Claims And Issues

CHANGE SENATE RULE, STOP THE FILIBUSTER, WE'RE DONE.

The U.S. Senate voted to stop the filibuster of the bill for a January 6 Commission, which was modelled on the 911 Commission.  The vote was 54 to 35 to end the filibuster.

          As I understand it, Senate Rule 22 regulates voting in the Senate.  To end a filibuster, the vote has to be 60 out of the 100 Senators whether the Senators are present or not.  That's 60% of the Senate.

         To pass almost all actual legislation, on the other hand, the vote only has to be a majority of the Senators voting and present.

         The easiest way to rein in the filibuster might be to change Rule 22 to require 60% of the Senators voting and present are necessary to end a filibuster.

         With that change, they would have ended the filibuster on the January 6 Commission.  We would then be well on our way to seating the Commission.

         Which is exactly what Mitch and the Gang-of-35-out-of-100 don't want.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

THEY WOULDN'T EVEN MEET HIS MOM.

I read a newspaper report that thirteen Republican Senators would not even meet with Officer Sicknick's Mom.  Recall that Officer Sicknick died in the line of duty protecting them.

13 Republicans.

Not Democrats.

Not Independents.

13 Republicans.  These are totally Mitch's people.  I would like to know their names.  Wouldn't you like to know their names?

They've got no fetchin' up.  They do not even respect Moms.  I would like to know their names.

Name them.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

THEY COULDN'T DO IT WITHOUT MEDIA: 14% CONTROL GOP, HEADLINES.

 

January 6, 2021:  The United States Capitol, Capitol Police, and Others.  (Manual Balce Ceneta / Associated Press)

14% of the people in the United States control the headlines.  The same 14% control the current so-called "Republican" political party.

          On Twitter, Richard Hine broke down the latest Gallup poll, Richard Hine (@RichardHine), TWITTER, May 24, 2021, http://twitter.com/richardhine (last visited Tuesday, May 25, 2021).  53% of respondents identified themselves as Republicans and they told Gallup that they thought Mr. Trump won the election last November.

          Hines put this number in perspective:  26% of the population identify themselves as Republicans.  That means that 14% of the U.S. think that Mr. Trump won the election.  14%.

          Yet it is the 14% that control the GOP.

          The 14% get all the headlines.  They still know how to manipulate the media.  They have the experience.  They have been doing it for over 40 years.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

REMOTE JOBS REPORT?

Chalked on a driveway in Winter Springs, Florida.  (Dennis Wall)

The recent Jobs Report released by the Department of Labor reported a jobs number that was lower than many people predicted beforehand.

          After the fact, some people are suggesting that unemployment benefits makes people lazy and that's why they are not back at work.

          Other people explain the Jobs Report by pointing out that women find it hard to return to work if they can't get child care.  Still others point out that the employers that pay more, get more workers than employers that expect workers to return for low wages and low benefits.

          A recent poll reported something interesting that I have yet to see  mentioned by any of these other people.  The new poll said that 83% of CEOs of businesses looking for employees want them back full-time on the job site, whether the job site is an office or a factory or whatever. 

          In the poll 10% of people who identified themselves as employees want to go back to a physical space to work alongside other people for long hours, endless meetings, early rising, and longer commutes.  People just don't want to go back to work the same old way.

          It looks like 90% of us want to continue to work remotely, according to these poll results.

          Remote work.  Hmm.  Working from home as a value.  Something to think about, take into account, factor in when we read reports about the number of people looking for jobs, don't you agree?

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

TWITTER SHOWS WHY SOMETHING'S NOT A SECRET IF IT'S GOOD.

The former justice department reportedly used a grand jury subpoena to Twitter to try to identify who was criticizing Devin Nunes on Twitter.  See Charlie Savage, Trump Justice Dept. Tried to Use Grand Jury to Identify Nunes Critic on Twitter, New York Times, online Monday, May 17, 2021.

    In response to this revelation, Washington informants tell the newspapers that the former justice department really tried to use a grand jury subpoena instead to go after critics of Mitch McConnell.

    Regardless of who they were going after in the former regime -- and we can expect many, many more stories of subpoenas and other things to come out as time goes by -- I want to take a look at the secrecy Order that a United States Magistrate Judge apparently signed giving her or his "okay" to using a grand jury subpoena without telling anyone about it.

