[guest post by Dana]

Yet again, it’s different when Democrats target private citizens:

Sad to see so many San Antonians as 2019 maximum donors to Donald Trump — the owner of ⁦@BillMillerBarBQ⁩, owner of the ⁦@HistoricPearl, realtor Phyllis Browning, etc⁩.

Their contributions are fueling a campaign of hate that labels Hispanic immigrants as ‘invaders.’

The tweet is followed by a list of retirees, and the names of their businesses, who have contributed the maximum amount to the Trump campaign. I’m not going to publish the list here. These are private citizens, not political opponent(s). Yet now, a sitting member of the House of Representatives has made their names public, thereby putting them at risk of harassment, or worse. His campaign has literally invited trouble upon them. How can this be acceptable to anyone from either side of the aisle? While donor information is public – one can do the research themselves and find the names – the fact that an elected official is responsible, is reprehensible. And it’s just really staggering that this is happening only a few days after a horrific mass shooting left 22 people dead in Castro’s home state of Texas. How incredibly tone-deaf, cynical and vicious does one have to be to make the decision to go with this? There is absolutely no excuse. What a disgrace Joaquin Castro is. He brings shame to himself, his party, and his district (especially if some of the individuals live in his district). We can only hope that no harm comes to anyone on the list.

Interestingly, Joaquin Castro retweeted these remarks from his brother, Julian, made after the El Paso massacre:

“That is no accident. That is due in part to the climate this president has set, of division, of otherness.”

Good to know no one else but Trump can add fuel to the ugly fires of division and otherness. No accidents, indeed.

P.S. So far, not a peep from Big Media about this. But, hey, you know…

UPDATE: Joaquin Castro was confronted on Twitter by the Trump re-election campaign’s director of comms, Tim Murtaugh, who said:

At the very least @Castro4Congress is inviting harassment of these private citizens. At worst, he’s encouraging violence.

Will media concerned about “rhetoric” care about this?

He’s listing people and their employers.

This is a target list.

Castro attempted to justify his targeting of private citizens:

First, the Indivisble@group’s graphic I shared doesn’t have private or personal info — no addresses or phone #, etc. It’s publicly reported info printed in newspapers routinely from the @nyt to the @dcexaminer. You know that. 1/

2nd, what I said is true — your campaign has stoked fear of brown-skinned immigrants. Those contributions hv been used to pay for over 2K @Facebook ads declaring an invasion by Hispanics.

That is truly dangerous for millions.
Will you commit not to run another ad like that? 2/2

It’s not only a target list, it’s a direct shot across the bow to warn Trump donors. Ths is an elected official brazenly intimidating private citizens.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

[Headline from DRJ]

Law & Crime:

In 2017, United States District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff held an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Palin’s complaint against the Timesproperly alleged all the required elements of a defamation claim. Rakoff then relied on the evidence adduced at that hearing to dismiss Palin’s complaint under the Federal Rules of Procedure 12(b)(6), meaning Palin failed to state a claim upon which relief can legally be granted.

“Nowhere is political journalism so free, so robust, or perhaps so rowdy as in the United States,” Rakoff wrote in the ruling. “In the exercise of that freedom, mistakes will be made, some of which will be hurtful to others.”

However, according to the Second Circuit’s ruling Tuesday, Rakoff’s reliance on any facts outside of Palin’s original complaint was improper and grounds for reinstating Palin’s claim.

— DRJ

[guest post by Dana]

As warnings about travel to the U.S. are being issued, it’s not hard to see that there is a consensus out there that “indiscriminate gun ownership” is running rampant in the United States:

Foreign nations are warning their citizens that traveling in the United States could put them at risk of becoming a victim of a mass shooting.

A statement Monday from Uruguay’s Foreign Ministry warned about “growing indiscriminate violence” in the U.S.

