The Morning Dispatch: Is Mike Bloomberg for Real?

Plus, Bill Barr has had enough, and a handy guide to reading the polls.

By
34

Happy Friday! Reminder that today is Valentine’s Day. Might not be too late to grab some flowers and dinner reservations!

Quick Hits: Today’s Top Stories

  • The Senate on Thursday passed war powers legislation—with the support of eight Republicans—designed to limit President Trump’s ability to attack Iran without new congressional approval. Trump is expected to veto the measure. 

  • Two old hands are returning to the White House, as President Trump grows more suspicious that his staffers are working to undermine his presidency: Hope Hicks, his longtime aide and close friend who left the White House to take a job with Fox News, and former body man John McEntee. 

  • The Trump administration announced it will divert $3.8 billion appropriated by Congress for military purposes to build a wall on the southern border, earning a rare bipartisan rebuke on the Hill. 

You're out of free articles
Create an account to unlock 1 more articles
By signing up with your email, you agree to The Dispatch’s privacy policy and terms and conditions
Already have an account? Sign In
34
By
Comments (34)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Deleted Comment

    This comment has been deleted

    1. Avatar photo
      cheerio

      Much like the impeachment trial in the Senate, I'm pretty sure it was Kabuki theater.

      Collapse
      1. Deleted Comment

        This comment has been deleted

  2. Avatar photo
    Martha Bergman

    “For now, though, it’s an amazing spectacle to watch what truly unlimited money can do for a person in American politics.”

    The subject of this spectacle is not any person in American politics. We are watching a very well qualified Michael Bloomberg spend his own fortune. He is a CEO, big city mayor who was very effective leading the city forward after 9/11 and through the 2008 economic crash. Maybe he can calm down the daily business of the executive branch and no-tweeting.

    In 2020 Bloomberg offers folks a clear choice. He is well-qualified with deep executive experience and knowledge of how government works. And Bloomberg won’t need unlimited money so long as his message conveys confidence he can beat Trump.

    After that let’s hope he can be a team player and direct resources to be used as Congress specified to maintain our world class armed forces instead of squandering our fortune on a wall. Martha Bergman

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    David

    Bergman could have simply said “Sorry not sorry” and been more sincere.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Butch Earl

    "In the months since former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg entered the 2020 race, your Morning Dispatchers have frequently been tempted to write him off as a sideshow."
    Posterity is always vague but, it is safe to say in the Trump/post-Trump era the possible success of a sideshow candidate can never be ruled out.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    David Link

    The paragraph describing Bloomberg's downsides in a political context made me cry a little. All of those things put together are pretty much nothing compared to any five Trump problems picked at random. And yet they still count, individually, for a candidate running against Trump -- and that would be true for any Republican running against Trump, even one from his own party. It seems so small to say it isn't fair.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Bill Dyer (aka Beldar)

    Aldi built a new store that, as it happens, is now the closest grocery store to my Houston home. I paid it a visit.

    Upon entry, I learned that all shoppers are conclusively presumed to be antisocial miscreants who will, at a minimum, fail to return their shopping carts to the designated place(s), or worse, steal the shopping carts; accordingly, I to gain access to a shopping cart, I was obliged to pay a 50-cent deposit.

    This across-the-board insult to the store's clientele was enough to prompt me to turn on my heels and look for the exit. Unfortunately — but again, by design — to exit the premises after having once entered it, one had to walk the entire length of the store. By the time I got through the exit, I'd resolved never to set foot in an Aldi again.

    I didn't know it's a German chain, but that makes perfect sense, and triples my resolve not to return.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      cheerio

      Wow, 50 cents? Everything really must be bigger in Texas. Here in upstate NY it is a mere quarter and most of us Aldi customers hand off carts to each other as we are leaving/entering the store. You also must bring your own bags. However their stores are a fraction of the space that our local Wegmans, uses so "walking the length of the store" is not a Fitbit challenge. I love Aldi and if you use facebook there is an Aldi Nerd fan group with great tips and reviews of their products. Alas, in NY we don't have the wine offerings. I save a lot of $ shopping at Aldi and believe me groceries have gone up in our super-charged + economy.

      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Michelle O

    I must say, I loathe Aldi. I've always found that a good American grocery store is a testament to the glory of capitalism and Aldi is intentionally the antithesis of that. Crappy store brands, random stuff in the aisles, and lots of processed food. I have their major competitor, Lidl, in my town. The only thing I will go in there for are Bavarian pretzels (they remind me of my stay in Germany) and pretzel rolls, which are unavailable elsewhere.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      CynthiaW

      Also, Aldi doesn't open until 9:30. I'm done with shopping by then. I wish you hadn't mentioned pretzels at Lidl, though.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Michelle O

        Let me tell you, they are good. I hate that they have them because the store is right down the road from my regular grocery store and I can't help myself from stopping in.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          CynthiaW

          We have one nearby, but it's on the wrong side of the highway to be convenient for me. I'll try to forget about the pretzels.

          Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Steve Gordon

    Agree with what both Earl and Kevin posted here. Seems like the prosecutors were bending over backwards to push aggressively for a more stringent sentence using every possible angle for a guy that is a known blowhard and poses little physical threat to anyone. Doesn't seem that Barr and co. could have responded in such a quick manner to Trump's tweet and have seen reporting elsewhere that this sentencing controversy was simmering before that happened. In fact, in Barr's comments yesterday he seemed in part to be saying to the President, "hey look, I've got this and you're not particularly helpful to your own cause."

