree of transparency, no executive privilege, limited redactions and resulted in a report of no collusion." Read the report. Collusion is a cliche, not a crime.

During AG Barr's testimony to the Senate, he told Sen. Harris that he'd made the call of no obstruction without looking at underlying evidence and based on the Mueller report which didn't make a determination one way or the other. He also couldn't say whether the White House had suggested investigations for the DOJ to engage in because he was "grappling" with the meaning of the word "suggest." He also couldn't say if campaigns should report foreign interference when they see it. The cherry on top is that, in his opinion, a president can shut down an investigation into himself if he feels he's being falsely accused.

In late March, Mueller wrote to Barr that his summary letter "did not capture the context, nature and substance of this office's work and conclusions." And that it "threatens to undermine ... full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations." Yet, on April 10 Barr told Sen. Van Hollen, "I don't know whether Bob Mueller supported my conclusion." I'm curious if our congresswoman has faith in William Barr discharging his duties in a manner consistent with the Constitution.

She's such a hack. She was in the paper today, too.

“I have read the report which found that there was no conspiracy or collusion. However, the report is extremely clear that Russia did attempt to meddle in our elections and that cannot be ignored,” she said in a follow-up email.

And

When asked to comment about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s’ comment that Barr had lied during his testimony to Congress, she said she did not see the testimony because she had committee hearings that day.

Stefanik said she did not reach any conclusions from the report different from what Barr said in his summary letter.

Link

Complete Schiff Response to Republican Quislings

Link

“My colleagues might think it’s OK that the Russians offered dirt on the Democratic candidate for president as part of what’s described as the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign. You might think that’s OK.

“My colleagues might think it’s OK that when that was offered to the son of the president, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the president’s son did not call the FBI; he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help – no, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help with the Russians.

“You might think it’s OK that he took that meeting. You might think it’s OK that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience running campaigns, also took that meeting. You might think it’s OK that the president’s son-in-law also took that meeting. You might think it’s OK that they concealed it from the public. You might think it’s OK that their only disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary Clinton wasn’t better. You might think that’s OK.

“You might think it’s OK that when it was discovered, a year later, that they then lied about that meeting and said that it was about adoptions. You might think that it’s OK that it was reported that the president helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s OK. I don’t.

“You might think it’s OK that the campaign chairman of a presidential campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian oligarch in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s OK, I don’t.

“You might think it’s OK that that campaign chairman offered polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s OK.

“You might think it’s OK that the president himself called on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, if they were listening. You might think it’s OK that later that day, in fact, the Russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s OK.

“You might think it’s OK that the president’s son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communication with the Russians through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s OK.

“You might think it’s OK that an associate of the president made direct contact with the GRU through Guccifer 2.0 and WikiLeaks, that is considered a hostile intelligence agency. You might think it’s OK that a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile intelligence agency had to say in terms of dirt on his opponent.

“You might think it’s OK that the national security adviser designate secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador about undermining U.S. sanctions, and you might think it’s OK that he lied about it to the FBI.

“You might say that’s all OK, that’s just what you need to do to win. But I don’t think it’s OK. I don’t think it’s OK. I think it’s immoral, I think it’s unethical, I think it’s unpatriotic and, yes, I think it’s corrupt – and evidence of collusion.”

“Now I have always said that the question of whether this amounts to proof of conspiracy was another matter. Whether the special counsel could prove beyond a reasonable doubt the proof of that crime would be up to the special counsel, and I would accept his decision, and I do. He’s a good and honorable man, and he is a good prosecutor.

“But I do not think that conduct, criminal or not, is OK. And the day we do think that’s OK is the day we will look back and say that is the day that America lost its way.”

