Trump’s bad pick for the Federal Reserve

That Fed nomination is a really big deal – and a really bad one, telling you a lot about Trump and his party https://t.co/YWiRrxIPjx
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) March 25, 2019

This is the first genuinely bad Trump pick for the Fed. But make no mistake: It's a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad pick. He hasn't gotten a thing right in twenty years, (check the record), and the Senate should not confirm him. https://t.co/q701SriSZz
— Justin Wolfers (@JustinWolfers) March 22, 2019

Scoop on how this went down: At lunch last week, Kudlow showed Trump Stephen Moore’s op-ed in WSJ.

Trump said: Why didn’t we make him Fed chair.

Kudlow said you could name him to one of open seats.

Trump said call him.

Later Trump called Moore, too.https://t.co/NW7IuewBs5 https://t.co/1Vr20OEiTm
— Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) March 22, 2019

“Former Wall Street Journal editorial page colleagues complained that he was not always careful with economic facts in his writing during the time he worked at the newspaper.” @vtg2 and me on @StephenMoore for the Fed. https://t.co/82qo4AsDUI
— Ben White (@morningmoneyben) March 22, 2019

I just remembered that I was on CNN with Stephen Moore when he said that Doug Jones' support of abortion was morally equivalent to the allegations against Roy Moore. https://t.co/QPZ00PHJvv
— Philip Bump (@pbump) March 27, 2019

Here it is… IRS went after Stephen Moore for $75,328.80 in back taxes on January 29, 2018. pic.twitter.com/GWIpMQdRtC
— Heather Long (@byHeatherLong) March 27, 2019

"'I will be independent,' [Moore] told POLITICO in a phone interview Tuesday night, though he admitted, 'I’m a big fan of Donald Trump’s.'" https://t.co/xdhGAG4mYq
— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) March 27, 2019

Amazing. Moore isn't just a hack, with terrible judgment. He's a hack who has repeatedly shown himself unable even to get basic facts right 1/ https://t.co/OxCzhbTA0J
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) March 22, 2019

Of note: Moore has only a master's degree in economics. The GOP in 2011 blocked an Obama nominee who had earned a Nobel Memorial Prize in economics. https://t.co/urgy52IMVL
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) March 22, 2019

"I won the Nobel Prize in economics for my work on unemployment and the labor market. But I am unqualified to serve on the board of the Federal Reserve — at least according to the Republican senators who have blocked my nomination."

-MIT economist Peter Diamond, June 2011 https://t.co/XhJxaeHXd2
— Brendan Duke (@Brendan_Duke) March 22, 2019

And one at mar a Lago. https://t.co/OW7ANvPFeX https://t.co/h5PcNVElhX
— David Fahrenthold (@Fahrenthold) March 22, 2019

Trump just named Stephen Moore—a terrible pick—for the Fed. Here’s Moore getting destroyed in real-time on basic facts by @crampell. pic.twitter.com/7HDrU0jNXi
— Brian Klaas (@brianklaas) March 22, 2019

Trump reportedly wants to put Stephen Moore on the Fed, which Moore says should loosen monetary policy because the Fed policy is causing "deflation." We do NOT actually have deflation right now.
— Catherine Rampell (@crampell) March 22, 2019

I see @BenSasse is continuing his downward intellectual descent. https://t.co/mn5KJ2ggTj
— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) March 25, 2019

Would Sasse choose a surgeon or a pilot based on who angers the "establishment" the most? Sometimes actual expertise is important. https://t.co/7l9NWX4AH1
— Catherine Rampell (@crampell) March 25, 2019

Steve Moore: “I’m kind of new to this game, frankly, so I’m going to be on a steep learning curve myself about how the Fed operates, how the Federal Reserve makes its decisions.” https://t.co/0fZJlPbhkU via @bpolitics
— David Wessel (@davidmwessel) March 25, 2019

My cat would be a better pick 1/ https://t.co/y0HWBPhxbq
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) March 22, 2019

Of course Donald Trump’s nominee to the Fed is catastrophically hackish.https://t.co/vSvMya49Uy pic.twitter.com/vQvSbvRWol
— Jamison Foser (@jamisonfoser) March 22, 2019

From a Bush 43 appointee: https://t.co/DSOJDnVsQq
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) March 24, 2019

Here's no less than Stephen Moore arguing for "Atlas Shrugged" as the blueprint out of the financial crisis in January 2009. His nomination to the Fed must be withdrawn.

https://t.co/M0NLCMt3Gd via @WSJ
— Invictus (@TBPInvictus) March 23, 2019

this emphatic thumbs down from Greg Mankiw – a leading Republican economist – poses a significant problem for Steve Moore’s nomination to the Federal Reserve Board https://t.co/DUOszwYV5F
— John Harwood (@JohnJHarwood) March 23, 2019

Trump campaign goes on the attack

They are the last people to accuse others of lying. Sad!

