Hey, there! Log in / Register

Capuano won't attend inauguration

US Rep. Michael Capuano tweeted today he's going to be holding office hours in Cambridge on Friday instead:

While I have great respect for the Office of the President and I accept the results of the election, I will not attend the Inaugural.

Instead I am holding an open house at my Cambridge District Office, located at 110 First Street from 8-10 a.m. on Friday the 20th.

So many of you have contacted my office to raise concerns about the future of our great country I wanted the opportunity to hear from you.

One other Massachusetts rep, Katherine Clark, will also not attend.

Topics: 

Ad:

Comments

Charlie Baker should have done this.

up
Voting closed 0

Its incredibly immature and accomplishes nothing.

up
Voting closed 3

He's not arguing that Trump ins't an american or didn't win the election. Capuano is making a principled stand that he's opposed to the circumstances around Trump's win and his behavior since becoming President-Elect. As a result he doesn't want to associate himself with the inauguration ceremonies. Plenty of congressmen have skipped inaugurations in the past. It's not a big deal.

If Capuano jumps up in the middle of the State of the Union speech and yells "You Lie!" then I'd say he's out of line.

up
Voting closed 0

Lets say Hillary didnt run a horrible campaign ignoring most of the swing states and she won. Now 50+ Rep claim they're not going, how fast would the media and the left claim the GOP is sexist.

Its part of your job and it childish to not show.

Even Hillary has the decency (surprisingly) to attend.

up
Voting closed 0

Where in the Constitution does it say congressmen must attend the inauguration?

And if Hillary had won it would be Trump egging his party on to stay home. He's the one who claimed for 7 years that Obama wasn't Constitutionally elected.

up
Voting closed 0

I want to know if and how the Trump campaign worked with Russian state actors. If that my friends we indeed have an illegitimate presidency.

The FBI is on it. They should have been by July 27th at least. And we have news of FISA court subpoenas but I don't know the time frame on those. We have also the 'not a puppet' assertions by Peotus Pussygrabber in the debates.

Le Pen, France's far-right candidate was photographed in Trump tower last week. Her campaign is funded by Russian banks. Both she and Trump deny meeting although she was photographed getting into the elevator.

Meanwhile Trump took another swipe at Rep John Lewis and continues to spread the lie of black communities mean dysnfunction.

up
Voting closed 0

Don't you think they would have come up with something better than disclosing that John Podesta has a bunch of suck ups in the media? That Debbie Wasserman Schultz was in HRC's back pocket? Do you honestly think a Trump voter in Wisconsin or Michigan changed his or her vote because Tony and John Podesta liked to eat a lot of pasta?

up
Voting closed 0

They interfered in our election. That's treason.

You can downplay the consequences of that treason all you want. Still treason.

up
Voting closed 0

Can one commit treason against another country?

up
Voting closed 0

I agree with Anonymous above - there are a lot of potential Russian connections we need investigated & explained.

-Four days before the election, Cylance (the IT firm) put out a statement that software used on voting machines was vulnerable to hacking. They were concerned, more specifically, that the AVC Edge software used on Sequoia (Dominion) voting machines could be tampered with to change vote totals, in a similar manner to a virus installed by Russia in Ukraine ahead of their elections a few years ago.

(For those who need a reminder about what happened in Ukraine: Russian hackers installed malware on the computers of town administrators. Those workers then moved the voter rolls from their computers onto a flash drive, taking the malware with it, and the malware installed itself on voter machines. The malware tampered with vote totals by only a hair of a percent in each district, and then uninstalled itself when the vote totals were removed from the machines.)

-Here are the states that use the vulnerable Sequoia (Dominion) machines with AVC Edge models, including: Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, & Florida.

