Aaron Blake/WaPo:
Why Alexander Vindman’s testimony is big
Here’s why Vindman is different than the others, though: In addition to delivering it in sworn testimony, that testimony is the first by a White House official who was on the July 25 call between Trump and Zelensky. His opening statement doesn’t dwell on that call too much — he does say, “This would all undermine U.S. national security” — but that gives you a sense of how close to these decisions and conversations he was.
By contrast, Taylor’s most significant allegation is secondhand, relying upon another official telling him that Sondland had conveyed the quid pro quo to a top Ukrainian official. (We’re still waiting for the testimony of that official, Tim Morrison.) And Sondland seemed to be putting a good face on whatever quid pro quo existed.
CNN:
Liz Cheney calls attacks on White House Ukraine expert's patriotism 'shameful'
"We need to show that we are better than that as a nation," Cheney said, adding, "Their patriotism, their love of country, we're talking about decorated veterans who have served this nation, who have put their lives on the line. It is shameful to question their patriotism, their love of this nation, and we should not be involved in that process."
That’s ‘Republican attacks’, fixed it for you.
Longer list in addition to Liz Cheney from National Review:
Iowa GOP senator Joni Ernst said Vindman was an “honorable man” and that the attacks on him were “inappropriate.”
“That guy’s a Purple Heart. I think it would be a mistake to attack his credibility,” South Dakota’s John Thune, the second-ranking GOP senator, told Politico. “You can obviously take issue with the substance and there are different interpretations about all that stuff. But I wouldn’t go after him personally. He’s a patriot.”
“I’m not going to question the patriotism of any of the people coming forward,” Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell said.
“It’s absurd, disgusting, and way off the mark. This is a decorated American soldier and he should be given the respect that his service to our country demands,” Utah senator Mitt Romney said of attacks on Vindman.
Think about it. The WH was desperate to take this guy down, but Republican Senators were not playing. That gives you an idea of how much the Senate is in play.
WaPo:
Firsthand account of Trump’s Ukraine call puts GOP in bind, emboldens Democrats
Democrats described the testimony of Vindman and others as crucial in the abuse-of-office case.
“I think the big picture here is, we’ve talked to a lot of people who are firsthand, direct participants in various aspects of the story. And with every new witness, it becomes harder to deny the facts, and it’s become more embarrassing to the president’s conduct because it reaffirms the central details” of a quid pro quo, said Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-N.J.), an Intelligence Committee member.
Philip Bump:
The fundamentally un-American attacks on Alexander Vindman
This idea of dual loyalty is something that Trump himself has raised. During his attacks on a group of Democratic lawmakers this summer for purportedly being anti-Semitic, Trump suggested that American Jews who support Democrats are being disloyal to Israel. He’d made similar comments in the past.
The reaction to Vindman, though, reveals a fundamental hypocrisy in the Trumpian approach to immigrants. What Trump prioritizes in migrants who come to the United States is self-sufficiency and assimilation. He prefers migrants from Europe over Africa or the Middle East. What he wants is Alexander Vindmans — until Alexander Vindman points out where the loyalties of Trump himself might be questionable.
Seth Masket/FiveThirtyEight:
Warren Is Increasingly Popular With Democratic Activists In Early States
And in this installment, we’ve reached something of a milestone: For the first time since I started conducting these interviews last December, a majority of respondents are now backing a candidate. Fifteen of the 29 people who answered my latest round of interviews claim to be backing a candidate now, up from 11 of 29 in August (although one activist changed who they were backing over the course of my interviews with them, switching from former Vice President Joe Biden to Warren). The most striking development, however, is that four of these activists now back Warren, while zero backed her in the last round. Warren is also the first female candidate who any activist in my sample has committed to support. One new Warren supporter told me that it was Warren’s policies that sealed the deal, adding that Warren’s performance at the debate in Houston, which the activist attended, “was especially influential.” Another said Warren “has the clearest message” and “the plans to back up that message.”
