Beto O’Rourke
has been slammed for his male privilege in a recent newspaper column
that pointed out that no female politician could get away with
O’Rourke’s style of exploring a presidential campaign bid.
The former Texas Rep. has been rumored to run for president
in 2020 ever since his loss to Sen. Ted Cruz last year in a big-money
Senate race, prompting him to go on a road trip across the country and
stay in the public’s eye. He is also set to travel to Iowa this weekend
in what appears to be a sign that his entry into the White House race is
imminent.
But
O’Rourke is already facing criticism over the way he tried to raise his
profile across the country, which included less talk about policies and
more about publishing odd diary entries, visiting college campuses and
listening to Metallica.
“Imagine, they say, if Beto were Betsy,” Lisa Lerer, a reporter, wrote in The New York Times.
“What would the reception have been if a female candidate left her
three small children home and spent several weeks traveling the country,
posting stream-of-consciousness diary entries? Or if she chose to forgo
a Senate race that would provide a greater opportunity for victory?”
“What
would the reception have been if a female candidate left her three
small children home and spent several weeks traveling the country,
posting stream-of-consciousness diary entries? Or if she chose to forgo a
Senate race that would provide a greater opportunity for victory?” — The New York Times
The
paper noted that female Democrats are growing increasingly frustrated
with O’Rourke’s unorthodox approach and says the fact that his profile
increasing is a sign of double standard that women face.
O’Rourke
particularly irked others after he ruled out a second Senate run last
month, this time for Sen. John Cornyn's (R-Texas) seat, which given his
prominence in the state he would have a good chance to win, as it was
seen as a move serving purely his own interests.
“If a woman was
presented with a similar choice: Do that less ambitious but better for
the party thing, versus more ambitious but longer shot thing, I don’t
see people being super understanding when she takes the latter,” Jess
McIntosh, a Democratic strategist and former Hillary Clinton aide, told
the Times.
Democrats aren’t the only ones attacking the likely
2020 candidate. A group that boosts GOP candidates across the country
will air a two-minute commercial in Iowa that paints O’Rourke as the
prime example of “white male privilege” and compares to former President
Barack Obama, Politico reported.
“With
a charmed life like his, you can never really lose,” the ad by Club for
Growth states. “That’s why Beto’s running for president — because he
can.”
House
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland hit back at some of the most
visible new Democrats in Congress when asked Monday by Fox News about
the push to impeach President Trump: “We’ve got 62 new (Democratic) members. Not three.”
Hoyer
apparently was referring to Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York,
Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, who regularly
have fought the Trump administration's policies since entering Congress.
Earlier Monday, House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., revealed she’s opposed to impeachment
in the absence of evidence that is “compelling and overwhelming and
bipartisan.”
“I’m not for impeachment,” Pelosi told The
Washington Post in an interview published Monday. “Impeachment is so
divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and
overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path,
because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”
Ocasio-Cortez replied in
a Washington Examiner interview: “I happen to disagree with that take.”
The congresswoman added, “But you know, she’s the speaker. … I think
we’ll see.”
Hoyer also said about Pelosi’s words: “It seems to me that she said what we’ve been saying. Maybe a little stronger.”
He
also said he thought anything the House might attempt would die in the
Senate, which requires 67 yeas to convict and remove the president:
“Nobody thinks there is going to be a conviction in the Senate.”
Tlaib said she would introduce articles of impeachment against Trump later this month. She and Omar last month signed a “pledge” to impeach Trump. Fox News’ Chad Pergram contributed to this report.
Rahm is right.
The Democrats are in a leftward lurch that could ruin their chances of retaking the White House.
Rahm Emanuel,
now stepping down after two terms as mayor of Chicago, knows something
about winning elections. He was a key White House operative for Bill
Clinton and chief of staff for Barack Obama.
It
was Rahm, as chairman of the Democratic campaign committee, who
engineered the party's takeover of the House in 2006 — and is known for
his hardball brand of politics, with all the subtlety of his frequent
F-bombs.
If Mayor Emanuel believes the Democrats are in danger of self-destructing, as he argues in a piece for the Atlantic, his party might want to pay attention.
I've
been arguing that the Democrats, who regained control of the House in
November mainly on the strength of more moderate candidates, are
increasingly being defined by their most extreme members.
Just
look at the last few weeks, and the stances embraced by some of its
presidential contenders and younger members: Slavery reparations. Green
New Deal. Medicare for All. Free college tuition. A 70 percent tax rate
on income over $10 million. Break up Amazon, Facebook and Google.
Is that how they win back Trump Democrats in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin?
Add
to that various self-inflicted wounds, such as delaying and then
watering down a resolution to denounce Rep. Ilhan Omar after her latest
anti-Semitic comments, and you've got a party with a problem. (President
Trump went way overboard in saying the Democrats have become "an
anti-Jewish party" and telling donors that "the Democrats hate Jewish
people," given that perhaps three-quarters of Jews vote Democratic. But
he was seizing on an opening.)
At the South by Southwest
conference, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez offered the standard left-wing
critique of capitalism by saying that "we're reckoning with the
consequences of putting profit above everything else in society." But
she added that "to me capitalism is irredeemable," the kind of sound
bite that goes viral, given the enormous media attention she attracts.