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Earl King

    If one has heard of the Frog and Scorpion parable you know that expecting Trump who has the self discipline of a two year old to not Tweet is simply not possible no matter how much we wish it. But the attack on Barr who seems to be a very level headed a political figure by this staff is bizarre. Stone is a high profile case...why wouldn't Barr be involved? Finally and this is where I am mystified by the Dispatch writers where is the lack of outrage at the aggressive prosecutions out of the Mueller probe. It is my understanding that this Prosecutor was from the Mueller staff. Use of a SWAT team for Stones home invasion and subsequent filming by CNN is highly unusual in a "lying to Congress case". Manafort's forced isolation and the multiple overcharging of Cohen for his tax evasion was all done to get these people to flip against Trump. They were treated like Organized Crime prosecutions. Flynn did not lie according to the FBI agents who interviewed him...but threatening to bankrupt him got him to plead guilty. There was also a threat about his son that also moved him. I have no doubt that all of these prosecutions were simply due to association with Trump and Mueller probe. Yes they were guilty but Manafort hard previously been looked at and prosecutors declined to indict. I hold nothing but contempt for Cohen and Manafort...who have obvious character flaws and are cheats. Stone was found guilty. Fine. But none of them should suffer sentences less nor more because of an affiliation with Trump. To deny that there are and were people in the DOJ and FBI who had it in for Trump and any associates would seem blind at this point. My god they went after Carter Page after the CIA said he works for us.....

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Kevin Durant?

      My favorite part of the timeline is when Hillary’s campaign manager’s brother Tony Podesta was given blanket immunity to give information on Paul Manafort who was then tortured nearly to death by MSNBC contributor Andrew Weissmann

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      JohnF

      Rather than spending time typing out pretty much the same comment you posted yesterday, take a few minutes today to read about what Ken Starr's team did to Monica Lewinsky when they originally brought her in for "questioning". I raise this not in the spirit of: "They did it, so now we can do it", but to point out that aggressive prosecutions are not a new invention created solely for the purpose of persecuting the fine and decent people who surround Donald Trump.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Kevin Durant?

        Monica Lewinsky lied in sworn testimony, a felony, and was granted transactional (blanket) immunity by Starr’s team.

        You’re right. That isn’t

        “They did it so now we can do it”

        That is

        “They gave her literally the best deal you will ever get so now don’t complain when you die in prison”

        Okie dokie

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          JohnF

          Please. That's not even close to the truth. The Affidavit she signed hadn't even been filed with the court at the time she was "arrested" by Starr's crack team of prosecutors and the FBI. They took her to a hotel room and threatened her with 20 years in prison if she wouldn't cooperate. They held her for 10 hours without charging her with anything and denied her access to a lawyer (because she wasn't under arrest, even though she was also told she couldn't leave).

          In those days, I guess lying to courts, congress, the FBI, etc. was still considered a crime. Now it's just another day in Trumpworld.

          Your posts seem very partisan. I take it you're a great admirer of Ken Starr?

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Kevin Durant?

            False. The affidavit was filed Jan 7 the hotel was Jan 16

            She lied on a court form she filled out where you obviously can’t lie. She got immunity

            General Flynn lied when he was talking to agents who told him it was not an interview and he did not need an attorney. His life is over

            I’m sorry she had to stay at the Ritz Carlton though

            Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Jenny

        Let's be nice. Just because politicians are cashing in on divisive comments doesn't mean we need to as well. It sucks to see your guy get attacked or to think that you are not getting fair treatment. Please recognize that in each other.

        Remember, we all are just trying to do the best we can. We're all here on this platform trying to understand both our own views and the views of others better.

        --Can't wait to get called out for being a hypocrite later when I post a mean comment(;

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          JohnF

          Fair enough. My comment would probably have had the same content if I'd left out the first part of the first sentence. I will try to keep that in mind going forward.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Jenny

            I'm no saint either(: Part of why I joined the Dispatch is to figure out how to talk politics with my dad without losing my mind.

            Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Friends, your take on Barr is looking a little “Astro-y”...not really calling balls and strikes objectively. Both here and in podcast, you are taking something clearly true- Trump is bad and does bad things, including publicly pushing particular outcomes in legal cases - and using it to smear Barr; that is the effect of your words, whether intended or not. The esteemed Mr. French coins the cute “friends and family discount” which accurately reflects what Trump wants, and seamlessly applies it to what Barr did. There are very believable alternatives to Barr simply caving to Trump pressure, as Barr’s statement yesterday made clear. Your dispatch today acknowledges that, but can’t resist adding he STILL did something Trump wanted...and that is not objectivity given facts we currently have. Even before that statement, though, there were many honest, non-Trumpist observers saying there were good reasons to object to the severity of the sentence. It doesn’t matter whether you agree with the “too severe” opinion to be able to acknowledge that some good and expert people clearly agree; it is unreasonable to presume they all just bow to Trump pressure. Our heroic and wise Editor seemed undone on podcast by even mild pushback that one should consider specific facts and alternative explanations in the many cases of Trump acting badly. He said, correctly, we know what Trump is doing, but then slid into, therefore it doesn’t matter why any others act. I take so long to belabor this because we need the Dispatch “on that wall” for us calling out the unfit Trump. There are enough others exaggerating things like Barr’s actions here just because Trump misbehaved. We don’t, in my opinion, need you to jump on that bandwagon. By all means expose ANY evidence that Barr did something wrong, but arguing that “It pleases Trump” so it doesn’t matter what he actually did or why, does you a disservice, I think. Remember that Barr is also dealing with some years of outrageous misbehavior by some within FBI and DOJ. None of this justifies Trump acting improperly, of course. He is unfit to be President. Respectfully.

    Collapse
    1. Deleted Comment

      This comment has been deleted

Load More