Latest StoriesRSS

select from:

E.g., 10/6/2015
E.g., 10/6/2015
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks during her campaign stop at the Broward College Hugh Adams Central Campus on Oct. 2, 2015 in Davie, Fla. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty)

Clinton campaign seizes on GOP Benghazi admission

10/06/15 08:02AM

By any fair measure, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) delivered an amazing gift to Hillary Clinton last week when he admitted his party's Benghazi committee was really a partisan election scheme. This week, Clinton has opened the gift, taken it out of the box, and begun putting it good use.
The Clinton campaign unveiled a new television ad overnight, titled, "Admits It." For those who can't watch clips online, here's the script:
Audio voice-over and text on screen: The Republicans finally admit it.
MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell: Republican Kevin McCarthy saying the committee investigating Benghazi and Clinton’s emails was created to destroy her candidacy.
Kevin McCarthy: Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee. What are her numbers today?
Audio voice-over: The Republicans have spent millions attacking Hillary because she’s fighting for everything they oppose -- from affordable health care to equal pay. She’ll never stop fighting for you and the Republicans know it.
The 30-second ad is part of a national cable-TV ad buy, which will begin reaching viewers today.
The spot is a reminder of just how valuable Kevin McCarthy's accidental candor is to Clinton and her supporters. For much of the summer, the Democratic presidential hopeful has been on the defensive, leading to "a poll-deflating feedback loop." All of a sudden, however, the likely next Speaker of the House inadvertently told the truth, acknowledging facts that Republicans aren't supposed to admit in public, and Clinton is bouncing off the ropes.

Oregon shooter's writing and other headlines

10/06/15 08:01AM

Oregon shooter rants in writings about having no girlfriend. (AP)

Could Congress actually pass new gun-control laws? (New York Magazine)

Ben Carson suggests more people should be armed. (USA Today)

U.S. government deports fewest immigrants in nearly a decade. (AP)

Texas inmate set for execution. (AP)

Frogs find themselves in a downward spiral. (New York Times)

Nobel Prize in Physics. (New York Times)

read more

Monday's Mini-Report, 10.5.15

10/05/15 05:30PM

Today’s edition of quick hits:
* TPP: "The United States and 11 other Pacific Rim countries have reached a deal on the most sweeping trade liberalization pact in a generation but the accord on Monday faced initial skepticism in the U.S. Congress."
* A heartbreaking story out of Afghanistan over the weekend: "Twelve Doctors Without Borders staff along with seven patients, including three children, were killed after an apparent U.S. airstrike hit the international charity's hospital in the Afghan city of Kunduz."
* NATO warned Russia today to stay away from Turkey "after the Turkish Air Force intercepted Russian warplanes that strayed into its airspace from Syria, underscoring the heightened risk of a wider conflagration as Russia escalates its intervention in the Syrian conflict."
* Officials in South Carolina "warned Monday afternoon that the dangers from the state's unprecedented floods were not over -- and that clearing skies did not erase the threat of shifting water and unstable roads."
* In a video message to attendees to the Our Oceans conference, President Obama "announced plans for two new marine sanctuaries, one off the coast of Maryland, and the other in Lake Michigan. They’ll be the first new national marine sanctuaries designated by the federal government in the past 15 years."
* California "will become the fifth state in the nation to allow terminally ill patients to legally end their lives using doctor-prescribed drugs after Gov. Jerry Brown announced Monday he signed one of the most emotionally charged bills of the year."
* ISIS: "The Islamic State has blown up the iconic Arch of Triumph in the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra, officials said."
Voting booths are illuminated by sunlight as voters cast their ballots at a polling place on Nov. 6, 2012. (Photo by Jae C. Hong/AP)

