All along, we have been able to see how blessed we are in Massachusetts to have a United States senator like Elizabeth Warren. But this week, she out did herself.
With a two TRILLION dollar rescue package looming, earlier in the week it appeared that the bill might be muscled through by Mitch McConnell loaded with billions of dollars of goodies not only for large corporations, but also in a way that would allow $500 billion of that money to be controlled fully by one man. Donald Trump. He even opined at one point this week in his oily Queens accent, “I will be the oversight” of that $500 billion. It was Elizabeth Warren, more than any other senator, who went into action to shed light on this banana republic move.
In conjunction with the Democratic Senate leadership and her colleagues, it was Elizabeth Warren who dug her heels in, and then dug into the bill with her staff, and unearthed the provisions that most closely resembled a no-strings corporate raid on the treasury.
We have seen her brilliant questioning of witnesses, we have seen her dogged determination to defend the consumer protection bureau that was her brainchild, and we have seen her tireless energy on the campaign trail, but this week, she showed what an active and, perhaps even currently irreplaceable asset she is in the United States Senate.
I only briefly worked as a legal fellow in Senator Ted Kennedy’s Labor Committee in 1993, but I was there long enough to learn of the tremendous respect other senate offices had for Kennedy’s senate and committee staffs. Even were she not sitting in the very seat of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, she would be reminding senate staffers of old of the Liberal Lion, Ted Kennedy, in her workhorse wont.
She is not only honoring his seat, she honors all of us. How often can we say that of our elected officials today?
I understand one of these bills specifically prohibits any money going to entities owned by an elected official (e. g. Trump hotels).
Warren laid out 8 conditions that should be met for any corporate bailout money.
This bill has 0 of those conditions.
I’m not blaming her, but it’s tough to say she, or anyone, won much of a victory here.
This bill is a travesty. Mostly a no strings corporate bailout and WAYYYYYYYY too small in terms of direct assistance to the people who need it.
It is the largest bill in American history in terms of spending and it won’t touch the real situation we are facing.
For those who desperately need it, the $1200 payments will be eaten by rent and insurance premiums.
For those who are more secure, and if they get any payment at all, they will likely save the money for fear of the looming and giant recession. There will be no real stimulus for those who need it.
We could be dooming small businesses for good with this as the response to the crisis. And the Senate has now walked away for weeks.
Maybe something can happen in the House tomorrow but I am not hopeful. Pelosi’s slowness on backing anything close to the response needed and openly hand-wringing over means-testing has been, in a word, pathetic. This awful response to the crisis is going to mean many dead and long-term desperation for millions.
And again, where is Joe Biden, who is now credibly accused of sexual assault? All I’ve seen or short online videos and a couple cable interviews that were worrisome at best.
Can’t get through a comment without a swipe at Biden, could you?:( The only whiff I’ve heard of an assault allegation against Biden comes from a rightwing outlet that nobody including the usual advocates find prudent to pick up.
We’re in a crisis, he is supposed to be our leader and he is nowhere.
The Intercept is rightwing? The reporting there is that Time’s Up refused to support the woman because she was accusing a politician. But also, one of Biden’s chief surrogates, Anita Hill, is heavily involved with Time’s Up.
And yeah, it’s shocking that the guy who we’ve seen hundreds of pictures and videos of touching women inappropriately, constantly, might have done more.
It’s Believe Women, unless it’s a guy we like, like Biden or Bill.
He’s not a good guy. He’s not a leader. And he’s more than likely going to lose an election to Trump.
This isn’t about Bernie. That’s done.
Continuing with Biden is insanity. Deadly insanity.
A lot of people aren’t buying it. Also, Biden has been all over COVID-19. What has Biden done to you? It sounds personal.
Christopher, you linked to a summary a pretty neutral post followed by a nasty comment thread full of ad hominem attacks–not only attacks on the accuser but ad hominem attacks on anyone reporting the story.
Is that your idea of “a lot of people aren’t buying it”. ?
I was disappointed when the accusation against Kavanaugh didn’t keep him off the Supreme Court. But we have to take all accusers seriously, not just the ones against Republicans.. Biden’s accuser may turn out to be just as credible as Kavanaugh’s.
Reade also called Putin a great president that the corporate elite is afraid of and wished America had a president like him. This is after his regime has extended his presidency another sixteen years to 2036, after he’s jailed and murdered journalists and gay rights activists, after he butchered and leveled Chechnya and East Ukraine, after he illegally annexed territory in violation of international law.