“And I will tell you one more thing that is apropos of the hearing today: I don’t think it’s OK that during a presidential campaign Mr. Trump sought the Kremlin’s help to consummate a real estate deal in Moscow that would make him a fortune – according to the special counsel, hundreds of millions of dollars. I don’t think it’s OK to conceal it from the public. I don’t think it’s OK that he advocated a new and more favorable policy towards the Russians even as he was seeking the Russians’ help, the Kremlin’s help to make money. I don’t think it’s OK that his attorney lied to our committee. There is a different word for that than collusion, and it’s called ‘compromise.’

“And that is the subject of our hearing today.”

And one of those quislings is my own rep. Rep. Stefanik. We are so proud of her. 

Leonardo Crows

Leonardo Alcivar in today's PS does a touchdown dance, or possibly the nihilist victory dance, over the bucks Elise is raking in from sources like John Bolton (10 grand) and another 10 grand from a Fraternity and Sorority PAC that they have no idea why they received it.

In Comments, I'll be sure to report back if he responds:

“The Democratic candidates’ embarrassing fundraising numbers speak for themselves,”

Leonardo, if you open up the Good Book to Judges you can read about a plucky shepherd boy who smote a Philistine giant. Since you may not be familiar with the story, tell Elise to keep her head down. Oops, she already does.

“The Stefanik campaign is proud to have earned such overwhelming financial and grassroots support across every county in our District, and beyond,”

I don't think "grassroots" means what you think it means. Being funded by Paul Ryan, Devin Nunes, John Bolton, Adelson, Singer and the Koch's is not the definition.

I'm sure Stefanik will still be better funded. After June 26th, there'll be one Democratic opponent and the donations from Dems will go to that candidate. You know, grassroots donations. The kind from within the 21st district.

Great Letters That Are Not Mine

The first is from Nicole Clark who demonstrates that Elise Stefanik is well-versed in tautologies.

To the dismay of many, this week Elise Stefanik continued her practice of providing slick, non-answers to constituent questions. For example, at Thursday’s “coffee” in South Glens Falls, when Michele Davis asked her to clarify her position on universal background checks and gun violence, she emphasized that “these horrific crimes (in Parkland, Las Vegas, etc.) are by people who have broken the law.” Notably, she ignored the fact that both the Parkland and Las Vegas murderers legally purchased their military-style weapons before killing throngs of people. 

Sara Schaff pointing out that our congresswoman may not be up to the job.

No one is asking her to "disagree" with Trump. Our love of our families, neighbors and country is far bigger than that. It's the kind of love that demands our elected officials stand up for a democracy under threat from an incompetent, incurious, bigoted, easily-bored, lying, narcissistic bully.

If Ms. Stefanik is not willing to do that, she doesn't deserve the job we pay her to do.

Julie Wash reminding us that Elise's ethics are essentially the same as Trump's and the rest of the elected members of the Republican Party. 

I appreciate the congresswoman's honesty to tell me face-to-face that she has no personal standards of integrity when it comes to fundraising off a self-proclaimed sexual abuser. Basically, if it wins the GOP the White House, Stefanik's professional integrity takes a back seat to a party that nominates and confirms a known abuser who riles the basest instincts in voters.

In Defense of Elise Stefanik

I did this once before. Don't remember what the situation was, but I believe the Stefanik may, at some point, ask me to stop defending her. Here's a link to the Dylan Ratigan piece.

     I'm writing to defend Elise Stefanik from the charges made by Dylan Ratigan.  He said, "My number one problem with Rep. Stefanik is that she's a career politician and she's part of the system." First, that’s just meaningless cliches. Second, I don't believe she is a career politician. Before coming back to the district, long enough to get elected to Congress, she was a gofer in the Bush Junior White House. She's been in Congress for only 3 years. Third, it presupposes that there's something wrong with being a politician with experience. I'm getting a hip replacement in a couple of months. I'm not looking at my doctor and saying, "I don't want him operating, he's a career surgeon!" Not being a career politician was supposed to be a selling point for Donald Trump's election. How's that working out? The White House running pretty smoothly? Like them or don't, politicians like Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell know how to get things done.

