Archive for the ‘Bernie Sanders’ Category

Now that Shepard Smith left FNC, it’s time to get rid of Chris Wallace and Juan Williams, in that order. This morning, Wallace interviewed Acting WH Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney about the confusion over his ‘admitting’ that President Trump connected military aid to Ukraine with investigating the Bidens. I get it that the media loves stirring up controversies where they don’t exist but this is ridiculous.

First, Mulvaney said that governments engage in quid pro quos all the time. While I haven’t heard him say it this way, I’m confident that Mulvaney meant that reporters are getting hung up on the phrase quid pro quo rather than asking the important follow-up question, which is ‘was the quid pro quo corrupt? Or was it innocent?’ Quid pro quo simply means “this for that.”

Imagine this: every time you buy something in a store, you’ve committed a quid pro quo. You exchanged financial considerations for a product, aka this for that. If that’s illegal or corrupt, shopping malls are filled with criminals.

Of course, everything in DC gets overhyped. That’s how this story went from being a big nothing to being the biggest story this side of the other nothing story, aka the impeachment nothing story. This is utterly predictable. Without conflict, ratings would tank. Without misleading headlines, there wouldn’t be the clicks. Conflict drives ratings and attention.

That’s why I don’t pay attention to those tricks. I want to gather information. I don’t care about the latest hot stories. Rest assured that the content that you find here is important to people and is reliable. I don’t buy into the gamesmanship that the networks employ. They’re always telling us that this or that event is super-important before turning into a non-event.

I pay attention to political rallies because they tell me whether voters are fired up. If they aren’t, that’s an automatic disadvantage to that candidate. This year thus far, Trump holds the advantage over most of the Democrats, with Bernie and Elizabeth Warren being the exceptions — sorta. Crazy Bernie and Elizabeth Warren are doing best but they still can’t match Trump’s crowds and enthusiasm.

This article highlights the difference between the Trump campaign’s cutting edge media strategy and Biden’s strategy:

One recent video from the Trump campaign said that Mr. Biden had offered Ukraine $1 billion in aid if it killed an investigation into a company tied to his son. The video’s claims had already been debunked, and CNN refused to play it. But Facebook rejected the Biden campaign’s demand to take the ad down, arguing that it did not violate its policies. At last count, the video has been viewed on the social network more than five million times.

Chris Wallace is going the way of the dinosaur. Fox Nation is a great option because it’s more of an on-demand option. Why go old-fashioned when you can customize?

I can’t say that Marc Thiessen is President Trump’s most diehard supporter. What I’ve known for quite awhile, though, is that he’s a fair-minded man who’s written some good stuff that supports President Trump. For instance, this article is outstanding.

Thiessen opens the article by saying “With three polls showing her in the lead, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., may soon eclipse former Vice President Joe Biden as the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. That’s great news for Republicans, because Warren has a problem: The central message of her campaign is that the economy is working for the very wealthy but it is not working for ordinary Americans. Unfortunately for her, ordinary Americans disagree.

Next, Thiessen empties both barrels of the heaviest artillery:

A Marist poll asked voters whether “the economy is working well for you personally.” Nearly two-thirds of Americans said yes. This includes large majorities in almost every demographic group. Sixty-seven percent of college graduates and 64 percent of those without a college education say the economy is working for them. So do 68 percent of whites and 61 percent of nonwhite people.

So do Americans of every generation: 63 percent of Generation Z and millennials; 69 percent of Generation X; 63 percent of baby boomers; and 69 percent of Greatest Generation and Silent Generation voters. So do supermajorities in every region in the country: 60 percent in the West, 65 percent in the Northeast, 67 percent in the Midwest, and 68 percent in the South. So do most voters in every type of American community: 63 percent of both big and small city voters; 64 percent of small-town voters; 66 percent of rural voters and 72 percent of suburban voters.

Call me crazy but that sounds like an economy that’s working for tons of people. That doesn’t sound like an economy that’s just benefiting millionaires and billionaires. That sounds like an economy that’s benefiting pretty much everybody in pretty much every geographic part of the US. Then there’s this:

The only groups who disagree, Marist found, are progressives (59 percent), Democratic women (55 percent) and those who are liberal or very liberal (55 percent.