She is a Marianne Williamson donor, claims she only gets her news from David Sirota and the Intercept, and her story does not seem entirely credible to me. I don’t see Biden saying “come on man” like he does on the stump after assaulting someone. I think others would have come forward by now with similar stories like what happened with Franken and Trump.
I wish her no ill will, and if the story is corroborated it would seriously endanger Bidens fitness for service. The fact that only far right and far left outlets have picked up on this so far is cause for caution and not leaping to assume it is true. So I’m a skeptic for now.
I linked it for the comment thread, not objective maybe, but just to show there’s no stampede on the left to kill Biden over this. I don’t take accusers seriously when too conveniently timed, have questionable allies, and they change their story. This sounds way too much like Paula Jones for my tastes.
So your waiting for a stampede to make up your mind for you,, Christopher? And the “conveniently timed ” trope was already old when it was used against Anita Hill (as well as against Kavanaugh’s accuser–I notice nobody’s commenting on that comparison on this thread).
I agree with Tom that this is worth investigating. I don’t think the investigation should hang on whether she’s ever said anything nice about Putin.
Can you ever comment without sounding like you have a chip on your shoulder. This one just doesn’t pass the smell test. Investigate, I guess, but it’s not likely to change my support.
“Investigate” does not mean “print every rumor encountered and see what gets the most ratings.”
The Washington Post standard, during Watergate, was to gather and confirm corroborating evidence from at least two independent sources before publishing any item.
While I agree that an investigation of the allegations against Mr. Biden is warranted, I also think that such an investigation should be private and should start by exploring what, if anything, was reported at the time of the alleged incident and what if anything, was investigated as a result of those reports.
It did not take long for Mr. Woodward and Mr. Bernstein to validate that something was badly amiss with the first White House party line about Watergate (“A second-rate burglary by dissatisfied Cuban dissidents”). It did not take long for investigators to determine that the allegations of Paula Jones were not credible.
The high-profile repetition of unsupported allegations decades after the alleged incident does not increase the credibility of the accuser.
It’s simple enough-apply the same standard to all accusers. Christopher’s standard or waiting for a stampede of internet commenters shouldn’t be part of that standard.
@apply the same standard to all accusers:
I agree.
I enthusiastically support the intent and goals of the #MeToo. movement. I am deeply distressed by the resulting trial-by-mob mentality that it seems to encourage.
Our economic and legal systems must provide a mechanism for victims of sexual harassment and abuse to obtain justice for themselves and for sexual predators to be identified and appropriately punished.
Our standard of innocent until proven guilty must not be compromised.
I don’t see that any of this is relevant to the Joe Biden campaign, other than to most strongly encourage all of us to ignore these complaints until they have been investigated by the appropriate authorities.
As I understand it, most European nations do not allow any individual to be publicly identified in connection with any alleged crime until AFTER they have been charged in an official proceeding. This standard is designed to prevent exactly the kind of character assassination that is so prevalent in the US.
These attacks on Mr. Biden strike me as epitomizing the intent of that European standard.
Okay, but where would the European standard leave us with Trump’s accusers? Or with Harvey Weinstein?
“It’s simple enough-apply the same standard to all accusers.”
So there would be a media blackout on “me to” until formal charges were filed? Or on Roy Moore’s accusers? I’ve got to think that I’m misinterpreting what you propose.
The standard in Germany is that a suspect is identified by first name and the initial of the surname. Europe has a thriving scandal-sheet industry, there’s little risk of a media blackout.
In addition to making at least cursory attempts to protect the privacy of individuals, German media generally adhere to The Pressekodex (you’ll have to translate from the German).
The principle of applying a single standard to every accuser is your own. Surely you agree with me about the importance of innocent until proven guilty.
We’re talking about two different things. If charges are filed the policy can be not to officially release the names of either the accuser or the accused. However, the accuser has the right to tell her own story and the media have a right to conduct their own investigations. There’s really nobody who can officially investigate Biden with the possibility of legal consequences unless the accuser files a police report, for which the statute of limitations may have expired already.
@…for which the statute of limitations may have expired already:
There is a very good reason why we have a statute of limitations, and this case appears to illustrate that reason.
The idea of innocent until proven guilty is a foundation stone of our liberties. Along with that comes the idea of “preponderance of evidence” and “beyond reasonable doubt”, the standards for conviction of civil and criminal actions.
