October 29-30, 2017
Oct 29 00:38 City Council's defining moment Oct 29 08:10 Tomassoni criticizes Rom, Carron Oct 29 20:21 Questioning Gov. Dayton's support Oct 30 08:52 Drinking the resettlement kool-aid Oct 30 09:42 Manafort indicted Oct 30 11:16 Pelosi's misstep, Manafort's mess Oct 30 16:40 What will Gov. Dayton do?
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
City Council's defining moment
Last Monday, the St. Cloud City Council went off the deep end. On Ox in the Afternoon's Friday program, it was said that the City Council "flipped us the bird." This was planned. Most disgustingly, it was a surprise ambush. Jeff Goerger put forward a resolution for the Council's consideration. In putting forward the resolution, Goerger ignored the rules that the City Council revised this past August.
Apart from the tactics used, and infinitely more important, the City Council didn't listen to the people. There have been a large group of people clamoring for an independent audit that tells St. Cloud residents how much of their taxes are being spent on subsidized housing, education, public safety, health and other things. That's what was the driving force behind Councilman Johnson's moratorium. City Council President Lewis, Councilman Laraway, Councilman Libert, Councilman Goerger and Councilman Masters voted against accountability and transparency.
They, along with Mayor Kleis, sang from the same discredited 'hymnal' that this is a federal issue that doesn't intersect with the city's budget. If they want to continue singing that discredited refrain, that's their right. It's also St. Cloud's right to defeat each of these councilmembers the next time they're up for re-election.
Goerger, Masters, Laraway, Lewis and Libert exposed themselves as unworthy of being called leaders. They did what Kleis wanted them to do. That makes them sheep, not leaders. Further, Goerger, Masters, Laraway, Lewis and Libert attempted to quiet the city with this resolution. They did the opposite. Rather than having a rational discussion with their constituents, the City Council essentially told the people to shut up, that they knew what's best.
Goerger's condescension was showing when he introduced his resolution, which was titled "in support of a just and welcoming community." The implication wasn't lost on St. Cloud. It's apparent that Goerger thinks that those that disagree with him aren't just. His introductory speech made that clear, saying "This one guy bringing forward a resolution is not the voice of the City Council [video no longer available]."
What is the City Council afraid of? It's clear that they thought that they had to control the debate. It's clear that the Council felt they had to repudiate Councilman Johnson. It's clear that there's a sizable and growing group of people who simply want to know that their taxes aren't getting spent foolishly.
The other unmistakable message sent by the City Council was that they have no intention of being transparent with the people of St. Cloud. The unmistakable message sent by Councilman Goerger is that he's a liberal who isn't that bright. In his resolution, he stated that "the city of St. Cloud has the capacity to provide municipal services to the aforementioned prospective new residents without an impact on the city budget or quality of life."
Anyone that thinks that refugees don't have an impact on the city budget is delusional. I wrote in this post that this was a crystallizing event. Further, it's clear from watching the video of the meeting that there were essentially as many citizens opposing Goerger's resolution as supporting. Why, then, was the vote lopsided in favoring Goerger's resolution?
Further, people are saying that the Goerger resolution passed. It didn't. The only vote taken was on whether to call the question. No votes were taken on whether to approve Goerger's resolution. [Video no longer available.]
That's shown approximately 1:20:00 into the video. Within seconds of the vote to call the question, Council President Lewis adjourned the meeting.
Finally, it's clear that the anti-transparency activists weren't there to listen people with a different opinion. They were there to shout down people who disagreed with them. Think about that. The people supporting the resolution titled "in support of a just and welcoming community" shouted down the people who wanted a full, respectful discussion. These anti-transparency activists who demand St. Cloud be a welcoming community were openly hostile to Councilman Johnson.
That's both ironic and pathetic.
Originally posted Sunday, October 29, 2017, revised 30-Oct 8:52 AM
Comment 1 by John Palmer at 29-Oct-17 03:28 PM
The St. City Council 5 revealed what all the obfuscation and silence about the worst kept secret in St. Cloud really was about. In the Orwellian world of 1984 words and phrases often meant the opposite of conventional meaning. In the reality of 2017 'Welcoming' has a new meaning. The meaning is determined by acclamation of a few with a disregard for the many. Under the St. Cloud Council 5 only those who agree with them are welcome and those who dare to attempt to disagree are silenced. At least the St. Cloud 5 did not directly tell those who feel unwelcome to leave unlike our Governor did. The 5 simply were 'Minnesota nice' in a long tradition of passive agression.
Comment 2 by eric z at 29-Oct-17 06:30 PM
Welcoming community - Willkommen -- parallel showmanship?