I would further recommend that people reading this google Erik Prince (Betsy DeVos' brother, big donator to the RNC, CEO of mercenary army Blackwater, and accused mass-murderer of Iraqi civilians) & Keith Schiller, former NYPD cop turned Head of Trump's private army. If you've also read Steele's dossier before reading the bios of these 2 men, you'll see that a lot of information in the dossier begins to suddenly make more sense.

up
Voting closed 0

"incredibly immature and accomplishes nothing" sums up Trump very well.

up
Voting closed 0

You think Baker and Capuano should emulate Trump's manners.

Personally, I'd like to see them set the bar higher, but hey, to each their own.

up
Voting closed 0

Emulating Trump's manners would include sexually assaulting women and bragging about it while wearing a microphone(great example of Trump's stupidity), a 40 year well documented history of racism, cheating on multiple wives, not paying taxes, mocking disabled people, insulting prisoners of war and families of deceased soldiers, etc

I don't think deciding to not show up to an event and instead spending time with your constituents is equal to Trump's history of being a total piece of garbage.

up
Voting closed 0

You were the one that countered the argument that Capuano (and Clark) not attending the inauguration is "incredibly immature and accomplishes nothing" by noting that it sums up Trump very well. Own what you said. How one is incredibly immature is another thing altogether. Myself, I prefer my adult leaders acting like adults. If the Republicans and Democrats both battle to see who can go lowest, I fear for the future of this country. And if you don't see the bipartisan issue, ponder this- back in 2009 the Senate could block the nomination of a cabinet pick if the opposition could muster 40 votes. That was changed, so we'll get the cabinet we get.

up
Voting closed 0

So far, 50+ House Democrats won't attend Trump's inauguration, and then surely for the next Democratic POTUS's inauguration 60+ Republicans won't attend... and so on and so forth, until before you know it we'll be shooting crossbows at each other atop rusty 18-wheelers barreling through a desert wasteland.

Suck it up and show some class, it'll pay dividends.

up
Voting closed 0

Will it? With this president elect? I'm skeptical.

up
Voting closed 0

atop rusty 18-wheelers barreling through a desert wasteland.

That's what a lot of the recent years of prepper enthusiasm was about. People feel powerless and stripped of dignity, but they almost welcome the collapse they fear is coming, because they would shine, with their guns and their cans of beans.

I'm just stockpiling Beano for barter.

up
Voting closed 0

This is unlike other inaugurations. It is completely valid to say that trump is illegitimate. He lost the popular vote by an unprecedented 3 million votes. Without Russian interference AND partisan interference from FBI director Comey, trump would not have narrowly won 3 crucial rust belt states to give him the edge in the Electoral College.

It's fair to say that a majority of Capuano's constituents would support him on skipping the election. He is doing his job by listening to them and representing their views.

up
Voting closed 0

Reverse things. If the Smartest Woman in The World had won the Electoral College and lost the plebiscite, and Trump had carried on with his "election is rigged" routine, you would be apoplectic.

The Electoral College is how the system is set up. I think Team Hillary knew that going in. And still got their ass handed to them by Trump and the Deplorables.

If you don't like the Electoral College system, go to Capuano's pout-a-thon on Friday and encourage him to go back and get it changed. Liz Warren, who has a stellar legistlative record--mainly congratulating local sports teams--can join him.

up
Voting closed 0

A lot of us didn't like her either.

The other mistake: EVIDENCE as in WEIGHT of EVIDENCE. Just because you trumpards traffic in unfounded rumors doesn't make them true; nor does it make the problems with Trump into unfounded rumors.

He's owned by the Russian Mob. Plenty of proof. You can't tell the difference because you are so mired in fake news that you don't know what evidence is anymore. Probably never did, actually - not many scientists on your side, I note.

up
Voting closed 0

Trump lost the popular by the margin of California. Why should one large state on the west coast get to dictate what representation 49 other states have every 4 years?

up
Voting closed 0

Trump won by the margin of Texas, Florida and Arizona. Why should three states decide the date of the country?

Because they're frickin' Americans, that's why. Same as Californians.

up
Voting closed 0

People do.

up
Voting closed 0

People of the states vote for members of the Electoral College. Those representatives of the states vote for President. So, yes, California and New York voted for Clinton, while Florida and Texas voted for Trump (except those 2 unfaithful electors in Texas, but that is a different issue altogether.)