After a certain period of time passes, it becomes impossible to prove an allegation of a long-past offense. The concept of a statute of limitations reflects that reality. America has always explicitly said that allowing a guilty party to go unpunished is preferable to tarnishing an innocent man or woman.
This entire episode stinks to high heaven. Surely there’s a way to get Hunter Biden and Burisma involved. Where’s Rudy when he’s needed?
I do agree about innocent until proven guilty. I agree that there is a lot of potential unfairness in the way some accusations are handled, and I’m not sure I know how this can be remedied.
But what seems to be going on here on this thread is something different. There seems to be a concerted effort to silence this accuser. Christopher cites with apparent approval a hate filled comment thread which attacks the accuser, and Jconway attacks the K Halper, who interviewed the accuser. All with the subtext that they are not loyal Americans.
This is dangerously close to the bad old days when Harvey Weinstein was able to smear his victims with the assistance of the NY Post and Black Cube.
The allegations should be investigated on their own merits, not on the basis of what opposition research can dig up on the accuser.
I haven’t even read the comment thread that Christopher cited.
This accuser reminds me so strongly of Paula Jones that I think she should be ignored. I’m not advocating silencing her. I’m saying that I find her allegations very difficult to believe and her timing makes those allegations even less credible.
@There seems to be a concerted effort to silence the accuser:
Any figure who chooses a personality named “Krystal Ball” to go public with tawdry allegations about events of more than 20 years ago is already self-identifying as — to quote James Carville about Paula Jones — “trailer trash”.
I’ve walked past hundreds or thousands of racks next to checkout counters that screamed “First Successful Human Head Transplant”, “Abducted by Aliens”, or “I Killed JFK”. I ignore them. I don’t think they should be silenced. I also don’t think they should be given and credibility whatsoever.
“allegations about events of more than 20 years ago”.
Kavanaugh, Roy Moore and many others made the same argument.
Is it really the length of time since the events, or the given name of the interviewer which is setting you off? Or is it the identity of the accused?
@Kavanaugh, Roy Moore and many others made the same argument.
Their accusers chose more reliable sources. Will you at least admit the possibility that the reason those reliable sources would not touch these allegations is that they found nothing to support them and every reason to doubt them?
Do you generally rely on outlets likes “Krystal Ball” to get your information? How much do you know about her background and politics?
When somebody has something credible and concrete, by all means it should be reported. I have seen nothing that comes remotely close to meeting that standard.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-sexual-assault-tara-reade_n_5e7e69c8c5b6256a7a2a88f2,
https://www.newsweek.com/biden-campaign-team-denies-past-sexual-assault-allegation-former-senate-staffer-1494794
Your explicit comparison of the allegations against Joe Biden to the allegations against Roy Moore is an egregious distortion, and demonstrates why this is nothing more than character assassination. The comparison to Mr. Kavanaugh is just as deceitful.
There are no lines of underage women describing assaults by Mr. Biden. There are no yearbooks inappropriately signed by Mr. Biden. There are no records showing that Mr. Biden was physically present at the events where these multiple assaults were alleged to have occurred.
There is instead a woman who filed a sex harassment claim against the Biden organization and omitted ANY reference to the alleged behavior. A woman who said nothing for twenty years until after it was clear that neither of her preferred candidates (Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders) had a realistic shot at the nomination.
Then, suddenly, she decides to go public with something else:
In other words, “I’m looking to take down Joe Biden, and I don’t care how I do it. I know there isn’t any evidence, and I’m going to take advantage of that.” Ms. Reade strikes me as an unscrupulous woman perfectly willing betray the real pain and suffering of millions of women in order to advance her own private agenda. “Something more existential” indeed. Most of us have encountered men and women who seek such “existential” validation. Paula Jones has spent a lifetime seeking similar “existential validation” (not to mention lots of cash from any source willing to part with it).
Funny how she apparently ignored her mother, who told her to call the police, Funny how she listened to her brother, who told her to “let it go”. Funny how that brother says he voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 and won’t vote for either Mr. Trump or Mr. Biden in 2020.
Funny how in all this tortured “reporting”, there is not one shred of objectively verifiable evidence. No police reports. No stained dresses. A contemporaneous harassment complaint that omits it entirely. Where are the references to collaborating accounts that journalists obtained to support these allegations? Where are the on-the-record substantiations?