National spotlight turns to Alabama voting rights controversy

10/05/15 04:59PM

Following on the segment from Friday's show, the racially charged controversy regarding voting rights in Alabama is quickly becoming a story of national significance. Rep. Terri Sewell (D-Ala.), who represents many of the affected voters, wrote an op-ed in local media today making her case.
On September 30th, my Black Belt constituents were dealt yet another devastating blow when it was announced by the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency that it would close 31 driver's license offices.
The decision left 8 out of the 14 counties in my district without a DMV that will issue driver's licenses. Many of the residents affected by this decision will have to travel miles outside of their communities to take a driver's tests and obtain state-issued identification. This fact means many of my constituents who have limited modes of transportation will be denied an equal opportunity to obtain a means to vote.
MSNBC's Zach Roth reported today that the Alabama congresswoman has "formally asked the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the state’s shuttering of driver’s license offices in several heavily black counties."
Sewell has also urged state officials in Alabama to either keep these DMV offices open so that voters can obtain the materials necessary to vote, or "rescind the voter ID law" so that all eligible Alabamans can go back to the voter-access laws that existed before Republicans imposed the current burden to address a problem that didn't exist.
Roth's MSNBC report added, "The issue has also found its way into the presidential race. Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton issued a statement Friday warning the driver’s license office closings are 'only going to make it harder for people to vote,' and calling them 'a blast from the Jim Crow past.'"
For those who are new to the story, let's revisit Friday's segment, because this isn't just another local voting-rights story.
U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton holds a 'Grassroots' organizational event at Broward State College in Davie, Fla, Oct. 2, 2015. (Photo by Joe Skipper/Reuters)

Hillary Clinton bucks trend, goes bold on gun issue

10/05/15 03:00PM

Over the last several decades, leading Democratic presidential candidates have consistently avoided major campaign fights over gun violence. The party's nominees, cycle after cycle, have found there's no real upside to taking on the NRA and its allies, and the risk of alienating voters in some swing states is simply too great.
But Hillary Clinton is taking a very different path. This started in earnest a few months ago, but the former Secretary of State is staying on the offensive in ways recent Democratic frontrunners have not. MSNBC's Alex Seitz-Wald reported today:
While campaigning in New Hampshire Monday, Clinton rolled out a new gun control proposal that includes using executive action to close the so-called gun show loophole and making it easier for people to sue gun makers. Clinton contrasted her stance with that of Republicans, paying special attention to presidential candidates Bush and Donald Trump.
“On the Republican side, Mr. Trump was asked about it and said something like ‘you know, things like that happen in the world,’” she said. “Governor Bush said ‘yeah, stuff happens.’ No. That’s an admission of defeat and surrender to a problem that is killing 33,000 Americans.”
This touches on an important political point. Putting aside whether or not one considers Friday's "stuff happens" flap important, the broader point remains the same: Trump and Bush are only too eager to express ambitious, arguably unrealistic goals about a range of issues -- economic growth, job creation, national security, veterans' care -- but when the questions turn to gun deaths, the leading Republican candidates' boldness quickly disappears. Trump,. in particular, quickly transitions from, "I can solve any problem" to "we'll just have to accept thousands of gun deaths because there's nothing to be done."
But this isn't just about election positioning against GOP candidates. Clinton has a credible policy agenda on curtailing gun violence that warrants its own attention.
Rep. Trey Gowdy and Rep. Elijah Cummings arrive as the panel holds its first public hearing to investigate the 2012 attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, Sept. 17, 2014.

Dems on GOP's Benghazi committee start to play hardball

10/05/15 12:46PM

It's always interesting to see what happens when a charade ends. For quite a while, congressional Republicans tried to keep up appearances, pretending their Benghazi committee was a legitimate, non-partisan search for truth -- a claim no one, anywhere, seriously believed -- but House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) accidental candor last week ripped off the mask.
There was brief discussion about whether Democrats would simply quit the taxpayer-funded, anti-Clinton fishing expedition in protest, a move Dems ultimately rejected, but that doesn't mean they plan to sit idly by. The Washington Post reported this morning:
Democrats are taking the unprecedented step of releasing excerpts from a closed-session interview the House Benghazi committee conducted last month with Hillary Clinton aide Cheryl Mills, accusing the panel’s Republican Chairman Trey Gowdy (S.C.) of selectively leaking information to damage Clinton in the presidential race.
In a letter sent Monday morning, Democrats on the panel released statements made by Mills from the Sept. 3 interview that paint Clinton in a favorable light. The letter charges Gowdy with failing to provide a fair account of Mills’s interview, alleging that he orchestrated small press leaks designed to produce negative stories about the Democratic presidential front-runner.
In a letter signed by all five Democratic members of the panel, the lawmakers told Gowdy, "It has become obvious that the only way to adequately correct the public record is to release the complete transcript of the Committee’s interview with Ms. Mills.... [W]e plan to begin the process of correcting the public record by releasing the transcript of Ms. Mills’ interview. Since you have indicated your unwillingness to do this in a bipartisan manner, we plan to do so ourselves."
Let's back up for a minute to recap for those unfamiliar with the issue surrounding Mills.