The Trump campaign thinks that people who have made "outrageous and unsupported claims" in the past should not appear on TV — which seems like it might cripple their campaign strategy. https://t.co/GVup1iFo71
— Philip Bump (@pbump) March 25, 2019

This is an unprecedented abuse of Presidential power. https://t.co/gRIWdidp73
— Jon Cryer (@MrJonCryer) March 25, 2019

The quotes in this memo are accurate and the press shouldn't be bullied by nonsense like this. There is significant evidence of collusion. There may not be enough evidence to support bringing a conspiracy case in court, but there is plenty of evidence. We need to see the report. https://t.co/HOssfXmBQq
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) March 25, 2019

"[Trump] is feeling vindicated…He's sending out memos from his campaign asking networks to have a blacklist on certain people…In a political sense his campaign will be to now cast doubt and to delegitimize all of these other investigations"-@SykesCharlie w/ @NicolleDWallace pic.twitter.com/I1EmgejgfX
— Deadline White House (@DeadlineWH) March 25, 2019

Republicans demand apologies, resignations and investigations of their opponents after Barr reports the Mueller investigation found no Trump conspiracy with the Russian government: https://t.co/u29LwNFoy5
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) March 25, 2019

Trump, who is Putin’s stooge, accuses others of treason!

The Barr letter on the Mueller report

I don’t think we can evaluate the report until we see it. I am not surprised that Barr concluded there was no obstruction of justice – he has basically endorsed presidential authority which is why Trump picked him.

I don’t know what the legal definition of conspiracy is and apparently Trump and his campaign didn’t meet it. They met with the Russians to get dirt on Clinton. If that’s not illegal, it’s still wrong. Trump told Russia on live TV to get Clinton’s emails and they listened. If that’s not illegal, it’s still wrong.

Barr has helped Trump by squashing the obstruction of justice issue. I want Congress to weigh in.

I still believe Trump is a criminal and belongs in jail. If nothing else, he (AKA individual 1) participated on the election-related crimes that Michael Cohen is going to jail for. I hope he is indicted by SDNY as soon as he leaves office. There are lots of other investigations and we’ll see what they find.

The letter states that Mueller found Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Will Trump finally admit this or does his still believe his friend Putin?

If I was Trump and his team, I would be pleased with the outcome. However, they still have to lie about it and claim it was total vindication. It wasn’t. Isn’t the truth ever good enough for them?

One big question – if they didn’t commit crimes, why did Trump and his team lie over and over again about contacts with Russia? Doesn’t that matter?

There have been hundreds, maybe thousands of tweets. I am posting a few of the best overviews.

The Barr story, made simple:

* Trump won in part due to a massive foreign attack on our democracy.

* Trump engaged in extensive abuses of power to prevent a reckoning into that.

* Trump's AG is blocking a public airing on both those fronts.

My piece:https://t.co/Ox6969NPcs
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) March 25, 2019

This is a terrific, highly skeptical NYT deconstruction of William Barr's decision to jump in and clear Trump on obstruction, when Mueller pointedly did not do so.

First, the NYT strongly suggests decision was highly irregular and driven by politics:https://t.co/XsnJT6EC5P pic.twitter.com/jctH9kpvbf
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) March 26, 2019

Trump may not have “conspired” or “coordinated” with the Russian government, but he welcomed its interference in the U.S. election, lied to cover up the attack, and did his utmost to stymie investigations of Russia’s actions. My @PostOpinions column: https://t.co/U9Pz3RRlUy
— Max Boot (@MaxBoot) March 25, 2019

Why did Mueller punt on obstruction, leaving the decision to Barr?https://t.co/1lNuqiZTB3
— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) March 25, 2019

A very smart take on Barr and the Mueller Report, from one not hostile to Trump, @henryolsenEPPC https://t.co/Pryx8IDI0J
— Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) March 26, 2019

This thread 🔥 https://t.co/ZBZspCk2U1
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) March 25, 2019

