House hearing on reparations for slavery is set for first time in more than a decade

Is this a frigging joke?

A House hearing on reparations for slavery is set for next Wednesday, which marks the first time in more than a decade that a panel will consider slavery's "continuing impact" on the country and the next steps to "restorative justice."
The scheduled hearing held before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties will feature testimonies from writer Ta-Nehisi Coates and actor Danny Glover.
The purpose of the panel is said to “examine, through open and constructive discourse, the legacy of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade."
Former Democratic Rep. John Conyers of Michigan first proposed that Congress study reparations in 1989 after he sponsored a bill, House Resolution 40, that he reintroduced every session until he resigned in 2017.
Democratic Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, the bill’s new sponsor, introduced it earlier this year and pushed for next week’s hearing. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that she supports a reparations study, which has not been the subject of a hearing since 2007.
The topic of reparations reemerged to national prominence as several 2020 Democratic presidential candidates signaled their support for some form of compensation for the descendants of slaves. None, however, seemed to support compensation in the traditional sense of direct payouts to black Americans.
Instead, candidates have proposed somewhat vague ideas such as using funds to create policies addressing economic inequalities that could disproportionately benefit African-Americans.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Hannity: Trump playing Democrats and the media 'like a flute'

Fox News host Sean Hannity on Thursday reiterated his belief that President Trump purposely "played" the media by saying he would listen to a foreign government who has intelligence on a political rival.
"Of course, listening to foreign research or any 'opp' research, or any reporting, anything elicit and saying you would take it to the FBI, that would not be a crime," the host said on "Hannity."
"I wonder if he knew exactly what he was doing, the exact way he was asked that question and the answer he gave because time after time, he knows the media bubble and fizz like Alka-Seltzer in water and he is playing them like a flute."
Hannity was referring to comments that Trump made during an interview with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos in the Oval Office. The host also shared his theory on why the president's critics are so easily manipulated.
"Here's the point, and the people you just saw, as we predicted, so blinded in their hatred for President Trump, they don't even realize they were set up like bowling pins, showing their ridiculous hypocrisy. Because they're the very same people smearing the president hour after hour," Hannity said.
Hannity continued to press critics who believe Hillary Clinton's alleged actions were fine but Trump's are supposedly illegal.
"The same ones that ignored, let's see, foreign election interference that was bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC," Hannity said.
"It's like I'm the only person who cares about Bernie Sanders. No outrage by any of these people. She bought it, she sought it, she paid for it, they spread it, they tried to use it to impact the election."

Stacey Abrams Cartoons

Rep. Dan Crenshaw blasts NY Times writer, other critics: 'They have succeeded in politicizing 9/11'

Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, addressed a New York Times op-ed writer who accused him of not supporting the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund on Wednesday, calling the writer's initial accusation "inexcusable."
"That is a pretty inexcusable thing to say, you're going to stand on the graves of 9/11 victims and claim that I am not a patriot and I have not defended this country against the perpetrators of 9/11, that I have not defended this country to prevent another 9/11 from happening. It's an inexcusable accusation from the get-go," Crenshaw said on "Fox News @ Night with Shannon Bream."
New York Times contributing op-ed writer Wajahat Ali claimed on Twitter that Crenshaw hadn't sponsored the fund's renewal while praising the involvement of Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.
"Anytime a Republican says they are 'patriots' ask them if they voted to fund the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund. You know who's for it? Ilhan Omar. You know who hasn't sponsored it? Dan Crenshaw," Ali wrote in the now-deleted tweet.
"Hey 'journalist,' maybe you should check your facts. I am a co-sponsor. Nice try though," Crenshaw tweeted in response.