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cabaret+willkommen+youtube
Tomassoni criticizes Rom, Carron
State Sen. David Tomassoni's op-ed expresses his disgust with Becky Rom and her husband Reid Carron with a sense of humor. This fight started with this article , which includes quotes from Rom and Carron that got under miners' skin.
Specifically, the quote from Rom that's bothering Tomassoni and the miners is "Danny Forsman drives to the mine in his truck, comes home and watches TV, and he doesn't know this world exists." The quote from Carron that's got miners upset is "Resentment is the primary driver of the pro-mining crowd here; they are resentful that other people have come here and been successful while they were sitting around waiting for a big mining company. They want somebody to just give them a job so they can all drink beer with their buddies and go four-wheeling and snowmobiling with their buddies, not have to think about anything except punching a clock."
Sen. Tomassoni's tongue-in-cheek reply starts with "It came to me as I was sitting on my deck drinking a beer (metal chair, a byproduct of mining; wooden deck, from logging; beer, from hops and grains from farming). I thought, now what's wrong with sitting on my deck and drinking a beer. Then I thought, I wonder if the anti-mining people have metal chairs on their decks? Maybe they don't. Maybe they have plastic chairs (that came from drilling oil)."
Tomassoni's needling continued:
Getting hungry, I came into the house for a BLT. I fried some bacon on a metal stove in a copper lined pan. (Copper pans don't stick and they clean up in a breeze). The bacon was in my metal refrigerator, which has a cooling element going through copper pipes.
Of course, none of that copper was mined on the Iron Range and anti-mining forces seem content to get their copper from another country that has no environmental, safety laws nor child labor laws. I thought, what's wrong with this picture?
Great environmental laws, child labor laws and safety regulations are good things. Shouldn't we be doing the mining where all are enforced?
Sen. Tomassoni finishes Rom and Carron off, saying:
That's why I'm always puzzled when mining opponents say they will support projects: 'If the science proves it safe.'
Well, let's see:
We have been mining for 135 years in virtually the same area that PolyMet will mine. PolyMet will use a former iron ore mining site to process the ore.
The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board recently published an environmental report card on Minnesota's statewide water quality. Guess where you'll find the only area that has really good water? Yup. Right here in Northeastern Minnesota. The heart of mining country IS the Land of Sky Blue Waters. Pretty good science if you ask me.
Rom and Carron aren't trustworthy people. Rom is especially willing to mislead.
Our history proves we helped America become a global economic powerhouse. We need minerals, paper, lumber and food from our own backyards and we can provide them in a safe and reliable manner.
So, back on my deck with my beer and BLT, I couldn't help but think that the environmentalists must drink beer too. Maybe even one of those craft beers made in those great big copper vats. But hey, at least we have something in common. Or maybe we have a lot in common as we all need mining and mining jobs.
Apology accepted. Now show me it's sincere.
Posted Sunday, October 29, 2017 8:10 AM
No comments.
Questioning Gov. Dayton's support
The editors at the Mesabi Daily News are being respectful of Gov. Dayton, though they aren't letting him off the hook either. In this Our View Editorial , they simply ask what Gov. Dayton meant when he said he supports PolyMet.
It's clear that the Mesabi Daily News welcomed the headline when they stated "Dayton's support is more than welcome around the Iron Range, which has been through the ups and downs and review process with the project for more than a decade. Having the top DFLer in Minnesota give it the thumbs up cannot be understated." Still, they aren't excited about Gov. Dayton's statement because they then wrote "But what does Dayton's support mean to the project in real terms?"
The reason why they don't trust him is stated clearly when they wrote "Every time PolyMet celebrates a new achievement on its way to breaking ground, a new lawsuit swoops in to try and delay it. Will Dayton help call off the dogs as the project's bigger milestones enter the horizon?" That's a totally fair question. It's easy to say you support mining if you know that environmental activists will file another lawsuit that adds another delay to the project.
There's a bigger point that's important to make, too. Why should Rangers tolerate a regulatory system that's this convoluted? How many studies are enough? How many hearings need to be held? Chip Cravaack tried getting this pushed through when he was in office. He was elected in 2010, the same election that gave us Gov. Dayton.
It's clear that Gov. Dayton hasn't jettisoned the environmentalists. He's still siding with the environmentalists on Twin Metals and the Line 3 Pipeline project. While the lawsuits fly, PolyMet sits in limbo:
If they get through the permitting and the lawsuits, this will be part of PolyMet's processing plant. So much for preserving pristine waters.
Posted Sunday, October 29, 2017 8:21 PM
No comments.