Brilliant thread. I hope all media reads. https://t.co/nl5m6AjYVM
— Mimi Rocah (@Mimirocah1) March 25, 2019

My new Letter from Washington>>> https://t.co/aQKPTSr0B1
— Susan Glasser (@sbg1) March 25, 2019

Not to get crazy here: but how does Barr’s summary memo negate concerns over Trump’s pursuit of business deals in Moscow, his shady inauguration funding or his false statements (such as the one dictated on AF1)? Can’t people find that troublesome even sans proof of collusion? https://t.co/d46WbIDdeB
— Sam Stein (@samstein) March 26, 2019

"It seems hard for me to imagine that Bob Mueller asked Bill Barr to do this"

"That's just not the way he's wound" – fmr AG @EricHolder on Barr making Mueller probe obstruction conclusion pic.twitter.com/HnM9OzUZR9
— TheBeat w/Ari Melber (@TheBeatWithAri) March 25, 2019

"I talked to my former boss Eric Holder today, he said he couldn't remember one time in 6 years that a prosecution decision came to him without a recommendation"@matthewamiller on former Attorney General Eric Holder and the Barr report: pic.twitter.com/79yMLOPbDL
— TheBeat w/Ari Melber (@TheBeatWithAri) March 25, 2019

“On close reading, Barr’s putative summary of the Mueller report clears Trump of only the most narrowly drawn accusations, which nobody was making.” Read @brianbeutler. https://t.co/5yzPzgCipI
— Jamil Smith (@JamilSmith) March 25, 2019

THIS IS WHAT WE CARE ABOUT👇🏾 https://t.co/6Er8iDTzQD
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) March 25, 2019

THREAD. The claim that the activities of the Trump campaign didn't meet the criminal threshold of conspiracy doesn't address the nat security question of whether these members were or are acting in the country's best interests. A trip down memory lane of my pieces that explain:
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) March 25, 2019

"[Barr's] version of the Mueller report is imprinted on the brains of lots and lots of people. So when it later comes out that, well, it's more of a mixed bag for the president, everyone's moved on, it's old news, and I worry about that." — @PreetBharara https://t.co/1oKi61n1Gz pic.twitter.com/tMPrXOenSm
— Pod Save America (@PodSaveAmerica) March 25, 2019

This is a very important read as the entire media rushes to exonerate Trump based on a report they haven’t read summarized by a Trump ally with a known bias against the Mueller probe https://t.co/2qCxZyIFQV
— Dan Pfeiffer (@danpfeiffer) March 25, 2019

President Trump's potential criminal liability is far from over. There is compelling evidence that he may have personally committed up to eight criminal offenses while campaigning for president and during the first year of his presidency. https://t.co/gvM99107yI
— Citizens for Ethics (@CREWcrew) March 25, 2019

"If there is any exoneration on the question of whether Trump obstructed justice, it has been done by Barr, not by Mueller," writes @neal_katyal: https://t.co/Taj59EyjcG
— POLITICO Magazine (@POLITICOMag) March 25, 2019

The president and his talkers falsely denied Russian interference. They falsely denied meeting with the interferers. They falsely denied that Trump was pursuing business opportunities in Russia through election day …
— David Frum (@davidfrum) March 25, 2019

One question:
What the Mueller probe established, according to the AG, is that the Russians hacked the DNC and engaged in an aggressive, covert campaign to influence our election.
So why did @realDonaldTrump stand next to Putin in Helsinki and meekly accept his denials?
— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) March 24, 2019

My first reaction, having not read the report, is how could Ken Starr and Republicans conclude Clinton obstructed justice based on the facts and Donald Trump did not. Clinton never interfered with probe, never fired FBI director, never dangled pardons or threatened witnesses
— Joe Lockhart (@joelockhart) March 24, 2019

Mueller found no smoking gun of collusion, but he clearly has no doubts that Russia interfered in the election to benefit Trump. Barr’s letter discusses Russian interference as a given, even though the president has previously suggested it's a hoax. https://t.co/lq4AEhKfHw
— James Hohmann (@jameshohmann) March 25, 2019

In case what's missing from your life is a @lawfareblog emergency podcast with @DavidKris @Susan_Hennessey @carriecordero and me–on you know what. https://t.co/z8hO306gAC
— Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) March 25, 2019

Recent polls of Democrats

The top priority is beating Trump. That’s more important than positions on specific issues. We have to get this lying bigot out of the White House!