Oh, and if there isn't a majority in the EC, then the members of the House of Representatives vote on a state by state basis with each state being counted equally.

up
Voting closed 0

A) The popular vote doesn't matter
B) How many people didn't vote for Clinton and instead voted for Trump because of Wikileaks?
C) How many people didn't vote for Clinton and instead voted for Trump because of James Comey?

I think Trump is an idiot, will be surprised if he finishes out his term, but the idea that anything involving RUSSIA or the FBI is why Clinton lost is silly. The rust belt doesn't care about Debbie Wasserman Schultz and what she did/didn't do.

up
Voting closed 0

The popular vote doesn't matter

It might not matter in terms of who becomes president, but you can't claim a mandate. Trump/GOP can not claim the country supports his views when a majority of the country specifically wanted someone else.

up
Voting closed 0

A "mandate" doesn't really mean anything, regardless of what Trump tweets about. One could also argue that controlling the House, the Senate, the Presidency, 33 of 50 governorships, controlling both houses of state Senates in 32 of 50 states (and 17 w/veto-proof majorities) is somewhat of a mandate.

up
Voting closed 0

You are correct about the House and Senate. They have clear, democratically elected majorities. Trump and the GOP have the power to do what they want in the eyes of the law.

Mandates have no legal definition. However, without one it's hard for Trump to claim his views represent that of the majority of Americans and thus, it encourages skepticism on his plans. Obama and Bush in 2004 could legitimately claim the majority of people preferred their vision of the country.

up
Voting closed 0

But would you agree that it's pretty clear at this point that the Republican Party has a mandate in the U.S.?

up
Voting closed 0

But would you agree that it's pretty clear at this point that the Republican Party has a mandate in the U.S.?

Nope. While they maintain majorities, they lost seats in both House and Senate in November. That does not imply a mandate to me.

up
Voting closed 0

So if a political party held 80 of 100 seats in the Senate, but in the next election the lost 2 seats, then the don't have a mandate?

up
Voting closed 0

So if a political party held 80 of 100 seats in the Senate, but in the next election the lost 2 seats, then the don't have a mandate?

No, I would say they did. And if your mother had wheels instead of legs, she'd be a bicycle. In the real world, however, she doesn't, and the Republicans have 52 seats in the Senate and 241 seats in the House -- nowhere near 80%.

up
Voting closed 0

They had to keep hundreds of thousands of people from voting and gerrymander everything to do that, plus lose the popular vote, plus destroy ballots, etc.

Not hardly a mandate of any sort.

up
Voting closed 0

And while I'm a bit annoyed that Capuano won't be at the swearing in, I'm heartened that he concedes that point.

If you want to talk about a President whose election was essentially a fraud, let's hop on the Red Line and go down to Quincy Adams.

up
Voting closed 0

You meant the JFK stop.

Yeah I said it.

up
Voting closed 0

In the past few months, I've been tempted to talk about President Tilden, but the fraud that was the election of 1824 is just sitting there. That we named a T stop after him just shows the hypocrisy.

up
Voting closed 0

You really do learn something new everyday... I did not know this.

Interesting Waquoit. Thanks.

up
Voting closed 0

Here, here!

The Pats have an offense and a defense. You cant win without both.

We r all on the same team, even if we play different positions.

We have to cut the crap, watch each other's back, and call out our teammates when when they screw up, not when they are on the podium on draft day!

up
Voting closed 0

On Friday, the chief justice will swear in the Birther-in-Chief.

The basic idea of we're all in this together is nice, and I long for the days when even a Reagan and an O'Neill could work together on things and vicious remnants of a bygone era like Strom Thurmond were not part of the mainstream, but this isn't 1982 anymore.

And besides, dissent is part of what makes America the democracy it is. We're not Russia, at least not yet.

up
Voting closed 0

My mom taught me that two wrongs don't make a right.