Drinking the resettlement kool-aid
This St. Cloud Times Our View editorial is proof that the Times has drank the resettlement Kool-Aid. It started by saying "The St. Cloud City Council did the right thing Monday night when it voted 5-1 to adopt a resolution declaring the city a just and welcoming community." Actually, that's a point of disagreement. If the Times thinks that ambushing the citizens and a city councilmember with a last minute resolution that people hadn't seen before is doing the right thing, then they need to rethink their ethical principles.
Transparency isn't a nicety. It's what ethical people do reflexively. It's done out of respect for others. What happened Monday night was disrespectful and mean-spirited. When supposed civic leaders treat the citizenry with that type of disrespect, the citizenry is entitled to not trust their civic leaders.
Later in the editorial, it said "The intent of these forums is simply to foster respectful, public dialogue aimed at answering questions based on facts, not fear." When I first read that, I questioned whether this was written by the Onion or if they were serious. Apparently, they intended it to be serious. They failed if that was their intent.
The unmistakable message sent from Monday night's ambush was that the City Council wasn't interested in respectful public dialogue. They were interested in hiding the facts about the program to the point that they denied the fact that they're breaking federal law.
This article highlights information that triggers new questions:
About 70 percent of those residents, for example, are participating in the workforce - a rate that compares to the overall workforce participation of native-born Americans in the region. "They're filling important roles in the St. Cloud economy," Goldenrod said. "Minnesota is increasingly relying on immigrant workers to fill critical roles in our workforce."
Question: Of the 30% of refugees that aren't participating in the workforce, how many of these refugees qualify for subsidized health care or rental assistance? What other government benefits do they qualify for?
This isn't helpful:
For all that, though, Ali said he wasn't surprised that an elected official proposed a plan to ban refugee resettlement in St. Cloud, drawing parallels between Johnson's resolution and President Donald Trump's travel ban, which restricts refugees from several predominately Muslim countries from entering the U.S.
I've had it up to here with this Muslim ban BS. Jeff Johnson isn't proposing a ban on refugee resettlement. That's an intentional incendiary term. Councilman Johnson is proposing a moratorium. The definition of moratorium is "an authorized period of delay or waiting." The definition of ban is "the act of prohibiting by law; interdiction."
Words mean things. Councilman Johnson's resolution wouldn't have the force of law by itself. Therefore, the word ban is entirely inappropriate. However, a moratorium is entirely appropriate because that's an authorized wait period.
Up until this point, Councilman Johnson has been portrayed as unreasonable. That's insulting, considering the fact that he's the person who published his resolution 2 weeks prior to debating it. It's insulting, especially considering the fact that he wasn't the person who tried portraying those that didn't agree with him as uncaring or un-American.
The people who supported Councilman Goerger's resolution acted like hooligans. They tried shutting down debate. They tried shouting down those that disagreed with them. They were the people who weren't interested in having a lengthy debate.
Posted Monday, October 30, 2017 8:52 AM
No comments.
Manafort indicted
This isn't surprising from the standpoint of people didn't see this indictment coming. It's now official. Paul Manafort has been indicted by a grand jury. (To read the indictment, follow this link ). Following this summer's early morning raid of Manafort's home, this was expected to be the first indictment. That early morning raid told everyone that Manafort was in Special Counsel Mueller's crosshairs.
Several things are noteworthy. On the first page of the indictment, it says "Defendants Paul J. Manafort, Jr. and Richard W. Gates III served for years as political consultants and lobbyists. Between at least 2006 and 2015, Manafort and Gates acted as unregistered agents of the government of the Ukraine... Manafort and Gates generated millions of dollars of income as a result of their Ukraine work. In order to hide Ukraine payments from United States authorities, from approximately 2006 through at least 2016, Manafort and Gates laundered the money through scores of United States and foreign corporations, partnerships and bank accounts."
This article says "Manafort laundered more than $18 million, which the indictment says he concealed from the federal government. From 2008 to 2014, Manafort wired $12 million to be sent to vendors for personal items, including $5.4 million on home improvements in the Hamptons, $934,350 to an antique rug store in Virginia, $520,440 to a clothing store in Beverley Hills and $655,500 for landscaping in New York, according to the indictment."
The long and short of it is that this doesn't connect Manafort's dealings with the Ukraine to the Trump-Russia collusion story. Ed Morrissey highlights the fact that "Manafort only served as the Trump campaign chair for two months (and for three months prior ran his delegate liaison effort), and that his scope of knowledge on the 2016 election is likely to be less than comprehensive. Two days after a security briefing to Trump in August 2016, Manafort left the campaign, leaving Kellyanne Conway and Steve Bannon in charge. Manafort might have some knowledge, but if so, Mueller should have been able to get it from other people without having to cut a deal with Manafort."
