Author: Paul Murphy

This is what bad government regulation really looks like.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/02/an-inside-account-of-trumps-fuel-economy-debacle/606346/

This is a long and sober article but worth the effort to read. In a nutshell it covers the long and successful history of the regulation of tailpipe emissions and the efforts of the Trump administration to roll them back.

One of the major takeaways from the story is the importance of peer-reviewed, evidence-based work in setting policy. The scientific and economic studies done by Team Trump to justify the rollbacks are junk science and were known to be such two years ago. They are full of very dubious assumptions and horrendous mathematical errors. But still the rollbacks moved forward.

Too bad. For Trump. The political hacks put in charge of policy seem not to understand that changes in government regulations have to be justified objectively and the deeply flawed analyses they based these changes on makes it unlikely that the new tailpipe regulations will survive court challenges.

Big Surprise. Trump’s SOTU speech does not stand up well when you check the facts.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/04/fact-checking-president-trumps-2020-state-union-address/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most

For those without access to the WAPO, the analysis dismantles 31 questionable and fraudulent claims he made in this one speech. So many lies! That is so Trump – pathetic for a campaign speech but when it is the SOTU speech, it is disrespecting the country, the people and the Constitution.

Air cover for Republican Senators?

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trumps-senate-impeachment-trial-judge-andrew-napolitano

Judge Andrew Napolitano brings a dose of reality to Fox News and Washington Examiner fans. He completely obliterates the baloney that Trump defenders are peddling. He explains in plain language how Trump’s actions are not just impeachable. They are criminal offenses. In conclusion he writes . . .

“What is required for removal of the president? A demonstration of presidential commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, of which in Trump’s case the evidence is ample and uncontradicted.”

Rubin nails it again

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/22/how-are-senate-republicans-supposed-defend-their-impeachment-vote/

Conservative columnist asks a telling question. How can GOP Senators possibly defend a vote to acquit when challenged by voters, hometown journalists or a tough opponent? A trial without witnesses is not a trial. It is a cover-up. The President’s defense team is offering nothing but complaints, whining, obvious lies and name-calling.

As she sums it up . . .

“In sum, the “nothing matters, just lie” mode of politics only applies within the Trump cult. As soon as you leave the bubble to encounter voters, the media or opponents who know better, your talking points make you sound dumb or corrupt or both.

That is what Republicans should contemplate: How the heck am I going to defend this to the people back home? Trump’s attorneys are giving them no fig leaves or explanations that can pass the laugh test.”