Obama State of the Union Cartoons (Remember)

Ex-CIA and Democrat: Democrats should own mistakes, reach out to Trump voters in State of the Union response

As President Trump prepares to deliver his first State of the Union address, Democrats have selected Rep. Joe Kennedy III, D-Mass., to deliver the party’s response. If history is any guide, Kennedy will criticize President Trump and promote the Democratic Party instead.

Yet doing so would represent a missed opportunity. Since Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016, the party hasn’t fully understood or accepted the plight of America’s working class and their desire for change. Case in point: Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., recently slammed the $1,000 bonuses some companies were offering their workers following the Trump tax cuts.

“Crumbs,” she called the amount. Never mind that $1,000 is more than the average weekly pay for the men and women at America’s factories.
Kennedy’s speech needs to tackle this ignorance head on, blasting the Democratic Party out of its elitist moorings, and chart a course back to victory. To do so, he needs to offer Americans something different. Something bold. Something totally unexpected.
Here’s what I hope he says.
“Good Evening. Tonight I stand before you as a humbled man from a humbled party.
A little over a year ago, my fellow Democrats and I ran spirited campaigns across the country to lead our great nation into the 21^st century. When the dust settled, however, it became clear that America had chosen a different path.

America’s greatness is not at risk because of Russia, China, or North Korea. Rather, it is the partisanship that has rooted in the hearts and minds of our leaders.