Monday's Campaign Round-Up, 10.5.15

10/05/15 12:00PM

Today's installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.
* To the delight of the DSCC, New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan (D) announced this morning she's running for the U.S. Senate next year. The two-term governor will take on incumbent Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R), setting the stage for one of the cycle's premier races.
* The latest Pew Research poll shows Hillary Clinton maintaining a strong national lead over Bernie Sanders in the race for the Democratic nomination, 45% to 24%. Vice President Biden is third in the poll with 8%.
* On a related note, the new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll shows Sanders continuing to lead Clinton in New Hampshire, 48% to 39%, essentially unchanged from a month ago. In Iowa, however, Clinton leads Sanders, 47% to 36%, which is also essentially unchanged since September.
* Clinton received an endorsement over the weekend from the National Education Association, which is the nation’s largest labor union.
* Jeb Bush will reportedly turn to George W. Bush for fundraising help again this month, and there's increasing talk that the former governor hopes to use the former president to give his campaign a boost in South Carolina.
* Carly Fiorina was the CEO of Hewlett-Packard for six years, but "of the 302,000 employees at the company, not one has given a reportable amount to help Fiorina fund her 2016 presidential campaign, according to the campaign’s most recent FEC filings, which lists all donations over $200."
* Speaking of Fiorina's former staffers, some of the people who worked on her failed 2010 Senate campaign claim they're still owed money. The operations director for her Senate campaign told the Washington Post, “People are just upset and angry and throwing her under the bus. If we didn’t win, why do you deserve to get paid?"
U.S. President Barack Obama holds a news conference in the State Dining Room at the White House Oct. 2, 2015 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty)

Obama's case for single-issue voting -- on guns

10/05/15 11:20AM

Two weeks ago, before the mass-shooting in Oregon, Quinnipiac released national poll results on a variety issues, including guns. When respondents were asked, for example, "Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?" the results weren't close: 93% of Americans support the idea.
In fact, while bipartisan consensus seems difficult in these polarized times, this is an issue where Democrats and Republicans are on the same page. According to the Quinnipiac results, 90% of GOP voters support mandatory background checks for all gun buyers, 92% of independents agree, as do 98% of Democrats.
And yet, the idea stands no realistic chance of success in the Republican-led Congress. It won't even get a vote. Elected lawmakers know what the polls say, but they don't care.
Why is that? Mother Jones' Kevin Drum explained the other day, "Most polls don't tell us how deeply people feel. Sure, lots of American think that universal background checks are a good idea, but they don't really care that much."
I think that's generally correct. On issues like background checks, progressives have effectively won half a battle: on key elements of the policy debate, the left has persuaded the vast majority of Americans on the merits of an idea. The second half of the battle is more complicated: making the transition from passive agreement to genuine passion for constructive change.
All of which leads us to something President Obama said on Friday, which was a departure from his previous rhetoric on the subject.
Republican presidential candidate Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (Photo by Carlos Barria/Reuters).

Rand Paul facing the question no candidate wants to hear

10/05/15 10:44AM

At an event last week, Kentucky gubernatorial candidate Matt Bevin (R) initially said he'd supported Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's (R) presidential campaign, but with Walker out, Bevin now likes Ben Carson. A few hours later, the Kentucky Republican switched gears and said he’s actually backing Kentucky’s Rand Paul.
Evidently, Bevin forgot that his third choice is supposed to be his first.
And just a few days later, Bevin stood alongside his home-state ally for a campaign rally that the Lexington Herald-Leader described as "subdued."
About 50 people came out on a rainy Saturday morning to see U.S. Sen. Rand Paul rally for Republican gubernatorial candidate Matt Bevin.
Hmm. A month before Kentucky voters choose a new governor, the Republican nominee joined Kentucky's own presidential candidate -- on a weekend -- for a high-profile event. Just 50 people showed up?
The underwhelming turnout also came the same week as Rand Paul's presidential campaign announced it raised about $2.5 million from July to September -- a weak showing and a sharp drop-off from the $7 million the senator raised the quarter before.
Adding insult to injury, on Friday, American Bridge 21st Century, a progressive super PAC, reached out to contacts, letting them know that going forward, the super PAC will focus its attention on Paul as a vulnerable U.S. Senate candidate -- as opposed to a competitive presidential candidate.
There's arguably nothing more insulting than having one's critics decide you're just not that important anymore.
Senator Marco Rubio and then-Governor Jeb Bush attend Mitt Romney victory campaign Rally at Bank United Center on Oct. 31, 2012 in Miami, Fl. (Photo by Vallery Jean/FilmMagic/Getty)