More important in your vote in the Democratic primary: supporting the candidate you like the most or the candidate who has the best chance of beating Trump?
Best chance 51%
Like most 36%
(Fox Poll, Dem. primary & caucus voters 3/17-20/19)
see full wording: https://t.co/Ia9DLzNsgc
— PollingReport.com (@pollreport) March 25, 2019

Views of Dems: They think Biden can win but align with Bernie
Beat Shares
Trump Positions
Biden 32% 21%
Sanders 14% 31%
Harris 16% 7%
O’Rourke 11% 11%
Warren 6% 5%
Kerry 4% 4%
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) March 19, 2019

Lukewarm take: the conventional wisdom is right that Biden, Bernie, Harris, Beto are the 4 candidates most likely to win the Democratic nomination in some order. https://t.co/VogcZrTbsf
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) March 19, 2019

Trump wants to limit aid to Puerto Rico

He only cares about his base. We have seen this over and over. Sad!

"At an Oval Office meeting on Feb. 22, Trump asked top advisers for ways to limit federal support from going to Puerto Rico, believing it is taking money that should be going to the mainland, according to senior administration officials" https://t.co/JNtdYVsPL0
— Mark Berman (@markberman) March 25, 2019

NEW: More than 1 million Puerto Ricans just had their food stamp benefits cut, a devastating blow as the island tries to rebound from Hurricane Maria.

–Parents go hungry so their kids can eat
–HIV Clinics can't afford supplies https://t.co/VLvvL8sET6 @JStein_WaPo @jdawsey1 pic.twitter.com/YWszBfgRt1
— Heather Long (@byHeatherLong) March 25, 2019

*while being not white https://t.co/KGsn9C0Lzp
— Zerlina Maxwell (@ZerlinaMaxwell) March 26, 2019

HUD inspector general’s office says it’ll look into whether White House interfered with Puerto Rico disaster aid https://t.co/EMDOM09CB7
— Damian Paletta (@damianpaletta) March 26, 2019

Trump privately complains about Puerto Rico aid to GOP senators as he boasts a "clean bill of health" from Mueller probe, tells Rs to not kill the GND so he can run on it, and other things. w/ @jdawsey1 @pkcapitol https://t.co/YXb98jOyQl
— Seung Min Kim (@seungminkim) March 26, 2019

Critical week for gerrymandering

Two gerrymandering cases go before the Supreme Court. They are North Carolina (Republican) and Maryland (rare Democratic gerrymandering). The court has been reluctant to get involved in political gerrymandering cases. If they don’t this time, I am counting on Democrats in the congress. They included it in H.R. 1 which passed the House. Of course, the Senate won’t even discuss it since Republicans are the main beneficiaries and thus are not interested in fair elections. Sad!

Recent polls show that most Americans on both sides of the aisle want the court to step in to put an end to gerrymandering. If the court doesn’t act, its risks appearing more, not less, political, says Brennan Center expert @tomTMwolf. https://t.co/hFIaNJISm5
— Brennan Center (@BrennanCenter) March 25, 2019

Typical Walker. This is utter nonsense. Under his leadership, Wisconsin is one of the most rigged/unfair states in the country. He and his cronies in the legislature gerrymandered in 2011 and then used that power to pass a discriminatory voter ID law that targets people of color https://t.co/yqA74Nh7xY
— Eric Holder (@EricHolder) March 21, 2019

https://twitter.com/bgmc31/status/1109047027483074560

If SCOTUS legalizes extreme partisan gerrymandering before next round of redistricting that will have as devastating an impact on democracy as anything in Mueller report. Pay attention to NC/MD cases this week https://t.co/fQIEuXndOO
— Ari Berman (@AriBerman) March 25, 2019

The Democratic governor of North Carolina & the Republican governor of Maryland say in a joint op-ed that it’s time for SCOTUS to put limits on gerrymandering. #fairmaps https://t.co/ibT7Nc6NzQ
— Michael Li 李之樸 (@mcpli) March 25, 2019

https://twitter.com/letamericavote/status/1109970651471765504

North Carolina is evenly split politically. But Republicans drew maps that gave them 10 of the state's 13 House seats. Can they do that? The Supreme Court is about to decide. https://t.co/p0p6kVLMmI
— NYT National News (@NYTNational) March 25, 2019

"You don’t need to agree with the statement, and you don’t need to support partisan considerations in redistricting … But you should understand the full story." @RalphHise and @RepDavidRLewis give context to a controversial gerrymandering statement: https://t.co/FrDnFd2NYD
— The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) March 25, 2019

An analysis of 2018 election results from @AP finds Republicans had a built-in advantage in how political districts were drawn that helped reduce Democratic gains. https://t.co/rqk4jPTghl
— The Associated Press (@AP) March 21, 2019

Pee tape prayer candle

You can get a Pee tape prayer candle here: https://omfg.church/

I think they’re great – the picture is of the one I purchased.