The most obvious disappointment was losing the presidency. But that loss hides the more painful truth: my party now has the fewest number of elected officials since the 1920s.
There’s no other way to say it. We somehow lost the confidence of our fellow Americans.
For the past year, I have spent considerable time listening to the people of Massachusetts and states beyond to understand exactly what happened. Tonight I’d like to share with you what I’ve learned, because those voices – your voices – tell the important story of the state of our union.
In virtually every conversation I’ve had, I’ve walked away with the clear message that many Americans are hurting – and angry. In Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, many of your steel mills and manufacturing plants have shut down. The same is true of furniture and clothing companies in North Carolina. The reason? Global trade deals, especially with China.
It wasn’t supposed to be this way. In the 1990s, politicians in Washington promised you that, in exchange for your shuttered mills and plants, new jobs would come along. Better, safer jobs. But it turns out that their promises were wrong. Studies now show that many communities have been devastated by these trade deals and have yet to recover.
In the Pacific Northwest and Appalachia, your struggles are similar. The timber mills and mines that powered your rural cities have largely closed, hammered by environmental regulations and a fight against global warming. Some of those rules were important and necessary. Others were not. Regardless, your government took away too much, and gave too little in return.
Rather than acknowledge their mistakes, some politicians – including Democrats – have attacked you and your suffering. They dismissed you as deplorables who cling to your guns and your God. That is unforgivable. I am sorry.
To add further insult to injury, many of these same politicians have failed you in protecting the nation from foreign threats. Take China as an example. For the past 20 years, our intelligence community has repeatedly warned that Beijing was stealing or hacking hundreds of billions of dollars in American technology for their own benefit.
The result? A communist nation – unmoored by decency or a commitment to basic freedoms – has robbed us of the very jobs and ingenuity we need to thrive in the 21^st century. To this day, the Chinese have never paid a price for their treachery.
Meanwhile, your leadership launched an unnecessary war in Iraq, costing over $6 trillion dollars and ending the lives of thousands of your loved ones. These politicians also emboldened a group of Islamic radicals that later morphed into what we now call ISIS.
And even that fight they couldn’t get right. While ISIS is now on the run, their ideology is not. Since the attacks on 9/11, the world has desperately needed global leadership to name and explain the religious beliefs that underpin terrorism – specifically a brand of Islam called Salafism. Instead, they simply say Islam is a religion of peace.
These are just a small sample of the many issues that you shared with me in frustration. And yet time and again, you also shared a willingness to find solutions. To compromise. To get America back to work. In fact, that’s what struck me the most. People on both sides of the aisle want Washington to stop the fighting and start governing again.
But somehow, that message isn’t reaching many of my colleagues.
And that’s perhaps the most important issue of our time. America’s greatness is not at risk because of Russia, China, or North Korea. Rather, it is the partisanship that has rooted in the hearts and minds of our leaders.
In the years since my grandfather and great uncles helped defeat the Soviet Union, race to the moon, and pass the Civil Rights Act, our politicians have seemingly lost their desire to find common cause and embrace common goals. Instead, they’ve locked on to America’s darkest forces – the activists, the lobbyists – who have demanded political purity… or else.
Sadly, this partisanship has crept into our society as a whole. Think about how we speak to each other without concern for decency or kindness. We use words like “libtard” or “Trumpsters.” None of it appeals to our better angels. None of it elevates our families, our friendships, or our politics.
And that gets to the most important reason for why I’m here tonight. How do we fix what ails us? Can we fix what ails us?
The answer, I’m happy to say, is yes. For all of the troubles we have – and it’s clear that we have many – we also remain an exceptional nation.
Renewing the American spirit will not come easy. And it’s up to you to decide whether President Trump remains the best person to accomplish that goal. But as for the Democrats, we owe it to you to offer a new covenant in recognition of where we’ve fallen short.
Tonight I give you a new path forward. I offer you Our American Oath.
Our oath consists of 10 priorities that I’ve heard many of you express as the most important to you and your families. Democrats and Republicans alike. In the days ahead, I’ll be sharing more about these priorities with you. But, for tonight, let me tell you what I believe to be most critical.
First, renewal starts with fixing our broken political system. That means a constitutional amendment for term limits and a lifetime ban on elected officials serving as lobbyists. Say what you will about President Trump, but I share his desire to drain America’s swamp.
As a demonstration of my seriousness, I’m calling on Rep. Pelosi and Sen. Schumer to step down from their leadership posts. The country cannot move forward with officials who think that a government shutdown is in our best interest, or that a $1,000 bonus is a meaningless crumb.
I also call on Republican leadership to step down as well. We need a clean start.
With new blood, Congress can offer a new approach with President Trump. I believe we should meet at Camp David for a five-day summit, plotting how we can best work together. The most important priority for Democrats would be getting a commitment and timeline for advancing term limits and a ban on lobbyists.
Next, our focus would be on how to best support America’s working class. Part of that is collaborating with the Trump administration on the renegotiation of NAFTA and changes to the World Trade Organization. We’re also eager to prioritize inner cities and rural communities as we craft a bipartisan infrastructure bill.
Third, we want to work with the president on doubling down on our support for the solar, wind, and natural gas industries. The wars of the Bush and Obama administrations were fought over oil. That has to stop, and we can do it with renewable, homegrown energy.
And that speaks to the wholesale change needed in our foreign policies. Though ultimately the domain of the president, Congress needs to work hand in glove with him on bringing the nation together in the face of global threats.
Most important of these is China and Russia. It’s time to acknowledge that we are in a new Cold War with these nations, both of which have the resources and conviction to wreck global peace, prosperity, and freedom. We’ll need our diplomats, spies, and military leaders to help guide us through this long struggle. And we’ll need our president to make it resolutely clear that he will stand against Chinese and Russian aggression.
Additionally, our fight against terrorism should include tough measures against the radical Salafi ideology that pours from Saudi Arabia. We’ll need to rework the Muslim ban, as the issue will not be solved by targeting a few countries but rather by countering a global ideology.
There are of course other issues to be discussed – reforming immigration, education and entitlements in particular – and I suspect that we’ll have disagreements. But if each side is flexible, progress can be made.
Beyond the debates of policy, a productive summit in and of itself would show our fellow Americans that we can lower the temperature of the nation’s heated politics. We would show America that it still has leaders that can focus on solving problems and facing threats, not spewing personal insults on Twitter or shouting obscenities in meetings.
At the end of the day, that’s the kind of leadership that you’ll see from me and other Democrats who embrace Our American Oath. Through actions of integrity and fortitude, we will inspire each other to make America the more perfect union that our founding fathers and mothers intended some 230 years ago.
With that, I wish you a good night and safe journey wherever this message finds you. May God keep and protect you, and may His Divine Providence bless all of us with an abundance of strength and compassion.”

