"Steal what you can and burn the rest down on the way out."

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo: 

I think there’s a decent chance Mitch McConnell suckered President Trump into canceling stimulus bill negotiations. The GOP looks to be shifting into bust out mode. McConnell and other party leaders likely see that Trump is finished and that the Senate majority probably is too. The cynical play is straightforward: pocket the Court seat and leave an incoming Biden administration in as deep a hole as possible. It even cues Republicans up to switch seamlessly back into austerity/fiscal scold mode in 2021, without their fingerprints on any more stimulus spending. Little discussed here is Trump’s assertion that leaving stimulus negotiations until after the election will clear the calendar to focus on confirming Amy Coney Barrett. Of course it will. That seems to be the point.

Normally it would be reasonable to ask whether anyone really thinks that cynically about governance. With Mitch McConnell not only do we know he thinks that cynically he actually acted this cynically under Barack Obama. We have a track record.

President Trump’s defeat already looks increasingly likely. Not only foreclosing the possibility of any additional relief but owning that decision publicly is the political equivalent of taking a hammer to your own head. Trump campaign advisors who spoke to reporters off the record last night were apoplectic. The stock market tanked. This is likely why by mid-evening Trump was back on Twitter demanding Nancy Pelosi agree to more deals and more spending.

It is no accident that we haven’t seen the President speak live on camera since his COVID diagnosis. It is hard to distinguish the President’s current state of mind from his baseline antic, mercurial nature. But much of what has happened over the last three days resembles a fairly typical manic episode and mania is a relatively common side effect of the steroid medication he was given as part of his COVID treatment. His Twitter feed is increasingly difficult to distinguish from Kanye West’s. Whatever the clinical effects of these medications, it is likely and would be unsurprising that the events of the last week – the failed debate, a life-threatening medical diagnosis and difficulty breathing – affected the President’s mental state. How could it not?

But don’t take your eyes off this broader calculus – one separate from Trump, his state of mind, one that is above all rational. Yes, everyone should give their 110%. Everybody get out to vote. The stakes for a second Trump term are too high to take anything for granted. But for those gaming out their own moves and post-January realities, Trump’s defeat is starting to look very likely. Under normal circumstances that would lead congressional Republicans to cut Trump loose and pitch their reelection as a check on the power of a Democratic President. That would be a great card to play for a number of endangered Republican Senators at the moment. But it’s all but impossible since loyalty to Trump is now the centerpiece of Republican identity. And any move away from him would trigger a fatal backlash.

So look for more signs of this bust out scenario. Steal what you can and burn the rest down on the way out.

The Germans have a word for this face.

Backpfeifengesicht



Hands off our Social Security, Moscow Mitch. You gave away millions to the rich and to the corporations but always turn around and blame Social Security for everything.

The only ones entitled here are the Republican a*holes in office

Because of course the Republicans went for the 'entitlements' (which is their term and NOT TRUE). We knew this was coming from the start of Trump's presidency. 

McConnell Blames Entitlements, Not GOP, for Rising Deficits

While laughing maniacally

When in doubt

Blame Obama.

No sense of shame

The next two years.... and maybe more.

A note to Senator McConnell

Federal employees are Americans. They pay taxes. And they vote.

Steve Benen clarifies it all

The reason why incoherence is a deliberate strategy to deal with Obama:

I've been trying to think of a way to explain this in a way Mitch McConnell would understand. As 2009 got underway, Republicans had left two huge messes related to the economy: 1) a nearly-catastrophic recession and unemployment crisis; 2) a budget mess, including a $1.3 trillion deficit and $10 trillion debt. Both problems were simply left for the Obama administration to clean up.

The economic question of 2009 was which problem would be addressed first, but there was a catch that went largely unstated. Whichever mess policymakers chose to clean up first would necessarily make the other mess worse. It was simply unavoidable -- investing in a recovery would increase the deficit; lowering the deficit would take money out of the economy and exacerbate the recession.

Questions of sincerity notwithstanding, it was the main difference between the Democratic and Republican approaches to the economy -- Dems wanted to focus on one of the messes Republicans created (growth and jobs); the GOP wanted to focus on the other (deficit and debt).

That is, it would be the difference if lawmakers like McConnell approached governing with even the slightest bit of seriousness. Notice in his response that there's nothing even approach coherence -- he wants Obama to spend less, and more. He wants the administration to take on a larger role, and smaller. He wants the White House to care more about debt reduction, and less. He wants the president to prioritize investing in job creation, and to stop prioritizing investing in job creation.

Why anyone could take such policy gibberish seriously is a mystery to me.

They do it because it works. We are now celebrating the Era of Stupid and the stupids vote.

Mitch McConnell's office is responsible for the attacks on the 12 year old?

Senator Mitch McConnell:



I am so sorry! I mean:



Think Progress:

Mounting evidence suggests that the right-wing smear campaign may have been orchestrated by a staffer in Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) office.

First, ABC News reported earlier this week that a staffer in Sen. Harry Reid’s (D-NV) office received an email that was not intended for him. The email from a “Senate Republican leadership aide” showed the minority leader’s office was intently tracking the smear campaign well before it had gained widespread attention:

“This is a perverse distraction from the issue at hand,” said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid, D-Nev. “Instead of debating the merits of providing health care to children, some in GOP leadership and their right-wing friends would rather attack a 12-year-old boy and his sister who were in a horrific car accident.”

Manley cited an e-mail sent to reporters by a Senate Republican leadership aide, summing up recent blog traffic about the boy’s family. A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., declined to comment on Manley’s charge that GOP aides were complicit in spreading disparaging information about Frosts.