So even though R's were obstinate and non-productive, that does not mean D's should copy them or escalate the lack of civility.

up
Voting closed 0

Should Democrats concede the seat on the Supreme Court Republicans denied Merrick Garland?

up
Voting closed 0

.BORK BORK BORK

up
Voting closed 0

They don't have the votes to do so. If they had a majority in either branch of Congress, they could try.

up
Voting closed 0

The US Constitution does not say that the senate gets to vote on Supreme Court justices at all. It falls broadly under the advice and consent clause, but recess appointments are permitted if the Senate isn't around to work on that. It never says that they get to vote up or down on candidates - this is simply a courtesy and a convention. If they refuse to discuss it, they have had their shot at advising.

up
Voting closed 0

Do you throw one too - or teach him how to act like a grown up and get your way like a big boy?

This "tactic" won't work with a hypersensitive narcissistic self-acclaimed master of the deal - in fact probably the worst thing you could do if you want to play to his strength.

The Dems will need to be smarter than the Republicans were.

The alternative is 8 years of Trumpism - not 4 (and don't misunderstand - I'm not a Trump fan - just resigned to reality. 4 years of Trump already argues for shorter term limits!)

up
Voting closed 0

doesn't have an active hand in siphoning my tax dollars to his own business interests, several raging personality disorders, or nuclear weapons at his disposal. Bravo, Capuano. Don't normalize this lunatic.

up
Voting closed 0

Thanks to certain family members - I've seen this show for the past 8 years too up close and personal. A bit tired of it - it's deja vu all over again only different because the noise is in my left ear instead of my right ear.

up
Voting closed 0

And this can't be repeated enough:

The right hated Obama because of what *they* claimed he believed in (taking all yer guns, taking all yer jobs, taking all yer Jesus, and being an Islamic Manchurian false candidate who never showed his birth certificate, etc).

The left (and sane people) oppose Trump because of what *he himself* has said he believes in (climate change is a Chinese hoax, he grabs women by the pussy, sanctions should be lifted again Russia for no reason other than the obvious to all of us, freedom of the press should be curtailed, etc etc).

Do not compare the two. Ever. They are nowhere near the same.

up
Voting closed 0

It was the same - only different. You only cite the red herrings.

This is exactly how the right started off with Obama - spread the wealth, Obamacare, apology tour to the world blabbedy blah, blabbedy blah, break the bank on solving climate change.

In the end - very little of that happened (and Obamacare had some good points - they just made it too cumbersome and expensive trying appease too many people).

Let's see what happens in 6-12 months. My guess is just like Obama - reality separates itself from rhetoric (and Oh my - the rhetoric - all in 140 characters or less at 3 am from the Golden Throne on high!).

up
Voting closed 0

You like to pretend that you aren't a right wing nut job by pretending you are a centrist.

More gaslighting - but, hey, gaslights raise property values, right?

Wake up and smell the coffee, dude. You aren't a centrist (except in your mind) and these are not red herrings.

up
Voting closed 0

With the Russophobia? I expected more from you.

up
Voting closed 0

up
Voting closed 0

I mean, they're already holding (laughable) cabinet confirmations. Full of gems like, just today, the Secretary of Education not thinking that IDEA should apply to schools and that students are in danger of grizzly bear attacks. Like... those are mistakes that are / have happened, are you saying we don't get to decide this is a fuckup until he's officially sworn in?

up
Voting closed 0

There is nothing classy about being present at the inauguration of a PEOTUS who has yet to reveal the likely numerous financial ties/burdens with Russia and China, who verbally attacks American citizens via Twitter for any perceived slight, and who will likely be non-compliant with the Constitution immediately upon taking the Oath of Office on Friday.

I'm happy to see that Capuano will be meeting with his constituents on Friday. We need as much access to our elected representatives as we can get.

up
Voting closed 0

Don't act like Democratic lawmakers started something new. You do know that Republicans skipped Obama's inaugurations, don't you?

up
Voting closed 0

Name one

up
Voting closed 0

I said Lawmakers ... Rick Perry for one.

