Impeachment Marathon Thoughts

It's 8:45 pm and they're still at it - since 9am this morning (Alaska Time).  

In addition to listening, I got a couple of kitchen shelves cleaned out, I shoveled the driveway in the morning, and then swept the newly accumulated powder in the evening.  I sorted out the pile of mail that arrived after our being away.

I also got wiped out as a reaction to yesterday's shingle shot.  A little fever, and a lot of impeachment in the background as I dozed on and off.  

So, I listened to a lot of this and here's my takeaway.

1.  The Senate, under the direction of Majority Leader McConnell,  wants this to happen as fast as possible and they want no additional information or witnesses.

2.  Given that, the Democrats have essentially put into the record as close as they can get to the testimony the witnesses would have given.  Or at least they explained the details of the House testimony and how the requested witnesses and documents would fill in the holes.  They did a pretty good job.  Nadler - around midnight in DC time - outlined the details of the Ukraine shakedown and how Bolton would add to our understanding.

[John Roberts is admonishing both the House impeachment managers and the President's men to be civil.]

3.  The Republicans are doing two things:

A.  Not really addressing the facts the Democrats detail, but rather make sweeping narratives about executive privilege, about how there is no case here, how the Democrats are abusing the impeachment process, etc.
B.  Preventing any new documents or witnesses.  

I would say that the Democrats are talking to the American public, knowing that they are unlikely to win any of the procedural votes.
The Republicans are simply blocking any new information from coming to the attention of Senate.

I would add, that the senate's control of the media - including using Senate cameras, not C-Span's
- means the public does not get as good a view of things as in the House Impeachment process.  For instance, during roll call votes, in the House, we saw a close up of each committee member and could hear how they voted.  Today, we simply saw the whole chamber during roll call votes.  At best, some of the Senators stood up when they voted, and some shouted out their vote loud enough for me to hear.

Of all the Republican counter arguments, the only one that made some possible sense at all was that the House didn't actually follow through with subpoena of Bolton.  The Democrats response was that his attorney said he wouldn't respond to a subpoena and that he would sue them.  They argued that if they went through the courts, it wouldn't be resolved until after the 2020 election.  I can't really judge this.  Since so much is of today's hearing was simply performance, I'm inclined to assume this is also performance.

Apparently Alaskan Senators Got McConnell To Start Impeachment Hearings On A Good Schedule For Alaskans

We made it home last night and today was the warmest of 2020 in Anchorage.  Thanks!!
The snow on the ground and in the trees is beautiful.
This afternoon, the snow falling was wonderful.
Down south people can't understand how anyone can choose to live here.  That's good, because they won't be tempted to come here.

But, starting the impeachment at 1pm DC time means it will begin at 9am Alaska time.  And we'll be able to see the good parts in prime time tomorrow night.

I have to figure out all the menial tasks I can do around the house tomorrow so I can feel like I got something productive done while I was watching.

McConnell has gotten a lot of things done for his team, so he thinks he can spray legal perfume on the skunk in the White House.  But even Republicans know this is wrong.

Two of the Republicans' ridiculous arguments against impeachment were:

1.  Democrats are trying to overturn the 2016 election with impeachment. (See end of first comments by Tamara Keith).   But, of course, impeachment is the remedy the founders put in the constitution to remove a bad president.  And since Clinton got nearly 3 million more votes than Trump in 2016, you could just as easily argue that Trump used the electoral college to nullify the election.

2.  Since the impeachment isn't bipartisan, it's illegitimate.  (Scroll down to Robert Ray)  To me, he seems to be simply making this up.  If acts of Congress have to be bipartisan to be legitimate, very little that McConnell's Republican majority in the Senate has done since before Trump was elected has been legitimate.


 McConnell maybe be able to control Senate Republicans.  He may be able to control the rules, but I doubt he can control Trump any more than any of  the others who thought they could.  And he can't control what voters do in November.

"Women in power are targets of abuse"

That's an LA Times headline today.

The article goes on to say that mayors are subject to abuse at greater levels than the average person and

"A recent study published in the academic journal State and Local Government Review found that mayors — women and men — face greater levels of physical violence and psychological abuse than those in the general U.S. workforce, with social media being the most common channel for that abuse.
Female mayors were not only much more likely to face some form of violence or abuse, but they were also more likely to experience abuse of a sexualized nature.
“Women are facing more of this kind of abuse and violence, and more types of it,” Sue Thomas, a research scientist and co-author of the study, told me."

More specifically:

"If you are a woman who is so bold as to inhabit a vaguely public stage, chances are high that you will be called a lot of things that can’t be printed in a family newspaper. And then some.
It’s a truism that unfortunately appears to transcend industry or geography. Exist in public, and eventually an online mob will nitpick your looks, rate your sexual desirability in relation to your ability to do your job, and probably make threats vague and specific — regardless of whether you’re a female journalist, the founder of an indie game studio or trying to run a small city in the Central Coast region of California."