Then there's this:
Based on this indictment, there's no question that Manafort and Gates are accused of committing some serious crimes. That being said, I predict that the word leverage will quickly become the hyperventilating media's favorite new word by week's end.
Based on this indictment, Mueller is no closer to proving Trump-Russia collusion than he was the day he was named special counsel. That being said, the hyperventilating media will do their best to make it sound like Mueller is closing in on President Trump. The other thing that liberal blowhards have already started doing is speculating on whether President Trump will fire Mueller. (He won't.)
Finally, it's important to note that an indictment is just the prosecution's side of the story. It doesn't include the defense's cross-examination of the prosecution's witnesses or the presenting of their case.
Posted Monday, October 30, 2017 9:42 AM
No comments.
Pelosi's misstep, Manafort's mess
It isn't surprising that Nancy Pelosi is calling for an independent investigation to prevent Russian meddling in US elections.
In her statement, Ms. Pelosi said "Even with an accelerating Special Counsel investigation inside the Justice Department, and investigations inside the Republican Congress, we still need an outside, fully independent investigation to expose Russia's meddling in our election and the involvement of Trump officials,' Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement Monday. 'Defending the integrity of our democracy demands that Congress look forward to counter Russian aggression and prevent future meddling with our elections."
This seems like stupid messaging. This morning, it was announced that Paul Manafort and his associate Rick Gates had been indicted. According to the indictment, some of the alleged illegal activity happened before Barack announced his candidacy for president .
Ms. Pelosi decision to call for this independent investigation steps all over the message that Manafort has been indicted. When there's bad news coming out about your political adversary, exit the stage and let them endure the spotlight. Ms. Pelosi apparently didn't figure it out that she should leave the stage.
Erick Erickson's op-ed on the Manafort indictment is worth reading. In his op-ed, Erickson wrote "The Mueller team looked into the campaign, went down various rabbit holes, and wound up in Manafort's tax returns circa 2012 , well before Trump considered running for office. Therefore, they can claim, there is nothing there with the campaign."
Judge Napolitano's explanation might help shed light on the importance of the Manafort indictment. [Video no longer available.]
At this point, there's nothing found thus far that hints the Trump campaign worked with Putin's administration to win the election. The thought that Putin tried meddling with the election is something that the overwhelming majority of Americans have already accepted. In terms of momentum, this isn't a game-changer.
Posted Monday, October 30, 2017 11:16 AM
No comments.
What will Gov. Dayton do?
Last week, Gov. Dayton announced that he's finally supporting the PolyMet precious metals project. In this post , I wrote "Why should Rangers tolerate a regulatory system that's this convoluted? How many studies are enough? How many hearings need to be held? Chip Cravaack tried getting this pushed through when he was in office. He was elected in 2010, the same election that gave us Gov. Dayton. It's clear that Gov. Dayton hasn't jettisoned the environmentalists. He's still siding with the environmentalists on Twin Metals and the Line 3 Pipeline project."
Speaking of the Line 3 Pipeline project, Rep. Matt Grossell, Rep. Sandy Layman, Rep. Matt Bliss, Rep. Dale Lueck, Rep. Debra Kiel, Sen. Justin Eichorn and Sen. Paul Utke wrote a letter to Gov. Dayton. Their letter's opening paragraph says "The proposed Line 3 Replacement Project (L3R) is a vital energy infrastructure project for Minnesota and the region that will generate more than $3 billion in private investment. It will create thousands of good-paying construction jobs and provide millions in much-needed tax revenue to local governments in our districts and our region." Follow this link to read the entire letter.
It isn't likely that Gov. Dayton will back off. His Commerce Department testified that (a) the L3R isn't required and (b) the existing pipeline should be shut down. That's the public part of Gov. Dayton's policy. That doesn't mean, though, that he doesn't see the political difficulties and complexities this might cause the DFL.
Yesterday on @Issue with Tom Hauser, former DFL Chair Brian Melendez said that Gov. Dayton allegedly told environmentalists 'Good luck with the Republican governor in 2019', implying that the environmental activists' demands will hurt the DFL in 2018.
This video [no longer available] is part of the reason why Gov. Dayton won't abandon environmental activists.
The truth is that Gov. Dayton and the DFL aren't consistent with their beliefs. First, they're constantly talking about the importance of infrastructure projects. When this infrastructure project was proposed, though, they ran from it like it was toxic waste. Finally, the DFL is constantly pushing bonding bills as their annual "jobs bill". This pipeline project is the size of three bonding bills .
Posted Monday, October 30, 2017 4:40 PM
No comments.
