Happy July 4th! Keep working to make this truly the Land of the Free (whether it ever was or not, it’s an ideal worth fighting for).
The Hill:
Farm group: There’s ‘a lot of anxiety’ over Trump tariffs
A National Farmers Union representative says American farmers are growing even more concerned over President Trump’s new trade tariffs.
Matt Purdue, who is the Government Relations Representative for the organization, thinks there’s “a lot of anxiety” within rural communities across the country over the Trump’s trade policies, which impose steep tariffs on some of America’s closet allies like Canada and China.
“I think a lot of people are willing to take him at his word – that what he’s doing is going to be helpful for farmers and ranchers in rural communities,” Purdue said. “At the same time, there’s a lot of anxiety and I think that anxiety is growing over time.”
Purdue acknowledged that Trump was right to be point out the flaws in U.S. trade policy and make sure that America gets a fair shake on a global scale when it comes to trade agreements. He pointed to one of the main concerns for the National Farmer’s Union – country-of-origin labeling (COOL). This is a consumer labeling law that requires retailers to identify the country of origin where certain foods are processed.
But instead of being able to bring stronger trade agreements to the table, Purdue says the president has sparked a trade war.
CNN:
Dubious Fox News article appears to have sparked Trump attack on Obama
President Donald Trump appeared to rely on a dubious Fox News report Tuesday morning to unleash an attack on his predecessor, accusing President Barack Obama, without any real evidence, of granting citizenship to 2,500 Iranians as part of nuclear deal negotiations.
"Just out that Obama Administration granted citizenship, during the terrible Iran Deal negotiation, to 2,500 Iranians - including to government officials," Trump tweeted. "How big (and bad) is that?"
Jeff Prescott, the former senior director on Obama's National Security Council, called Trump's allegation "absurd and entirely false."
That Trump lied or flat out made stuff up because he heard it on Fox is bad enough. But the next time might be far more serious.
Tom Nichols/USA Today:
Trump treats 'national security' like a political slogan. That won't keep us safe.
Every president has relied on the totem of national security to bolster his standing and shore up his support. But no president has matched Trump in his utter indifference and lack of understanding about security. Other chief executives have had different ideas of what constitutes “security,” but this administration is unique in using the language without attaching any content to it beyond what plays well at any given moment with the president’s base.
There is no way to justify the internment of children, for example, as a national security threat. A state without borders is not a state; but a state that separates children from parents as a deterrent to illegal immigration is not a state worthy of the sacrifices of the American Revolution we celebrate again this summer. We can secure the border without losing our virtue.
Likewise, trade among our closest allies, even when we disagree over fairness, is not a national security threat. To the contrary, Trump’s policy of destroying the bonds of democratic and historical attachment between the United States and its North American and European friends, is potentially a significant danger to our security, one no doubt celebrated by dictators in Moscow and Beijing.
They’re not wearing hard hats, and they’re likely not union dinosaurs. Other than that… (original source not identified. Possibly it’s from a manual for school age space aliens).
Greg Sargent/WaPo:
Keep the focus on Trump’s cruelty and incompetence
“These are the guys that go in and take MS-13, and they take them out,” Trump said. “You get rid of ICE, you’re going to have a country that you’re going to be afraid to walk out of your house.” This comes after Trump tweeted that the “liberal left” wants “Open Borders,” which would make crime “rampant and uncontrollable,” and that the left wants to do away with “all police.” Trump has absurdly claimed that he has “watched ICE liberate towns” from MS-13, and has falsely called Nancy Pelosi an “MS-13 lover.”
As an answer to all this, Democrats might consider offering some variation of the following, in every conceivable forum:
Trump’s cruel and incompetent policies just ripped more than 2,000 children away from their parents, and there are no indications when he’ll be able to reunite them, even though a judge has ordered him to do so. It’s time for him to show some leadership and clean up the immense humanitarian catastrophe he has created, rather than wasting all of our time with his petty little tweets and lies.