     I don't like hearing nonsense attacks from Republicans. I like them even less from Democrats. One of the reasons I'm supporting Tedra Cobb is because she has been involved in politics. She won an election to the St. Lawrence County Legislature. She has served in government. If elected, she has more maturity than Ms. Stefanik did going in. I like prepared people. Mr. Ratigan has run a business and has been on CNBC. Those qualifications are pretty similar to what Mr. Trump had going for him. He needs to explain how those prepare him for the US Congress. I have problems with our rep, as regular readers will attest. I can tell you what they are without making ad hominem attacks on her, though. Her opponent should be able to as well.

More Thoughts and Prayers from Elise

I'm still curious as to whether our congresswoman is actually praying or not. I can guarantee you I am praying very hard that she gets shown the door in November.

When asked about the high number of Facebook comments regarding the shooting on her page, Stefanik, through her spokesman Tom Flanagin, responded by email: “The news of this devastating shooting is heartbreaking and the thoughts and prayers of our nation are with the families impacted in Parkland, Florida. In the coming days, we will learn more about how this happened and hopefully how we can work to prevent something like this from happening again. Right now, we pray for those who lost their lives and those who were hurt by this tragedy, and we thank the first responders and law enforcement officers who worked heroically to save lives.”

Pat Tuz is not running, but I love her and lots of good people are anyway. We're up to 10 contenders now with the latest being someone named Dylan Ratigan from CNBC. Pat Tuz:

 “As long as Elise Stefanik, her boss Paul Ryan and many others in Congress are funded by the National Rifle Association, we will not have any necessary and meaningful federal legislation that works to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people,” said Pat Tuz of New Yorkers’ Against Gun Violence, Saratoga Springs. “We’ve had how many school shootings this year, but, how many of them have been in NY? That’s because New York with the SAFE ACT has a ban on assault weapons, limited capacity magazines, a good pistol permit law and background checks.”

The amount Stefanik has taken from NRA ghouls is relatively small. And good for Dan Donovan for taking nothing. It's still a matter of how do you vote. Do you vote in lockstep to avoid a primary opponent?

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan ranked No. 64 out of 532 in the 2016 campaign contributions from the National Rifle Association with $61,401; U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-Willsboro, ranked 225 with $7,179.

In that same campaign contribution cycle, 14 Democratic representatives from New York took no funding from the NRA, along with one New York Republican, Dan Donovan, NY-11.

Elise Votes to Release Memo

The quiet woman votes to release memo.

North Country Rep. Elise Stefanik voted in favor of releasing a controversial memo compiled by the House Intelligence committee's Republican majority.

For the record. 

Notes From the Candidates' Debate

Eight of the contenders to go up against Rep. Stefanik in November met on Sunday in South Glens Falls. These were the Democrats. Russ Finley (R) was missing due to a medical emergency that involved his mother. Steve Schibbe (R) has not been seen in action, to my knowledge, since announcing he was running. Chris Schmidt (Libertarian) hasn't been seen much either. I assume he was invited. The two Green candidates promised by Green Party boss, Matt Funiciello, have yet to be named or spotted.

After eight congressional candidates, hoping to unseat U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-Willsboro, responded to questions for nearly three hours during the NY-21 Congressional Candidates Forum in South Glens Falls on Sunday, Democrat Tedra Cobb emerged as the frontrunner from a straw poll of 176 attendees.

The event at the Moreau Community Center drew nearly 200 who, by a show of hands, indicated they were there to learn more about the candidates and their platforms.

