Mediaboss Marketing

A week out from a council vote on Chicagos next budget, Mayor Lori Lightfoot says shes done haggling over the $11.6 billion spending plan despite criticism from progressives that shes breaking promises made during the campaign.

The budget is the budget is the budget, Lightfoot said Wednesday at a press briefing.

After making it past committee-level hurdles this week, its likely that Lightfoot will get aldermanic approval at City Councils Nov. 26 meeting.

But progressive organizations are actively working for aldermen to vote against it.

The spending plan does not reopen the city clinics. It does not introduce progressive revenue that asks the rich to pay their fair share and it does very little for fair housing and homelessness, said Emma Tai, director of United Working Families.

Lightfoot says those critiques are invalid because such demands are untethered form the reality of the fiscal challenges we have in our city.

The mayor also hinted that politics may be part of the equation, given that United Working Families counts labor groups like the Chicago Teachers Union as a funding source. In the mayoral race this year, CTU backed Lightfoots rival, Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, and although the mayors office and Chicago Public Schools reached a contract deal theres still obvious tension following last months 11-day teachers strike.

This is an organization thats closely aligned with the Chicago Teachers Union. I would expect that they will have a drumbeat of complaints throughout my term and it woudlnt surprise me later in the day if they support a challenger to me, Lightfoot said, referring to the 2023 race.

Tai called that suggestion petty.

This is not personal. This is about what Chicago what the poor, working black and brown folks of Chicago need and deserve and this is about what the 2019 mandate was for, Tai said.

Follow Amanda Vinicky on Twitter:@AmandaVinicky

Related stories:

Lightfoot Claims Uber Paid Off African American Ministers

Lightfoots Proposed Real Estate Transfer Tax Hike Gets Pushback

Lightfoot: No Property Tax Hike If Springfield Chips In

Congestion Charge a Tough Sell for Overtaxed Chicagoans

Go here to see the original:
Mayor: Progressive Pushback to City Budget 'Untethered' from Reality - WTTW News

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) on Friday announced the three co-chairs for her presidential campaign: progressive Congresswomen Deb Haaland (D-NM), Katie Porter (D-CA) and Ayanna Pressley (D-MA).

Haaland, a Native American, has received flack for supporting Warren. The reason? People feel Haaland betrayed her people. After all, the senator claimed she was Native American. It was later revealed through DNA testing that she is only 1/1024th Native American.

Freshman Congresswoman Katie Porter was going back and forth between endorsing Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) but eventually went with Warren. When she announced her decision to back the Massachusetts senator, she shared a picture of her with Warren when she graduated from Harvard Law.

When Rep. Ayanna Pressley announced she was endorsing Warren, she was the first member of "the Squad" to do so. Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN) endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

The only member of "the Squad" who has yet to make an endorsement is Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).

Rumors have swirled, saying "the Squad" is fighting over who deserves to be president. Tlaib, however, said that's the furthest thing from the truth.

The rest is here:
Meet the Progressives Leading Warren's Campaign - Townhall

WASHINGTON A group of progressive lawmakers that includes Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) slammed the Trump administrations support for the right-wing leaders who have taken power in Bolivia following the ouster of socialist President Evo Morales, saying Friday that the White Houses dangerously misguided backing risks creating a full-blown humanitarian emergency in the South American nation.

We are troubled by statements from Administration officials, including President Trump, that welcome these developments in Bolivia that bear the hallmarks of a military coup dtat,the group of lawmakers said in a letter drafted by Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), a progressive who has been outspoken on human rights issues in Latin America throughout his career in Congress.

The letter was sent to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Friday.

Morales, who was first elected in 2005, resigned on Nov. 10amid pressure from Bolivias armed forces as protests erupted across Bolivia after a disputed October election, in which his opponents accused him of fraud. The Organization of American States, a regional body of governments from across the Americas, said in a preliminary audit that it had found serious irregularities in the election. Morales (who says he is the victim of a coup and has fled to Mexico), his supporters, and some independent groups have questioned the evidence behind the OAS findings.

Morales decision to seek a fourth term even after he initially lost a 2016 referendum asking Bolivians to alter constitutional term limits to allow him to do so and the fraud allegations sparked the protests that led to his resignation. But his departure came two months before his current term would have ended in January. And his ouster paved the way for the rise of right-wing figures including Jeanine ez, a conservative senator who declared herself interim president to power.

JOSHUA LOTT via Getty ImagesPresident Donald Trump talks to the media on the South Lawn of the White House on November 20, 2019.

President Donald Trump welcomed Morales ouster as a a significant moment for democracy in the Western Hemisphere, and his administration immediately recognized ezs legitimacy as interim leader.

But since taking power, ez and her allies have threatened lawmakers from Morales Movement for Socialism party and journalists with prosecution while also unleashing the military, which they exempted from prosecution, to crack down on pro-Morales demonstrations.

Protesters have accused the military of killing at least eight people during a demonstration last week.

We urge you to consider an immediate change in course and to take action to support democracy and human rights in Bolivia, the lawmakers wrote.While there is legitimate debate surrounding Morales decision to run for a fourth term, it is simply not acceptable for the U.S. administration to welcome the forced removal of a democratically-elected leader before the end of their mandate.

