Day 38: Apparently, dictatorship is fine

My Congressman supports Trump being a dictator.

Well, he hasn’t said that in so many words, but I’ve been asking for a while whether he would vote for impeachment if Trump were to murder someone who was investigating him.

He hasn’t answered.

And when I say “a while,” I mean since June 4th.

That’s seven-and-a-half weeks ago. 52 calendar days. Or Day 38 if we take June 4th as Day 1 and count only work days.

Here’s today’s conversation (earlier ones are linked at the end of the post).

Last week Mr. Faso issued a statement criticizing the president’s handling of the press conference after the Helsinki summit.

Since then, we’ve heard hints from the Russian side about what was agreed to in the summit itself, and sometimes we get confirmation from the White House, sometimes we get silence.

And the president apparently agreed to some very dangerous things, like ratifying the Russian seizure of Crimea and potentially ratifying the occupation of eastern Ukraine.

In dealing with this, we have no coherent report from the American side, and no coherent response within the U.S. government, because the president ignored everyone’s advice beforehand and went in one-on-one—the only other American in the room was his translator.

This is not mishandling a press conference. This is, at best, massive incompetence in the conduct of foreign policy. But it also looks like subservience to a foreign dictator.

Is Mr. Faso doing anything about this threat to our country?

What you like him to do?

Is he doing anything other than criticizing a press conference?

I want to know, first, what he thinks of the deeper, more serious issues about the summit itself.

And he could perhaps have hearings, ask to talk to the Secretary of State or others involved in foreign policy.

[Takes name and contact info, promises to pass along my concerns.]

While I have you, I just need to follow up on another question that I’ve been trying to get an answer on since June 4th. That’s seven-and-a-half weeks ago. If I’ve spoken to you before, you probably know what it is.

The president’s lawyer says he could kill James Comey and it would still be illegal to indict him, because the only remedy for a president is impeachment. So I want to know: If the president were to kill someone who was investigating him, would Representative Faso vote to impeach him?

I have not spoken to the Congressman as to whether he would vote to impeach if the president were to murder someone investigating him.

Well, as I said, I’ve been asking this question for seven-and-a-half weeks, and everyone I’ve spoken to about it has said that they would see that the Congressman got the question, so presumably someone has spoken with him about it, but I guess it wasn’t you.

This is the first I’ve heard of it.

And this is not some bizarre hypothetical. The president’s own lawyer brought it up.

This is an absurdly easy question. If you don’t support impeachment for a president who murders investigators, then you support dictatorship.

It’s beyond pathetic that Mr. Faso can’t answer this question.

The question is basically, Can the president murder his opponents without being impeached? Can the president murder his opponents without being impeached?

Why is that even a question?

You should be able to say, “Of course Mr. Faso doesn’t believe the president should be able to murder his opponents without being impeached.”

But you can’t say that, because Mr. Faso hasn’t seen fit to answer the question.

And that is simply absurd.

I will certainly see that he gets asked this question.

Do you personally interact with the Congressman?

Yes.

Do you think you personally could put this question to him?

Yes, I can do that.

And can you convey to him how absurd it is that he can’t answer it?

Yes, I will do that.

And perhaps at some point in, oh, the next two years, I might get an answer, but by now I fully expect not to get one. Though I will keep asking.

Mm-hm.

What kind of world is this, where a congressman can’t answer this question?

I don’t know.

You have a good day sir.

I would have a better day if my elected representative believed in democracy. You have a good day, too.

In case you're in John Faso's district, the number for his D.C. office is (202) 225-5614. He'd love to hear from you!

Earlier calls:

• Monday, June 4
• Tuesday, June 5
• Wednesday, June 6
• Friday, June 8
• Monday, June 11
• Thursday, June 14
• Monday, June 18
• Wednesday, June 20
• Monday, June 25
• Thursday, June 28
• Friday, July 6th
• Monday, July 16th
• Wednesday, July 18th

How to ruin small-talk

Everybody knows that feeling when you walk away from a conversation, then five minutes later think “That’s what I should have said.”