That figures. Those groups are filled with sourpusses.

There is a good reason for that. Unemployment is near a record low, and the United States has about 1.6 million more job openings than unemployed people to fill them. Not only are jobs plentiful, but wages are rising. And The New York Times reported in May that “over the past year, low-wage workers have experienced the fastest pay increases.”

It isn’t surprising that Democrats opened their debate talking impeachment:

Old-fashioned Democrats had an economic agenda that appealed to people from time-to-time. Today’s Democrats aren’t persuasive because their ideas sound like they’re from outer space. They couldn’t sell ice-cold Gatorade in a desert if their lives depended on it. Bernie Sanders brags that he’ll raise everyone’s taxes. Elizabeth Warren’s evasive replies prove that she’d raise taxes, too, though not as much as Bernie. Think of Elizabeth Warren as ‘Bernie Lite.’

The other way to think of Crazy Bernie and Pocahontas is to think of them as destructive to this fantastic economy. Their policies wouldn’t make life better for families. Their policies are just plain stupid.

After tonight’s debate, the pundits’ consensus was that, thanks to impeachment, the race would essentially remain a 2-way race between Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren. After the debate, though, that conventional wisdom appears to have gotten shattered. The oldest candidate in the race suddenly became the most appealing choice to young people:

At least three members of the “Squad” of far-left freshman members of Congress will reportedly endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders for president. Fox News has learned that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., will appear with Sanders on Saturday in Queens, N.Y., at a “Bernie’s Back” rally designed to generate excitement for the senator’s campaign following his recent heart procedure. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., will also endorse the candidate, Fox News confirmed.

In addition, CNN reported that Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., will endorse Sanders as well. It was not immediately clear if Omar and Tlaib will appear at the same Sanders event.

This will be fascinating to watch. First, will this change the trajectory for Elizabeth Warren, who has been climbing since late summer? Next, will this stop Bernie’s recent slide and reposition him firmly amongst the frontrunners? Third, does this essentially end the race for the second-tier candidates?

The endorsements would be a significant blow to the campaign of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who like Sanders has been representing the party’s progressive wing. Word of the endorsements also followed Tuesday night’s Democratic debate in Ohio, where Warren was under attack from multiple candidates after rising in the polls in recent weeks.

This is a potentially big moment from the standpoint of attracting young voters. It also denies Sen. Warren a big victory. Bernie can now point to this as proof that the heart attack didn’t stop him from being a force. How many points this will be worth in the next round of polling is unknowable but there’s little doubt that his post-heart attack slide just stopped.

Whether that’ll catapult him in Iowa or New Hampshire remains to be seen, too. What isn’t disputable is whether Saturday’s official endorsement will breathe new life into Bernie’s campaign. It certainly will.

The other thing that this sets up is a situation that tests whether the socialist wing of the Democratic Party is big enough to defeat the not-quite-as-crazy wing of the Democrat Party.

Salena Zito’s latest column highlights what I think will be one of the biggest issues of the 2020 election cycle, in both the presidential election and in congressional races. The title of Ms. Zito’s column is “The crackers and frackers could hold the keys to 2020”. I’ve said for awhile that I think they will be one of the biggest issues in the race.

Democrats are in a difficult position. If Democrats side with Tom Steyer and AOC, they’ll lose the people who used to be the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, the industrial unions like the Pipefitters, the UAW, the USW and other major unions. If Democrats side with these unions, Tom Steyer stops writing checks for their campaigns.

Republicans don’t have such conflicts. They can support fracking without hurting their standing with other interest groups that support the GOP. The great news is that Republicans can boast how they support great-paying blue collar jobs that are helping rebuild close-knit communities in major battleground states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan.

All Darrin Kelly wanted for the energy workers in Western Pennsylvania was that the Democratic presidential hopefuls would talk to them before going to war against shale. That opportunity slipped away last Friday when Elizabeth Warren joined Bernie Sanders in calling for a total fracking ban. “On my first day as president, I will sign an executive order that puts a total moratorium on all new fossil-fuel leases for drilling offshore and on public lands. And I will ban fracking — everywhere,” Warren tweeted.