Keep hammering this, Bob. The more you write, the more you demonstrate the fundamental sleaziness of this entire affair.
You are still flailing, Tom, only now you’re spewing, too. “No yearbooks inappropriately signed. . . “? That’s a new one.
Flailing?
You seem to be more interested in insulting me than anything else.
If you had bothered to pay attention at the time, you’d remember that one of Mr. Moore’s many accusers submitted a yearbook that Mr. Moore signed for her when he was a 30 year old customer and she a 16 year old server in a restaurant he frequented. She added a note and a date, but the message from Mr. Moore was authentic.
@we have to take all accusers seriously:
Yes indeed we do. That does not mean that we assume that their accusations are true. It means that we listen to them and investigate their credibility.
@Biden’s accuser may turn out to be just as credible as Kavanaugh’s:
Perhaps. She might also turn out to be just as credible as Paula Jones.
Somewhere along the way we need to preserve the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Just a recap of how the Russian trolling operation works (since at least 2016 and still going):
1. Plant outrageous fictional story in alt-right web outlets.
2. Push references to alt-right story in social media. Use bots and fake accounts to amplify the “buzz”.
3. Force response from the victim
4. Use outlets like “The Hill” to encourage Fox News to report the false claim and response.
5. Use left-wing outlets to argue about the false story, emphasizing the buzz.
6. Repeat 2-5 until mainstream media start reporting the “conflict”.
At the moment, we’re in the 2-5 loop, contributing to the publicity.
It’s ironic Taibbi and Harpers podcast is called “Useful Idiots” because they so often have acted like ones…
@But also, one of Biden’s chief surrogates, Anita Hill, is heavily involved with Time’s Up.:
Anita Hill a “chief surrogate” of Joe Biden? Not on the planet the rest of us live on.
Here on planet Earth, Joe Biden was Senate chair who ridiculed Anita Hill because Ms. Hill was telling the truth about Clarence Thomas and Mr. Biden didn’t want that truth told. Here on Planet Earth, Anita Hill famously said throughout most of 2019 that Mr. Biden’s “apology” wasn’t enough. Ms. Hill, so far as I know and am able to find on Google, has not yet even endorsed Mr. Biden — never mind become a “chief surrogate” for him.
Why should any of us pay any attention whatsoever to commentary from a source that claims that Anita Hill is a “chief surrogate” of Joe Biden?
My apologies.
Anita Dunn.
I miswrote.
Apologies accepted.
You sure? Since the only media I am seeing this in is Katie Halper who is a hardcore Bernie or Buster along with Matt Taibbi a noted Russiagate truther, the Hill podcast that brings a far left and far right populist together to take on the “elites”, the Intercept which is a Sanders outlet and another Russiagate Truther outlet and the Now Trumpist National Review which at least was the only publication to have the decency to call these allegations unproven.
So these are all people who have an agenda. Mainly, they would rather see Bernie compete in vain until the end of the primary cycle and are desperately hoping this late breaking scandal turns the tide. They are also invested in a second Trump term since they can once again blame the Democratic loss on the failure of centrism and neoliberalism. They would rather Trump wins and centrists lose.
I would rather leftists win and centrists lose in a primary, but in a general, there is no contest. All of these rich white journalists do not have to put up with the downside to having a racist in the White House. Biden is bad on some issues, he is not a racist. Biden is bad on Medicare for all, but he would also fully supply N95 masks to hospitals instead of tax cuts to the wealthy. It’s an all hands on deck election.
These are the same outlets that repeated right wing smears against the Clintons during 2016 and may or may not have tied to suspected Russian intelligence assets like Assange and Snowden and Roger Stone.
Bernie lost like 3-1 in the primary. I voted for the man twice and loved his recent fiery speeches on the Senate floor condemning corporate bailouts. America still needs his voice. It would be better served in the Senate helping push President Bidens agenda to the left than lining in vain for an 83 year old Bernie to win the nomination in 2024…. it’s over dudes.
Though I don’t begrudge Sanders continuing his challenge especially with June 2 shaping up to be another Super Tuesday.
It’s like that aphorism from Gandhi about Jesus; I love Bernie, it’s his followers I can’t stand.
Bernie has every right to compete and debate and he should to get his voice heard on these critical issues. I just worry too many of his supporters are in the “DNC is rigged” column and allergic to delegate math.