    A little background for people who may not be familiar with the Courts.   A U.S. Magistrate Judge is not a judge.  She or he is chosen by actual Judges to help them.  Think of a U.S. Magistrate Judge as a kind of Assistant Judge.  Among other things, they review subpoenas.

    Back to the secrecy Order in this case.   I wrote that the U.S. Magistrate Judge "apparently signed" it.  The only copy we have so far is not signed.  Her or his identity is a secret.  Perhaps they are ashamed.  But in any event, their identity is a secret, so far.  Ironic, when you think that the reason for the Order itself is secrecy.

    When this unknown, unidentified Magistrate was presented with a request from the former regime to keep the subpoena a secret, the Magistrate not only granted their request but ordered Twitter "not to notify any other person of the existence" of the subpoena.

    That is why we only recently found out about the existence of the subpoena, and about the existence of the secrecy Order as well.  Not even people trying to take over the justice department for their own interests could have hidden that better.

    Oh, wait ....  Here is the Order:  Download UNSIGNED SECRET TW O.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

THE 21% SOLUTION DOES NOT MAKE POLICY FOR US.

"The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and many Republican politicians have argued that the temporary $300-a-week supplement [i.e., temporary supplement to Unemployment Insurance benefits due to Covid] has made workers reluctant to return to the job."  As a result, currently 16 states have moved to end "pandemic-related unemployment benefits" which are fully funded by the Federal Government.  Patricia Cohen, As Jobless Claims Decline, G.O.P. Pushes to Cut Aid, New York Times, Friday, May 14, 2021, at B3.  That means the 16 states would not have to pay a dime of the benefits.

          The newspaper does not report it, but the 16 states refusing to deliver Federal money for unemployment assistance during a pandemic, account for roughly 21% of the U.S. population.  I just did the math, and because math is not necessarily my strongpoint, I say "roughly 21%."

    
     Their cruelty is not our policy.

          Even if every single person in the population of these states wanted to cut pandemic-related unemployment benefits -- and that's doubtful -- that is nowhere near enough people to decide that cruelty is U.S. policy.  It is just not nearly the majority view in our Republic to deny pandemic-related unemployment benefits to everyone who is unemployed in America.

The real story is that the people in these few states do not make our national policy.  The reporting to the contrary is not really reporting and it is not because it is "fake news."  It isn't even news.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

BILL BARR DECIDED WHAT DON McGAHN CAN TALK ABOUT.

Bill Barr.  (Alexander Drago / Reuters)

This is a postscript to yesterday's article posted here, NO McGAHN TESTIMONY IN PUBLIC.  ANOTHER BAD DEAL.

When if ever Mr. McGahn testifies before Congress about his previous testimony to Special Counsel Bob Mueller months ago, he can only testify to what Bill Barr decided the American public should know.

          Congress agreed not to ask Mr. McGahn about anything in the Mueller Report that is not already public, and Congress agreed that McGahn doesn't have to answer any questions about his testimony that is not already public.

          It's a farce made for newspaper headlines and cable television shoutouts.  There's no substance here, there's nothing we don't already know -- and nothing that we're likely to know ever, or at least for a long time.

          When Bill Barr decided what if anything to make public from the Mueller Report -- and there's lots of evidence that is still "classified" and that the public cannot see, yet -- Bill Barr decided then what McGahn could testify about, and what he couldn't.

          Bill Barr is still making the decisions.  See the deal Congress made with Bill Barr's decisions in the attachment to this notice that his Department of Justice filed this week: Download Mcgahn-agreement-2021-05-12 IN HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY v. McGAHN D.C. CIR. APPEAL.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

NO McGAHN TESTIMONY IN PUBLIC. ANOTHER BAD DEAL.

 

William Barr.  (Alexander Drago/Reuters)

They caved.  So long as the House Judiciary Committee remains under the current management, we will get deals like this.  The people currently in charge of the Judiciary Committee have proven over and over again that they either incapable of negotiating or that they are unwilling to negotiate, one thing or the other.  This deal is one more example of what they cannot accomplish.

          This deal was about Don McGahn's subpoenaed testimony.  McGahn isn't even a party to the deal between the Judiciary Committee and "the Executive Branch."  Use your imagination to figure out who "the Executive Branch" is, I guess.

          They agreed, without McGahn, that McGahn would obey the subpoena, that he would show up to testify, but that the public cannot hear his testimony.

          Forgive me, but wasn't the whole point that McGahn would testify in public?