FBI's McCabe, now stepping down, suspected in leak against White House

Andrew McCabe, who is abruptly stepping down today as the FBI's deputy director, has been the target of criticism by President Trump. But he was also involved in an incident with the White House early last year that raised questions about whether he and the bureau were trying to damage the president.

In an excerpt from my new book "Media Madness: Donald Trump, The Press and the War Over the Truth," I describe events that unfolded last year, beginning with a conversation between McCabe and the then-White House chief of staff: 

Reince Priebus was chairing a 7:30 a.m. intelligence meeting when one of the participants, Andrew McCabe, asked to speak to him privately.
McCabe, the deputy FBI director, closed the door and told Priebus: “We want you to know that everything in this New York Times story is bull--.”
The Times had quoted unnamed sources in reporting that Trump campaign aides and associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials. CNN had carried a similar report.
Priebus pointed to the three televisions on his office wall: “Here’s my problem, they’re going 24/7. Can the FBI say what you just told me?”
McCabe said he would have to check. Priebus thought he might come out of this a freaking hero.
A few hours later, McCabe told him the bureau couldn’t start the practice of commenting on newspaper stories or it would never end.
“Give me a break,” Priebus said. “I’m getting crushed all over the place, and you won’t say publicly what you told me privately?”
James Comey called later. “We really can’t do anything about it,” the FBI director told him. But Comey said he’d be willing to tell the Senate Intelligence Committee that the charges were bogus; he was sure its members would repeat that for the cameras.
Now, a week later, CNN was airing a breaking news story naming Priebus. According to “multiple U.S. officials,” the network said, “the FBI rejected a White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump’s associates and Russians known to U.S. intelligence.”
Priebus was stunned by the implication that he was pressuring law enforcement. Had he been set up? Why was the FBI leaking this information when one of its top officials had initiated the conversation?
Comey assured Priebus that afternoon that he hadn’t done anything wrong, but the story reverberated for days. “Is Reince Priebus Lying About the FBI?” Slate asked. “Reince Priebus Should Resign,” a Boston Globe columnist demanded. The damage was done.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz. 

Rep. Joe Kennedy III to deliver State of the Union rebuttal: What to know

Rep. Joe Kennedy III, D-Mass., a member of one of America’s most prominent political families, is taking the national stage to give the Democratic response to President Trump’s State of the Union address on Tuesday night. 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who announced the news with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Jan. 25, labeled Kennedy as a “relentless fighter for working Americans.”

“From health care to economic justice to civil rights, the Democratic agenda stands in powerful contrast to President Trump's broken promises to American families," Kennedy said in a statement. "Our vision for this union is guided by a simple belief that equality and economic dignity should be afforded to every American.”
The 37-year-old also said that he’s “honored” to have been chosen to deliver the party’s response.
Ahead of Kennedy’s rebuttal on Jan. 30, here’s what you need to know about the representative.

Who is he?

Kennedy is the son of Joe Kennedy II, a six-term Massachusetts congressman. He’s also the grandson of Sen. Robert Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1968. And his two great uncles are former President John F. Kennedy and former Sen. Edward “Ted” Kennedy. (It’s worth noting that in 1982 Sen. Edward Kennedy, along with other Democrats at the time, gave a pre-recorded response to former President Ronald Reagan’s State of the Union message).

Kennedy, currently serving his third term, was born and raised in Massachusetts. He’s a graduate of Stanford University, where he earned a bachelor's degree in management science and engineering, according to his biography. He later attended Harvard Law School, graduating with a J.D.
He and his wife, Lauren, a health policy expert, met during a class that Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., taught at Harvard. The couple has two children together, a young daughter named Eleanor and a son, James, who was born in December 2017.
The young family lives with their dog, Banjo, in Newton.