Tyler Pager/Bloomberg:
Joe Biden in Danger of Humiliating Loss in Iowa, Top Democrats Warn
Another warning sign for Biden in Iowa is that Warren and Buttigieg were the top second choices for caucus-goers in the latest USA Today/Suffolk poll. In the caucuses, candidates who do not reach a 15% threshold are not considered viable in that precinct and their supporters move to a different candidate who has reached the threshold.
When Biden does campaign in the state, he has often skipped the community centers, school-based town halls and the visits to diners that Iowans prize so much. Instead, he has tried to project the aura of the Oval Office by delivering speeches from a TelePrompter without taking questions. That has the benefit of helping him avoid the verbal gaffes that hurt his campaign over the summer, but it has made the famously friendly politician seem aloof.
Keith Porter, the president of a foreign policy think tank in Muscatine, said he was surprised by the lack of communication from Biden’s team in the state. Porter, who attended a Biden event in Muscatine last Wednesday, said he was leaning toward Warren but has also been pleasantly surprised by Buttigieg.
Jenna Johnson/WaPo and read every word:
In Milwaukee, an inner-city group tackles a key Democratic need: Turning out black voters
BLOC’s [Black Leaders Organizing for Communities ] first meeting with a Democratic presidential candidate came in March, when Beto O’Rourke stopped by during the initial week of his campaign. Although the former congressman from El Paso spoke passionately about wanting to wipe out systemic racism and “repair the incredibly broken system of justice and opportunity in this country,” the ambassadors repeatedly cut him off and asked for evidence that he has spent time in neighborhoods like theirs and truly understands their problems.
“He’s a nice guy, but he’s just now doing his research on us,” said Tamer Malone, 21, who didn’t vote in the 2016 election and grilled O’Rourke, asking why she should trust him when so many white politicians tell black voters all the right things while running for office, then “turn their back” once elected.
In April, Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) arrived for what was supposed to be a “silent canvas” — an opportunity for the candidate to listen as the activists knocked on doors and talked with people. But he loudly talked throughout, often running ahead of the BLOC staffer and shouting, “This is Rick, I’m Cory, we’re here with BLOC.”
“He was like running to the next door, trying to get to as many as possible, and he was always talking . . . I was like, ‘Dude, stop,’ ” said Rick Banks, 28, BLOC’s political director, who canvassed with Booker. “He keeps saying that he’s the only presidential candidate who’s from the inner city, but it’s usually only in terms of crime and guns and things like that. In terms of other issues, like investment in underinvested communities, and really being vocal about the issues that are affecting black communities, other than shootings, I don’t think he has led — and I can honestly say the same about Kamala Harris,” the Democratic senator from California….
Castro is the favorite candidate of many of the ambassadors, although most say they doubt he has a real shot at winning the nomination. They also like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), whom Lang met at a private gathering the senator had with organizers from across the country. Former vice president Joe Biden has not shown up, but his authorship of the 1994 crime bill, which led to sharp increases in incarcerations, has made him an unpopular figure with most of the activists.
Last month, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) stopped by for about 30 minutes to tout her ideas for increasing access to voting. She took a couple of questions from the group, whose members asked about her time as a prosecutor and pushed her for details on how she would help the poor, rather than the middle class, which they saw her as more focused on. Her brief appearance angered several of the ambassadors, and none of the 16 listed her as their favorite candidate.
James Hohmann/WaPo:
New poll shows why Trump’s defenders are more focused on impeachment process than substance
The Grinnell poll, conducted Oct. 17-23, surveyed 1,003 adults. Its margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. The numbers of people who say it’s wrong to seek assistance from a foreign government are remarkably consistent across ages, demographic groups, education levels, income and even party lines. More than 80 percent of self-identified Republicans, evangelicals and rural dwellers say it’s not okay for a president to ask for assistance from a foreign government to help win an election.
“When it comes to foreign interference, having findings this close to a consensus are rare in polling these days,” said Selzer, who also conducts the gold-standard Iowa poll for the Des Moines Register. “The substance of the question at hand in the impeachment inquiry does not seem in dispute. What’s appropriate in terms of process and consequences is far less clear.”
Keep in mind the process complaints have fallen apart. Even Trump wants to tackle the substance and not process, because if you‘re arguing process you’re losing. Of course, the substance is even more against them but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.