Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Ellison category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Ellison’ Category

In a surprise move, the DFL has opted to hold an endorsing convention to fill the soon-to-be empty seat left by Keith Ellison’s decision to run for Attorney General.

According to the DFL’s official statement, “The party said in a statement that Ellison’s move has ‘resulted in a great deal of confusion and interest’ in how the DFL will handle the primary election. The party said delegates should have a chance to endorse a candidate.”

Later in the article, it said that “the candidates are state Rep. Ilhan Omar, former Minnesota House speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher, state Sen. Patricia Torres Ray, state Sen. Bobby Joe Champion, Frank Nelson Drake and Jamal Abdi Abdulahi.”

This should get interesting. First, most of these candidates are socialists. Putting them on display will only remind Minnesotans how far left the DFL has drifted. Despite all of the names on the ballot, this is essentially a 2-person race between Ilhan Omar and Margaret Anderson-Kelliher. Based on what I’ve seen thus far this election season, I’d consider Omar to be the frontrunner for the endorsement. I don’t know that there is a frontrunner in the primary.

One thing that’s pretty apparent, though, is that Margaret Anderson-Kelliher and Ilhan Omar represent significantly different wings of the DFL. Omar stated that “I am a coalition builder and will continue Congressman Ellison’s legacy of using the Minnesota Fifth District seat to fight for all of us not only in Washington but here at home.”

It will be interesting to see which part of the DFL is dominant. I suspect it’s the Ellison-Omar wing.

This article might offer the most revealing insight into why Keith Ellison left his DC job to pursue the AG’s job.

Inside the article is this gem:

Why Ellison is making that risky move now is rooted in the realization that in the Donald Trump era, the best place to advance a progressive agenda might not be in Congress, but in the courts.

Despite his talk about representing the people, Ellison is mostly interested in harassing President Trump with lawsuits. It isn’t likely that Ellison would be interested in strengthening law enforcement. In fact, it’s easier to picture Ellison becoming Minnesota’s version of Eric Holder. It isn’t a stretch to think that Ellison would launch tons of investigations into Minnesota’s police departments. Most likely, Twin Cities police departments would have the most to fear from Ellison.

After he filed his paperwork to run for attorney general at the State Capitol on Tuesday, Ellison spoke with MinnPost and outlined his vision for the attorney general job: a “people’s lawyer,” Ellison said, “who holds people in power accountable and makes sure the average person has a fair shot.”

Mostly, he’s defended cop-killers like Assata Shakur. He’s better off as a lawyer for CAIR than anything else.

It’s difficult to picture Ellison as pro-law enforcement. I’m more than skeptical of the talents Rep. Ellison brings to the position. It isn’t difficult to picture the AG’s office taking a hostile stance towards law enforcement. Listen to Rep. Ellison’s explanation for why he isn’t seeking re-election:

That explanation simply isn’t credible. At one point, Rep. Ellison talks about talking with people in rural Minnesota. That’s a bunch of BS. The only time he’s seen outstate Minnesota is from his airplane heading to or from Washington, DC. His gibberish about fighting for people who “didn’t have anybody on their side” is utter spin. Ellison’s legal career was spent defending cop-killers like Assata Shakur. Actually, Scott Johnson’s article leaves no doubt that Ellison is a liar. Johnson’s timeline leaves little time for defending people’s civil right in court actions.

Briana Bierschbach’s article for MPR is a nice run-down of the DFL’s ‘Dumpster Fire Day’. The article opens by saying “At the end of filings Tuesday, Minnesota Democrats were facing a six-way primary for attorney general in August, a sudden eight-way intraparty battle for U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison’s seat, and an unexpected, three-way primary for the open governor’s seat. It was all part of what was described by some Democrats and Republicans as a “dumpster fire” day for Minnesota’s DFL Party. And it had plenty of people wondering: What does this mean for Minnesota Democrats in such a pivotal election year?”

Saying that the DFL isn’t united is understatement. This is the fight that Ken Martin has tried avoiding the past 5 years. In the DFL gubernatorial primary, it pits the Iron Range against Twin Cities environmentalists. When that primary ends, will the DFL be able to unite? That’s far from a foregone conclusion.

This paragraph jumped out at me:

Three-term Attorney General Lori Swanson went into the party’s convention Saturday seeking the endorsement for her job, but newcomer Pelikan ran to her left and was a close second to her on the first ballot. Swanson unexpectedly dropped out of that endorsing contest and instead moved on to run in the governor’s primary, setting off the mass of filings Tuesday.