A lawyer turned politician

Before entering politics, Kennedy served in the Peace Corps and then as an assistant district attorney in eastern Massachusetts, where he  worked for Michael O’Keefe, “an old-school rough-around-the-collar Republican,” Peter Ubertaccio, a professor of political science at Stonehill College, a school outside of Boston, told Fox News.
“It’s an interesting part of his career -- that’s really where he got his start,” he added.
In 2012, Kennedy ran for a seat in Massachusetts' fourth district after Barney Frank, a longtime Democratic congressman, announced his retirement.
Frank’s retirement was unexpected, said Ubertaccio. But for Kennedy, the timing served as the perfect way for him to “enter politics the way he wanted.”
As a representative, Kennedy has focused on educational access, healthcare and has “continued the conversation around STEM and STEM training,” Ubertaccio said. STEM is an acronym for science, technology, engineering and math.

“He understands what it means to be a Kennedy. But he doesn’t rest on that name. He works hard to develop his [personal] reputation."

Kennedy is also a member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, where he’s focused on issues like mental health, addiction and energy costs, among other things. In the past, he was a co-sponsor of the Paycheck Fairness Act and opposed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The representative has also advocated for LGBTQ equality, voting rights and civil rights.
“He understands what it means to be a Kennedy. But he doesn’t rest on that name. He works hard to develop his [personal] reputation,” Ubertaccio said.

What does giving the rebuttal mean for Kennedy's career?

Kennedy has a good reputation in his home state, said Ubertaccio.
“He’s developed a reputation for himself in Massachusetts as thoughtful and conscientious," he said. And while Kennedy can be “passionate and aggressive” on issues that he deeply cares about, the Massachusetts representative has worked in a “bipartisan fashion which is still expected in the state despite its liberal reputation.”
But the rising political star has largely lacked national recognition up until now. Indeed, aside from introducing Sen. Warren at the 2016 Democratic National Convention, giving the rebuttal at the State of the Union is arguably one of Kennedy’s most significant political moves to-date, said Ubertaccio.
“The national recognition will benefit him. If he wants to move up politically, this opportunity raises his profile,” he added.
And giving the response does not just benefit the representative, Ubertaccio added. It also could be an advantage for the Democratic Party.
“In a time when the Democratic Party is struggling with its image, it’s a smart political move to give a young leader the rebuttal,” he said. “He’s done an excellent job in Congress and is well regarded by those across the [political] aisle.”

Trump ready to deal in State of the Union - are Democrats?

President Trump will use his first State of the Union address on Tuesday night to extend an olive branch across the aisle and signal he’s willing to make bipartisan deals on second-year-agenda priorities like immigration and infrastructure, officials say. 

But what’s less clear is whether the president will get buy-in from Democrats, who have been bashing his immigration deal proposals and who are wary of helping him secure policy victories in a midterm election year. 