“It is disappointing that any national candidate would not come in here and want to talk to the men and women of this area first before unilaterally making that decision,” said Kelly, a charismatic Pittsburgh firefighter who is also the head of the powerful and influential Allegheny Fayette Labor Council. They represent workers stretching from Pittsburgh to the borders of Maryland and West Virginia.

It isn’t just Bernie and Warren that’ve abandoned blue collar America. Joe Biden ditched them, too:

Biden denied the donor’s association to the fossil fuel industry before calling the young woman “kiddo” and taking her hand. He said, “I want you to look at my eyes. I guarantee you. I guarantee you. We’re going to end fossil fuel.

“There you have it. Blue Collar Joe just said that he’ll stop the fossil fuel industry. Then there’s this:

Trump’s magic came in rural and post-industrial counties such as Luzerne and Erie, but most importantly in the populous counties around Pittsburgh, where shale is king and fracking is seen as the second coming of the steel industry.

They may look like ordinary construction cranes to someone unfamiliar with the history of this region. But if you’re from here, they look like something different. Building the ethane cracker plant, each of these cranes looks like a new colossus rising from the ashes of yesterday’s despair.

Building the plant has brought in 6,000 good-paying jobs, with more to come. Ultimately, there will be 600 permanent jobs at the plant, with industry analysts predicting triple that amount in supporting industries.

Jobs postings are everywhere touting opportunities, no matter the skill level — high school education, trade school certificate, chemists, engineers, IT, labor. If you reliably turn up for work, there is likely a career for you in the oil and gas industry.

Let’s remember this: In 2016, then-candidate Trump promised he wouldn’t forget their communities. In 2020, he’ll return with the campaign slogan of promises made, promises kept.

The rebuilding isn’t complete but it’s been started, thanks to President Trump’s policies. President Trump identified the Obama administration’s anti-coal regulations as one of the things killing the energy industry. Thanks to the Republicans’ use of the Congressional Review Act, which they used 16 times, and the Trump/GOP tax cuts, communities are rebuilding. Under Obama/Biden, those communities were forgotten.

This article makes it emphatically clear that Democrats, especially those in the media, have a recession obsession. The Q2 GDP was 2.1, down from 3.1 in Q1. For historical perspective, the average GDP during the Obama administration was about half that of Q2.

Back then, when economic growth was pathetic, the MSM didn’t talk about the possibility of a recession. The MSM talked about things like consecutive months of job growth as though that was a miraculous accomplishment. Here’s a hint for the MSM: The default of the US economy is to create jobs. That isn’t a miracle, except if you compare it to European countries. By their standards, the US default is miraculous.

By comparison between administrations, economic growth during the Trump administration is significantly better than economic growth during the Obama administration but the Trump economy is getting the negative press.

What’s upsetting to me is that we’re talking about a slowdown at this point, which is a distant cry from a recession. The fact that we’re in a full-fledged trade war with China, the next biggest economy in the world, and our economy keeps growing should be a point of confidence. If we’re going through all this and the economy is still growing at twice the rate it did during the Obama administration, shouldn’t we take note of the Trump economy’s durability?

During the Clinton administration, economists worried about tough economic times in Asia. Back then, economists rightly worried about what was then called “the Asian Flu.” They worried that the Asian Flu would trigger a recession in the US. All that happened was that the US economy slowed down. Years afterward, the economists concluded that the Clinton economy was fundamentally strong, which helped it weather the storm.

Maria Bartiromo nailed when she said that the media that’s predicting a recession is the same media that predicted President Trump’s impending impeachment from the Russia collusion illusion:

I think the broader picture is that the media continues to have an incredible amount of influence in terms of explaining to the world what is going on. When you go back to the fact that we just came off of the 2 years of collusion delusion where the media was all about President Trump colluded with the Russians, et cetera, et cetera. You know, “Sunday Morning Futures,” my program right before this program was every week poking holes into that narrative for 2 years and I got slammed in the media as a result of the fact that Congressman John Ratcliffe and Devin Nunes, the congressmen who actually saw the redacted document, the people who were there interviewing the FBI officials and they knew the story better than anybody…