I would argue that one reason Trump's base doesn't shrink any further is that a sizable section of it includes men who are very much like Trump:  they're insecure about themselves, need constant adulation, are abusive to people with less power than themselves, particularly women. Trump is a role model who helps vindicate their own terrible behavior.  Of course they love him and vote for him.

I've long believed that the way to improve people's social interactions is to work to improve parenting.  How we are raised affects how we feel about ourselves and how we deal with conflict.  As much as I dote on my grandchildren, it's also true that babies can be very annoying and exhausting tor parents who aren't prepared for that responsibility. Even for parents who do everything right.   And for parents whose own parents were poor models, learning how to be a nurturing yet firm parent is difficult.

A study published by the National Institute of Justice, for example, states:

"Using carefully developed methods for eliciting retrospective reports of childhood abuse and neglect, a new study of inmates in a New York prison found that 68 percent of the sample reported some form of childhood victimization and 23 percent reported experiencing multiple forms of abuse and neglect, including physical and sexual abuse. These findings provide support for the belief that the majority of incarcerated offenders have likely experienced some type of childhood abuse or neglect."

The National Association of Adult Survivors of Child Abuse posts:

"Based on the reports we have, it's conservatively believed that in today's society 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys WILL BE sexually molested before they are 18 years old -- which means 1 in 5 of America's youth, or fully 20% to 25% of the population !!
In addition, as we mentioned we're concerned here at NAASCA with helping stop ALL kinds of child abuse, including sexual abuse, violence, emotional trauma and neglect, and the Center for Disease Control (CDC) believes that close to 50% of our youth will experience at least one of these.
In it's most recent study, a few years ago, the CDC estimated the lifetime cost to society for dealing with all issues related to the child abuse of just one year's worth of traumatized kids is $585 billion, an astonishing figure that obviously repeats each year !!!" (emphasis added)

I would argue that having loving parents is the best inheritance any child could have.  These are the truly privileged people in our society.  Furthermore it's clear that many people manage to survive and thrive despite forms of childhood mistreatment.  Just assume  kids raised in poverty manage to get financially secure. But they are the exception now.

All of us are guilty of neglecting these kids to some degree.  The Democrats, who championed all sorts of 'outsiders' saw whites - particularly white males - as a generalized privileged group.  They didn't recognize the pressures on males, they didn't distinguish those white males who had been physically or emotionally abused.  And in part that helped build a base for a candidate like Trump.

But the Republican steadfast focus on abortion is also at fault.  Even if the figure cited above of 50% of American youth experiencing some form of abuse is high (and remember, it could also be low), that's huge!   But the pro-life crowd focused mostly on abortion, not on healthy parenting for kids, not on sex education and the prevention of unwanted kids.  

There are a lot of hurting people in the US.  Online anonymity along with an abuser in the White House has increased their opportunities to vent their own self-anger on to others.  

This is not an issue that will be resolved by just cracking down on apprehended offenders.  It needs a much larger societal approach to raising kids and developing a population of individuals who feel good about who they are.  

Time To Review Article II

President Trump said last July that "Article 2 let's me do whatever I want."  As the Senate impeachment event (will it be a trial?) nears, it might be useful to read Article 2.


This comes from Cornell Law School:

Article II

Primary tabs

Section 1.

The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:

Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said House shall in like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each state having one vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them by ballot the Vice President.

The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Section 2.

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.

Section 3.

He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

Section 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

The first blue section comes from the 12th and 20th Amendments and it links to12, which has a link to 20..

You'll notice that about half of the article is details for election.  Only Sections 2 and 3 outline the president's powers.

At Some Point, Honesty Will Come Back Into Fashion. Maybe November 2020

The website Amino, the source of this image, says the original Japanese intent of the phrase "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" was to keep a person pure, but

"Now it means turning a blind eye to evil and wrongdoing. It is meant to represent the fear of witnessing or speaking about evil and choosing to ignore its existence altogether."

That seems to be a pretty good description of what most Republican Senators are doing.  Avoiding any and all evidence of what they know is true.  First McConnell just wanted to acquit Trump with no real trial at all.  No witnesses.  No evidence.  And they're doing their best to hide what little will happen from the public.  The  Senate has added new, greatly restricted rules for press access to cover the impeachment.

Tim Miller, at The Bulwark, writes about Sen Martha McSally's response to reporter Manu Raju's question whether the Senate should take new evidence in the impeachment hearing:

“Manu, you’re a liberal hack. I’m not talking to you. You’re a liberal hack.”

Miller goes on to say this is the Republican 'heel turn' in response to questions about impeachment.