And
on "Morning Joe" the other day, 2020 contender John Hickenlooper, the
former Colorado governor, repeatedly refused to call himself a
capitalist. When did that become a dirty Democratic word?
In the Atlantic, Emanuel says Trump could win over swing voters by constantly branding the Democrats as socialists.
"The
last thing we should do is serve him slow pitches over the plate that
allow him to define us on his terms. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what
Democrats have been doing since he went before Congress in early
February. It’s almost as if we've been duped into reading from his
ready-made script.
"Earth to Democrats: Republicans are telling
you something when they gleefully schedule votes on proposals like the
Green New Deal, Medicare for all, and a 70 percent marginal tax rate.
When they're more eager to vote on the Democratic agenda than we are, we
should take a step back and ask ourselves whether we're inadvertently
letting the political battle play out on their turf rather than our own.
If Trump's only hope for winning a second term turns on his ability to
paint us as socialists, we shouldn't play to type."
He's not pulling punches.
While
saying the party shouldn't abandon its core priorities, Rahm says
Democrats and independents are so desperate to win that they'll support a
candidate who doesn't agree with them on everything, as long as that
person is seen as able to win.
"So the ideological debates often
shroud what voters really want — a nominee capable of standing steady
and strong as Trump tries to bully his way into an Election Night
victory. The president's low approval ratings suggest that, if he wins a
second term, Democrats will have no one to blame but ourselves."
What
began as a broadside from the right has now gone decidedly mainstream
as the stumbles continue. The argument even made the front page of Sunday's New York Times:
"The
sharp left turn in the Democratic Party and the rise of progressive
presidential candidates are unnerving moderate Democrats who
increasingly fear that the party could fritter away its chances of
beating President Trump in 2020 by careening over a liberal cliff."
The
challenge for Pelosi is to rein in her more lefty members who are
sharply changing the public face of the party. But she can't control the
Bernie-style presidential candidates who seem to believe that a hard
left turn is the way to win the nomination. Fox News Chastises Pirro
Jeanine Pirro, the Fox weekend host who is friendly with President Trump, has drawn a strong rebuke from the network.
She took on Omar, one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress, in remarks that crossed a line.
Judge
Jeanine said Saturday night that Omar is "Sharia-compliant" and engages
in "Sharia-adherence behavior." Why? Because the freshman Democrat
wears a hijab.
She asked: "Is her adherence to this Islamic
doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which is
antithetical to the U.S. Constitution?"
In a statement, Fox News
said: "We strongly condemn Jeanine Pirro's comments about Rep. Ilhan
Omar. They do not reflect those of the network and we have addressed the
matter with her directly."
I've been critical of Omar for making
anti-Semitic comments about money, then apologizing, then making more
remarks about pro-Israel advocates having "dual loyalty" — an old
anti-Semitic canard that is one of the worst things you can say about
Americans.
But
the congresswoman should be able to wear whatever she wants in
accordance with her religious beliefs. That shouldn't result in her
loyalty to the Constitution being questioned. And the comments were in
Pirro's scripted opening remarks, not something uttered off the cuff.
Omar
thanked Fox for the statement, tweeting: "No one's commitment to our
constitution should be questioned because of their faith or country of
birth."
Pirro, a former prosecutor, is not backing off, however.
In a statement Sunday, she said, "I did not call Rep. Omar un-American.
My intention was to ask a question and start a debate, but of course
because one is Muslim does not mean you don't support the Constitution."
She invited Omar to appear on her show.
As the Hollywood Reporter
noted, Pirro's slam drew criticism from a staffer for "Special Report
with Bret Baier." Associate producer Hufsa Kamal tweeted: "@JudgeJeanine
can you stop spreading this false narrative that somehow Muslims hate
America or women who wear a hijab aren't American enough? You have
Muslims working at the same network you do, including myself. K thx."
Pirro hosts an opinion show, but her comments were out of bounds.
Several Democratic 2020 presidential hopefuls -- including Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris and now Kirsten Gillibrand -- are defending their self-professed commitment to the ideals of the #MeToo movement against a series of accusations they recently mismanaged sexual-misconduct claims against their subordinates.
As
the three prominent senators each have sought to draw a sharp contrast
with President Trump, who has faced his own misconduct allegations, the
claims highlighted vulnerabilities that could become major liabilities
not only in a heated Democrat Party primary, but also in the general
election.
Back in 2017, Gillibrand and others ramped up the pressure for then-Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., to resign amid sexual misconduct allegations. He ultimately stepped down.
Gillibrand, who has been described by GQ Magazine as "the face of the MeToo movement," said at the time
that Franken's alleged conduct had "shocked and disappointed her" and
that he should "step aside" because "enough is enough." But, it emerged
on Monday that last summer, an aide in her mid-20’s who was working in
Gillibrand’s Senate office also apparently decided that enough was
enough, as she resigned in protest over the office’s handling of her
sexual-harassment complaint against a senior male adviser to Gillibrand.