What’s important is what’s missing. What’s missing is the fact that Matt Pelikan outed his opponent as having an A rating from the NRA. Within 15 minutes of that bomb getting dropped, Swanson had dropped out of the endorsement fight.

Broton worries that the DFL candidates it will hurt most are those in races not facing primaries but are top-tier targets in November. That includes the 1st congressional district, which is open after U.S. Rep. Tim Walz decided to seek the governor’s office, and the 2nd and 3rd Congressional Districts in the suburbs. “My fear is that this will actually hurt [2nd District candidate] Angie Craig and [1st District candidate] Dan Feehan,” he said. “These other races that are really competitive and they need the resources in the fall.”

Broton is right. These primaries eat up lots of resources. That won’t help Craig or Feehan. Still, that’s just one of the DFL’s problems.

The fact that the DFL is openly hostile to the Second Amendment is cause for GOP celebration. It won’t DFL candidates in the Twin Cities much to oppose the Second Amendment. In outstate Minnesota, that’s a different story. DFL legislative candidates campaigning in outstate Minnesota should wear flack jackets if they oppose the Second Amendment.

The DFL isn’t the semi-sane party that it used to be. They’re crazy. That’s why they’ll do poorly in outstate Minnesota.

As rumors swirl that Keith Ellison will run for Attorney General of Minnesota, the question must be asked what he’d contribute if he ran. Before we get to that, though, it’s important to know that the “decision has not been finalized, but Ellison huddled with his top advisers on Monday night to discuss the move, which comes amid the congressman’s frustrations with Congress as well as being DNC Chair Tom Perez’s understudy, sources say. Ellison declined to confirm that he was considering a run for attorney general on Tuesday morning. Politico first reported the news on Monday night. ‘I am not ready to make any comments,’ he told CNN. ‘It will all be clear as crystal, and it won’t be too long from now.'”

I don’t think it’s a stretch to think that, as Minnesota’s Attorney General, Ellison would spend most of his time suing President Trump for ideological reasons. It isn’t a stretch to think that he’d become Minnesota’s Xavier Becerra or Eric Holder. Further, it isn’t a stretch to think that Ellison pictures himself as the Minnesota face of the #Resist movement. Further, it isn’t difficult to picture Ellison suing Minnesota police departments anytime that a black mad is shot by police.

During Lori Swanson’s time in office as Minnesota’s AG, it was common knowledge that she spent tons of time suing President Trump.

UPDATE: It’s official:

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) is running for attorney general of Minnesota, setting off a potentially history-making battle that is sure to attract national attention. He officially filed the paperwork for his candidacy on Tuesday afternoon.

Ellison, one of the staunchest progressives in Congress and the current deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee, would be the first Muslim statewide elected official in the country’s history. The six-term Minneapolis congressman would also be Minnesota’s first black statewide official.

Let’s not be timid in saying this. Ellison is famous for being a bombthrower and a terrorist sympathizer. It’s impossible to see how he’d add anything productive to the state.

UPDATE II: Mike Hatch has filed to run for Attorney General, too.

With regards to Mr. Ellison, “Ellison’s decision to run is motivated as much by the availability of the post as by his desire to marshal the forces of the state to resist the agenda of President Donald Trump, according to a Democrat familiar with his thinking.”

In other words, Ellison thinks that he can be a bigger pain in President Trump’s side as Minnesota’s Attorney General than he can be as a bomb-throwing back-bencher in the minority in the U.S. House of Representatives. This isn’t about patriotism for Ellison. It’s purely about being an obstructionist. Ellison doesn’t care about what’s best for Minnesota. He cares about the #Resist movement. His rhetoric in this video shows that he’s a radical’s radical:

In his speech, which sounded semi-sincere, he talked about people in “Ely, Zumbrota, Minneapolis or St. Paul” not getting their fair pay. Later in his rant, he spoke about “consumer justice.” Still later, he spoke about fighting for environmental standards, gun violence and the unions.

Ellison won’t represent all Minnesotans. He’ll represent progressive Minnesotans. It’s impossible to think that he’d fight for gun rights, miners and small business owners. During his legislative career, both in the legislature and Congress, Ellison didn’t waste a split-second of time fighting for the middle class, blue collar workers or conservatives. Ellison is a radical’s radical. That’s who he’ll always be.