“I think Donald Trump is going to offer the Democrats certain deals,” Bill McGurn, a former speechwriter to George W. Bush, said on “Fox and Friends” ahead of the speech. “They may not like the terms [on] immigration, infrastructure and so forth. One of the questions will be: can they take yes for an answer?”
A senior administration official said Trump will emphasize his trillion-dollar infrastructure plan to rebuild the country’s roads, bridges, ports and tracks during the annual speech to Congress.
The official also said the president will tout the framework his administration released last week for an immigration deal that includes a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants brought to the United States as children in return for funding for his wall along the Mexico border.
TRUMP IMMIGRATION PROPOSAL COULD PROVIDE PATH TO CITIZENSHIP FOR 1.8 MILLION IN US ILLEGALLY
“The president has offered a compromise solution, showing real leadership that reaches across the aisle,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah told Fox News on Monday. “We’re going to see if Democrats are serious about border security. We’re going to see if they actually want to fix a problem or demagogue it.”
Over the weekend, the president lamented that Democrats have, so far, rejected his immigration offer.
“I have offered DACA a wonderful deal, including a doubling in the number of recipients & a twelve year pathway to citizenship, for two reasons: (1) Because the Republicans want to fix a long time terrible problem. (2) To show that Democrats do not want to solve DACA, only use it!” he tweeted.
He added: “Democrats are not interested in Border Safety & Security or in the funding and rebuilding of our Military. They are only interested in Obstruction!”
In Tuesday night’s speech, the president, like other presidents before him, is also expected to use the speech to tout the successes of the last year, such as getting Neil Gorsuch confirmed on the Supreme Court and signing the GOP's tax reform bill.
White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Monday said the speech’s theme would be “building a safe, strong, and proud America.” She called it “must-watch TV.”
“Look, we have an economy that's booming. ISIS is on the run. We’re remaking the judiciary in a way that actually believes in upholding the Constitution,” Sanders said. “There are some great things happening in this country.”
The president also will talk up the economic boom and stock market record over the last year, emphasize his belief in fair and reciprocal trade and discuss his administration’s efforts to combat North Korea’s escalating behavior, the senior administration official said.
A sign of the tension between the president and Democrats: multiple liberal lawmakers are boycotting the speech, with Texas Rep. Frederica Wilson saying Trump doesn’t deserve “to be honored at this time.” A number of other Democrats have announced plans to bring DACA recipients as their guests to the speech.
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus will likely engage in a number of “silent” protests during the speech, Fox News has learned. For example, lawmakers in the caucus were encouraged to wear traditional kente cloth in protest of Trump's reported comments about immigration from “s---hole countries,” many of them in Africa.
Sanders said first lady Melania Trump and all of the president’s children – with the exception of 11-year-old Barron Trump – will attend the primetime speech at the Capitol.
It’s customary for presidents to travel to promote their message after delivering a State of the Union address, but Sanders declined to say Monday whether Trump would partake in that tradition.

Nancy Pelosi Cartoons

Democrat hits Pelosi over 'make America white again' comment

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi addresses the media last week. She has been criticized over her recent comment on immigration.

Sen Joe Manchin, D-WVa., criticized House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi for her response to President Trump’s immigration plan that she called a blue print to “make America white again.”

Trump’s proposal would offer a path to citizenship for 1.8 million so-called “Deamers.” He would insist on $25 billion in funding for a border wall and security. The proposal also called for a crackdown on chain migration and the diversity visa lottery program.

Pelosi wrote in a statement on Friday that the 50 percent cut to legal immigration and the “recent announcements to end Temporary Protected Status for Central Americans and Haitians are both part of the same cruel agenda. They are part of the Trump administration’s unmistakable campaign to make America white again.”
She tweeted the comment.
Manchin, who was on CNN’s ‘State of the Union,’ said we “don’t need that type of rhetoric on either side, from Nancy, (Speaker) Paul Ryan or anybody else.”
Reuters reported that Manchin is a leader of a bipartisan Senate group that is working on an immigration solution.
The Senate's top Democrat, Chuck Schumer of New York, dismissed Trump’s plan Friday as a "wish list" for hard-liners. He acknowledged the bipartisan common ground on protections for the immigrants now shielded by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA.
But he accused Trump of using them as "a tool to tear apart our legal immigration system and adopt the wish list that anti-immigration hardliners have advocated for years."

John Kerry makes fun of Trump's weight, asks for 'girth certificate'

Look who's Talking!

Lurch :-)

Former Secretary of State John Kerry could not resist poking fun at President Trump’s weight during a speech Saturday in Washington.

The Hill reported that Kerry, who was defeated by President George W. Bush in 2004, was giving a speech at the Alfalfa Club dinner and brought up Trump’s recent medical exam that listed the president's weight at 239 pounds.

Kerry, 74, said, “Personally, I just won’t believe him until he produces his long-form girth certificate.”
Kerry’s speechwriter apparently keeps a close eye on social media because the joke went viral shortly after Trump’s examination results were released. Sports Illustrated compiled a list of athletes who weigh the same as Trump to make a comparison.
Dr. Ronny Jackson, the president’s physician, said in a statement earlier this month that Trump’s exam went “exceptionally well.” Trump, 71, stands at 6’3 and weighed 239. Trump is known to enjoy fast food and steaks.
The “girther” comment is a response to Trump’s push to obtain Obama’s birth certificate, which became known as the “birther” movement. In 2016, Trump said Obama was born in the U.S. “period.”
Trump blamed the Clinton campaign in 2008 for starting the controversy.