You know that feeling, right?

I still don’t have that feeling.

It’s been half a day, and I’m still at, “What should I have said? Should I have said something?”

I was in the grocery store and I almost collided with another customer. His physical type was one you encounter pretty often here in upstate New York: 60-ish, a rough, full beard, and a weathered face.

Oh, and on his chest, in something like a baby carrier, he was wearing a Chihuahua.

It was basically this model. Now replace the woman wearing it with a gristled 60-year-old man in a rural New York Price Chopper.
Image from https://usak9outfitters.com/STCRPP.htm

Day 32: Don't expect action

On Monday I called the office of John Faso (NY-19), expecting that he wouldn’t have yet figured out what to say about Trump’s Surrender Summit in Suomi.

To my surprise, the staffer had a statement there to read to me (which I later learned was also on Faso’s website). I was so surprised, that I said I agreed 100%, but I think it was more that seeing my congressman criticize Trump as much as he did was a bit like seeing a dog talk. On reflection, the dog was only making a little sense. (Still, yay dog for talking at all, right?)

Since my call on Monday, Trump had sort of walked back his dis of U.S. intelligence in favor of Putin’s view of what happened in 2016, but not really, and then had gone ahead and full-on ignored the intelligence community’s assessment of risks for 2018.

So I thought I’d check in with Faso.

I’m calling to find out what Congressman Faso is doing to follow up on his statement from Monday regarding the president’s summit with Vladimir Putin.

I haven’t had a chance to speak with him about that. Is there a message you’d like to pass along?

There are two very specific actions that Congressman Faso should take.

First, he should work with his colleagues on closing the loophole in the Defense Authorization Act that allows the president to waive sanctions on the Russian military.

And the second?

He should vote with the rest of the House to release the president’s tax returns. Every other presidential nominee for the last 45 years has released his or her tax returns. Trump said he would do it if he was elected. We’re now 20 months past the election, and we still haven’t seen them.

Taking out the garbage (statistics)

Have you ever encountered a list of claims about how great the economy is doing under Trump, and wondered how much substance there was behind it?

As a public service, here’s a list I encountered this morning, set in the context of data.

Enjoy.

And reuse, link, etc.

“Lowest unemployment rate amongst African Americans and the Spanish community since it's been tracked.”

Those numbers are continuations of trends that were running for the last 5 years of Obama’s presidency.


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=kwnF

 

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=kwnO

And the employment-population ratio for both groups is still below what it was in 2007, and far below what it was in 2009.


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=kwnV

The situation for Latinos (I assume that’s what you meant by “the Spanish community”) is actually still pretty far below the 2007 level.


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=kwod

“Lowest unemployment rate for woman in 66 years.”

I assume you mean “women,” and not some one individual “woman” who’s got her best numbers in 66 years.

Day 30: The non-answer answer

Back on June 4th I called the office of my congressman, John Faso (NY-19). The thing that got me to pick up the phone was Rudy Giuliani’s statement about the president being above any law except impeachment. I kept calling (see the roster at the bottom of the post), and a couple of other issues crept in.

On July 7th, I finally got a response (see the JPEG at the end of this post). I choose the word advisedly, because I didn’t get an answer.

So I called again.

(Note: The “Day 30” in the title is the count in terms of business days. In calendar time we’re already at Day 48 since my first call on June 4th.)

I’ve been asking questions on three areas:

     1. Tariffs 

     2. Family separations 

     3. Limits of presidential power

I got a letter dated July 7th that says nothing in particular. The Congressman says that he doesn’t agree with President Trump on everything (though he declines to mention anything specific on which he disagrees), and he says he’s working with the Problem Solvers Caucus to find solutions.

I asked specifically whether there would be legislation to prevent further destructive use of tariffs. The letter says nothing about that.