Today, the New York Times adds more to the story, reporting that Sen. McConnell’s office was preparing to issue a press release to attack the Frost family, but pulled back once the progressive blogosphere revealed the malicious campaign...

Update: Yes.

Update 10/16: Wild backpedaling by the McConnell staffer. Watch out for the blowback.

Christy Hardin Smith of Firedoglake:

So, let’s see. We have a senior aide to the Senate Minority Leader fronting out information about a 12 year old and his family that he failed to independently verify in order to smear the family in a political ends justifies the means effort to spike the legislation on SCHIP? Nice operation you have there, Mitch. Classy.

What I’m hearing through the rumor grapevine: There is some substantial anger among conservative bloggers at being left to hold this festering turd of a strategy for McConnell’s office — so much so that I heard yesterday that a couple of the bigger bloggers are considering actively working against McConnell’s re-election. This could get interesting.

Update: Think Progress has the YouTube of McConnell lying about his office's involvement.

What just happened in the Senate

After their all night pajama party?

Read Spencer Ackerman at TPM Cafe:

1. Procedurally, what's next for Reid? What various options does he have?

The problem for Reid right now is this: How can he get the Reed-Levin proposal on redeployment, his chosen way of ending the war, to a vote, now that it's been revealed yet again that the GOP has the votes necessary to block it? What legislative vehicles are available to him?

At the Dems' post-vote press conference, Reid said that he's "not tipping my mitt" by answering the question. But leadership staffers acknowledge that there are really only three courses of action open to Reid going forward:

A) Keep them attached to the defense authorization bill. Reid voted against the bill today in order to reserve the right to bring defense authorization to the floor again later. But obviously, as a senior leadership aide conceded to me, this course would just replay today's blocked cloture vote unless the GOP agreed not to block it again, which is an open question.

B) Attach the amendment to the upcoming defense appropriations bill, and reintroduce it that way. The GOP might filibuster again, and the same game would start. This time, each side would try and blame the other for blocking the year's half-trillion-dollars of Pentagon funding.

C) Introduce the amendment as a free-standing bill. This would be a potentially even tougher road to follow, because there's no larger Defense-funding measure to accuse Republicans of opposing. Furthermore, Democrats uncomfortable with a mandated timeline for redeployment, like Nebraska's Ben Nelson, could balk for the same reason.

Reid indicated at the presser that the most likely vehicle for Levin-Reed is going to stay with the defense authorization. "There are two things that I want to accomplish," he said. "One is to pass a defense authorization bill, but with a deadline dealing with Iraq."

While Reid may not want to be hemmed in by his statement, it's a fair indicator of his intent. Sticking with the defense authorization may be the best course politically for the Dems. That's because it has the political upshot of not tying the Dems' Iraq effort to a bill supplying actual money to the Pentagon, which would be the case with the Defense appropriations bill. And that means Dems won't be opened up to the charge that they're willing to defund the Pentagon in order to stop the war.

He goes on from there in discussing Reid and his actions, past and future. He ends with this:

5. Stop this equivocating! Who won?

The GOP won -- today, at least. Sen. Mitch McConnell prevented the crucial ten Republican defections. Much of the media is portraying the Democrats as either obstructionists -- which must rankle them, since they weren't the ones filibustering the defense bill -- or as losers. And since the Dems didn't break the filibuster, that last part is true enough.

Looking beyond the day's vote, however, reveals a more complicated picture. After the Democrats lost the Iraq battle over the supplemental appropriation in the spring and didn't launch another fight against the war, many on the left were disillusioned with the Democrats. Antiwar liberals appear much more energized now, so clearly today's events had one positive effect for Reid: It appeared to shore up his support on the left again.

More importantly, by raising the Iraq debate in the summer, the Democrats have created something of a public expectation that September is the beginning of the end for the war. Even Fred Barnes's summation piece for the Weekly Standard is titled "McConnell Holds The Line; At Least Until September." The benefit for the Democrats of the July push, even the unsuccessful one, has been to redefine the debate over the war.

By forcing the discussion now, Dems forced Republicans into the fall-back position of saying, "The war should begin to end not now, but in September." That means it will be tougher for Republicans to continue to back the war come September -- Petraeus report or no.

Two weeks ago, it was hardly clear that September would be the beginning of the end, as opposed to a potential rallying point for Republicans when Petraeus comes to Washington. But thanks to how the July debate unfolded, come September the GOP's victory today could look like a Pyrrhic one.

Update: The Los Angeles Times:

WASHINGTON -- For the seventh time this year, Senate Republicans today blocked a measure to change U.S. policy in Iraq, beating back the latest Democratic proposal to set a timeline for withdrawing troops.

Democrats fell eight votes short of the 60 votes demanded by Republican leaders for an amendment to the defense authorization bill being debated in the Senate. Four Republican lawmakers joined Democrats, ending a round-the-clock session orchestrated by Democratic leaders Tuesday night to highlight what they alleged was Republican obstructionism.

Reid pulled the defense authorization bill from the Senate floor after the vote, enraging Republicans.

The maneuver means that highly partisan debate on the $649-billion measure — and other amendments calling for a change in Iraq — is on hold. Reid would not say when he would reintroduce the legislation.

And Bill Geiger:

Note how Reid "reminded" the Republicans that nothing in the DoD bill he just set aside takes effect until October anyway as a preemptive strike against their predictable cries of Democrats depriving the troops and not supporting them.

"We have spent 2 days showing America that we will not back down," said Reid. "That we will keep fighting. That if President Bush and his allies in Congress refuse to budge, we will continue to show them the way."