“I
have offered my resignation because of how poorly the investigation and
post-investigation was handled,” the woman, who resigned less than
three weeks after reporting the purported harassment, wrote to
Gillibrand in a letter obtained by Politico. Gillibrand,
responding to the allegations on Monday, said an appropriate
investigation was launched -- and her office later said the male staffer
had been fired after other unreported, "deeply disturbing" comments
surfaced.
The woman was granted anonymity because of fears of retaliation.
Gillibrand faced immediate friendly fire
after calling for Franken's resignation -- in 2018, liberal billionaire
megadonor George Soros argued that Gillibrand turned on Franken to
"improve her chances" in the 2020 presidential race -- and some of those
hard feelings among her fellow progressives have not subsided.
For Sanders, the Vermont Independent who caucuses with Democrats, looming resentment from establishment progressives also has posed a major challenge. A January report in The New York Times outlining what
one former Sanders delegate called an "entire wave of rotten sexual
harassment that seemingly was never dealt with" during his 2016
presidential run seemed only to bolster on-the-record claims from Democrats that Sanders was too impersonal and arrogant to lead the party.
Asked by
CNN anchor Anderson Cooper earlier this year whether he was unaware of
the sexual harassment allegations, Sanders replied: "Uh, yes. I was a
little bit busy running around the country, trying to make the case." He
then appeared to smile.
The
next week, after reports surfaced that a top aide was accused of
sexually assaulting a female subordinate during Sanders' campaign, he
issued a strong apology and a vow to change.
Bernie Sanders kicking off his 2020 presidential campaign earlier
this month in Brooklyn, N.Y. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle, File)
"To the women in that campaign who were harassed or
mistreated I apologize," Sanders said in a statement. "Our standards and
safeguards were inadequate."
Allegations of sexism also briefly
surfaced contemporaneously during Sanders’ 2016 bid, as some of his
young, white male supporters -- known as "Bernie Bros" -- attacked
Hillary Clinton and her followers online, contributing to a hostile
atmosphere between the campaigns. In her book, the election
retrospective "What Happened," Clinton slammed Sanders for
using “innuendo and impugning my character” such that she
suffered “lasting damage" into the general election, although Clinton
did not accuse Sanders of orchestrating the gender-based attacks.
The
back-and-forth has continued into 2019. Late last month, after former
members of Clinton's team leaked details concerning Sanders' expensive
travel on behalf of the Clinton campaign after she secured the
Democratic nomination, Sanders 2016 campaign spokesman Michael Briggs
returned fire. "You can see why she’s one of the most disliked
politicians in America," Briggs said, referring to Clinton. "She’s not
nice. Her people are not nice." Briggs went on to call Clinton and her
team among the "biggest a--holes in American politics."
But,
although Gillibrand and Sanders have made public overtures to the
alleged victims who worked for them, California Democratic Sen. Kamala
Harris acknowledged earlier this month
that she still had not spoken to a woman who sued her former top
adviser for sexual harassment, leading to a $400,000 settlement.
A
spokeswoman for Harris insisted last December the team was “unaware” of
the harassment allegations while Harris was California’s attorney
general, but the agency that she oversaw, California's Department of
Justice, reportedly was informed about the complaint three months before she exited in early 2017.
The
lawsuit, filed by Danielle Hartley, accused Larry Wallace of demeaning
her based on her gender while she worked for him as his assistant.
Hartley said Wallace placed his computer printer under his desk and
often asked her to crawl under and refill it with paper as he sat and
watched, sometimes with other men in the room.
"In this specific
case, I have not talked to the victim," Harris told Univision. "That
case is being handled by the Attorney General's Office and I've left it
up to that office to handle the case as they've seen fit, which included
a settlement."
In an uncomfortable twist,
Harris' autobiography, “The Truths We Hold: An American Journey,” which
was released in January, praised Wallace's "leadership" in
orchestrating a bias training program. Wallace, the former director of
the Division of Law Enforcement in California, resigned last December.
Republicans, meanwhile, have previewed a possible line of attack against Harris on the episode as primary season approaches.
“No
one is buying Kamala Harris’s claim she didn’t know her top aide of 14
yrs was accused of sexual harassment, resulting in a $400K settlement,”
GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel tweeted. Fox News' Paul Steinhauser, Louis Casiano and Lukas Mikelionis contributed to this report.
OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 12:05 PM PT — Sunday, March 10, 2019
Senator John Kennedy takes aim at disgraced Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, accusing him of harming the Bureau’s reputation. During an interview on Sunday, Kennedy said McCabe should “hang his head in shame.”
.@SenJohnKennedy
says former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe and others at the FBI
acted on their political beliefs and for that, they “should hang their
head in shame…and put their head in a bag.” pic.twitter.com/2JRvEO5C4p
Kennedy also accused him of politicizing the agency during the 2016 election. He added agents are entitled to their opinions, but claimed McCabe crossed a line by acting on his political beliefs. Kennedy continued to say McCabe is lucky he wasn’t prosecuted for perjury and misleading the FBI.
Bernie Sanders kicking off his 2020 presidential campaign earlier
this month in Brooklyn, N.Y. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle, File)