It was indeed a packed house. I'm really impressed that so many turned out on a Sunday when there are football playoffs on and it was freaking cold. The straw poll that was taken allowed attendees to vote for 3 candidates. the results shook out as:

Of those hoping to compete in the Democratic Primary:

Tedra Cobb, 23 %

Patrick Nelson, 17%

Emily Martz, 14 %

Tanya Boone, 12 %

Ronald Kim, 10%

Don Boyajian, 9%

Katie Wilson, 7%

Sara Idleman  7%

I'm pretty happy with that order of finish. Had a hard time narrowing my choices down from 5 to 3. First, I'll say there were no candidates that I wouldn't be happy to support in November. Ron Kim, Don Boyajian and Sara Idleman were the 3 that I eliminated just for the reason that they didn't excite me in any way. Sara just entered the race in the last week or so and I don't understand why with 7 very good people running already. 

Patrick is the flip side. I believe he's been running since the day after the election last November. He's a great speaker and very bright and knowledgeable. I'd have a hard time choosing between him and Tedra because all those factors apply to her as well. Emily was my favorite going in and I still like her a lot. If I was ordering that list I'd move Katie Wilson up to fifth. Tanya Boone was also well spoken and impressive. 

Really any of the top four finishers would be a wonderful candidate. I'm looking forward to maybe making it to another forum or two. It's unfortunate that the 21st district encompasses most of northern NY. It would be great to get the number of folks running whittled down to a more reasonable number. It's great that there is such interest in running, tho. 

One thing that thrills me is that they are all very legit residents of the district and have been for eons. In 2014, Bill Owens who was the Democratic rep for our district did a late dropout and left Dems scrambling. Aaron Woolf was recruited to run and had loose ties to the area. This was Stefanik's first race and she had loose ties as well. She grew up in Westport, left at 18 and never looked back until she wanted to run for Congress. (Well, what about Hillary?) Sorry, I just always expect to hear that. Anyway, the Dems ran Mike Derrick in 2016 and he was career military so not having ties to the 21st could be excused. In any case, he was not a scintillating candidate. Tedra Cobb is. 

Here's an article from the Wash Po about the interest in running nationwide. It could be worse. According to the article, there are 17 Dems registered to compete for the right to take on Scott Walker. Here was some really great news from it. There are also what sound like some high quality folks wanting to take on John Faso in the district below mine. 

“No party has ever lost an election because of too much energy or too much momentum,” said Rep. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), who leads the House Democratic election effort. “It’s a challenge, but it’s a challenge that we welcome.”

In other races, the crowds are notable not just for their size, but for the résumés and fundraising of the contenders. Democrats are arguing less about policy than about who has the strongest biography to present against the incumbent.

In New York’s 19th District, a competitive slice of the Hudson Valley held by Rep. John Faso (R-N.Y.), six Democrats are running, including two graduates of Harvard Law School, an Iraq War veteran who graduated from Georgetown and the U.S. Military Academy, a former CIA officer who became a schoolteacher, and a wealthy businessman who has loaned his campaign $500,000.

Three of them boast of supporting Medicare for All on their campaign websites; two have raised more money than the incumbent.

A Happy New Year LTTE

Actually, it had nothing to do with New Year's Day. Didn't have a good title. Out of practice. Maybe it's Happy New year to Elise. It'll be a very happy one if she's on her way out of office come the next one. 

I'd like to express a bravo and a boo for Rep. Stefanik. Thumbs up for the vote against the tax heist bill. Some cynics have suggested she might've gotten a hall pass because there were more than enough votes to pass it. In the spirit of the season, I'll concede that her concern over the state and local deductions was genuine. It would've been nice if she had been similarly disturbed by the damage being done to the ACA by the elimination of the individual mandate. I suppose that's a little boo for the sin of omission.

The bigger boo is for her vote against transparency back in March. The Democrats were pushing a bill to force the release of President Trump's taxes. He has said this tax bill will cost him "a fortune." From what I've read, there are many sweet perks in it that seem almost designed for him and his business. It would be nice to know for sure and not have to take his word for it.

Useful Idiots for the 21st Century

I seems like the only posts I've been putting up are LTTEs and I haven't been writing many of those. In any case, a letter to the editor in rough draft and associated links.