I asked specifically whether there would be hearings on the family-separation question, and also how the congressman reconciles, on the one hand, his stated opposition to detaining children with, on the other, his vote for a bill that would have authorized the continued detention of children. The letter says nothing about any of that.

When I started these calls back on June 4th, my very first question was, if the president did indeed kill someone investigating him, would Mr. Faso vote to impeach. It’s a very specific question, and a very reasonable one, because the president’s own lawyer said the president is immune from indictment, even if he were to have killed James Comey. That leaves impeachment as the only remedy should the president blatantly break the law, and I want to know if the congressman would use it.

It’s a very specific, relevant question, and I expect a grown man to be able to actually answer it, particularly if he thinks he deserves to represent us in Congress.

Is there a chance I can get answers to those questions?

Absolutely. (Takes name and contact info)

Day 24: No limits!

Early last month, in response to an insane comment by Rudy Giuliani, I started a series of somewhat regular calls to the DC office of my congressman, John Faso (NY-19). I wanted to know whether he believed in limits on presidential power.

I’ve kept it up (see the complete list of calls at the bottom of this post), sometimes asking other issues, such as the trade-war question included here, or the congressman’s response to the government’s kidnapping of children on the southern border.

And at times I’ve left the original presidential-powers question aside, to give the congressman adequate time to come up with an answer.

By today, I thought it was time to come back to my original question.

The short story: Mr. Faso seems unconcerned with any limits on presidential power.

(Note: This is Day 24 going by regular work days starting with June 4th as Day 1—it would have been Day 25, but there was July 4th in there. Going by calendar days, this is Day 33.)

Good morning, I’m following up on a couple of old questions of mine. Mr. Faso has made statements that he is opposed to the trade war the president has unleashed. I would like to know what action Congressman Faso is taking to actually rein that in.

I don’t specifically handle that, I will be sure to get it to the congressman’s desk. Do you have a specific suggestion?

Yes, he should work with his colleagues in Congress to craft legislation to limit the president’s ability to damage the country through pointless trade wars.

I will be sure to pass that along.

OK, I first asked that question on June 11th, three-and-a-half weeks ago. Everyone in the office there is very polite, and everyone says they’ll get my question to the congressman, but I still haven’t gotten an answer. Meanwhile, the damage is being done now. Events aren’t waiting for the congressman and his colleagues to get their act together.

I’m sorry nobody’s gotten back to you, but I will be sure to get the question to his desk.

I have another question: if the president were to kill someone who was investigating him, would Mr. Faso vote for impeachment?

A complicated Fourth

I’m out of the country, so there’s no July 4th Celebration nearby for me to go to. If, like yesterday, the rain forecast keeps getting pushed back later into the day, we’ll go for a bike ride, but there won’t be hotdogs, grilling out, fireworks, parades—none of that.

My Congressman, John Faso (NY-19), presumably will be at a July 4th event—after all, it would be political malpractice for an elected official not to be back in his district showing up at as many places as possible where he can associate himself with people’s nonpartisan love of their country.

But see, about that...

Right now our country is holding something north of 2000 children who have been separated from their parents when the families crossed the border. And as a judge wrote last week, “The unfortunate reality is that under the present system migrant children are not accounted for with the same efficiency and accuracy as property.”

That is the context in which detained parents are now being asked to sign a form that gives them two options:

1. I willingly leave without my child(ren)
2. I willingly leave with my child(ren)

The ACLU says that in some case, the people being asked to sign the form have already passed the first step of the asylum process, adding an extra layer of illegality to a policy that was already barbarically cruel.

But remember, we aren’t tracking those children as well as we track prisoners’ property, so how can ICE even meet its end of the bargain if the parent says they’ll leave with their children?

Meanwhile, month-old news by now, but the president’s lawyer says the president could murder the people investigating him, and the only remedy would be impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate—a president, in Rudy Giuliani’s view—cannot be indicted.