It urged Uruguayans traveling there to avoid “theme parks, shopping centers, festivals, religious events, gastronomic fairs and any kind of cultural or sporting events.” U.S. authorities are unable to prevent mass shootings because of “indiscriminate” gun ownership, the statement said.

Venezuela’s foreign minister released a similar statement, also warning its citizens to avoid large gatherings where mass shootings might occur.

The Japanese Consul in Detroit on Sunday published an alert that said Japanese nationals “should be aware of the potential for gunfire incidents everywhere in the United States,” which it described as “a gun society.”

These countries join France, New Zealand and Germany, who in past years have issued similar warnings.

Given the tensions between the U.S. and Caracas, it’s a bit rich to read this from Venezuela’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, especially when referring to “the elite who hold political power” and “acts of violence”:

The ministry specifically called out a number of U.S. cities including Detroit, Cleveland, Baltimore, St. Louis, Oakland and Memphis.

“These growing acts of violence have found echo and sustenance in the speeches and actions impregnated with racial discrimination and hatred against migrant populations,” which have been issued by the “elite who hold political power in Washington,” according to a translated version of the Venezuelan release.

“A fundamental factor to consider lies in the inexcusable, indiscriminate possession of firearms by the population,” the release added.

Also, Uruguay’s travel warning comes several days after the U.S. issued its own travel warning for the country. A country which remains allies with Venezuela.

–Dana

Democrats have made it very clear that they believe Donald Trump (or should I say Ttump) to be responsible for the El Paso massacre:

Ocasio-Cortez: Trump's immigration rhetoric is "directly responsible" for El Paso mass shooting https://t.co/6jZPnAP9wx pic.twitter.com/vWiXGFLD42

— The Hill (@thehill) August 6, 2019

.@CoryBooker also blames Trump for the El Paso shooting: "He is responsible. He is responsible when he has taken no action whatsoever to even condemn white supremacy…We have a president who is responsible."

More via @DCExaminer: https://t.co/drePVh13C8 pic.twitter.com/LAjZWB9Qu6

— Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) August 4, 2019

I believe that if you don’t incite violence against a group, your criticism of the activities of that group (such as illegal immigrants), at least when that criticism is truthful, cannot be held morally responsible in any way for violence against that group. (Deliberate slander or libel might be a different story.) Even if that rhetoric is vigorous and hyperbolic, and uses terminology I would not use (e.g. “invasion”), I can’t say the rhetoric is morally responsible for a shooting. The shooter is. And to a far lesser degree, anyone who publicly suggested we should shoot illegals might be morally responsible as well.

If Trump were a normal president who opposed illegal immigration, I would simply note that AOC, Booker, and Francis O’Rourke are trying to suppress criticism of illegal immigration by suggesting that such criticism leads to violence. I worry about that.

Of course, Trump is not normal, and he has complicated the matter by laughing when people at a rally of his joke about shooting illegal immigrants.

It is another way that sound positions become discredited when they come into contact with this man.

The sooner we can get him out of our politics the better.

P.S. While the Toledo Dayton shooter did not leave a manifesto clearly documenting his motives the way the El Paso shooter did, he seems to have been a big lefty — ironically favoring gun control, tweeting to Rob Portman after the Parkland school shooting: “@robportman hey rob. How much did they pay you to look the other way? 17 kids are dead. If not now, when?”

In the hours before the Dayton shooting, the account “liked” several tweets about the El Paso shooting including one supporting gun control and others that called the El Paso shooting suspect a “terrorist,” and a “white supremacist.”

— Donie O'Sullivan (@donie) August 6, 2019

When is the last time you saw AOC condemning Antifa? If you answered “never” you get the kewpie doll.

Although we don’t know whether the Dayton shooter’s lefty social media actions, some just before the shooting, are related to his motive, AOC and company might want to be careful attributing blame to people who share the political positions of one mass shooter, lest that logic come back to bite them in the rear.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

[guest post by Dana]

Over objections by Democrats, President Trump will be paying a visit to El Paso on Wednesday:

El Paso, Texas, Mayor Dee Margo told reporters on Monday that President Trump will visit the city on Wednesday, even as several prominent Democrats indirectly blamed the president for Saturday’s mass shooting there — with some warning him, in frank terms, to stay away.