          Such a deal.  Next, a person will play the role that Bill Barr played in the stage play about the Mueller Report:   Someone will say that they have read McGahn's nonpublic testimony and that it exonerates everyone, that for example there was no "collusion" (whatever that was).

          That was so good, they thought, that they had to do it again.

          As I said, so long as the House Judiciary Committee is chaired by the same chair that chaired the Judiciary Committee back in the day, expect more of the same and nothing different.  Clearly, we can expect nothing at all from this crew.

          Read the deal for yourself here:  Download Mcgahn-agreement-2021-05-12 IN HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY v. McGAHN D.C. CIR. APPEAL.  It is an attachment to the pleading filed by the Department of Justice.  Only lawyers from the Department of Justice filed it.  DOJ was apparently so happy with the deal that they alone could file it.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

Vampire bats could come to Florida: Headline Tells The Story.

The results of a pandemic release of deadly chemicals into the waterways of Manatee County are showing bad things.  But news of them is not to be found in the local Central Florida newspaper on Monday of this week.  Not headlines, not reporting, nothing in the newspaper.

Instead, the Local & State Section of the Orlando Sentinel on Monday published its top headline:

Vampire bats could come to Florida.

          I don't know what else to say.  I don't think there is anything else to say.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

"MISREPRESENTATION"? "DISINGENUOUS"? WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

Download Judge Amy Berman Jackson REDACTED FOR THE PUBLIC Opinion of May 3 2021 in CREW v. Department of Jutice

Judge Amy Berman Jackson's opinion to require disclosure of a memorandum written by people in the Department of Justice who have just left town, says that testimony in that case was a "misrepresentation."  The case is Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Department of Justice.

    The testimony in question came from a lawyer.  It was filed with the Court.  Surely Judge Jackson thought about the next step.  The judge's description of the testimony as a "misrepresentation" is on page 31 of her attached opinion from the Court File, which was redacted for the public by the Court.  If she called the lawyer's testimony under oath a "misrepresentation," which she said freed her from any deference to the DOJ's representations for secrecy of the memorandum, surely the judge or one of her clerks or somebody in her Chambers said something to the effect of, "Wait a minute, once you say that this lawyer's testimony is a misrepresentation, what's the next step?"

    To rephrase the end of the first episode of "The Night Watchman":  "Now that you said this, what are you going to do about it?"

    The corporate media understandably have paid very little attention to this.  The reporters on this story are mostly all civilians unfamiliar with lawyers and the law.  Their reports have concentrated much more on Judge Jackson's description of former Attorney General Bill Barr's statements as "disingenuous."  Parenthetically, that word appears twice on page 25 of the judge's attached REDACTED for the public opinion.  Come to think of it, same question:  "Now that you said this, what are you going to do about it?"

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

CATCH COVID? PAY FOR TREATMENT TOO? STILL THINK INSURANCE BORING?

 

Covid treatment in ICU.  (Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times)

At least some health insurance companies began charging their policyholders the full amount of their deductibles, copays, and coinsurance.   Other carriers are joining them, even as a pandemic continues to ravage their policyholders with illness and, in some cases, death.

          When the pandemic began a year ago, these same health insurance carriers voluntarily waived all deductibles, copays, and other costs because people who fell ill with Covid-19 had enough to deal with, what with hospitalizations, doctor visits, medications, and other treatments.  Then, it was good public relations for these carriers to waive what they call "cost sharing."

          "Cost sharing."  What a polite way of saying "You got Covid, now pay for it."  What was put into place with great fanfare is now done in silence.  Most if not all of these health insurance carriers are secretly ending their voluntary waivers of cost sharing, and many have already done so.  What was good public relations in the sunshine, is taken back in the dark.

          Except for Covid tests and vaccinations.  They should still be free to people, because the federal government requires that these costs be free.

          Some people think it's wrong to make a profit off of other people's misery.  The insurance companies' profits are going through the roof since the pandemic began.  They can afford to pay for Covid treatments; Covid patients, not so much.

          Still think insurance is boring?  Catching Covid?  Pay for the full treatment on top of being hospitalized and treated for Covid?   People can EMail, write and telephone their own state's Insurance Commissioners.  Let them know that you know what's going on in the dark, and let them know if you don't like it. 

          Let them and your federal Representatives and Senators know, too, if you want the federal government to require the costs of treatment to be paid by you or by your insurer, or if you want the costs of treatment for Covid to be treated (pun intended) like the costs of testing for Covid.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.