The claim that “Abolish ICE” is a liability for Democrats is a proxy for a larger argument over whether the broader liberal backlash to Trump is unleashing an insurgency that will force Democrats to take overly radical positions or compromise the party among swing voters. After the shocking win of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who supports doing away with ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), The Post and the New York Times reported that this prospect has Democratic leaders worried.
Democratic leaders like Joe Crowley? I can see what they’re worried about… they themselves will need to campaign for their jobs. But the bigger picture is taking back the House, so I’m over it.
Pew Research:
Shifting Public Views on Legal Immigration Into the U.S.
Many unaware that most immigrants in the U.S. are here legally
Since 2001, the share of Americans who favor increased legal immigration into the U.S. has risen 22 percentage points (from 10% to 32%), while the share who support a decrease has declined 29 points (from 53% to 24%).
The shift is mostly driven by changing views among Democrats. The share of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents who say legal immigration into the U.S. should be increased has doubled since 2006, from 20% to 40%.
Republicans’ views also have changed, though more modestly. The share of Republicans and Republican leaners who say legal immigration should be decreased has fallen 10 percentage points since 2006, from 43% to 33%.
33 point gender gap. Amazing. Why, it’s almost as if women care more about women’s health and controlling their own bodies than men do.
Howard Lavine and Wendy Rahn/NY Times (my bold):
What if Trump’s Nativism Actually Hurts Him?
We can’t know whether this asymmetry across elections is a function of Mr. Trump’s nativism, Mrs. Clinton’s inclusive pronouncements about immigration or both. What we can say is that after Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton repeatedly clashed over the issue during the course of the campaign, Mr. Trump’s electoral gain — relative to the percentages Mr. Romney, John McCain and George W. Bush received on the issue — paled against Mrs. Clinton’s gains over Mr. Kerry and Mr. Obama…
n 2016 (and 2017 and 2018), Mr. Trump dispensed with dog whistles in favor of a more explicit strategy of cultural confrontation, which prompted — and may continue to prompt — a more powerful liberal counterreaction.
For these reasons, we think that Mr. Trump’s explicit appeals to intolerance are likely to help Democrats more than Republicans. If we’re right, there will be less incentive for future Republicans to contest elections by instigating group division. Perhaps then partisan competition may return to one of its core concerns: how much the government should intervene in the economy and what the proper size of the safety net is. As polls consistently show, voters care more about these economic questions than they do about cultural politics.
Democracy Fund Voter Study Group:
Jumping to Collusions
Americans React to Russia and the Mueller Investigation
Key Findings
- While nearly half of Americans believe that the special counsel’s Russia investigation is being conducted fairly, most of those who voted for President Trump do not.
- Despite skepticism about the integrity of the investigation, Trump voters believe that the allegations being investigated by the special counsel would be serious, if proven.
- Most Americans do not believe that President Trump should remove Robert Mueller or pardon senior members of his administration. It’s only among those who have no confidence in the fairness of the investigation that a majority support removing Mueller or pardoning senior administration officials.
- Among Republicans, those who voted for Governor John Kasich and Senator Marco Rubio in the 2016 presidential primary are the most supportive of the investigation.
Look at the second bullet point. Mueller’s report and potential indictments will matter. Don’t believe the gaslighting that says it won’t.
And finally, today’s Pruitt watch entry:
CNN:
Pruitt directly asked Trump to replace Sessions with him
The offer from Pruitt -- and the President's consideration -- further signals how confident he has remained in Pruitt despite a dizzying number of ethics issues. Asked in June if he planned to fire Pruitt, Trump declined to answer, noting the "fantastic job" he has done at the EPA.
"I'm not happy about certain things, I'll be honest," Trump told reporters on the North Lawn of the White House. "I'm not happy about certain things. But he's done a fantastic job running the EPA, which is very overriding. But I am not happy about it."
Vote them out. They enable this stuff every damn day.