News of Trump’s planned appearance teed up a potentially bitter national political moment just four days after suspected gunman Patrick Crusius, 21, allegedly opened fire at a Walmart and killed 22 people while injuring more than two dozen others.

“He is president of the United States,” Margo, a Republican, told reporters. “So in that capacity, I will fulfill my obligations as mayor of El Paso, and hope that if we are expressing specifics that we can get him to come through for us.”

The mayor said he anticipated “political spin” and was “already getting the emails and the phone calls” from individuals “with lots of time on their hands,” but that his focus remains on his community, not politics. He added that Trump had called and was “very gracious” and offered any support necessary.

And speaking of El Paso and Trump… It looks like the president’s campaign still owes the city of El Paso payment for city services provided at a rally held in the city in February:

President Trump’s reelection campaign still owes El Paso more than $500,000 for police and public safety services that corresponded with a February rally in the city, an official said.

Laura Cruz-Acosta, communications manager for the city manager’s office, told The Texas Tribune that the Trump campaign now owes the city $569,204.63 for services El Paso provided during a rally during which the president focused on building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

“The city staff have followed the process and procedures as it relates to any invoicing that we provide, and we will continue to do so accordingly as per city and state policies,” Cruz-Acosta told the news outlet.

…

The El Paso Times reported in June that the Trump campaign had owed the city about $470,000 for services it provided to him during his campaign rally. The invoice included assistance from six city departments, including the fire, health, aviation and police departments.

“It shows a lack of concern for the community and the tax paying voters of El Paso,” city Rep. Alexsandra Annello told the newspaper at the time. “President Trump has in many ways, over the last year, put a financial burden on this community and has yet to show us the respect we deserve. It is clear that our borderland is not a priority of the president.”

It’s a shame that the Trump campaign didn’t pay what was owed before the president’s visit to El Paso tomorrow. While the city is certainly focused on far more grievous matters, this could have at least been one less thing at which his critics could hold against him.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

[Headlines from DRJ]

U.S. farmers are exasperated by latest trade war moves: ‘Another nail in the coffin’:

In response to President Trump recently announcing 10% tariffs on $300 billion in Chinese goods, China allowed the yuan to weaken and suspended purchases U.S. agricultural products.

“The Chinese market has a large capacity and the prospect of importing high-quality U.S. agricultural products is bright,” state-owned media Xinhua said on Monday. “However, we hope the U.S. will conscientiously implement the consensus reached at the [G-20 summit in Osaka, Japan] between the heads of the two countries, and implement the commitments to create the necessary conditions for cooperation in the agricultural fields between the two countries.”

America farmers were dismayed by the developments. “This is just another nail in the coffin,” Tyler Stafslien, a North Dakota-based soybean farmer, told Yahoo Finance. “To see this thing only seems to be getting worse rather than better is very concerning, and the American taxpayers may have to foot another round of funding if this keeps up — or we could see a ton of farmers’ loss throughout this nation.”

Wall Street banks bailing on troubled U.S. farm sector:

The retreat from agricultural lending by the nation’s biggest banks, which has not been previously reported, comes as shrinking cash flow is pushing some farmers to retire early and others to declare bankruptcy, according to farm economists, legal experts, and a review of hundreds of lawsuits filed in federal and state courts.

Sales of many U.S. farm products – including soybeans, the nation’s most valuable agricultural export – have fallen sharply since China and Mexico last year imposed tariffs in retaliation for U.S. duties on their goods. The trade-war losses further strained an agricultural economy already reeling from years over global oversupply and low commodity prices.

What’s next? Trump will call for more farm aid.

— DRJ