UPDATED: And new and improved(?)

     The Russians took actions to influence last November's election. That is a fact. Today I saw this posted on Facebook. "If liberal politicians treat the people this poorly when we're armed to the teeth, just imagine what they'll do once they've taken away your guns." In basic training, I was warned to beware of rumors and propaganda. I don't know the source of this meme, but it looks exactly like the products of Russian trolls recently released. Leaving aside the not so subtle threat to liberal politicians, are there folks "sharing" this who can't recognize propaganda when they see it?
     "What we're talking about is the beginning of cyber warfare. What we're talking about is a major foreign power with sophistication and ability to involve themselves in a presidential election and sow conflict and discontent all over this country" (Sen. Dianne Feinstein). "The strategy is to take a crack in our society and turn it into a chasm" (Sen. Angus King). They're both on Senate Intelligence and are investigating an adversary attacking us. Is it really necessary to help spread divisive material on the internet? I've struggled, but can't find a more appropriate term than the classic useful idiot.
     House Intelligence feels their time better served examining the sale of Uranium One to a company owned by Russians. Naturally, this conspiracy theory involves Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Lately, I've seen iterations that work in Robert Mueller. When nothing is found, we the people deserve a full report. The president should get one too so he can move onto another flight of fancy. 

WP Editorial 

David Ignatius 

Craig Timberg 

House Uranium 

Maybe They're Just Big Fans

Apparently some scoundrel is registering domain names in hopes of, I don't know, cashing in on my rep running for senate or president? Of course, in the Age of Trump speculation takes precedent over any actual facts. This is Stefanik spokesman Lenny Alcivar.

“Desperate attempts from desperate candidates and their partisan allies to smear Elise with false political attacks are not new,” he said. “Congresswoman Stefanik ran on always placing the people of the 21st District first. That is why, in the face of similarly false attacks from previous political opponents, our district has overwhelmingly supported the congresswoman’s bipartisan record of real results, it is why she recently won re-election by over 30 points, and it is why she will continue her fight for every family and every small business across the North Country.”

First, what happened to Tom Flanagin or how many spokesmen does a representative to Congress need? A few, I suppose, if you never actually say anything yourself. In the spirit of random hypothesizing I left this comment.

Alcivar has no evidence at all that Democrats registered those names yet he goes on a riff slamming them in true Trump style. Just make stuff up.

Since that's the way he wants to play. Maybe Russian trolls registered those domain names since they're so closely allied with the Republican Party now. Could be.

Another possibility that occurs to me is that her camp or fans of hers are registering these domain names in order to stir up talk of her running for these offices. 

Representative Cheerleader

So here's Rep Stefanik giving an attaboy to burning more coal.

U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik, whose northern New York district includes the Adirondack Park, has a nuanced response to the Trump administration canceling the Clean Power Plan, which would have reduced emissions from coal-fired power plants.

The Republican from Willsboro never supported the Clean Power Plan because it was started on President Barack Obama’s executive authority rather than by Congress.

“When Congress is circumvented in the process, the policy can easily be undone from one administration to the other,” Stefanik’s spokesman, Tom Flanagin, wrote in an email Thursday. “Congress, not federal bureaucrats, should set our national energy policy.”

Now Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency plans to scrap the Clean Power Plan to protect coal production, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said earlier this week. The plan was never enacted; a court blocked it shortly after Obama announced it.

A nuanced response is a lot more than we normally get from her. Apparently, laws passed and signed by the president are also easily undone from one administration to another. 

Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-Willsboro, issued the following statement on Thursday supporting President Trump’s executive order to expand choice in health care for families and businesses:

“Families and businesses in my district, deserve more choice in healthcare, and I applaud these efforts to lower costs,” Stefanik said. “Allowing employers to pool together and purchase insurance across state lines is commonsense and will allow more people to access affordable coverage. I will continue to work in Congress on bipartisan healthcare solutions to help lower costs, increase access and improve quality.”