The DFL is doing its best to deny their responsibility for hundreds of millions of dollars of fraudulent child care payments to happen. That’s what this MPR article amounts to.

The MPR article defends the Dayton administration by saying “Johnson said there wasn’t any evidence presented in the former cases to indicate ties to terrorism. He also said he found the $100 million figure to be not ‘credible.’ That would account for half of the child-care assistance program. ‘From what we know about the scope of fraud within the program, we’re obviously concerned about it, but it’s not at that level,’ said Johnson.”

Naturally, Keith Ellison is on the wrong side of this issue. The MPR article quotes Ellison as saying “Financial stability for the Somali people, both here and in Somalia, is one of our strongest protections against the terroristic threat posed by Al-Shabaab. We should be making it easier for our constituents to support their families, not impugning the community for it. Fox 9 should issue a thorough correction and apology for its irresponsible reporting.'”

Ellison knows better than to say this. A high percentage of the money being sent to Somalia is money that’s been gained through fraud. That’s been verified by Chuck Johnson, the acting commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Services, when he said “Essentially, it’s like a shadow situation where there’s not really care being provided for the children, but the children are signed up for care as if they are. And in some cases, the parents are paid a kickback to be part of that scheme.”

I’m certain this is a foreign concept to Rep. Ellison but Fox9 News shouldn’t apologize for reporting on this criminal activity. We know this is criminal activity because Chuck Johnson admitted that “an investigation that began in 2014 led to the closure of 13 child care centers, six felony convictions and $4.6 million in court-ordered restitution.”

Jim Abeler was interviewed by FNC’s Shannon Bream about the scandal:

Here’s Tim Pawlenty’s statement on the scandal:

Technorati: , , , ,

The political tide is turning. It’s unmistakable. It isn’t that Democrats can’t get their message out, which is their cop-out explanation for why they fell short of their goals. It’s that they’ve become the lecturing party or the ideological party rather than being the listening party or the solutions party.

Tammy Bruce’s op-ed highlights the Democrats’ tactics. In her op-ed, Ms. Bruce said “For a long time, the Democrats have been successful by scaring people into voting for them. It’s a tactic used when you can’t persuade people on policy. Americans were recently reminded of the Democrats’ usual refrain when House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi declared President Trump’s tax cuts as ‘Armageddon.’ Mrs. Pelosi went there, relying on contrived drama, comparing a tax cut to a fight between biblical armies during the end times. When the Senate GOP was discussing Mr. Trump’s health care bill, the Democrats’ response? ‘Hundreds of thousands of people will die,’ delivered again by Nancy ‘We’re all gonna die’ Pelosi.”

In late October, 2017, Democrats thought that they were looking at a blue wave. That’s before Republicans passed the Trump/GOP tax cuts and President Trump signed them into law right before Christmas. Since then, the trend has been unmistakable. While there’ve been a few bumps in the road for Republicans, the RCP average of polling of the generic ballot question has headed in the Republicans’ favor:

Speaking of messaging, the Republicans’ message has consisted of telling people about the strengthening economy, fatter paychecks and greater financial security. The Democrats’ message, compliments of Ms. Pelosi, has sounded like fingernails across a chalkboard.

The Democrats aren’t ready for primetime. They’ve pandered to Moms Demand Action rather than putting forward plans to make schools safer. They’ve pandered to La Raza rather than getting criminal illegal aliens off the street. Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi has talked in apocalyptic terms to frighten people to vote for Democrats:

Keith Ellison, the deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, was handed the Grim Reaper baton when he said this to the Progressive National Candidate Training gathering last week: “Women are dying because we are losing elections,” Mr. Ellison said, Fox News Insider reported. “We don’t have the right to lose a damn election. We have to win.” Mr. Ellison was referring to a reported rise in maternal mortality rates in Missouri and Texas. The good news is, for Texas, that report has already been disproven, and explained by a computer reporting error.

And what is their argument really based on? The infantilizing of women. Underscoring Mr. Ellison’s remarks is an argument that women are so fragile, so vulnerable, that if Democrats don’t win and government doesn’t control more of your life, you’ll die. That is an inherently sexist argument, promoting the fraud that women can’t control their own lives and need a Big Brother to help them along.