The fight to be the non-amateur GOP nominee

10/05/15 10:00AM

On Thursday night in Iowa, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) hosted an unremarkable campaign event, which became interesting for non-traditional reasons. The action, it turns out, wasn't on the stage, but rather, was in the audience -- a super PAC supporting Jeb Bush sent a tracker to the Rubio event. The senator's aides noticed and kicked the tracker out.
It was a reminder that the rivalry between Bush and Rubio -- two former friends from their days in Florida's state capitol -- has taken a more confrontational turn. MSNBC's Benjy Sarlin had a terrific report on this over the weekend.
After a campaign dominated for months by Republican front-runner Donald Trump’s various feuds, a new rivalry is taking center stage that may ultimately have a far bigger impact on the GOP race: Jeb Bush versus Marco Rubio.
Rubio’s message, which has always emphasized his youth and novelty in American politics, is growing more pointed as the campaigns converge. And the sharp end of the rhetorical stick is clearly aimed at a certain unnamed candidate more than the others.
There's really no subtlety to the messaging. As Sarlin's report makes clear, when Rubio takes aim at a certain unnamed candidate, he's taking on Bush.
At first blush, the dynamic might seem odd: there are simmering tensions and an increasingly public feud brewing between the candidates running in fourth and fifth place. What about the presidential hopefuls in slots one through three? Shouldn't they be the principal targets since they're the ones who are winning?
Not necessarily.
Handguns are displayed in the Remington booth during the 2013 NRA Annual Meeting and Exhibits on May 5, 2013 in Houston, Texas. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty)

Focusing on guns and mental health means talking about the ACA

10/05/15 09:20AM

In the wake of every mass-shooting -- events that occur with heartbreaking regularity in the United States, but no other industrialized democracy -- political rhetoric tends to follow a predictable trajectory. Democratic officials, in general, raise the prospect of new policies to curtail gun violence.
And Republican officials, in general, decry such efforts as anti-freedom, preferring to focus on practically anything else. For some on the right, mass shootings serve as an excuse to renew conversations about violent entertainment (though plenty of other countries enjoy similar cultural fare without violent consequences). For others, gun massacres are reason to start merging religion and public schools (as if the Second Amendment is inviolate, but the First Amendment is malleable).
But in recent months, a focus on mental health -- which must have tested well with focus groups -- has become one of the GOP's principal talking points. Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), the day of the mass-shooting in Oregon last week, urged President Obama to back Cornyn's bill "to address mental health factor in mass violence incidents."
In the Washington Post over the weekend, University of Chicago professor Harold Pollack described some provisions of Cornyn's proposal as "helpful and constructive," but highlighted a missing piece of the puzzle.
Cornyn's proposal does not address the most glaring issue in American mental health policy: the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion. Medicaid expansion was always the public health cornerstone of ACA. It remains the single most important measure to expand access to mental health and addiction treatment, serving severely vulnerable populations such as the homeless, addressing the complicated medical and psychiatric difficulties of many young men cycling through our jails and prisons.
I suspect that for many Republicans, the idea of "Obamacare" playing a meaningful role in preventing mass-shootings must sound ridiculous. After all, "Obamacare" is inherently bad, even when it's good, and all of its provisions must be rejected because, well, just because.
But Pollack is entirely correct, and if GOP officials are going to ignore gun-safety measures to focus on mental health, they should probably grow up and reconcile their mental-health rhetoric with their mindless, knee-jerk hostility towards Medicaid expansion through the ACA.