"They all know Trump is guilty. The only question is whether or not they can avoid admitting this, out loud, before they vote to acquit him. Every action Republicans take in the coming days should be viewed through the lens of them casting about for a strategy that lets them avoid telling voters what they actually believe."

Miller also tells us they are squeezed between doing what's right and being attacked by Trump.

My junior Senator - Dan Sullivan - was a marine.  Marines are supposed to be known for their courage and for risking their lives to protect the US.  That's the PR anyway.

In the Senate he doesn't seem ready to even risk his Senate seat to do the right thing.  I'm sure he's saying that not criticizing Trump means he can get things from this administration for Alaska.  Short term gains, long term disasters.  My senior Senator - Lisa Murkowski - is giving signs of trying to get out from under the charade, but we'll have to wait and see.

We also learn today that two of Trump's defense attorneys (Dershowitz and Starr) defended Jeffrey Epstein.  (Who committed suicide in prison where he was supposed to be watched carefully, and the video mysteriously disappeared.  This was a guy who hosted many big name men with underage girls.)  Dershowitz has been implicated in going to Epstein's parties.

From a Tweet by Kenneth Boykin:

"Ken Starr, the guy who thought Bill Clinton should be removed from office for a blowjob, is going to argue that Donald Trump should remain in office even after he illegally asked a foreign government to interfere in our elections."

Meanwhile Emptywheel raises questions about how presiding over the impeachment will affect Chief Justice John Roberts, who's not ever running for reelection:

Q: Does Roberts' presiding over Trump's trial present recusal issues for the pending Trump lawsuits? Might presiding over it change how he'd rule?

Everyone gets pulled into the mud.

My sense is that in a fair election, Trump gets beat bad by any of the Democrats, even if there is an automatic loss of votes if the candidate is a women or person of color..  Though that could be partially made up by people coming out to vote who wouldn't otherwise.  

But I know the Trump team will do everything they can to suppress voters, sway votes through outright lies, and meddle, if they can, with voting machines and electronic registration lists.  So, I'm not counting on a fair election.  

Reading On The Bus, Five Modes Of Transport Yesterday

Like the other school days in San Francisco, we left with the kids at 7am to catch the bus.  We got them settled and took the bus back.




Lots of the San Francisco bus stops have electronic monitors that tell you pretty accurately how long it will be for  the next two buses arrive.

I took this picture because of the woman reading on the bus.  That's fairly uncommon nowadays.  Most people are busy with their cell phones.  How many screens can you see in this picture?  (I see five, not counting the guy with the earbuds who had just put his away.)

I decided to blur the face of the woman looking right at me.  I learned last year in an OLÉ class on photo journalism that one benefit (for photographers) of taking pictures with your cell phone is that people tend not to pay attention.  But she seems to have figured it out.  And I don't know think people should have their pictures 'stolen' if they don't want it to happen.  So I blurred her somewhat.  She then started to do her eye makeup.

Next was BART to SFO.  There are lots of places, it seems, where there are escalators up, but not down.  With my tricky knee and a suitcase and backpack, that was slow.  And I couldn't find the elevator.   If you click on the image below, you can see it much more clearly.  These are the email messages I got from Alaska Airlines (in chronological order):

• Your flight is on time
• Your gate has changed
• Your flight is delayed

The delay turned out to be nearly an hour.  That seems to happen a lot out of SFO.   In Seattle it seemed like the cloud cover was down to about 30 feet when we landed at SEATAC and snow was blowing horizontally.

Fortunately, our two roll on suitcases were already coming onto the baggage carousel as we got there and the snow wasn't coming down either.





We got to the Link light rail station at the airport where an employee was telling people the train was no longer going past Pioneer Square.  To go further you had to get off and transfer to another train.  But that's where we were getting off anyway.

This construction began January 4. They're adding new lines and you can find out more here.










Then we walked down the hill a few blocks to the ferry terminal.  There's been construction there, it seems, forever.  I told J I'd take both suitcases up the elevator if she took the steps and got the tickets.  We were getting very close to departure time and they usually shut off the walk on passengers five minutes before the ferry leave.  But there was no elevator to be seen.  Grrrrrr.  As I start to haul my suitcase up while being careful not to move in a way that would cause pain in my knee, a young man reached out to help me carry it up.  I thanked him and pointed him to J who was just ahead of me.  By the time I got to the ticket booth, J had our tickets and we managed to get the 4:15 ferry.

It felt good to sit down and look out the window with the part of the Seattle skyline that includes the Space Needle, not to mention the reflections in the glass.

Finally, on the other side, our son-in-law was waiting and took J's suitcase and we walked to the market where our daughter and granddaughter were waiting.  They told us the elevator was in a new place now.   We decided that we'd just all get something from their take out offerings and eat in their modest dining space.

Today I walked with my daughter and granddaughter to her school.  Saturday she has a birthday, which is why we stopped here on the way home.