Bernie should be honest and address his supporters and admit that while it’s unlikely he will win, he wants to keep fighting for his issues. I could respect that. He could keep raising money for N95 masks and downballot Democrats. Pretending he has a shot so he can continue to get on TV is not the right move. So I hope his campaign can recalibrate around reality.
Not exactly complete, and what you left out of the quote may be important and pertinent: Gandhi said, “I like your Christ very much, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
I’m not convinced that followers of Sen. Sanders are all that unlike Sen Sanders…
I think the bigger issue is that this was the best deal we could get considering who controls the White House and the Senate. Considering that reality, I would work overtime to elect a Democratic President and Democratic Senate. This crisis will not go away with the Trump presidency. More bailouts will be needed in the future to recuse ordinary workers. Hopefully the right people will get elected to see that through. This was the most progressive bailout McConnell, Trump, and his cronies were willing to pass. Pelosi and Schumer played hardball and won. They are learning.
With any luck we are headed for a 1932-scale landslide. GOP is defending a lot of Senate seats this year.
Outright lunacy.
They didn’t put out an alternative vision and certainly did not pass one. And when Trump signed tonight, he said “F your concessions on the corporate giveaway” and there is not a damn thing they are going to do.
Everyone in this country lost today except some CEOs, and the Democrats didn’t do a thing to stop it.
The upward redistribution of wealth, into the hands of the connected few, is grounds for throwing out every person who voted for this legislation. There is very little pushback right now, even from Bernie. Dylan Ratigan on Jimmy Dore (mild profanity), is a rare example. But a populist revolt on the left is only a matter of time.
I join doubleman in being appalled at the weak response from Ms. Pelosi regarding the outrageous threats in Mr. Trump’s insulting signing statement.
We Democrats have not “won” yet, we’re barely in the game.
The correct response to the GOP for this legislation was something along the lines of “Corporate America received its bailout in the TWO TRILLION DOLLAR subsidy received from the GOP tax cut of 2017. If they’ve already squandered that money, then they must live with the results.”
When our nightly news is filled with stories of CEOs standing in line for groceries and of their families living under bridges with sheets of cardboard for a roof, then perhaps it will be time to reconsider corporate bailouts.
My daughter is a full-time bartender in Chicago. Like bars across America, her bar is shuttered by government action. When she attempts to file for unemployment compensation online, the website refuses to load even the front page. When she attempts to call, she either can’t get connected at all or sits in a hold queue for hours.
While politicians of all stripes proudly crow about the “generous” unemployment benefits they’ve enacted, victims like my daughter remain helpless and broke. Her rent is due by midnight next Tuesday. In the six weeks since this crisis began, has ANYBODY done ANYTHING to relieve her stress about that rent payment?
I’ll tell you what I think. I think that if this ever ends, then I think class action suits brought by people like my daughter should be filed against city, state, and federal governments claiming FULL REPAYMENT of every nickel that the government has taken from them as a result of these government-ordered shutdowns. This disaster has been enormously amplified by the utter incompetence of the government response, especially at the federal level.
Since large corporations and the ultrawealthy own the government, they should also pay the price for these reparations.
I don’t think anybody has “won” anything yet.
I could have sworn individuals were getting checks out of this and Dems had prevented this from becoming just a giveaway without at least some transparency, but I suppose it’s possible I’m a few days out of date.
I’m not talking about the $1,200 checks, I’m talking about unemployment benefits. There’s been lots of crowing from Democrats about how they “won” because the GOP allowed $1T in new unemployment benefits. Here’s a typical summary of the various provisions of the “CARE Act”. From that summary:
This makes a great newspaper piece. What I don’t see ANYBODY talking about is nitty-gritty information about how and when somebody like you or my daughter actually receives unemployment compensation IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT, and how much they get.
My daughter is in her early 30s. She has been a responsible citizen, she’s worked her entire life. She’s put aside a little bit of savings (that’s hard because she’s carrying a crushing student debt burden). Writing a rent check a few days from now is MUCH different if she can reasonably predict what she’ll receive in unemployment compensation and when.
At the moment, what she gets instead is a blank web page that ultimate times out and a telephone number that either can’t even be connected, rings forever, or drops her into an eternal hold queue.
I’m already starting to contact everybody I know in government to ask how we can organize a nationwide IT “rapid-response team”. for addressing government issues like this.
It seems to me that we ought to be focused on what each of us can do to address the here-and-now crisis, as it applies to each of us.