Latest StoriesRSS

select from:

E.g., 9/30/2016
E.g., 9/30/2016
Image: ***BESTPIX*** Donald Trump Campaigns In Estero, Florida

Trump vows to fulfill 'every dream you ever dreamed'

09/30/16 12:42PM

In February 2008, in the middle of a tough fight for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton was getting a little tired of Barack Obama's bold talk about hope and change. In fact, at an event in New Hampshire, she got a little sarcastic about it.

Mocking her rival's vision as naive, Clinton said, "Now, I could stand up here and say, 'Let's just get everybody together. Let's get unified.' The skies will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect."

The criticisms never struck me as altogether fair -- Obama frequently acknowledged how hard change can be -- but Clinton's rhetoric nevertheless struck a chord with her supporters, who had no use for grandiose and unrealistic campaign promises.

I'm starting to wonder if Clinton's mockery may have been eight years too early.

On the campaign trail on Tuesday, for example, Donald Trump told supporters, "We have 41 days to make possible every dream you've ever dreamed." Oddly enough, it's apparently part of Trump's new pitch: NBC News' Katy Tur noticed the Republican nominee make a similar comment a day later.
"You have 40 days until the election. You have 40 days to make every dream you ever dreamed for your country come true."
Yesterday, Trump also reportedly vowed to supporters he'd "fulfill every single wish" they have for his presidency.

He hasn't yet promised everyone that we'll get free ponies, too, but the election is still 39 days away, so let's not rule anything out.
read more

Friday's Campaign Round-Up, 9.30.16

09/30/16 12:01PM

Today's installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.

* For the first time in the history of the newspaper, USA Today's editorial board published a piece urging readers not to vote for a specific presidential candidate. "This year, the choice isn't between two capable major party nominees who happen to have significant ideological differences," today's piece read. "This year, one of the candidates -- Republican nominee Donald Trump -- is, by unanimous consensus of the Editorial Board, unfit for the presidency."

* On a related note, the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune, which nearly always backs the Republican nominee, threw its support to Libertarian Gary Johnson today.

* Healy Baumgardner, a Florida-based national surrogate for the Trump campaign, announced this morning she's quitting. "It is clear the campaign is now going in a direction I am no longer comfortable with and I have decided to move on," she said.

* Jason Miller, Trump's senior communications adviser, fielded questions yesterday from MSNBC's Chuck Todd on why the campaign takes unscientific online polls so seriously. Miller's attempts at answering did not go well.

* On Monday, Trump said Lester Holt did a "great job" at the debate. Yesterday, reflecting on the debate, the GOP nominee argued, "I had to put up with the anchor and fight the anchor all the time on everything I said." Trump now believes the debate was "a rigged deal."

* In Florida, a new Mason-Dixon poll shows Hillary Clinton leading Trump, 46% to 42%. Last month, the same poll showed Clinton ahead by just two in the Sunshine State.

* In New Hampshire, a new MassINC Polling Group poll for WBUR-FM shows Clinton ahead in the Granite State, 42% to 35%, in a four-way contest. In a head-to-head match-up, Clinton's lead grows to nine points.

* In Michigan, a new Detroit News-WDIV-TV poll shows Clinton up by seven in a four-way race, 42% to 35%.

* With polls showing Trump in the lead in Ohio, will the Clinton campaign give up on the state and focus resources elsewhere? That's a distinct possibility.
read more

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump pauses while speaking at a campaign rally, Sept. 29, 2016, in Bedford, N.H. (Photo by John Locher/AP)

The latest in a series of controversies for the Trump Foundation

09/30/16 11:36AM

If it seems as if there are new questions surrounding the Donald J. Trump Foundation nearly every day, your perceptions aren't far off. The Washington Post's David Fahrenthold has yet another scoop on the controversial charitable foundation.
Donald Trump's charitable foundation -- which has been sustained for years by donors outside the Trump family -- has never obtained the certification that New York requires before charities can solicit money from the public, according to the state attorney general's office.

Under the laws in New York, where the Donald J. Trump Foundation is based, any charity that solicits more than $25,000 a year from the public must obtain a special kind of registration beforehand. Charities as large as Trump's must also submit to a rigorous annual audit that asks -- among other things -- whether the charity spent any money for the personal benefit of its officers.
It's unclear what kind of action New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) might take, if any, but the Post's article added Schneiderman could go to court to "force Trump to return money that his foundation has already raised."