It Appears That Ruth Sheridan Has Left Us [UPDATED]

I got an email the other day saying that Ruth Sheridan had passed away at 101 years of age.  Ruth was an activist to the end.  I didn't know Ruth well, but I did see her frequently at various events around town - often at Bear Tooth movies, and often at protests.

I got the email because the writer had found a post I did in 2018 that had a picture of Ruth Sheridan at a protest against tightening immigration regulations and wanted permission to to send
copies to friends.

Anchorage's Ruth Sheridan at 100 July 2018.

She also wrote:

"January 25th would be her 102nd birthday.
Unitarian Fellowship is hosting a remembering of her and her life (Celebration of Life Service) from 2-5PM that day.
All welcome."

Luckily we'll be in town that day.

I'd note the tentative nature of the post's title.  I hate to post 'facts' when I get them from just one source, especially someone I don't know.  This does look pretty genuine. And I thought I'd post this to give people a heads up for the event on January 25.    I couldn't find any online confirmation when I got the email or even now.

I did find this 2016 note from the ADN in 2016:

"In addition to those 10 women, long-time Anchorage community and political activist Ruth Sheridan was named as the recipient of the Arliss Sturgulewski Award. This is a special award, which is not presented every year, said YWCA Board President Carrie Lindow. She said the previous honorees have included the late Iditarod champion Susan Butcher and Sturgulewski herself."

UPDATE JAN 19, 2020:  Here's a link to Ruth Sheridan's full obituary in the ADN. ]

More San Francisco Shots

The beads and pipe cleaners were already set out in my granddaughter's pre-school class when we got there.










We walked a bit in the neighborhood before getting the bus the rest of the way.  We stumbled into
Boudin Bakery on 10th and Geary.

Wikipedia says:

"Boudin Bakery (Anglicized pronunciation: "boo-DEEN") is a bakery based in San Francisco, California, known for its sourdough bread (trademarked as "The Original San Francisco Sourdough").[1] It was established in 1849 by Isidore Boudin, son of a family of master bakers from Burgundy, France, by blending the sourdough prevalent among miners in the Gold Rush with French techniques.[2] The Boudin Bakery is San Francisco's oldest continuously operating business.[1]
Steven Giraudo, an artisan baker from Italy whose first job in America was at Boudin, bought the bakery in 1941 but later sold it in 1993 after Boudin became the cornerstone of the San Francisco Frenchbread Company.[3] After a series of ownership changes the bakery was reacquired by Steven Giraudo’s grandson, Daniel in 2002. Under Daniel’s leadership Boudin’s products are available globally through retailers such as Costco, Safeway and other grocery retailers.[3]
The bakery has locations on Fisherman's Wharf near San Francisco Bay, Disney California Adventure Park, and 30 other cafés scattered throughout California. The main bakery in San Francisco is in the Richmond District on the corner of 10th Avenue and Geary Boulevard."

But according to the sales lady this morning, the bakery moved to Fisherman's Wharf last year.
She mentioned that when I asked about the names in the sidewalk out in front.  They're the names of employees in the bakery.  (There is another list just like this one a few feet to the left.)

 Just across the street is the neighborhood library.





Thom, an old Peace Corps friend who lives in San Francisco, picked us up and took us to lunch near the Castro District - a great little dim sum place called Ma Ma Ji.  The food was excellent - good sized portions - and a wonderful server.

That's the best I can do today.  Getting up at 6 to take the kids to school by bus at 7 and getting them later in the afternoon and today providing dinner as well, has limited my interest time.  But I'm not complaining.

Some San Francisco Shots

Up early to get the grandkids to school.  We bus to meet one school bus in front of the second kid's school.  Then walk most of the way back.  I have lunch with a student from over 20 years ago who is working on his doctorate and the National Intelligence University in Monterey.

Then back to do kid pick ups.  Here are a couple of pictures from the day.

The shot below was on the kitchen counter.  I call it Still Live with Monster and Cheerios.

But there parks, large and small, tucked in here and there too.

This is Mountain Lake.  The sign began:

"Before you is one of San Francisco's last surviving natural lakes . . ."

It's part of the Golden Gate National Recreational Area where I also took the following picture.

Everyday Art

People argue over what is art.  Artists have mocked critics with absurd creations.  Context is important to some so called pieces of art.  But some things are just beautiful.

I was stopped at a long red light, when I saw these cacti brightly lit by afternoon sunshine against this salamander orange wall.  Did someone plan that these cacti to grow again this bright wall? Did they think about the afternoon sun hitting directly on it like this?  Is it still a work in progress and the artist is aiming for larger cactus?  Maybe no one even thought about this at all.  But I think there's some intention.  You don't just paint a wall a color like that without wanting to make some sort of statement.

In any case, it's spectacular and it's free for anyone there in the afternoon sun.