So, the last letter ended up in the "letters I've written never meaning to send category." This one is sent. 

    It's not surprising to see Rep. Stefanik praising President Trump for ridding us of President Obama's evil executive order attempting to regulate coal burning. While Obama wasn't able to get that passed in Congress, he was able to get ACA passed. It seems a little hypocritical for our congresswoman to then extol Trump for an executive order undermining this established law. Having failed to "repeal and replace," the GOP is embracing the Samson option. Steve Bannon, a few days ago, "Not gonna make the CSR payments. Gonna blow that thing up, gonna blow those exchanges up, right?"

     "Allowing employers to pool together and purchase insurance across state lines is commonsense and will allow more people to access affordable coverage," from Stefanik statement. That means loosening laws on association health plans that will allow the skirting of the essential health benefits required under ACA. Commonsense is enabling insurers to choose the states with the most lenient regulations, I suppose. The insurance market won't work when the healthy and the sick self-select into their own respective niches and policies are not subject to regulation. That's the beginning of the race to the bottom.

     In 1992, there were plans such as these, referred to as multiple employer welfare arrangements (MEWAs).  They "left at least 398,000 participants and their beneficiaries with more than $123 million in unpaid claims between January 1988 and June 1991" (Washington Post). "MEWAs have proven to be a source of regulatory confusion, enforcement problems and, in some instances, fraud." (GAO). It's not much of a shock to see them promulgated 25 years later by the man who was successfully sued for Trump University. It is disheartening to see our representative giving him thumbs up for doing so, though.  

Defending Venomous Attacks

This will be in response to this letter which I'll just post the beginning of. that's really the apropos part.

Nearly every morning, as predicted, there is a venomous attack against our president or our congresswoman. It’s getting old. This paper has made a clear choice between being a journalistic-based or politically-based organization. Unfortunately, they have chosen to be political, much like most media outlets today.

So, this is my venomous attack on him.

    I'm responding to Harrison Francett's letter attacking the Post Star because "Nearly every morning there is a venomous attack against our president or our congresswoman. It's getting old." Since it's so frequent, it seems examples would've been easy to come by, but alas, not a one. What are really getting old are the venomous attacks on our daily paper, here and there, as "liberal media" without providing any basis for that. If there's an article or op-ed you find unfair write a letter about it.

     In that same day's paper, Rep. Stefanik "did not state her views on DACA specifically." There was some boilerplate from her spokesman about fixing immigration. No real opinion. Lots of us have a problem with the no comment thing. Chuck Schumer and Andrew Cuomo have given opinions on DACA, even if you don't agree with them. Most Congress people, even Republicans, have held more than one town hall since January. If enough upstate folks share Mr. Francett's view that she's approachable and independent then she'll be re-elected next November. As a reminder, the Post Star did endorse her re-election last year.

     Also in that day's paper was an article reporting that "staunch 'resist' Democrat" Schumer, along with Nancy Pelosi, had teamed up with President Trump to raise the debt limit. Maybe the president can work with Democrats to get an immigration bill since Congressional Republicans seem incapable of governing. Is it a venomous attack to report that Trump is making agreements with Chuck and Nancy? Probably in some circles.

If there's an edition of the Post Star that makes venomous attacks on Trump and Stefanik nearly every morning then I'm receiving the wrong one. 

Jimmy Carter V. Lester Maddox

I shared this with my congresswoman.

I know Elise has a very low opinion of Barack Obama as president. Four on a scale of 1 to 10? Really? I can only assume she has at least an equally low opinion of Jimmy Carter. BTW, real historians, like Douglas Brinkley who wrote the article, give Obama 12th place overall among presidents. Sounds better than 4 out of 10. Read about how a courageous man faces down racism in 1971 and doesn't kowtow to bigots.

Thought I'd put it up here, too.