At this point, the number of allegations surrounding Trump's foundation -- the Pam Bondi donations, the portraits, the administrative missteps, the suspected illegalities and suspicions of a "slush fund," etc. -- are piling up in ways that, collectively, represent a fairly serious scandal.
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich greets U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at a rally at the Sharonville Convention Center in Cincinnati, Ohio July 6, 2016. (Photo by Aaron P. Bernstein/Reuters)

The wrong issue, at the wrong time, from the wrong campaign

09/30/16 10:44AM

Hillary Clinton's campaign released a compelling new video yesterday featuring some of her most notable supporters: President Obama, Michelle Obama, Vice President Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren. It's nearly a three-minute clip -- far too long to run as an ad on television -- but the video is nevertheless effective in highlighting some of the nation's most popular figures singing Clinton's praises.

But this also served as a reminder of the scale of the presidential candidates' "surrogate gap." While Clinton has a potent combination of high-profile backers, Donald Trump's bench is far less imposing. Indeed, one of the Republican nominee's most high-profile backers is Rudy Giuliani, who appears to be increasingly unhinged. (A recent Politico piece asked, "Is Rudy Giuliani Losing His Mind?")

He's joined by Newt Gingrich, who, when he's not talking about Alicia Machado's weight and spreading conspiracy theories about the first debate, is also talking about Bill Clinton's record of infidelities. BuzzFeed reported yesterday on the former Speaker marveling at Trump's restraint.
"I'm very proud that at the very end when she attacked and went off on this whole rant about women -- and you could see his face -- in the Republican primary he would have just smashed her," Gingrich said on Thursday on the Sean Hannity Radio Show.

"He thought about it, and I'm sure he said to himself, 'a president of the United States shouldn't attack somebody personally when their daughter is sitting in the audience,'" Gingrich said. "And he bit his tongue, and he was a gentleman, and I thought in many ways that was the most important moment of the whole evening. He proved that he had the discipline to remain as a decent guy even when she was disgusting."
Let's put aside the fact that Hillary Clinton wasn't "disgusting" at the debate. Let's also overlook the fact that Trump and his team have spent the week trying to make Bill Clinton's '90s-era sex scandals a key 2016 issue -- including an odd quote from Trump himself just yesterday -- which hardly constitutes "decency."
read more

Ralph Nader

For Democrats, two terrifying words: 'Ralph who?'

09/30/16 10:04AM

On the surface, Democrats have a variety of demographic advantages, which is especially true when it comes to age groups. America's youngest voters are also the country's most progressive, which should help Democratic candidates for many years to come. What's more, given the size of the generation, millennials are positioned to be a potent electoral bloc.

The picture becomes a garbled mess, however, when one realizes that these young progressives may indirectly help elect Donald Trump as the next president.

The New York Times had an interesting piece yesterday on younger voters "shunning the two major political parties" on a scale unseen in recent decades, in ways that are causing alarm in Democratic circles. These three paragraphs were no doubt enough to cause heartburn at Hillary Clinton's campaign headquarters.
The vast majority of millennials were not old enough to vote in 2000, when Ralph Nader ran as the Green Party nominee and, with the strong backing of young voters, helped cost Vice President Al Gore the presidency.

"Ralph who?" said David Frasier, a junior at Charleston Southern University.

"Didn't he kind of come in at the last minute and kind of alter the votes or something?" Mr. Frasier, 26, asked, his memory barely jogged. "I was too young to remember."
"Ralph who?" has to be one of the scariest two-word phrases in the English language for many Democrats.
read more

Alicia Machado campaigns for Hillary Clinton on Aug. 20, 2016 in Miami, Fla. (Photo by Gustavo Caballero/Getty)

Targeting former Miss Universe, Donald Trump goes off the rails

09/30/16 09:22AM

One of the most memorable moments of this week's presidential debate came at the very end of the event. Hillary Clinton noted an incident in which Trump called a Miss Universe pageant contestant "Miss Piggy" and "Miss Housekeeping" because she was Latina.

"Donald, she has a name," Clinton said. "Her name is Alicia Machado. And she has become a U.S. citizen, and you can bet she's going to vote this November."

The smart move for Trump would have been to change the subject and stick to issues that play in his favor. The day after the debate, however, the Republican did the opposite, calling into Fox News to complain -- unprompted -- about Machado's weight. Trump campaign surrogates, including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, quickly piled on.