Our government should call for the prompt restoration of constitutional order, and for an immediate end to all persecution and attacks targeting leaders and supporters of Evo Morales and his political party, they said. Additionally, we call for the adoption of protective measures for those facing threats.

Warning that Bolivias escalating crisis threatens to spiral into violent internal conflict, the progressives argued that the administrations backing of the current Bolivian leadership could well contribute to a further breakdown in the rule of law in Bolivia and a full-blown humanitarian emergency, with large migrant outflows.

We strongly urge you to revise this approach and support the prompt restoration of constitutional order, dialogue between opposing political factions, fair and inclusive elections and respect for the human and cultural rights of all Bolivians, they wrote.

Although it was addressed to the Trump administration, the letter also marked the latest effort from progressive lawmakers to set themselves apart from Democratic leadership on foreign policy and human rights issues, particularly in the Americas.

In March, progressives came out against the Trump administrations decision to back Venezuelan opposition to socialist President Nicolas Maduro, who has become increasingly autocratic and authoritarian as an economic crisis has crippled his country. Millions of people have fled Venezuela, and Trump has aggressively supported efforts to remove Maduro from office by imposing economic sanctions and making thinly veiled threats of military force.

Progressive lawmakers argued in March that Trumps sanctions and threats of American military-led regime change would only hurt ordinary people and exacerbate Venezuelas crises.

Progressive Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) said at the time that the coordinated effort to challenge the White House even as top Democrats backed Trumps strategywas a deliberate move to reshape foreign policy conversations within the party.

Khanna was not among the 14 lawmakers who signed the Friday letter about Bolivia. The signatories were Reps. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Susan Wild (D-Pa.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), Debra Haaland (D-N.M.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Jesus Chuy Garca (D-Ill.), Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and Alan Lowenthal (D-N.Y.).

Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), Washington D.C.s representative to Congress, also signed the letter.

Ocasio-Cortez and Omar have both previously called Morales ouster a coup. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Sanders and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard are theonly Democratic presidential candidates to have done so.

picture alliance via Getty ImagesSupporters of the resigned Bolivian head of state Morales march in La Paz, the capital, carrying a coffin with the remains of a victim killed in the recent violent clashes and demanding the end of the current interim government.

Pompeo, in a new statement Thursday, reiterated the United States support for ezs transitional government and renewed condemnations of Morales and other party officials who Pompeo said were responsible for egregious irregularities and manipulation of the vote in Octobers elections.

But he also said the United States opposed crackdowns on the press and protesters.

We support robust press freedoms and peaceful assembly and protest. Violence, repression, and political intimidation have no place in a democracy, Pompeo said. We call on all parties to refrain from such violence, to observe the rule of law, and to respect the rights of all citizens to participate in building Bolivias future, whatever their views. Security services must respect the rights of peaceful protestors, and the Bolivian authorities must ensure accountability for any violations of the right of citizens.

REAL LIFE. REAL NEWS. REAL VOICES.

Help us tell more of the stories that matter from voices that too often remain unheard.

Visit link:
House Progressives Blast Trump For Embrace Of Right-Wing Bolivian Leaders - HuffPost

As the impeachment hearings continued, Attorney General Bill Barr on Friday trash-talked Democrats for attempting to drown the executive branch with oversight demands, saying they were working for political gain without thinking of the consequences.

In waging a scorched-earth, no-holds-barred war against this administration, it is the left that is engaged in shredding norms and undermining the rule of law, Barr told a room of attorneys at the annual gathering of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal group that has been influential in determining President Donald Trumps nominees for federal judges.

The remarks about Democrats ignoring the rule of law were especially ironic because they came a mere hours after Roger Stone, one of Trumps previous advisers, was convicted on all counts for lying to Congress during its probe into Russias interference in the 2016 election. The attorney generals speech also came on the second day of presidential impeachment hearings examining allegations that Trump attempted to interfere in the 2020 elections by asking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

Barr criticized Democrats for launching a holy war and using any means necessary to gain momentary advantage, while he said conservatives tend to have more scruple over their political tactics and rarely feel that the ends justify the means. He said:

In any age, the so-called progressives treat politics as their religion. Their holy mission is to use the coercive power of the State to remake man and society in their own image, according to an abstract ideal of perfection. Whatever means they use are therefore justified because, by definition, they are a virtuous people pursing a deific end. They are willing to use any means necessary to gain momentary advantage in achieving their end, regardless of collateral consequences and the systemic implications. They never ask whether the actions they take could be justified as a general rule of conduct, equally applicable to all sides.

Conservatives, on the other hand, do not seek an earthly paradise. We are interested in preserving over the long run the proper balance of freedom and order necessary for healthy development of natural civil society and individual human flourishing. This means that we naturally test the propriety and wisdom of action under a rule of law standard. The essence of this standard is to ask what the overall impact on society over the long run if the action we are taking, or principle we are applying, in a given circumstance was universalizedthat is, would it be good for society over the long haul if this was done in all like circumstances?