"It's actually really sad because they have succeeded in politicizing 9/11, they politicized this bill for the victim compensation fund and its shameful, it's absolutely shameful."
— Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas

Crenshaw dismissed the tactic, calling it "dishonest" and "cynical." He also blamed Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., for starting the trend.
"They know it's dishonest and we cannot get to this place in politics where you are seeking out something somebody hasn't cosponsored yet and claiming you are against it. They know the public doesn't understand that, they think you're voting against it," Crenshaw told Bream.
Earlier Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee passed a reauthorization bill for the 9/11 Victims’ Compensation Fund, a day after comedian Jon Stewart lambasted lawmakers for failing to attend a hearing on the bill.
Crenshaw also addressed another tweet from Ali where he called on Crenshaw to address his condemnation of  Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and her comments about 9/11.
"Thanks for letting me know. I'm glad you did and I have no problem correcting and updating the record with facts. Now try it with your comments about Ilhan Omar. You'll feel better. Sincerely, a fellow patriot," Ali tweeted.
In April, Crenshaw criticized Omar for describing 9/11 as "some people did something." The congressman called Ali's comments "shameful."
"Defending the indefensible comments by Ilhan Omar regarding 9/11 -- which is where all of this materialized. It's actually really sad because they have succeeded in politicizing 9/11, they politicized this bill for the victim compensation fund and it's shameful, it's absolutely shameful," Crenshaw said.
Fox News' Andrew O'Reilly and Joseph A. Wulfsohn contributed to this report.

Stacey Abrams visits Hollywood to urge against boycott over Georgia's 'heartbeat' abortion law

Former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams flew to Los Angeles this week to encourage Hollywood executives and industry officials not to go through with boycotting Georgia over the state’s new heartbeat abortion law.
The film industry has threatened to boycott Georgia due to the controversial law, which makes abortions illegal once a fetal heartbeat can be detected. That typically occurs around six weeks into a pregnancy, often before women realize they are pregnant.
Though she doesn’t hold office, Abrams told Atlanta’s WSB-TV that her “mission is to make sure these jobs stay in Georgia.” She met with executives, producers, actors and low-level behind-the-scenes staffers to convince them that pulling business from Georgia would be premature.
“I don’t disparage boycotts. They have their function. But this is a situation where the political realities are that a boycott won’t have the intended effect,” she told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

“I don’t disparage boycotts. They have their function. But this is a situation where the political realities are that a boycott won’t have the intended effect.”
— Stacey Abrams

Georgia’s law won’t take effect until January but it is expected to be challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court, where it could test the precedent set by Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case that made abortion legal throughout the U.S.
Abrams, therefore, urged filmmakers to wait before potentially wreaking havoc on the state’s economy.
Direct film spending in Georgia reached $2.7 billion in 2018, and the approximately 450 projects shot in the state in 2018 supported roughly 92,000 jobs, the newspaper reported. Because Georgia has one of the nation’s most generous tax-incentive programs for filmmakers, Hollywood also saves big money by shooting movies there -- roughly $800 million in 2018.
Hollywod also invested in Georgia by funding studios, soundstages and equipment that wouldn’t be easy to pull out should a boycott ensue.
Abrams made national headlines as the first black female gubernatorial candidate to be nominated by a major party when she ran in 2018. She ultimately lost but refused to concede to Republican Brian Kemp who signed the heartbeat bill into law after taking office. Some expect a Kemp-Abrams rematch in 2022.
Kemp said the backlash from Hollywood does not change his position: He supports life and the film industry tax credit. He canceled a trip to visit Hollywood in May given wind of potential protests.

How much do polls showing Dems trouncing Trump really mean?