Then she finishes that flourish with this:

The media’s responsibility is to report the truth and seek the truth, but Howie, how many programs do you hear the media saying the unemployment rate is at 51-year low, how many media outlets are you hearing saying we had 4 plus percent growth for one quarter last year, 3.1% in the first quarter and 2.1% in the second. A recession is two quarters of negative performance, meaning negative, not positive. We are only seeing positive readings, so the fact that we are talking about a recession being on the horizon and not even talking about the facts reminds me of editorial meeting that took place at New York Times two weeks ago where the editor there said, well, for two years we were putting all of our resources into Russia collusion, the story changed on us. The story didn’t change, Howie, the story is the same story, but they put all resources in collusion and now they decided that they will put all resources on racism.

KA-BOOM! That’s delivering the boom like a true economist should. First, consumer spending represents two-thirds of the GDP. That’s up 0.7% over last month. The Trump-GOP tax cuts have put hundreds of billions of additional dollars. Unemployment is at a historic low. What part of that sounds like a recession is right around the corner?

Thad McCotter was right when he wrote about “The Left’s ‘3 Rs’: Russia, Racism, & Recession.” He was exceptionally right when he said that “the Democrats were missing the 4th R: Reality.”

Amen, Thad. Democrats are indeed missing that. I don’t anticipate Democrats finding that missing ingredient anytime before the election, especially if Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren is the nominee. It’s obvious that Democrats, especially the Media Wing of the Democratic Party, is hoping for a recession. They’re practically begging for that recession. Bill Maher didn’t hide it. He explicitly called for a recession to get rid of President Trump.

Democrats have a recession obsession. Unfortunately, they don’t have an obsession for reporting the facts. To paraphrase Al Gore from the 1992 campaign, when he said “Everything that’s up should be down and everything that’s down should be up”, everything that Democrats should be for, they’re against and everything that they’re supposed to be against, they’re for. Democrats should be for a booming economy but they’re praying for a recession. Democrats should be for sealing off the border but they’re for decriminalizing illegal immigration.

Saying that the Democrats have a candidate crisis this presidential election cycle is understatement. It isn’t just about the Democrats’ candidates, though that’s part of their problem. Part of their problem is that they’ve alienated their traditional base. Specifically, Democrats alienated blue collar workers and industrial unions. It’s more than interesting that Democrats have pushed aside unions like the UAW, Teamsters and United Mine Workers.

In this LTE, Rob Braun wrote “Middle America feels as if no one on the coast is taking their views and opinions seriously. The coastal liberal elites don’t want to hear that they aren’t happy with the moral and social re-engineering they promote. Or, calling Middle America bigots because they adhere to traditional sexual standards. And more importantly, the elites haven’t done a very good job at convincing middle America that their experiment in social and moral re-engineering is the best way of structuring a healthy and functional society.”

That’s certainly a significant part of why Democrats are pushing aside people of faith and rural America. When President Obama demonized people living in “small towns in Pennsylvania”, he criticized these people, saying that it isn’t “surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

That’s an invitation for rural voters to abandon Democrats. That’s what those voters did in 2016. President Trump capitalized on the situation, promising these voters that his policies would revive rural America’s economy. President Trump has delivered on that promise. Remember President Obama mocking then-Candidate Trump about promising to improve the US economy? I remember it because of this:

Longtime Democrat operative Mark Jaede responded to Braun:

It seems that the author thinks the Democratic Party should throw LGBT people and people of color under the bus in order to win votes from socially conservative rural white people.

I disagree. We won’t win by pandering to anti-gay people. We won’t win by dismissing the struggle against racism as “identity politics.” We won’t win by concerning ourselves with how many counties have GOP majorities. We will win by fielding a candidate who can offer Democrats in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Virginia, and North Carolina a reason to turn out and vote.

As long as Joe Biden promises to eliminate the use of fossil fuels, as long as Bernie promises to spend $16,300,000,000,000 on his version of AOC’s Green New Deal, as long as the entire Democrat field promises to decriminalize illegal immigration and give illegal immigrants free health care, Democrats will continue losing those states cited by Prof. Jaede, with the possible exception of Pennsylvania and Virginia.