Other writeups: http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/46068

Mitt Romney was one of the first, if not the first, losing candidate to skip an inauguration

up
Voting closed 0

That article consists entirely of DC hacks who run PACs and think tanks. We're talking about a significant chunk of congress here.

up
Voting closed 0

I didn't see any names.

up
Voting closed 0

n/t

up
Voting closed 0

Stated Republican lawmakers did not attend Obama's inauguration. I still haven't seen a name of a "lawmaker" how didn't.

up
Voting closed 0

That's the first and only article that pops up on google when you search "did GOP skip Obama's inauguration", and it doesn't mention 1 single member of Congress. It says Republicans who LIVE in DC might skip town. Nice try though.

up
Voting closed 0

Michael Dukakis didn't attend G.H.W. Bush's in 1989- most non-federal-level office holders- like Romney, Dukakis and the previously-cited Rick Perry who was governor of Texas in 2009- don't attend presidential inaugurations because they don't have a role/ invitation for the proceedings

up
Voting closed 0

They skipped the hearings they were supposed to hold for Merrick Garland

up
Voting closed 0

How many witnesses are required to inaugurate a President? It's not like people choosing not to attend make a difference - they only even mildly make a statement.

That said, I'm glad they're choosing even to make those. Dissent is an important part of democracy, and it's important for people to remember that they make choices about when and when not to stand up.

up
Voting closed 0

This deserves a Trumpland tag.

People behaving silly because Trump got elected.

Should apply to both sides, no?

up
Voting closed 0

You say silly, I say reasonable reaction to Russia's first elected president. Or whatever.

More important, though, I've only been using the Trumpland tag for violence and intimidation and the like. Disagree all you want with what Clark and now Capuano are doing, it's hardly intimidation.

up
Voting closed 0

Et tu , adamus !

U.S.

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-...

up
Voting closed 0

Many of us here have no use for Clinton and never really did.

This is a logical fallacy. Consider it called out.

It is also irrelevant - OMG CLINTON STOMPED IN PUDDLES TOO! has nothing at all to do with the very shady dealings of the current president elect and the ways in which they compromise our national security, constitutional government, and way of life.

up
Voting closed 0

Judge them by their reasons.

up
Voting closed 0

Did the same concerned citizens express concern when Capuano urged labor union members to "get a little bloody" in the streets to advance their cause? Fitting that he will be in a Sanctuary City as Trump signs the Executive Order to deny federal funding to same. Give Capuano credit, at least he's consistent and knows his audience. Baker, meanwhile, alienated the 1,000,000+ Trump voters in MA by opposing him and now alienates the rest by attending the inaugural. Tito Jackson should be running for Governor, not Mayor. Capuano should hold his office hours in Eastie, Somervile or Chelsea with the MS-13 crowd. If he insists on Cambridge, maybe Elizabeth Warren could open her mansion with snacks from her favorite "cheese shop" where she solicits votes.

up
Voting closed 0

That collection of word salad is absurd. Do you have a point, or are you playing "Conservative Talking Point Bingo"?

up
Voting closed 0

His other motif is pretending to be a retired cop.

Hey, wait - shouldn't he and the 3/5ths GF be off getting their passports stamped on a domestic flight into a national airport right now? Getting late to get to the inaugural.

up
Voting closed 0

...sometimew you are really funny. I appreciate you.

up
Voting closed 0

Democrats sure we're happy taking his $ for decades and loved him when he publicly criticised Republican pols.

up
Voting closed 0

accuse Mike of being bi partisan.

up
Voting closed 0

They would attend the inauguration and do their best to secure federal funds for the citizens of Massachusetts. They would work together to ensure that four years from now Democrats campaign in the rust belt and retake the White House. Joe Kennedy is the future of the Democratic party and represents the voice of the new wing of the Democratic party.

up
Voting closed 0

Joe Kennedy? