NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label sen jeff sessions r AL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sen jeff sessions r AL. Show all posts

19 November 2016

Racially Charged Remarks Derailed Trump's Attorney General Nominee 30 Years Ago 18NOV16


sen jeff sessions r AL is a bigoted, fascist, neo-nazi pig who would have been qualified for Generalstaatsanwalt in hitler's third reich but is no way qualified to the the US Attorney General. His selection by drumpf/trump-pence is more proof of the coming battles over the US Constitution, our civil librties, civil rights, human rights, the fate of our Republic. From +NPR ...

Racially Charged Remarks Derailed Trump's Attorney General Nominee 30 Years Ago

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama talks to the media at Trump Tower in New York Thursday. Sessions was picked to be President-elect Donald Trump's attorney general Friday.
Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images
President-elect Trump's selection of Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama to be Attorney General is stirring old memories-about his first failed foray on the national political scene.
In 1986, the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected Sessions, nominated by Republican President Reagan to be a a federal judge, after he acknowledged making racially insensitive remarks and calling the NAACP, the ACLU, the Southern Christian Leadership Council, and the National Council of Churches "un-American."
It was the first time that the committee had rejected a lower-court nomination in nearly a half century, and it came, amazingly, at a time when Republicans controlled the Senate.
The vote to reject the nomination was 10-8, with two Republicans joining all eight Democrats on the committee, to defeat the nomination after more than 20 hours of hearings.
In many ways, it was fellow Alabamian Howell Heflin, the former chief justice of the state, and a conservative Democrat, who cast the decisive vote against sessions.
'I must vote no'
The "overriding inquiry," Heflin said, is "will Jeff Sessions be a fair and impartial judge? Frankly, I have to say I don't know."
But "fairness and impartiality go to the very heart of our justice system," Heflin continued, and "as long as I have reasonable doubts, my conscience is not clear, and I must vote no."
The dramatic vote capped two sets of hearings over several months, and testimony from Sessions that changed significantly over time. At issue, were Sessions' racial attitudes in comments expressed to a variety of people, and a prosecution he brought as U.S. Attorney against three civil rights leaders for alleged voter fraud.
A jury of seven blacks and five whites subsequently acquitted all three after deliberating for just three hours, and civil-rights groups charged that the prosecution had been aimed at intimidating black voters, who in the previous election had turned out in record numbers.
The KKK 'OK'... except for the pot-smokers
For years, Democrats had held back in their opposition to Reagan's attempt to reshape the judiciary, treating it as a back-burner issue. But in Sessions they saw a target-rich environment. And the Reagan administration knew it. After initially refusing to allow Justice Department lawyers who had worked with Sessions to testify, the department relented, only to hear career attorneys testify about racially tinged remarks Sessions had made.
Sessions maintained that he was just "joking" when he said thought the Ku Klux Klan "OK" until he found out its members smoked pot. He denied ever bringing a prosecution in order to discourage black voters from casting ballots.
But Sessions made so many damaging admissions at his March hearing that Republicans called a second round of hearings in May, and at that second hearing, his answers changed so significantly that he faced credibility questions.
White civil-rights lawyer 'a disgrace to his race'
In March, asked about testimony that he had characterized a white civil-rights lawyer as "a disgrace to his race," the nominee replied, "trying to recollect on it, the best I could recall was I said, 'Well, he's not that popular around town. I've heard him referred to as 'a disgrace to his race.'"
In May, however, he said, "I am absolutely convinced that I did not call Mr. Blacksher a disgrace to his race, and I did not acknowledge it in any form."
In March, two lawyers, including a 13-year Justice Department veteran, testified that Sessions had referred to the NAACP, the National Council of Churches, the ACLU, and other groups as Communist-inspired and "un-American." Sessions conceded that he had made such remarks.
"It's probably something I shouldn't have said," Sessions said then. "But I really didn't mean any harm."
He went on to explain that he had not actually meant these groups were un-American but that "they take positions that are considered un-American," and thus "hurt themselves" and "lose credibility."
But by the May hearing, Sessions proclaimed that these organizations "are essential in a pluralistic society.... quintessentially American organizations. They are not un-American organizations."
Under questioning from then Sen. Joseph Biden. Sessions maintained that these organizations may have taken positions "adverse to the security of the United States," but if you hold such views "in good faith, you are not an un-American person ... or organization."
'I am not a racist'
Session sought to explain his changed answers by saying he had been taken by surprise at the previous hearing. But under further questioning from Biden, he conceded that he had been informed well in advance of the March hearing about all the controversial areas on which he would be questioned.
In a final plea, he told the committee, "I am not the Jeff Sessions my detractors have tried to create; I am not a racist. I am not insensitive to blacks. I supported civil-rights activity in my state. I have done my job with integrity, equality and fairness for all."
His answers, however, seemed to add a credibility problem to his troubles.
As a pained Sen. Heflin put it in hearkening back to his experience as a judge, these "admissions, explanations, partial admissions" leave one "in a quandary."
On that day in 1986, Sessions would lose his fight to be a federal judge. But 10 years later, in a moment of exquisite irony, he would win the election in Alabama to succeed the retiring Heflin.
He has served in the Senate for 20 years, earning the respect, if not the agreement of some of his liberal adversaries. This year, he was the first and for many many months, the only U.S. senator to endorse Trump for president.
In the GOP primary and general-election campaign, he campaigned hard for Trump, gaining increasing influence with the nominee and the now president-elect.
And on Friday, Trump picked Sessions to serve as the nation's chief law-enforcement officer.

01 August 2013

Inside Groundswell: Read the Memos of the New Right-Wing Strategy Group Planning a "30 Front War" 25JUL13

groundswell, the coalition of fanatical right wing repiglicans and tea-baggers, seeks to replace the gop with a political movement that will impose their neo conservative, fascist policies on America. They have no interest in the US Constitution, civil liberties and human rights. They have no interest in the truth, feel no obligation to honor the teachings of the Christian faith most of them claim as their own, to be fair, honest, and compassionate. They have the right to organize, plan, strategize and campaign. One has to question why, considering all the meetings and communications among the group, they don't have more policy substance and less deceptive, manipulative propaganda to offer the American people? One thing is certain, they are a threat to our Republic. Just like the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, groundswell is big on deceptive, inflammatory rhetoric but lacks the intellectual capability to govern. And so it goes. From Mother Jones...

Ginni Thomas, Allen West, and a crew of conservative activists and journalists have formed a hush-hush coalition to battle progressives—and Karl Rove.

| Thu Jul. 25, 2013 9:53 AM PDT

ginni thomasFrom left: Frank Gaffney; Ginni Thomas; Allen West
Believing they are losing the messaging war with progressives, a group of prominent conservatives in Washington—including the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and journalists from Breitbart News and the Washington Examiner—has been meeting privately since early this year to concoct talking points, coordinate messaging, and hatch plans for "a 30 front war seeking to fundamentally transform the nation," according to documents obtained by Mother Jones.
Dubbed Groundswell, this coalition convenes weekly in the offices of Judicial Watch, the conservative legal watchdog group. During these hush-hush sessions and through a Google group, the members of Groundswell—including aides to congressional Republicans—cook up battle plans for their ongoing fights against the Obama administration, congressional Democrats, progressive outfits, and the Republican establishment and "clueless" GOP congressional leaders. They devise strategies for killing immigration reform, hyping the Benghazi controversy, and countering the impression that the GOP exploits racism. And the Groundswell gang is mounting a behind-the-scenes organized effort to eradicate the outsize influence of GOP über-strategist/pundit Karl Rove within Republican and conservative ranks. (For more on Groundswell's "two front war" against Rove—a major clash on the right—click here.)
One of the influential conservatives guiding the group is Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, a columnist for the Daily Caller and a tea party consultant and lobbyist. Other Groundswell members include John Bolton, the former UN ambassador; Frank Gaffney, the president of the Center for Security Policy; Ken Blackwell and Jerry Boykin of the Family Research Council; Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch; Gayle Trotter, a fellow at the Independent Women's Forum; Catherine Engelbrecht and Anita MonCrief of True the Vote; Allen West, the former GOP House member; Sue Myrick, also a former House GOPer; Diana Banister of the influential Shirley and Banister PR firm; and Max Pappas, a top aide to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).
Among the conveners listed in an invitation to a May 8 meeting of Groundswell were Stephen Bannon, executive chairman of Breitbart News Network; Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service agent who resoundingly lost a Maryland Senate race last year (and is now running for a House seat); Leonard Leo, executive vice president of the Federalist Society; Sandy Rios, a Fox News contributor; Lori Roman, a former executive director of the American Legislative Exchange Council; and Austin Ruse, the head of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. Conservative journalists and commentators participating in Groundswell have included Breitbart News reporters Matthew Boyle and Mike Flynn, Washington Examiner executive editor Mark Tapscott, and National Review contributor Michael James Barton.
Groundswell has collaborated with conservative GOPers on Capitol Hill, including Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Cruz and Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.), a leading tea partier. At its weekly meetings, the group aims to strengthen the right's messaging by crafting Twitter hashtags; plotting strategy on in-the-headlines issues such as voter ID, immigration reform, and the sequester; promoting politically useful scandals; and developing "action items."
A certain amount of secrecy cloaks Groundswell's efforts. Though members have been encouraged to zap out tweets with a #GSW hashtag, a message circulated to members of its Google group noted that the role of certain advocates should be kept "off of the Google group for OPSEC [operational security] reasons." This "will avoid any potential for bad press for someone if a communication item is leaked," the message explained. (The Groundswell documents were provided to Mother Jones by a source who had access to its Google group page and who has asked not to be identified.)
"We want to protect the strategic collaboration occurring at Groundswell and build on it. Please be careful about bringing guests and clear them ahead of time."
Washington is full of coalitions that meet to coordinate messaging and strategy. For two decades, conservative strategist Grover Norquist, who heads Americans for Tax Reform, has held his now-famous Wednesday morning meetings for a broad spectrum of Republicans, including conservatives opposed to gay rights and abortion rights and those who favor them, as well as GOPers on different sides of the immigration reform debate. Groundswell, which meets at the same time as Norquist's group, appears to be a more ideologically pure version of the Norquist confab, and its emergence—given the prominent role of Ginni Thomas and the participation of journalists—prompts several intriguing questions.
Critics have contended that Thomas' work as a lobbyist opposing Obamacare posed a conflict of interest for her husband, who would rule on the constitutionality of the health care reform initiative. (Clarence Thomas joined the Supreme Court minority that favored striking down the law.) And Common Cause has maintained that Justice Thomas had a conflict of interest when he participated in the Citizens United case because his wife at the time was running a conservative nonprofit fighting the "tyranny" of President Barack Obama that would benefit from removing limits on such groups' spending and fundraising. With her involvement in Groundswell—which zeroes in on contentious issues that come before the high court, including voting rights, abortion, and gay marriage—Ginni Thomas continues to be intricately associated with matters on which her husband may have to render a decision. Ginni Thomas did not respond to requests for comment.
The participation of journalists in coordinating messaging with ideological advocates and political partisans raises another set of issues. Conservatives expressed outrage when news broke in 2009 about Journolist, a private email list where several hundred progressive-minded reporters, commentators, and academics exchanged ideas and sometimes bickered. (I was on Journolist, mainly as a lurker.) The late Andrew Breitbart once offered $100,000 for the full Journolist archives and denounced it as "the epitome of progressive and liberal collusion that conservatives, Tea Partiers, moderates and many independents have long suspected and feared exists at the heart of contemporary American political journalism." The Groundswell documents show conservative journalists, including several with Breitbart News, colluding on high-level messaging with leading partisans of the conservative movement.

How Groundswellers Win "Brownie Points"
Notes prepared after a Groundswell meeting held on March 27 detailed the group's mission and origins:
Groundswell evolved out of conversations among conservative leaders after the November elections. This is the eighth meeting. Now others are asking to be included. Growth needs to be strategic; it should be made up of senior level people willing to collaborate. It is important to keep a balance of social conservatives, national security conservatives, and constitutional conservatives. Outreach has occurred to incorporate groups with extensive reach: Heritage, Heritage Action, FreedomWorks, AFP [Americans for Prosperity], FRC [Family Research Council] and the NRA, among others…Our country is in peril. This is a critical moment needing critical leadership. We want to protect the strategic collaboration occurring at Groundswell and build on it. Please be careful about bringing guests and clear them ahead of time.
The memo declared that the goal was not to merely ponder, but to be proactive:
What Groundswell is not is a room of note takers. The goal of Groundswell is to sync messages and develop action from reports and information exchanged. Going forward there should be an action item accompanying each report.
At the March 27 meeting, Groundswell participants discussed one multipurpose theme they had been deploying for weeks to bash the president on a variety of fronts, including immigration reform and the sequester: Obama places "politics over public safety." In a display of Groundswell's message-syncing, members of the group repeatedly flogged this phrase in public. Frank Gaffney penned a Washington Times op-ed titled "Putting Politics Over Public Safety." Tom Fitton headlined a Judicial Watch weekly update "Politics over Public Safety: More Illegal Alien Criminals Released by Obama Administration." Peter List, editor of LaborUnionReport.com, authored a RedState.com post called "Obama's Machiavellian Sequestration Pain Game: Putting Politics Over Public Safety." Matthew Boyle used the phrase in an immigration-related article for Breitbart. And Dan Bongino promoted Boyle's story on Twitter by tweeting, "Politics over public safety?" In a message to Groundswellers, Ginni Thomas awarded "brownie points" to Fitton, Gaffney, and other members for promoting the "politics over public safety" riff.
"If we lose on immigration, we lose on every other issue. They key to defeating this bill is Sen. Rubio."
There was much more on the agenda for the March 27 meeting than a single talking point. The group routinely addresses an ambitious to-do list for its campaign against the left. At that session, Groundswellers discussed several immigration-related "action items." These included attempting to link the pending reform bill to Obamacare and collecting health care reform horror stories to provide to Cruz, a leading opponent of the Senate immigration reform bill. (Cruz has repeatedly compared the legislation to the health care reform law.)
Groundswell members saw immigration as a life-or-death issue. "If we lose on immigration," the post-meeting memo noted, "we lose on every other issue. The key to defeating this bill is Sen. Rubio. He can gracefully remove himself from the 'gang of 8' and still save face…The messaging on this issue has to be 'we can't trust Obama' to enforce immigration laws after the amnesty."
The group also reviewed how best to oppose the confirmation of Tom Perez, Obama's nominee for labor secretary. Groundswellers claimed that Perez, then a senior Justice Department official, supported "Muslim Brotherhood organizations and Shariah." (One Groundswell memo maintained that Perez "is extremely antagonistic toward whites.") A third agenda item that Wednesday morning was beating back the effort to end the Boy Scouts of America's ban on gay Scouts. And there was yet another issue for the Groundswell members to stoke: "John Kerry has family ties to Iran that opens the doors to blackmail and other national security risks. Kerry's son in law is an Iranian American with extensive family still in Iran." The post-meeting memo suggested Twitter hashtags to push: #CantTrustObama, #PoliticsOverPublicSafety, #SequesterLies.
"We're Failing the Propaganda Battle"
The Groundswellers feel that they too often lose the political narrative to their progressive rivals. One memo that circulated among members declared, "We must reclaim the language and put 'a face' on our messages; tell stories. Write articles on 4th grade level!"
A Groundswell memo noted, "Terms like, 'GOP,' 'Tea Party,' 'Conservative' communicate 'racism.'" They proposed an alternative: "Fredrick Douglas Republican."
Notes from a February 28 Groundswell gathering reflected both their collective sense of pessimism and desire for aggressive tactics: "We are failing the propaganda battle with minorities. Terms like, 'GOP,' 'Tea Party,' 'Conservative' communicate 'racism.'" The Groundswellers proposed an alternative: "Fredrick Douglas Republican," a phrase, the memo noted, that "changes minds." (His name is actually spelled "Frederick Douglass.") The meeting notes also stated that an "active radical left is dedicated to destroy [sic] those who oppose them" with "vicious and unprecedented tactics. We are in a real war; most conservatives are not prepared to fight."
The notes from the March 20 meeting summed up Groundswell griping: "Conservatives are so busy dealing with issues like immigration, gay marriage and boy scouts there is little time left to focus on other issues. These are the very issues the Left wants to avoid but we need to magnify. R's cannot beat Obama at his own game but need to go on the offense and define the issues." The group's proposed offensive would include hyping the Fast and Furious gun-trafficking controversy, slamming Obama's record, and touting Benghazi as a full-fledged scandal. "The problem," the memo noted, "is Speaker Boehner and [Rep.] Mike Rogers (Intelligence Community) are refusing to deal" with the Benghazi issue. It added, "Leaders can and should be shamed into doing the right thing."
Another problem for right-wingers, this memo pointed out, was that though "a group of freshmen and sophomore representatives in Congress…are willing and ready to stand up" for conservative causes, "no one is willing to step up and become that leader." Reflecting the dim view held by Groundswell members of House GOPers, the memo maintained that too many Republican lawmakers were co-opted by power and reluctant to challenge House Republican leaders: "The Speaker holds the control in the House. He controls committees, chairmanships, meeting rooms, etc. Conservatives sell out rationalizing their compromises will position them to advance their agenda through committee work. In reality they are being bought." Boehner, according to his memo, was too frightened to confront Obama head-on regarding budget issues because he "believes that Newt lost his speakership due to the government shutdown."
Venting about weak and squishy GOP leaders was a regular feature of Groundswell gatherings. One action item put it bluntly:
GAP of REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP: how do we tell them they are failing their base; will lose in 2014 unless they fight for principles (as opposed to show disdain for them and accommodate Obama; O is dividing Rs and they seem clueless: IDEAS NEEDED!
A week later, Newt Gingrich was scheduled to address the group on the "lack of Republican Leadership right now, and Rove." For 10 minutes.
At the March 27 meeting, Groundswellers once more voiced their anger with the GOP establishment and Rove—ideological sellouts, they believed, who undercut conservative candidates in order to back Republicans deemed more electable. They discussed the efforts among conservatives to respond to the Republican Party's recently released autopsy (PDF) of the 2012 elections, which called on the party to be more inclusive of minorities and less severe on social issues.
Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus, the post-meeting memo huffed, "is sending messages to the party…If we were all gay illegal aliens, the party likes us. He is preparing the way for a change on social issues by giving a warning, 'don't go Old Testament' and advising the party to consider what Rove said about the next nominees could speak favorably of homosexual marriage in the campaign." The memo summed up Groundswell's preferred solution to GOP woes: "embrace the libertarian and conservative wing of the party."

"I'm Going to Need Help Pushing Back"
Shortly after its creation, Groundswell started bolstering interactions between right-wing advocates and conservative members of the Senate and the House. On March 5, Gaston Mooney, a staffer for the Senate Republican Steering Committee, posted a message to Groundswell's Google group asking for questions that could be posed to Gina McCarthy, Obama's nominee to lead the EPA, during confirmation hearings or in meetings between her and individual senators. (She was confirmed as EPA chief this month.)
"If we were all gay illegal aliens, the party likes us. [RNC chair Reince Priebus] is preparing the way for a change on social issues by giving a warning, 'don't go Old Testament.'"
At an April 3 meeting, Groundswell members were encouraged to send Paul Teller, executive director of the Republican Study Committee, the caucus of House conservatives, "feasible asks in exchange for raised debt ceiling." The post-meeting memo noted, "House conservatives want clear consensus on what the conservative grassroots want to see negotiated." Here was a chance for Groundswellers to shape the next debt ceiling showdown.
In Groundswell's first months, one of the most active members in its Google group was Danielle Cutrona, chief counsel to Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions. She frequently placed information—speeches, articles, press releases—on Groundswell's Google group. In February, she posted opposition research material regarding a judicial appointment and asked members to distribute it: "Any help is much appreciated." In another message to Groundswell, she requested assistance in opposing the pro-immigration reform GOP establishment. "I'm going to need help pushing back," she wrote.
On one occasion, Cutrona promoted a column from the conservative site RedState.com. Headlined "Who is Going to Put an End to the McCain/Graham Circus?" this RedState.com post excoriated Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham as "Benedict Arnolds" for retreating on their opposition to Chuck Hagel's nomination as defense secretary and for "their treachery on the issue of illegal immigration." Cutrona, who occasionally used her official Senate email to communicate with Groundswell members, was encouraging this band of conservatives to spread the word that two party colleagues of her boss were ideological traitors. A spokesman for Sessions says that this blog post did not reflect Cutrona's views and "was simply one of scores of diverse news and opinion pieces she emailed on immigration."
"Even If the Idea Isn't Perfect, I Can Help Massage It"
Several conservative journalists have enthusiastically participated in Groundswell's deliberations. In March, Mark Tapscott, the executive editor of the conservative Washington Examiner, sent his most recent column to group members. It focused on a theme that Groundswellers had resolved to hype: President Obama is a divider. And after a meeting that month, Tapscott wrote to the group, "Enjoyed hearing from all of you who spoke earlier today. It's amazing how much we are accomplishing on so many fronts." But Tapscott tells Mother Jones that after attending one or two meetings at the invitation of Ginni Thomas, he decided to stop participating: "The implication of attending is that you're participating in their planning, and, as a journalist, I don't think that's appropriate. Other journalists may think differently."
At another Groundswell gathering, according to the minutes, the members decided to ask Breitbart's Stephen Bannon to arrange for his media organization "to get senators on the record regarding their support [or non-support]" of the filibuster that GOP Sens. Mike Lee, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz were threatening to mount against the gun control bill. This suggested that the Groundswellers thought they could task Breitbart News to pursue a story that would be strategically useful for the group. (Breitbart News was already covering the possible filibuster.)
"It's amazing how much we are accomplishing on so many fronts," the Washington Examiner's Mark Tapscott wrote to fellow Groundswell members.
Groundswell has forged a particularly close relationship with Breitbart. Matthew Boyle, one of Breitbart's more prominent reporters, has attended Groundswell meetings, used the group as a source for tips and a mechanism to promote his stories, and joined in its efforts to whip up coordinated bullet points to be deployed by conservative advocacy shops. In February, he tried to enlist the group to push a story he had written the year before at the Daily Caller, in which he maintained the Justice Department was in cahoots with the liberal group Media Matters to smear conservative whistleblowers and journalists. In a long note addressed to all Groundswellers—written at a time when reporter Bob Woodward was making (what turned out to be inflated) claims about the Obama White House intimidating foes—Boyle said, "Figured this might be a good time to bring this story back up and see if there's a way to drive it."
Boyle said he was hoping to prompt congressional Republicans to launch an investigation. He contended he had only revealed the "tip of the iceberg" and shared his suspicion that many government agencies (State, the CIA, the Pentagon, the EPA, and more) were conspiring with "far left wing groups" to undermine conservatives in the media: "I think we can get at the heart of the Obama admin's weaknesses here." He explained: "Any evidence obtained would be more proof of collusion between the administration and the media and far left groups, while at the same time serving as evidence of whatever ridiculously moronic big government policies they're pushing are."
The following month, Boyle sent a message to Groundswell members seeking tips and offering to help shape stories Groundswellers wanted to disseminate: "I'm saying we can get pieces out fast on Breitbart. Whenever you have an idea, email or call me with a pitch and I'll do my best to get the story out there. Keep us on offense, them on defense. Even if the idea isn't perfect, I can help massage it to get there."
A high-priority cause for Groundswellers is voter identification efforts—what progressives would call voter suppression—and when Groundswellers developed a thread on their Google group page exploring the best way to pitch the right's voter identification endeavors as a major voting rights case was pending in the Supreme Court, the coalition's friendly journalists joined right in. Dan Bongino, the ex-Secret Service agent and 2012 Senate candidate, kicked off the discussion: "We need to reframe this. This narrative of the Left has already taken hold in MD. The words 'Voter ID' are already lost & equated with racism. Maybe a 'free and fair elections initiative' with a heavy emphasis on avoiding ANY voter disenfranchisement combined with an identification requirement which includes a broader range of documents."
Sheryl Kaufman, communications director for Rep. Jim Bridenstine, chimed in: "'OBAMAGRATION'—I love it!! Communicates the similarity with Obamacare."  
In response, Tapscott suggested, "How about 'Election Integrity'?" And Gaffney weighed in: "I like it." Fitton noted that Judicial Watch had an "Election Integrity Project." Boyle proposed, "Fair and equal elections," explaining, "Terms 'fair' and 'equal' connect with most people. It's why the left uses them." Then came True the Vote's Anita MonCrief: "We do a lot under the Election Integrity Banner. Does not resonate with the people. Voter Rights may be better. We really have been trying to get the messaging right."
Minutes later, Breitbart's Mike Flynn tried to change the conversation, noting that Boyle earlier in the week had reported that Obama's daughters had been vacationing in the Bahamas while the White House had suspended tours due to the sequester. "The Obama White House has never been so exposed to public criticism as they are right now, because of their decision to cancel WH tours," Flynn wrote. "Everything should be focused on that front." He declared, "We have to be willing to march to the sound of the guns." (Earlier in the week, Boyle had posted his story on the Obama daughters on Groundswell's Google group page, noting, "I think this fits in nicely with that politics over public safety theme…Enjoy.") Ignoring Flynn's missive, Engelbrecht, the president of True the Vote, wrote, "We bill ourselves as an Election Integrity Initiative and have found it strikes the right tone."
In a response to a request for comment regarding his participation in Groundswell's message-making, Flynn emailed, "We have reporters covering lots of meetings in DC, as I'm sure you do as well. As you know, it provides critical background to know what's happening on the Hill." In a subsequent email, Flynn insisted, "[N]either Boyle nor I have spent 1 minute on any messaging. We haven't spent any time creating talking points." Flynn added, "[W]e are journalists with a point of view. We are open about that. We attend meetings of conservatives. Where we are allowed, we attend meetings of leftist activists." Boyle did not respond to requests for comment.

"We All Lament the Difficulty We Have Persuading Americans"
In between the weekly meetings, Groundswellers keep on scheming, frequently using their Google group to share ideas and need-to-know information. The material is often routine: a John Bolton op-ed, a press release opposing the nomination of the EPA administrator, a call to rally support for a Rand Paul filibuster. Often the material reveals the group's ideological excesses, such as a PowerPoint supposedly proving that John Brennan, the Obama national security adviser who has become CIA chief, is soft on radical Islam. In one post, Ginni Thomas encouraged Groundswell members to watch Agenda: Grinding America Down, a documentary that claims that progressives (including Obama) seek "a brave new world" based on the "failed policies and ideologies of communism" and that an evil left is purposefully "destroying the greatest country in all of world history." MonCrief posted an email noting that the bombs that exploded at the Boston Marathon were "similar to Bill Ayers' Weather Underground nail bomb."
But Groundswellers constantly brainstorm via their Google group in search of a magic talking point, or a silver bullet of messaging. On April 24, Keli Carender, the national grassroots coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, posted a message to the Google group, writing, "We should have a unified name for the immigration bill so that as the other side is calling it 'reform,' we present a unified front against that notion. If we're all calling it different things, their 'reform' message will win. We only combat the idea that it is reform if we hammer back with one different phrase/name." She tossed out a few ideas: "Schumer-Rubio bill," "anti-security bill," and "amnesty bill." Sheryl Kaufman, the communications director for Rep. Jim Bridenstine, chimed in that she was fond of a phrase derived by MonCreif: "'OBAMAGRATION'—I love it!! Communicates the similarity with Obamacare."
When Campaign for America's Future, a progressive group, sent out an email regarding the sequester headlined "Don't let Republicans destroy the economy," Carender sent a message to Groundswell members via the Google group: "What about a 'stick with sequester' (or similar) mantra from our side?" Responding to Carender's note, Peter List of LaborUnionReport.com wrote, "Most Americans don't understand sequesters. We need to be more clever than the Left on this…Something amusing and easy for LIVs [low-information voters] to understand. Maybe a tie in to Humpty Dumpty (the economy) and all King Obama's men ('tax increases') not being able to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. (I'm open to anything…and just made that up.)"
At another point, List emailed Ginni Thomas an idea for an anti-Obama ad that he thought could go viral:
A 15 sec internet [YouTube ad] featuring ethnically diverse children on a merry-go-round [soft music]…
Nuclear explosion.
Two bullet points on the facts.
Call to action:
Tell President Obama & Congress not to cut our nation's defense.
Thomas posted the note for all in Groundswell to see. "Brilliant idea," she commented. "…Taker?"
Several months after Groundswell kicked off, Steven Sutton, vice president of development for the conservative Leadership Institute and a former chief of staff to several House GOPers, proposed a "strategic message development project" for the outfit. "What is needed," he wrote, "is an umbrella thematic message under which each specific issue can be magnified and maximized. For those familiar with it, this is an extension and development of the Leesburg Grid (which the Left has co-opted and now uses extensively, and the Right has ignored and allowed to fall into disuse.)"
Sutton suggested using four main themes: Obama and liberal policies fail; Obama and liberal policies make things worse; there is a lack of leadership in the White House; and Obama "puts politics ahead of people/our country/America." These themes, he contended, "are best used sequentially, rather than randomly/haphazardly/isolated…The most important thing is to think thematically and drive these messages." Sutton went on:
Issues matter. Details matter. Substance matters. But theme matters more. Substance matters only as it helps to reinforce the themes.
We all lament the difficulty we have persuading Americans. After all, we have the facts, figures, and data to prove our points. Why can't we persuade? There are many tactics we can use to help persuade (telling stories, finding victims, tempering tone). But these tactics pale in comparison to the importance of providing a context…a theme…to help people organize their thoughts and opinions.
Groundswell has set itself up as the theme lab for the true-red activists of the conservative movement. Fearing that some hydra of the left has long been running wild, vanquishing the right, and bringing the nation closer to utter ruin, the members of Groundswell have birthed a hydra of their own.
Additional reporting by Kate Sheppard.
Image credit: D.C Hughes/LNI/ZUMA Press; Rex Curry/ZUMA Press; Gage Skidmore/Flickr

David Corn

Washington Bureau ChiefDavid Corn is Mother Jones' Washington bureau chief. For more of his stories, click here. He's also on Twitter and Facebook.

If You Liked This, You Might Also Like...

 http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/07/groundswell-rightwing-group-ginni-thomas?page=1 


05 February 2011

Corporate Tax Policies 'The Worst Of All Worlds' As Big Companies Often Pay Little 2FEB11 &Jeff Sessions: Lower Corporate Tax Rates Even If We Raise Taxes Elsewhere (VIDEO) 4FEB11

SO Sen jeff sessions r AL wants to lower the corporate tax rate in the U.S. Surprised? Not me. He is bought and paid for by corporate America and the military-industrial complex and they expect him to deliver. Note he doesn't address closing the corporate tax loopholes that allow a lot of companies to avoid paying most of their taxes, yet does mention someone else (that means the poor, working class and middle class) will have to pay more in taxes. This from HuffPost...
New York Times columnist David Leonhardt has an excellent piece out diving into the paradox of the American corporate tax code -- "the worst of all worlds" -- and the supreme difficulty of achieving the kind of reform Obama called for in his State of the Union address last week.
"I'm asking Democrats and Republicans to simplify the system. Get rid of the loopholes," Obama said in his address. "A parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries."
The top corporate tax rate in the United States is 35 percent, one of the highest in the world -- but, Leonhardt notes, the code is filled with so many loopholes and credits that few companies pay the top rate. And for this those companies that are paying only 4 or 5 percent, there is little incentive to overhaul the system.
As Leonhardt puts it, "any system that creates as many winners as this one won't be changed easily":
Or, as Jonathan Chait approximates it at The New Republic, "reforming the corporate income tax means transferring money away from companies with lots of political clout toward those with less political clout."
One of the major winners of the current loophole-ridden tax code system is General Electric -- and GE's CEO Jeffrey Immelt was recently appointed to head President Obama's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, which is expected to suggest changes to the corporate tax code.
How does GE play the game so well? There are a number of routes that companies who pay low corporate tax rates can go, such as spending large sums of money on new equipment, or a company losing money can subtract their losses from initial profits thus avoiding tax payments until they are consistently earning money again. GE, as Leonhardt put it, is simply "expert at avoiding taxes":
When the three accounting professors analyzed more than 2,000 companies, they found big variations in tax rates within almost every subset of companies. Companies in the same industry often paid very different rates, even when they were similar in size.
G.E. is so good at avoiding taxes that some people consider its tax department to be the best in the world, even better than any law firm's. One common strategy is maximizing the amount of profit that is officially earned in countries with low tax rates.
At the Atlantic, Derek Thompson displays some nice graphs (h/t Tax Notes) which track the drastic drop in GE's effective tax rate from approximately 30 percent in the 1990s to extremely low levels today. Thompson notes: "What's good for GE isn't necessarily good for the U.S. Treasury."
However, Thompson also adds that Immelt "should be an expert" at suggesting changes to the tax code. Given Immelt's history of blasting the high corporate tax rate, and his company's adept navigation of tax arcana, it may be doubtful that he will be a reform-from-within leader. But Thompson's point still raises the question: is Immelt President Obama's Joseph Kennedy?
Kennedy was appointed by Roosevelt to be the first chairman of the SEC -- despite years of risky behavior on Wall Street. A BusinessWeek article on "Joseph Kennedy's Enduring Example" lays out the relevant historical details:
After becoming the youngest bank president in the country at age 25, Kennedy gained notoriety as a Wall Street speculator throughout the 1920s and early 1930s. In the 1930s, for example, he participated in the Libby-Owens-Ford stock pool, a scheme in which Kennedy and his partners created an artificial scarcity of Libby-Owens-Ford stock to drive up the value of their own portfolios. The pool, and others like it, was investigated by Senate Banking and Currency Committee counsel Ferdinand Pecora, who just a few years later would report to Kennedy as one of the SEC's commissioners. Clearly, Kennedy wasn't an obvious choice for the role of reformer. Indeed, Roosevelt is said to have responded to criticism of his appointment of Kennedy by saying, "It takes a thief to catch one." Yet Kennedy succeeded beyond anyone's imagination in his efforts to create a watchdog for the securities business -- to the surprise of both his Wall Street associates and those who distrusted him. In retrospect, it seems as though Kennedy understood that the SEC represented such a radical idea that it was doomed to fail unless he persuaded a defiant business community to offer a measure of cooperation.

Jeff Sessions: Lower Corporate Tax Rates Even If We Raise Taxes Elsewhere (VIDEO)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/04/sessions-lower-corporate-tax-rates_n_818827.html 
WASHINGTON -- Among the longtime cornerstones of Republican economic policy is the argument that the U.S. corporate tax rate is too high, stagnating growth. This argument is becoming increasingly bipartisan, championed by President Barack Obama's deficit commission and endorsed by Obama himself during this year's State of the Union address.
But deficit hawks still want tax cuts to be "paid for" -- that is, offset by spending cuts elsewhere in the budget -- despite the conservative claim that the increased economic activity encouraged by lower rates will result in a wider pool of taxpayers.
On Friday, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) took to the floor of the upper chamber to call for cuts in corporate tax rates, and announced that he'd be comfortable offsetting the cuts by raising the rates in other places.
"I believe the American people are open to these kinds of ideas," Sessions said. "I think the idea that this is not a popular plan because, 'Whoa, you're talking about cutting taxes on corporations, nobody wants to do, they don't believe [in], that, the American people won't support that.' I think the American people understand we can't tax our corporations more than they are doing in Canada, 34 percent to 16 percent, and expect to win competition for jobs and business. We have got to make some of those changes, even if we have to raise taxes somewhere else, we've got to look at the taxes that are killing jobs and try to make our tax policy further growth and prosperity, not austerity." [emphasis added]


For the record, the top marginal corporate tax rate, for businesses with net taxable income over $18,333,333, stands at 35 percent. The effective corporate tax rate, however, is generally much lower, as The Huffington Post has reported and New York Times columnist David Leonhardt pointed out this week.
Sessions didn't detail what sort of tradeoffs he would find acceptable, and his office didn't return an email seeking clarification.
But the Alabama Republican's suggestion that taxes be raised elsewhere in order to make corporations more comfortable was too inviting for some Democrats to ignore. The office of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) quickly pounced, posting video of Sessions' speech on its YouTube channel.
"Today," Reid spokesman John Summers wrote in a statement, "Sen. Sessions said he wants to cut taxes for corporations, even if it means raising taxes somewhere else. So, whose taxes would Sen. Sessions raise? Does he think it's time to fund corporate giveaways on the backs of middle-class families?"
UPDATE: Stephen Miller, a spokesman for Sessions on the budget committee, sends over the following response. It's not a direct disavowal of the Senator's floor statement. But it does accuse Reid's office for twisting his words.
So let me get this straight: Senator Sessions goes to the floor for thirty minutes to explain a variety ways we can create millions of new private sector jobs--without government spending--and Democrat Leadership's apparent priority is to find a way to twist his words to fit into a scripted attack? I'm sure out-of-work Americans consider that a really constructive use of Congressional resources.
WASHINGTON -- Among the longtime cornerstones of Republican economic policy is the argument that the U.S. corporate tax rate is too high, stagnating growth. This argument is becoming increasingly bipa...
WASHINGTON -- Among the longtime cornerstones of Republican economic policy is the argument that the U.S. corporate tax rate is too high, stagnating growth. This argument is becoming increasingly bipa...

27 January 2011

Boehner: I ‘made a mistake’ by advocating raising the retirement age from THE RAW STORY 27jJAN11

REP john boehner (r OH) admits he made a mistake saying the retirement age should be raised. DUH! There is one thing the federal government needs to keep their hands off and it is Social Security. The program is solvent, it does not contribute to the national deficit, and anyone who says it does is a liar. The retirement age doesn't need to be raised, and Social Security payments do not need to be cut. Corporate America does need to reconsider their national responsibility and instead of concentrating solely on increasing profits and paying executives obscene bonuses, they should be investing in the economy and creating jobs which will increase Social Security taxes collected, further strengthening the Social Security program. The decrease in individual Social Security payroll taxes as part of the deficit sellout, er..."compromise" last year is a mistake that will cause a second year of the program taking in less than it pays out and so give a propaganda line on the frailty of the program to those who's ultimate goal is to eliminate the Social Security safety net. Let's see the republican House members submit and pass legislation eliminating their government sponsored pension plan BEFORE doing anything to Social Security. Unfortunately, their hypocrisy on this issue will prevent this from ever happening. They, like the greedy executives of the corporations, banks and financial institutions bailed out by the American taxpayers while still receiving their huge bonuses, feel they are entitled to it.
WASHINGTON – House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) walked back his prior remarks that Social Security benefits should be cut by raising the retirement age, but added that the idea still "ought to be on the table."
"I made a mistake when I did that because I think having the conversation about how big the problem is is the first step," Boehner told CNN's Parker/Spitzer Wednesday night. "And once the American people understand how big the problem is, then you can begin to outline an array of possible solutions."
Boehner, the most powerful Republican in Washington, made news last summer when he championed raising the retirement age from 65 to 70 for workers not retiring for another 20 years.
Although party leaders largely stayed away from the issue in the run-up to the November midterm elections, the GOP has slowly begun to coalesce this year around a drive to cut Social Security.
The top Republicans on the House and Senate budget committees, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) and recently Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), have championed plans that would largely privatize Social Security. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) also backed the idea last Sunday.Ryan, the author of the plan, was chosen by Republican leaders to give the party's rebuttal to President Barack Obama's State of the Union address Tuesday night.
But even as Democrats hammer away at Republicans on the issue, eager to cast them as out-of-touch with average Americans, the new House speaker didn't rule out increases to the retirement age as one way of cutting Social Security.
"But when you look at life expectancy in America today and you look at the Social Security system, we're all living far longer than anyone had ever anticipated and the result of these big demographic changes is having a disastrous effect on the Social Security program," Boehner said Wednesday.
"And so raising the retirement age or considering it is something that ought to be on the table."
Although the program's payouts did exceed revenues for the first time last year, the Social Security Trust Fund had a surplus of $2.6 trillion and was expected to remain solvent in its current form until 2037, according to its 2010 trustees report.