Back in January, I wrote this post, which I titled “2018: No wave, barely a ripple?” At the time, I wasn’t sure if the trend towards Republicans would continue. If I wrote that article today, I’d omit the question mark from the title. The blue wave propaganda is coming from people like Chris Cillizza and other mindless lefties. The polling is clear. Nobody thinks that the improving economy and fat bonuses isn’t changing the mindset of the American people.

The DC/NY worrywarts should take a valium. The Trump/GOP tax cuts virtually sell themselves. Republicans still have to get out the vote but the policy sells itself. There’s a lesson I learned from a small business near my house. It’s legendary, actually. It’s called Val’s Rapidserv. They’ve been in business for 50+ years. I might be wrong on this but I don’t remember ever hearing a radio ad for them, most likely because their word-of-mouth advertising is exceptional.

This morning, I spoke with a person who owned a business right by Val’s. This entrepreneur told me that they “piggyback off of Val’s”, telling callers that they’re right next to Val’s.

The point is this: Val’s has 100% name recognition and the best fries in Minnesota. This translates to politics. If you’ve got a great reputation and a fantastic product to sell, you’ll win if you work hard. That’s where Republicans are at right now.

I wish I could say I was surprised by David Fitzsimmons’ campaign finance reporting tactics. Unfortunately, I’m anything but surprised. While some might criticize John Kern’s LTE highlighting the Emmer campaign’s tactics, I won’t follow suit. This isn’t that dissimilar to how big corporations use a plethora of regulations against small business competitors to reduce competition as much as possible.

John Kern opened the LTE, writing “In July 2016, Congressman Tom Emmer’s chief of staff David Fitzsimmons and GOP delegate Matt Stevens filed multiple Federal Election Commission complaints against me, the AJ Kern for Congress campaign and a private citizen. These frivolous complaints accused me of filing quarterly reports late and apparently attempting to gain undue influence with my wife by exceeding personal campaign contribution limits from our shared assets. Eighteen months later, presidentially appointed FEC commissioners voted 5-0 to dismiss.”

That’s the predictable outcome of these FEC complaints. Rep. Emmer knew he was underperforming at the time. According to Minnesota’s Secretary of State’s website, Emmer, the incumbent, won the primary with a pathetic 68% of the vote. That’s pathetic considering the fact that Emmer “out-fundraised AJ Kern’s 2016 campaign” by a 61-1 margin.

Emmer won’t win by overwhelming margins because he’s ignored his constituents on key issues. Specifically, he’s agreed with the Obama administration lock, stock and barrel on the Refugee Resettlement Program. When questioned by constituents if he’d push for a moratorium of the program, Emmer replied “That isn’t happening.” (I know because I attended that townhall at the Ace Bar on July 1, 2015. That’s also the night Kate Steinle was murdered.) After that meeting, AJ Kern told attendees that she was thinking about challenging Emmer. Here’s the explanation for why Emmer didn’t support his constituents:

President Trump has frequently criticized “the Swamp.” Regulations implemented by the Swamp have a chilling effect on both speech and competition. The truth is that Emmer is part of DC’s Swamp. Bradley Smith, the former Commissioner of the FEC, is one of the fiercest champions of free speech. Here’s what he’s stated on the record:

Charges and litigation are used to harass opposing candidates and make political hay with the press… used most effectively by ‘incumbents’. Many, if not most, of these cases end up being dismissed, but not without distracting the campaigns and using up their resources. …The problem in campaign finance is that unethical politicians are threatening private actors, rather than that unethical special interests are threatening government.

When John McCain and Russ Feingold wrote the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, aka McCain-Feingold, grassroots activists criticized it by nicknaming it the ‘Incumbents’ Protection Act’. That’s exactly right. BCRA didn’t eliminate corruption. It codified corruption by burying challengers under mountains of paperwork. That’s what its intent was.

While career politicians might want to fight the hordes of uppity peasants insisting on being heard, those career politicians won’t silence the activists’ voices.

Emmer can take that to the bank.

Per tradition, the DFL issued this statement after delegates endorsed Angie Craig to run against Republican incumbent Jason Lewis. The statement was the usual milquetoast boilerplate, saying “Angie Craig embodies the American Dream. She went from a mobile home park to a leader at Minnesota manufacturer St. Jude Medical. She will fight to ensure every Minnesotan has the opportunities she did by fighting for good-paying jobs, affordable healthcare for all, and real middle-class tax reform.”

All the statements in the world, though, won’t take away the major mistake that Ms. Craig made last week. Last week, Ms. Craig bragged that she wants to team up with Keith Ellison on health care. It’s worth noting that Rep. Ellison “took the reins of single-payer healthcare legislation in the House” last month. After making a major mistake on health care the last time she ran, Ms. Craig apparently didn’t learn.

I’m not the expert on CD-2 that others are but it’s difficult to believe that there are many John Kline voters that’d support a candidate that wants to implement a single-payer health care system. This snippet will hurt Ms. Craig this fall:

While I won’t predict a lop-sided victory for Jason Lewis, I can’t picture him winning by less than 6-8 points. The DFL recently has talked about health care being a major issue this fall. To the extent that it’s an issue, it won’t hurt Republicans as much as it’ll hurt the DFL.

Ladies and gentlemen, Tina Smith gave us proof that she’s a typical Metrocrat when she was interviewed by Almanac’s Eric Eskola and Cathy Wurzer. During the interview, Cathy Wurzer asked Smith if she thought the Senate was close to a DACA deal. Sen. Smith replied that she thought there was a good chance of senators coming together on a deal on DACA. Then Eskola essentially asked why Democrats weren’t willing to trade funding for President Trump’s wall for protection of DACA-protected illegals.

That’s when Sen. Smith said “Well, you know the wall is just a dumb idea. To try to pay for a big wall is just — most people don’t think it’s a good idea. At the same time, we have to have really strong border security and so I hope that a compromise can be reached that makes sense so that we can have strong border security.” Eskola jumped in, saying “That’s a compromise — wall- DACA”. Sen. Smith then countered, saying “I don’t think a wall is — I think a wall is — what? $18,000,000,000? I think we need to focus on border security and not the idea of tons and tons of cement, which doesn’t really work.”

There’s reason to question Sen. Smith’s commitment to border security. She recently participated in a DACA rally that featured her and Keith Ellison.

At the rally, Smith told the crowd of about 200 people “Minnesota Dreamers are American in every way except their immigration status. They work hard to improve our communities and to make our state better, not just for themselves and their families but for all of us. So the notion that we would turn our backs on Dreamers now … it’s just disgraceful.”

In other words, Sen. Smith thinks that there’s no problem admitting lots of illegal immigrants into Minnesota. On Almanac, Smith talked repeatedly about needing to secure the border. At this rally, Smith talked about how DREAMers were “American in every way except their immigration status.”

Which is it, Sen. Smith? If DREAMers are “American in every way except their immigration status”, why do we need tight security at the border? If we need tight security on the border, how can DREAMers be “American in every way except their immigration status”? It’s apparent that Sen. Smith is already adept at talking out of both sides of her mouth.

Smith’s interview is the first segment of Friday night’s show:

It’s understatement to say that it didn’t help improve her trustworthy rating.

Technorati: , , , ,

It isn’t surprising that Keith Ellison, Louis Farrakhan’s first congressman, isn’t hiding the fact that he supports Antifa’s violent tactics. He’s had a history of supporting violence, including appearing at a fundraiser for Sara Jane Olson, who is described as “a member of the self-styled revolutionary group the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA), which is best known for kidnapping heiress Patricia Hearst. Olson was apprehended in 1999 in relation to the 1975 attempted bombings of two police cars and the slaying of Myrna Opsah during a bank robbery.”

Later, “Ellison also spoke favorably of convicted cop killer Assata Shakur and expressed his opposition to any attempt to extradite her to the United States from Cuba, where she had fled after escaping prison. ‘I am praying that Castro does not get to the point where he has to really barter with these guys over here because they’re going to get Assata Shakur, they’re going to get a whole lot of other people,’ Ellison said at the event, which also included a silent auction and speech by former Weather Underground leader Bernardine Dohrn. ‘I hope the Cuban people can stick to it, because the freedom of some good decent people depends on it.'”

The book Rep. Ellison endorsed is titled “Antifa: The anti-fascist handbook.” It’s written by Mark Bray.

Bray has not shied away from the violent side of Antifa. In an interview with Melville House following the release of his book, Bray praised the violent tactics of Antifa, admitting the group will “pressure venues to cancel their events, organize self-defense trainings, and physically confront the far right when necessary.” Bray also admitted that property destruction is a “part of the anti-fascist and more broadly revolutionary repertoire.”

Doesn’t that sound a lot like fascism?

a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Forgive me if I can’t tell the difference between Antifa and fascism.