Four days after the debate, Trump still can't help himself.
The GOP nominee unleashed a tweetstorm early Friday in which he called Alicia Machado "disgusting" and ripped into Hillary Clinton for mentioning her in the first presidential debate.

The purported "sex tape" appears to be a reference to reports about explicit footage from Machado's time on a Spanish reality television show called "The Farm."
Note, in one of his early-morning tweets, Trump specifically urged Americans to "check out" a non-existent "sex tape" -- making the 2016 Republican the first major-party presidential nominee to encourage the public to seek out porn. (Congrats, again, Christian conservatives.)

Gingrich, meanwhile, has begun equating the former Miss Universe with Benghazi because, well, just because.

Honestly, is there something in the water?
read more

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) at the Iowa GOP Lincoln Dinner at the DoubleTree by Hilton in Cedar Rapids, Iowa April 11, 2014.

GOP leaders flunk Governing 101 test on 9/11 bill

09/30/16 08:42AM

The Associated Press had a report yesterday on just how little the Republican-led Congress has done over the last two years, and the criticism is, to be sure, richly deserved. But there's one thing the conservative House and Senate accomplished with striking efficiency.

Though members are starting to think that might have been a mistake, too.

The bill has an odd name: JASTA, which stands for the "Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act." The point of the legislation is to allow Americans, most notably the loved ones of 9/11 victims, to sue Saudi Arabia for its alleged al Qaeda support in advance of the 2001 attacks. As Vox explained this week, President Obama has long urged Congress not to pass the bill, arguing that it would undermine the principle of "sovereign immunity" and put the United States at risk of prosecution in foreign courts.

Congress, afraid of an election-year backlash for standing opposite 9/11 families, passed JASTA anyway -- with sweeping, bipartisan majorities. The president vetoed the bill, once more urging lawmakers not to be too hasty with a complex measure that could have lasting international consequences. This week, bipartisan majorities in Congress once again ignored the warnings, and for the first time in the Obama era, members easily overrode a veto, making the bill law.

Incredibly, after already creating the law, Republican leaders said yesterday they may need to correct the mistake they were so eager to make. Bloomberg Politics reported yesterday:
The two top Republicans in Congress said they're prepared to rewrite legislation allowing victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia -- less than 24 hours after Congress took the extraordinary step of overriding President Barack Obama's veto of the measure to make it law.

Both House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the measure could have unintended consequences -- including the fact that it could leave U.S. soldiers open to retaliation by foreign governments.
Ryan conceded Congress should look for a "fix" to the new law to protect American service members from "legal problems" while serving abroad. McConnell added his new law "may" carry "some unintended ramifications." Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who criticized the bill before voting for it, added, "There will be an attempt to narrow the effect of what we've done."

Congressional Republicans this week followed an astounding trajectory: they (1) abruptly passed a law while ignoring substantive objections; (2) stopped to think about the new law after the fact; and (3) blamed the White House for not doing more to stop Congress from acting irresponsibly.
read more

German Chancellor Merkel and U.S. President Obama walk together during the family picture event during the G20 summit in St.Petersburg

Trump flubs 'favorite world leader' test in a surprising way

09/30/16 08:00AM

Late Wednesday, MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked Libertarian presidential hopeful Gary Johnson an interesting question: "Name one foreign leader that you respect and look up to." Johnson was stumped. Unable to name anyone, the former governor conceded he was having a "brain freeze."

It was, to be sure, painful to watch. But the exchange, which generated quite a bit of media attention, also served as a reminder to the other national candidates: you're bound to get the same question, so have a good answer ready.

Somehow, Donald Trump flubbed it anyway. NBC News reported late yesterday:
In a shock move, Donald Trump told an interviewer that German Chancellor Angela Merkel was the world leader he most admires, before immediately clarifying he was also disappointed with her.

Trump was asked by NECN to name his favorite global politician after Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson flubbed the same question at an MSNBC town hall on Wednesday, struggling to come up with an answer.
"Well I think Merkel is a really great world leader but I was very disappointed that, when she, this move with the whole thing on immigration," Trump told the New England Cable Network. "I think it's a big problem and really you know to look at what she's done in the last year and a half. I was always a Merkel person. I thought, really fantastic, but I think she made a very tragic mistake a year and a half ago."