The media, which are always enamored of polls, are really loving them right now.
That's because they show President Trump getting his butt kicked.
And while the latest numbers certainly aren't good for the president, I'm going to flash a giant yellow warning light here.
It's early, as everyone knows, but the problems run deeper than that.
The pundits are agog over a new Quinnipiac University survey that shows Joe Biden clobbering Trump, 53 to 40 percent.
Not only that, but other Democrats beat Trump by lesser margins: Bernie Sanders (51 to 42 percent). Kamala Harris (49 to 41). Elizabeth Warren (49 to 42). Pete Buttigieg (47 to 42). Cory Booker (47 to 42).
The Q poll is widely respected, but here's the thing:
If Joe or Bernie or Kamala or one of the others is up against Trump in November of 2020, he or she is not going to be seen by the public as the same person as during the current campaign spring training period.
The eventual nominee will have endured a year and a half of denunciations by Trump, his campaign, his allies, and his surrogates. That's along with millions of dollars in negative advertising by pro-Trump and independent groups and constant attacks from conservatives in the media.
In short, the person on the ballot will be fairly battered and bloodied.
And the Republicans have no monopoly on this. The Obama camp, the Democrats and liberals in the media pounded Mitt Romney, long before he became the nominee, as a heartless executive, flip-flopper and goofball.
Now by this logic, Trump will also be more scuffed up by the fall of 2020 than he is now. But that will be nothing new. He's been pounded by the press and his opponents since the last campaign, and while he'll have to defend his record, all the personal controversies — his business record, women, hush money — are pretty well known.
By contrast, no Democrat running, including Biden, has been through the searing scrutiny of running at the top of the ticket. So the race will tighten. Nobody is going to win by 13 points.
Meanwhile, Trump tried to push back hard on a New York Times piece which said: "After being briefed on a devastating 17-state poll conducted by his campaign pollster, Tony Fabrizio, Mr. Trump told aides to deny that his internal polling showed him trailing Mr. Biden in many of the states he needs to win."
Politico had reported earlier that the polling showed Biden ahead of Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.
The president never explicitly denied the Times account. But when asked by a reporter yesterday, he said "there were some fake polls" put out by "the corrupt media ... We have some internal polling, very little, and it's very strong."
Was he denying that the Fabrizio polls were "devastating"?
Or was he going after other surveys, such as the much-touted Quinnipiac poll? It wasn't clear.
If it's the latter, the university said that it stands by its numbers after 25 years of independent polling.
"We're used to this," Quinnipiac said. "Whoever is on the wrong side in a poll attacks the poll."
Kellyanne Conway, a career pollster, offered some caveats yesterday.
"When the president says we have some of the best numbers we ever had," the White House counselor said, "he means among Republicans and he also means among some of the individuals who voted for him last time."
Obviously, it will take more than just winning Republicans for Trump to get to 270.
Conway added that when "the president says he has the best numbers ever, he is also talking about the unemployment numbers, growth numbers, the optimism numbers."
For all the back and forth, it's clear that an incumbent president who's not higher than 42 percent has his work cut out for him.
But the latest polls are more than ephemeral. They reflect a political landscape that may be radically changed once people start voting.

Hannity praises Trump's 'genius setup' against Dems, claims president setting trap with 'nonstory' about foreign info

Fox News' Sean Hannity supported President Trump's comments Wednesday that he would be willing to listen to a foreign government if they approached him with information on a political opponent, calling it a "genius setup" by the president.
"In many ways that was a genius setup because the media mob will fall right into his trap, breathlessly spewing fake, phony outrage over a nonstory for days," Hannity said during his monologue on "Hannity" on Wednesday night.
Trump made the comments to ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, adding that he would not necessarily contact the FBI if such an approach was made.
"I think I'd want to hear it. ... I think you might want to listen. There isn't anything wrong with listening," Trump said in the interview.
Hannity defended the president and blasted Democrats for being critical of the president's comments but not Hillary Clinton's past actions or possible misconduct that led to the Russia investigation.
"Listening is much different than, let's see, lying, spying, and paying for Russian lies and spreading it through the media by 'deep state' operatives and then using it as a basis for a FISA warrant," Hannity said.
"Why are they not outraged about Hillary paying for Russian lies, disinformation, Comey generously using the unverifiable data from Russia to spy on the Trump campaign and get a FISA warrant?" the host continued.
Hannity also said the president's comments should force those outraged by them to address why they have not been outraged by Clinton's conduct.
"This will all get another round of fake, phony, moral selective outrage over that interview," he said, "but it's a perfect setup because if they are outraged about that and how can you not be outraged over what I just said?"
Hannity said Democrats are concerned only about Trump and not about justice.
"They are worried about obstruction of justice but only if it's Trump, not Hillary," he said. "They are worried about underlying crimes but only if it's Trump, not Hillary. They are worried about believing but only if it bludgeons Trump, not the lieutenant governor of ... the Commonwealth of Virginia over serious sex allegations."
Fox News' Liam Quinn contributed to this report.

Rachel Maddow Cartoons