One of the links in TakeAction Minnesota’s weekly newsletter was to this article on Bernie Sanders’ Green New Deal proposal. According to Kenza Hadj-Moussa, TakeAction Minnesota’s Communications Director, “Bernie Sanders rolled out a climate plan today that seems designed to terrify fossil fuel executives. And we love it.” Bernie’s plan is beyond utterly unrealistic. It’s frightening that a top Democrat presidential candidate could be this stupid. Unfortunately, Bernie’s that stupid and then some:

There are novel, meaty policy proposals that make Sanders’s proposal stand out from an already ambitious field: a cash-for-clunkers and financial assistance program to scale up electric vehicle usage, and plans to boost public transit ridership 65 percent by 2030; a requirement that the Congressional Budget Office work with the Environmental Protection Agency to give new legislation a “climate score,” like the budget scores it currently doles out; and abiding by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to ensure the free, prior, and informed consent by Indigenous peoples.

TakeAction Minnesota is part of the DFL’s labyrinth of activist outlets. TAM thinks that boosting transit ridership 65% within 10 years is achievable. No sane person thinks that. TAM, aka TakeAction Minnesota, thinks that giving Native American tribes veto power over fossil fuel projects is a fantastic thing. TAM thinks that ending “fossil fuels imports and exports” is a great idea. What type of idiot thinks that’s smart economically? These guys:

Sanders outlines an expansive system, building on the resolution introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey in April, that would generate publicly owned clean energy and 20 million new jobs.

First, it’s insulting that they think there’s that many net new jobs to be created through the Democrats’ Green New Deal. If TAM thinks that, then they’re using illegal drugs. Either that or they’re that stupid. Next, anyone that thinks that there isn’t tons of corruption within the environmental activist community is kidding themselves. (Think Solyndra, etc.)

It’s clear that the DFL is attached to the Democrat fringe. Today’s Democrat Party has virtually nothing to do with Bill Clinton’s Democrat Party. In Detroit, presidential candidate after Democrat presidential candidate criticized President Obama’s signature accomplishment, Obamacare. Now Tina Smith wants to pretend that she’s a moderate or a centrist? I don’t think so.

As I’ve said before, a moderate Democrat is one campaigning for office. Once they’re elected, Democrats suddenly start talking about their mandate, etc.

If you want to know the biggest difference between the Democrats’ presidential candidates and President Trump, it isn’t difficult to identify. The Democrats’ presidential candidates aren’t peddling the truth. They’re peddling doom and gloom. Whether it’s Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg or Bill de Blasio, they’re peddling a message that the world will end in 12 years if we don’t solve climate change or they’re peddling a message that blue collar families are getting screwed because ‘the rich’ are ripping everyone off.

Voters won’t flock to a political party that insists the world is going to hell in a handbasket.

Meanwhile, President Trump’s message is simple and two-fold. One part of President Trump’s message is Promises Made, Promises Kept. The other part of President Trump’s message is Keep America Great. They work hand-in-hand. President Trump’s speeches often start with him talking about how strong the economy is, especially for minorities and women, then talking about all the great judges that’ve gotten confirmed by the Senate, followed by talking about criminal justice reform.

Just like you can’t beat something with nothing, it’s true that you can’t doom and gloom yourself to the White House. You have to uplift people. Right now, Democrats don’t have a Reaganesque Happy Warrior. The Democrats’ candidates are angry and pessimistic. Think Bernie, de Blasio, Elizabeth Warren and Gillibrand. These are candidates that specialize in anger and pessimism.

Frank Luntz was in the debate hall for both nights of the Democrats’ presidential debates. To be honest, I thought that the supposed frontrunners sounded like idiot bomb-throwers while the lower tier candidates sounded reasonable in some instances. In this situation, reasonable is a relative term. Think John Hickenlooper, John Delaney, Michael Bennet.

I wouldn’t put Joe Biden in that category. At one point, Biden said “I am the only candidate whose plan limits the insurance companies from charging unreasonable prices. We should put some of these insurance executives who oppose my plan in jail for the 9,000,000,000 opioids they sell out there.”