For these reasons, conservatives tend to have more scruple over their political tactics and rarely feel that the ends justify the means. And this is as it should be, but there is no getting around the fact that this puts conservatives at a disadvantage when facing progressive holy far, especially when doing so under the weight of a hyper-partisan media.

Barr reportedly received a standing ovation, but outside the halls of the Federalist Society, his remarks sparked outrage and intensified calls from the left to impeach not only the president, but the attorney general himself. Others were quick to roast Barr for his statements. Bill Barr is the type of bare knuckles lawyer the Church would have hired thirty years ago to cover up sex abuse cases, Richard Painter, a former White House ethics counsel, tweeted.

Yesterday AG Barr addressed a radical political group and gave one of the most vicious partisan screeds ever uttered by a US cabinet officer, Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) tweeted Saturday morning. Barr says trump should have king-like powers. Barr is a liar and a fanatic and should be impeached and stripped of his law licenses.

Watch the attorney generals full speech below:

See the original post:
Attorney General Bill Barr Is Getting Roasted for His Outrageous Speech Blasting Progressives - Mother Jones

ANALYSIS Only a few months from now, populist Democratic progressives around the country hoping to elect one of their own to the White House will need to choose between VermontSen.Bernie Sanders and MassachusettsSen.Elizabeth Warren.

Do they back the angry Democratic socialist, or the feisty, anti-corporate populist who wants to break up the banks and big tech companies? One says he is trying to lead a revolution. The other calls for dramatic change, often dismissing critics in her own party for regurgitating Republican talking points.

Only one ofthem is now a front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. That would be Warren.

Sanders is passionate and intent on becoming the Democratic standard bearer, and hes running well in key state and national polls. But its still very difficult to see the 78-year-old Vermonter becoming the Democratic nominee next year.

This is Sanders second presidential rodeo, but unlike four years ago, he isnt a quirky novelty this time. He now shares his lane with another top-tier hopeful who echoes his populism. That alternative, Warren, is a woman, is eight years younger than Sanders, and is a strong enough speaker to have moved from near obscurity in the race to the top tier.

And unlike the Vermonter, Warren hasnt embraced socialism.

ButSanderscampaign, which has plenty of money, shows no signs of stopping after a relatively brief medical scare. Hes a man on a mission, and people like that dont quit easily. He took on Hillary Clinton (and the Democratic National Committee), after all, when nobody else was willing to do so. Its hard to believe he could be scared out of the presidential race by Warren.

And that is a problem for the Massachusetts Democrat. For as long as Sanders remains in the contest, Warren will have a hard time consolidating support among the partys left.

But Warren has another problem, which follows from her partys desire to beat Trump next year. Many Democrats in the business and financial communities believe her ultimate agenda is not very different from Sanders when it comes to raising taxes, sticking it to corporate America, distrusting the free market, adding new entitlements and piling on layers of additional debt to pay for new government programs.

Warrens continued embrace of Medicare for All has become a substantial problem for her. Its not just the cost of that program. Its the larger message that the government knows what is good for you better than you do. Many in the party prefer Medicare for All Who Want It or Obamacare with a public option, both of which seem more appealing and manageable to pragmatic legislators and voters.

Warren has had plenty of chances to slide to the right slightly, but she never takes them. On health care, all she needed to do to broaden her appeal was to emphasize her willingness to negotiate with others in her party. She could make it clear that while she prefers Medicare for All, she is certainly open to compromise.

But would Warren undermine her own appeal with populist, grassroots progressives, who favor dramatic proposals and not piecemeal changes, by giving herself some wiggle room on health insurance? Possibly. But it might also make her seem more reasonable to those worried about her agenda.

Not satisfied to paint herself into a corner on only one issue, Warren has unveiled a K-12 education plan that goes after charter schools. The Washington Post editorial board immediately challenged her, arguing that when it comes to education, Ms. Warren has a plan that seems aimed more at winning the support of the powerful teachers unions than in advancing policies that would help improve student learning.

On one hand, you can say that Warren is simply protecting her left flank, making sure that she doesnt lose true believers to Sanders. But the problem isher positions are less about campaign strategy and more about her views of government and her views of corporate America and the affluent.

Warren may not call herself a Democratic socialist, but her rhetoric and overall approach to issues like health insurance and education puts her far enough left that she would have a hard time appealing to pragmatists and political independents.

Of course, Warren (or Sanders) would energize the Democratic base and turn out voters who sat on their hands (or voted third party) in 2016, and that could be enough to flip the White House. But Warren and Sanders populist progressive positioning would also make it much easier for the GOP to make the 2020 election about them and socialism than about Donald Trump. And that may be the only way the president can win a second term.

Democratic candidates often move left in the primary but right if and when they make it to the general election, so its possible that Warren is merely following that well-traveled path. Maybe, if she gets her partys nomination, she will zig and then zag toward the center.

But like Sanders, Warren rarely (really, never) conveys the impression that she is prepared to build coalitions, negotiate with friends and foes alike, and eventually forge compromises to enact legislation. Put another way, both Sanders and Warren are as much prisoners of their ideology as Trump is a prisoner of his narcissism.

Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone.

See the original post:
Progressives are going to have to pick: Sanders or Warren? - Roll Call