Look, it wasn't a trick question. Asked to name his favorite international leader, Trump had plenty of credible choices and plenty of time to come up with a compelling answer. If he was tempted to point to Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose authoritarian style Trump has repeatedly praised, his staff had an opportunity to steer him away from the answer.
read more

USA Today publishes Trump anti-endorsement

USA Today publishes Trump anti-endorsement

09/29/16 09:28PM

Rachel Maddow updates the count of newspapers that have historically endorsed Republican candidates who have rejected Donald Trump this year, and reports on the USA Today editorial board taking a position on a candidate for the first time ever, encouraging readers not to vote for Donald Trump. watch

Thursday's Mini-Report, 9.29.16

09/29/16 05:30PM

Today's edition of quick hits:

* New Jersey train crash: "A speeding commuter train plowed into a platform inside NJ Transit's Hoboken Terminal Thursday morning, killing at least one person and injuring 108 others, officials said."

* Shutdown averted: "Congress averted a government shutdown Wednesday as the Senate and then the House approved a short-term spending bill, allowing lawmakers to avoid a crisis and return home to campaign. The stopgap spending bill, which would fund the government through Dec. 9, had been ensnarled in a debate over financing for the lead-tainted water system in Flint, Mich."

* Keep an eye on this one: "Sporadic shelling broke out along India and Pakistan's disputed border in Kashmir on Thursday after India said it conducted an anti-terrorism strike inside the section controlled by Pakistan -- marking a significant rise in tension between the two nuclear-armed rivals."

* This is going to help a lot of people: "The Obama administration, in its latest effort to update workplace policies it says have lagged far behind the realities of Americans' lives, will require federal government contractors to provide paid sick leave to their workers."

* Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf "faced down a furious panel of lawmakers Thursday as the House Financial Services Committee grilled him on his bank's shady practices."

* Given widespread public misperceptions about crime rates, these Pew Research findings are unexpected: "As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the first of two death penalty cases in this year's term, the share of Americans who support the death penalty for people convicted of murder is now at its lowest point in more than four decades."
read more

U.S. & Cuba Formally Restore Diplomatic Relations, Open Embassies (Photo by Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg/Getty).

Donald Trump's Cuba problem comes with big risks

09/29/16 04:15PM

The Newsweek cover story Rachel discussed at the top of last night's show is a doozy: investigative reporter Kurt Eichenwald, citing internal company records and court filings, reported that Donald Trump "secretly conducted business" in Cuba, spending $68,000 through a consulting firm to explore a business venture on the island.

If accurate, the allegations raised in the report are problematic for all sorts of reasons. First and foremost, it would have been illegal for Trump's enterprise to spend money in Cuba under a U.S. economic embargo. There are also political considerations, given that many Cuban Americans in South Florida would not be pleased to learn Trump illegally spent this money, as alleged.

Complicating matters, Trump was on record defending the economic embargo at the same time he was reportedly violating it, according to the Newsweek article.

Today, Trump's campaign manager made a television appearance in which she appears to have made the story quite a bit worse for her boss. The Washington Post noted:
Donald Trump's campaign manager denied Thursday that one of the GOP nominee's businesses violated the U.S.-Cuban embargo in 1998, dismissing an investigative report that accused Trump of knowingly spending $68,000 staking out an investment on the island.

"Read the entire story. It starts out with a screaming headline, as it usually does, that he did business in Cuba. And it turns out that he decided not to invest there. I think they paid money, as I understand from the story, in 1998 -- and we're not supposed to talk about years ago when it comes to the Clintons," Trump's campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, said on ABC's "The View" Thursday, amid cross talk.
Conway emphasized repeatedly that Trump ultimately chose not to follow through on the Cuban venture. By all appearances, that's correct. But the question is whether Trump spent $68,000 in Cuba in 1998, as the report claims, in violation of the U.S. embargo.

And on that front, Conway said this morning, "I think they paid money, as I understand from the story, in 1998." Trump's campaign manager may not have intended to be quite so candid: she effectively endorsed the point of the Newsweek article she hoped to dismiss.

Indeed, the Trump campaign also issued these talking points to surrogates today, trying to offer a defense of the candidate's alleged efforts in Cuba, and there's literally nothing in the talking points that refutes any of the concerns raised in the piece.

In other words, if Team Trump has found any factual errors in Eichenwald's Newsweek reporting, the campaign hasn't identified those mistakes to anyone else.
read more