The Pee Tape made it into the report. https://t.co/7h8ODxpA5u
— Slate (@Slate) April 21, 2019

Counties that hosted a 2016 Trump rally saw a 226 percent increase in hate crimes

This story has been buried by the obsession over the Mueller report but it’s really important. Trump’s hateful rhetoric sparks hateful acts. Words have consequences. He always denies it but it is clearly true. Sad!

The other Friday report. https://t.co/SLHYgLB2Lh
— Sherrilyn Ifill (@Sifill_LDF) March 23, 2019

Florida Man challenge

@_Florida Man is great

From botched robberies to deadly cockroach-eating contests, it seems like there's a wild story about a Florida man for every day of the year https://t.co/Mbv2XrsTkO
— CNN (@CNN) March 23, 2019

People are doing the "Florida Man" challenge … Here's what it is: https://t.co/kXWwYd9QxB
— MarketWatch (@MarketWatch) March 23, 2019

More on the Electoral College

It’s good that there is a discussion on it. Time for it to go!

i am a maniac and wrote about the electoral college again, addressing the most common arguments against ending it. https://t.co/wogpOHcEm7
— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) March 21, 2019

The current Electoral College debate confirms that powerful parts of the Republican Party have given up on trying to become a party that could be confident of winning elections by winning more votes. https://t.co/8SsxkeF6Mv
— Jacob T. Levy (@jtlevy) March 20, 2019

Yes, because this was already a standard Democratic position after 2000 for similar reasons! The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact started in 2006, the main reason it stalled for awhile was unrelated D losses at state level https://t.co/uIa44q8xeR
— Benjy Sarlin (@BenjySarlin) March 20, 2019

yes, because it is bad https://t.co/E1CraTOC0Y
— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) March 20, 2019

Trump has tried to exaggerate the significance of his victory by claiming the Electoral College is stacked in favor of Democrats, although most political scientists believe the opposite https://t.co/1U8EmbUOoe
— Yahoo News (@YahooNews) March 20, 2019

Opinion: Why Elizabeth Warren is wrong about the Electoral College https://t.co/AJ28nvhKr5
— POLITICO (@politico) March 21, 2019

I don’t agree but here’s an opposing view.

The Electoral College has been debated since the days of James Madison, who called it "evil."

So could it actually be abolished? @JohnAvlon explores that in today’s #RealityCheck. https://t.co/lCGCfDTMSL pic.twitter.com/Z1Tct6bMQL
— CNN (@CNN) March 20, 2019

Pundits who are implying that eliminating the Electoral College is some sort of radical position should check the polls. Most people support a Constitutional amendment to change to a popular vote. https://t.co/92DHVMFTgv
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) March 20, 2019

Abolish the Electoral College. Have the direct vote of the people choose the President. To ensure national support – if one candidate doesn’t get 50% of the vote have a runoff 4 weeks after the election between the top two vote recipients. More fair. Better for true democracy.
— Eric Holder (@EricHolder) March 20, 2019

Sounds like someone who lost the popular vote by almost 3 million votes. https://t.co/GaDPqUlW0z
— Joe Lockhart (@joelockhart) March 20, 2019

A rare example of Trump admitting he changed his mind. He used to trash the electoral college https://t.co/7i1YqcMVqA
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) March 20, 2019

The idea that amending the Constitution—or simply proposing amendments—is somehow radical is a recent phenomenon and a silly one. The 2016 Republican platform called for five constitutional amendments (abortion, same-sex marriage, term limits, balanced-budget, education). https://t.co/eLJeEmAirM
— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) March 19, 2019

This one is even worse than it looks — it’s from election night 2012 when Trump, ineptly following the returns, thought Obama would lose the popular vote. Obama won by 4%. https://t.co/oCTC98kUIJ
— Eric Columbus (@EricColumbus) March 20, 2019