Of all the many slimy things Donald Trump has done, his coddling of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke ranks among the most vile and degenerate.

Gonna read it now, aren't you?

Tracking Elise

Not in a stalking way. Turns out she has a Trump score of 92.5%. Tea Party, Freedom Caucus wingnut Mark Sanford only clocked in a 85%. Congrats congresswoman!

Must See TV

Latest letter to the Post Star in response to Elise's mouthpiece. 

I want to join Tom Flanagin in urging people to watch the Plattsburgh town hall with Rep. Stefanik at Mountain Lake PBS' website. It’s a good opportunity to see her between now and next year's campaign ads. Debates, who knows? There are two additional reasons, though.

The first is it disproves the notion that her constituents are going to go on a rampage if she holds one. I was a lucky attendee and can attest that there may have been a few groans but definitely no pitchforks. Understandably, health care is an emotional issue. So watch for the audio/visual evidence disproving that old saw.

The second reason is to see the gentleman questioning her at a little over an hour and eight minutes in. He points out that she had seven opportunities to sign onto a bill forcing President Trump to release his taxes. She responds she's "called on the president to release his taxes" and other obfuscations. The questioner persists by asking whether she'd vote for tax cuts without knowing how it would affect Trump. She stuck to the "calls for the president to release his taxes." I don't think that's going to work. No matter how many times she asks. Or, for that matter, how many times she's asked why she wouldn't vote to force the release of them. Are checks and balances about giving aid and comfort to the White House? I don't think she'll answer that either.

Next Challenger For Congress

Emily Martz, who I believe is number four.

Professionally, since her graduation from Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts with a bachelor’s degree in history and a minor in political science, her journey has spanned each coast and several elements of the evolving modern economy.

She worked in financial services and economic development in the Pacific Northwest as well as the Northeast, for companies such as Prudential Insurance, Putnam Investments and The Hartford. She pursued graduate studies in history, with a focus on the mutual fund industry, at the University of Delaware while also instructing business, economics and history courses at Paul Smith’s College. And she helped to lead the Adirondack North Country Association’s job-creation and sustainable development efforts before she recently resigned, on amicable terms, from her posts as ANCA’s deputy director and director of operations and finance to run as a candidate full-time. She also resigned as a volunteer on the Saranac Lake Downtown Advisory Board to run for Congress.

She sounds great as do all of them really. Patrick Nelson has been out campaigning forever it seems. Looking forward to the primary. 

Courtesy of Elise's FB Page

Can't believe how much great stuff is shared on my wingnut rep's FB page. Apparently someone went all Secret Agent Man Devin Nunes at a meeting Rep. Sally from Arizona had with some bankers.

McSally complained that President Donald Trump and his tweets were creating troubling "distractions" and "it's basically being taken out on me. Any Republican member of Congress, you are going down with the ship. And we're going to hand the gavel to Pelosi in 2018, they only need 28 seats and the path to that gavel being handed over is through my seat. And right now, it doesn't matter that it's me, it doesn't matter what I've done. I have an 'R' next to my name and right now, this environment would have me not prevail."

Admittedly, McSally was making these comments as she was asking the bankers to open their checkbooks for her reelection campaign, so it could well be that she was just doing the ol' fear-mongering-for-dollars act. 

Wonder if Elise is running around with the same spiel. I loved that 5 members of the Indivisible group got tickets to the talk, but then 4 were revoked. Oops, they missed one.

But the fifth member (whose identity The Skinny is not privy to) did manage to appear bankerly enough to crash the party—and the spy recorded McSally's entire speech for the Randall's group, and from there, it fell into our hands.

Yes, I believe she has a lot of Stefanik in her.

Randall says she's still hoping McSally will do some open town halls in Tucson so her group won't have to resort to subterfuge to try to find out her positions.

"I'm pretty angry that she was willing to talk to out-of-district bankers but she's not willing to talk to us," Randall said.

All we are saying is give town halls a chance.