Republicans weigh proposals to protect Mueller from firing

Republicans on the Hill appear to be divided on whether or not to agree on legislation that would help protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller from being fired by President Trump.

There have been conversations about protecting Mueller in the past, but last week’s report by The New York Times, claiming that Trump wanted to fire the investigator last summer, brought new attention to the matter, even though Trump denied the report and called it “fake news.”

“I have got legislation protecting Mr. Mueller,” Sen Lindsey Graham told ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” on Sunday. “I’ll be glad to pass it tomorrow.”
The Washington Post reported that Graham has a bi-partisan proposal—joined by Sen. Cory Booker—that calls for a panel to approve any call to fire Mueller.
“Everybody in the White House knows it would be the end of President Trump’s presidency if he fired Mueller.”
The report said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R.-Calif., turned down calls to pass such a proposal, claiming that there is no need for the safeguard. He said Trump and his team “have fully cooperated” with Mueller’s investigation into possible Russian collusion with Trump’s staff.
The Times reported last week that Trump ordered for Mueller’s firing in June and only backed down after his White House counsel refused to carry out the instruction and threatened to resign.
Trump was asked about the report in Davos, where he was participating in the World Economic Forum, and denied the report and called it “typical” of the paper to run the report.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D.- N.Y., said that the report calls for Republicans in Congress to act, The New York Times reported.
“The most important thing Congress can do right now is to ensure that Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation continues uninterrupted and unimpeded,” he said.
Schumer was not joined by all of his fellow Senate Democrats. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said it would be “premature for us to go down that road. Manchin, The Post pointed out, is up for re-election this year in a state where Trump easily won.

Hillary Clinton makes Grammys cameo to mock Trump by reading 'Fire and Fury'

Idiot

Hillary Clinton surprised viewers by making an appearance in a pre-taped segment for the 60th Annual Grammy Awards on Sunday night -- and she mocked President Trump in the process.

"We know that our current president does love winning awards and the good news he may just be the subject of next year's winner [for Best Spoken Word Album]," host James Corden said. "The question I've got is who'll be the narrator?"

In a pre-taped video, outspoken anti-Trump stars John Legend and Cher then auditioned to be the narrator for Michael Wolff's book "Fire and Fury" about Trump's White House.
Snoop Dogg, DJ Khaled and Cardi B also read excerpts from the book during the fake auditions.
Finally, Clinton read from the book and Corden declared, "That's it! We've got it!"
Clinton said, "You think so? The Grammy's in the bag?"
Corden replied, "In the bag!"
The segment resulted in wild applause from the star-studded crowd. But not all were pleased. United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley slammed the bit. However, the harshest words came from Donald Trump Jr.

The more Hillary goes on television the more the American people realize how awesome it is to have @realDonaldTrump in office #GrammyAwards2018

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) January 29, 2018

Nailed it.
So sick of celebrity preaching, I could scream.

— Ben Lund (@RealBenLund) January 29, 2018

I have always loved the Grammys but to have artists read the Fire and Fury book killed it. Don’t ruin great music with trash. Some of us love music without the politics thrown in it.

— Nikki Haley (@nikkihaley) January 29, 2018

I disagree. That part ruined the Grammys. Such a shame.

— Nikki Haley (@nikkihaley) January 29, 2018

That 👏🏻 was 👏🏻 amazing 👏🏻 @HillaryClinton 😂 #GRAMMYS

— Megan (@m_jensen5) January 29, 2018

After the show, Grammys Execuitve producer Ken Ehrlich said getting Clinton to appear in the skit wasn't tough. However, he credited Corden with sealing the deal.
"She kind of took a couple of days to say 'yes,' but ultimately she saw the script, she knew what we were doing and she liked it."
Clinton recorded the segment near her home on Friday, the Grammys producer added.
He also admitted that he was aware the cameo was recieving some backlash, but said they stand by what they did.