Deplorables of Northern NY

Link

Seeman said he took issue with comments made in the group’s mission statement that its members feel “bullied” by the left. He does not believe progressive groups have been bullies.

Joe Seeman is referring to this comment from a David Vanscoy.

Link

The group was started by a “small group of patriots who are tired of being bullied into silence by the progressive left,” according to its mission statement.

David Vanscoy, founding member of the organization, said in an email the group was started also in response to the calls for impeachment. Nearly 500 people have followed the Facebook page in over a month.

“We are excited and eager to show our local communities that it’s OK, and your right, to stand up and push back on the lunacy the progressive left, backed by the media, tries to ram down our throats,” he said.

I'm happy to report that, having walked around a bit at the rally, no progressives were there bullying any of them and no one tried to ram lunacy down their throats. That would've been a relief because they were absolutely not being bullied into silence.

Great Letters That Are Not Mine

I'd love to take credit for either of them, though.

John Busteed

Apparently he had the same reaction to Hunter Sartwell's line about Elise Stefanik representing the Republican Party that I did.

Earlier this week, Hunter Sartwell stated that Rep. Elise Stefanik represented Republican values. I agree that she does. I spoke with the congresswoman’s office on Thursday (July 25) and Friday (July 26) to see if they had a statement on President Trump’s “Send Her Back” racist chant. Her office said they had no opinion on that. Though they did point out that they vehemently opposed the “Squad.” So it would appear that she supports Trump’s overt racism, a Republican value.

Catherine Fay Roberts 

Thank you, Ms. Roberts for the fractured fairy tale about Elise's brother.

Pinocchio writes to Congresswoman Stefanik, his secret sister, from an Adirondack safe-house. He is safe in the north. She will never sell him for pulpwood. She doesn't like to go there. People ask her questions. They put her on the spot. She prefers to lecture empty seats in the House of Representatives. She can read her script, look important, and be on C-Span!

Northern NY is about as rightwing as Alabama and Elise Stefanik will likely be re-elected. No sense in her being too comfortable, though. 

If It Walks Like A Racist...

Link

I'd encourage everyone to read Rep. Malinowski's resolution: "Condemning President Trump's racist comments directed at members of Congress." He wrote on Twitter, "Do we embrace President Reagan's vision of an America made stronger by immigrants and refugees, or President Trump's message of fear?" Rep. Stefanik has aligned with the current president in voting against the resolution and has smeared her fellow congresswomen as "far-left socialists." Handing out billions to farmers hurt by ill-advised tariffs seems socialist to me. The four-woman "Squad" is working to confront climate change, income inequality and inhumanity towards people who are simply seeking a better life. It's possible to disagree with their solutions without taunts. If Ms. Stefanik likes labels, she should try out demagogue wherever appropriate. Mr. Trump has lied about Rep. Omar's statements on al-Qaeda whom she has actually called evil and heinous. His followers are now chanting "send her back." Is there any concern about her safety in the GOP?

It's risible that the president presents himself as a champion for the Jewish people in this episode. Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL writes of the slurs against the four congresswomen that they are "ripped straight from a white supremacist manifesto" and "the charge that one can't possibly be accepted as a full-fledged member of society because of who you are is one that is all too familiar to Jews." Andrew Anglin of Daily Stormer writes of the tweets, "This is the kind of WHITE NATIONALISM we elected him for." For a non-racist, racists like him a lot. Oh, and despite this, no one has forgotten that he's trying to take away our health insurance. 

Greenblatt Link

Whistling Past the Concentration Camp

Link

Elise Stefanik took issue with fellow U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez referring to migrant detention camps on the country’s southern border as “concentration camps” last week.

Stefanik, R-Schuylerville, responded by tweeting about a Holocaust education act she co-introduced and saying the congresswoman from the Bronx needs to learn the history.

“I think that she needs to educate herself,” Stefanik said in a phone interview on Thursday. “That was something that I learned in school. I vividly remember reading Anne Frank’s diary in sixth grade. As we see these numbers moving globally with lack of education on the Holocaust … frankly it’s disappointing that clearly in this case the members of Congress themselves needs to be educated.”

Apparently AOC has "educated" herself. Pick up a dictionary, Elise!

While the most common use of “concentration camp” is in reference to the Nazi Germany-era camps where many people were executed, concentration camp is defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary as any place where “large numbers of people, especially political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities, are deliberately imprisoned in a relatively small area with inadequate facilities, sometimes to provide forced labor or to await mass execution.”

Many nations before and after Nazi Germany have run concentration camps.

Mea Culpa

My bad. Rep. Stefanik did come out with a statement critical of the president's notice that he is open to information from foreign sources. It is nearly identical to the FEC chair's. What is remarkable is that anyone has to point out the chief executive that it's illegal. So we can only hope ignorance of the law is not an excuse in 2020. It's reassuring to see our rep working to protect the sanctity of American elections.

No such sanctity for congressional oversight. Due to my inexperience with law, I didn't realize obeying subpoenas was optional. Failure to comply doesn't mean jail? The same article said our rep "voted against a procedure that would allow the Judiciary Committee to initiate or intervene in judicial proceedings to enforce subpoenas." Her rationale is "this resolution does little to strengthen congressional oversight." Enforcing subpoenas doesn't strengthen it?

She also says it "only furthers House Democrat’s pro-impeachment agenda." There is a minority of Democrats in the House calling for impeachment and Speaker Pelosi has continually tamped it down. I saw recently that Rep. Stefanik has read the Mueller report. She's not curious why the president put forth so much effort into obstructing the investigation into Russian interference in the election? Mr. Trump stated in the Stephanopoulos interview that Don McGahn lied to the grand jury. He resorted to insulting the interviewer when it was pointed out he did not answer Mueller's obstruction questions in his written responses. Seems like enough reason to compel Mr. McGahn to testify. Still time for Republican congress folks to get on the right side of history.

In Defense of Government Employees

I'm responding to Carl Thomas' entreaty to "forget Russia" and focus on the supposed treachery of Barack Obama who apparently spent 8 years trying to destroy the country. That's when he wasn't busy rescuing it from the Great Recession and giving access to healthcare to over 20 million Americans. And "collusion investigators were complicit including Mr. Mueller" in the treachery. Read the report. They didn't investigate collusion. So, who should I trust: Mueller or Trump? Robert Mueller rehabbed his knee in order to serve in Vietnam, directed the FBI after 9/11 and has been married to his wife for 53 years. One wife, same as Obama. Trump? The less said on all of these and more, the better.

In a recent interview, the president said "there's nothing wrong with listening" if the Russians offer help. His cleanup efforts say you still have to look at it. That's after the chair of the Federal Elections Commission released a statement, "It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election." It's illegal to look at it. The FBI director concurs.

Rep. Stefanik has legislation targeting Putin and his minions. Great! But, Trump is inviting all comers to the table and Sen. McConnell is killing any legislation in the Senate designed to protect elections. In addition, there are a large number of people trotting out Deep State conspiracy nonsense about government employees, including former heads of FBI and CIA. I'd gladly match the patriotism and dedication of any of them against our president. Let's extend that to journalists, as well. Your silence implies agreement, congresswoman.

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