Notice how Biden started by saying that “insurance executives who oppose [his] plan” should get thrown in prison before catching himself and mentioning opioids. Before that, Biden said that his plan “limits the insurance companies from charging unreasonable prices.” Who determines what’s unreasonable? The government? Once the government is the arbiter of what’s too expensive, what effects will that have on insurance companies? Has Biden thought about that? I’m betting he hasn’t.

So we supposedly have a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party. Frank Luntz thinks that that fight is over:

Luntz is right. This fight is over. At the first Democrat debate, every Democrat presidential candidate raised their hands when asked if they’d decriminalize illegally entering the United States. Listen to the ferocious reaction of the audience when attacking CEOs and corporations. Notice how far left Democrats have gone with illegal immigration. Changing it from a criminal charge to a civil fine is like sending out a notice that a small fine will be imposed for illegally entering the United States. That would open the floodgates and then some. People wouldn’t need to game the asylum system. They could just pay a fine, then become a legal resident of the US. Tell me the difference between that and open borders.

The Democratic Party of Bill Clinton is dead. Based on the criticism against President Obama, I could make a strong argument that the Democratic Party of President Obama is in hospice and fading fast. I’m not certain that the Democratic Party as it exists today will exist in 15 years.

David Avella, one of the most astute political observers out there, made some shocking statements in this article. According to Avella, Steyer’s entry likely ends Joe Biden’s chances of winning the nomination. Steyer has promised to spend $100,000,000 of his own money on the race.

That won’t get him closer to winning the nomination. It just means that he’ll be one of the loudest complainers on stage and campaign trail. I’m betting that he’ll be Nancy Pelosi’s worst nightmare. While she’s insisting that impeachment is foolish politically, Steyer insists that it’s the only moral choice for anti-American progressives. How that fight will end is anyone’s guess. Let me modify that last statement. The winner will be President Trump.

This infighting won’t stop anytime soon. This isn’t just about dumping Trump. Already, these carnivores are starting to devour themselves:

The progressive-socialist party has absorbed what is left of the old Democratic Party. Its iconoclasts are not satisfied with erasing the images or commemorations of old white public enemies of the past—Father Serra, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson—but have quite logically turned their identity politics venom on all old white people of the present, including some of their own left-wing brethren.

At first, the progressive Old Guard in Congress, like good Girondists, found the revolutionary carnivores useful in reducing the ranks of the Trumpians, the Tea Party, Reagan Democrats, old Perot voters, and the white working class to the inanimate status of “deplorables,” “irredeemables,” “clingers,” and “dregs”—and with them, the bigoted, racist, sexist, nativist, classist, homophobic, and xenophobic Republican Party. Certainly, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and a few geriatric sympathizers, such as Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), enjoyed the progressive feasting on the Ancien Regime—especially the unity offered by shared hatred of the obviously soon to be impeached, deposed, exiled and discredited Donald J. Trump.

This story most likely is about who gets eaten last. If anyone thinks that AOC and Ilhan Omar will be satisfied with taking down old farts like Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, I’d offer members of the CBC as proof that the Justice Democrats have a lengthy target list.

The bloodbath has started. What stops it is anyone’s guess. What’s most likely to happen is to have Steyer’s ego trigger a definitive Trump victory in 2020. Steyer isn’t a serious presidential candidate. He’s a serious fundraiser but he isn’t a serious policymaker. Possibly the best description of him is that he’s a wealthy back-bench bomb-thrower. BTW, he’s got tons of liabilities:

Steyer’s notoriety comes from donating the billions he has made investing in fossil fuels, private prisons and subprime lending companies into progressive activism for impeaching President Trump and reckless environmental policies.

The minute he steps onto the stage is the minute he becomes a piñata for self-righteous lefties like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris. He’s a hardline lefty environmentalist who made his money investing in fossil fuels and as a subprime lender. What Democrat (other than Hillary) will put up with that? Can anyone picture AOC giving him a pass? At minimum, Jonathan Karl didn’t give him a pass in this interview:

I’m being charitable when I say that Steyer’s argument is ridiculous. Don’t bet that Nancy Pelosi won’t convince the moderators to attack Steyer, with the argument being that she needs impeachment off the table to maintain the Democrat House majority.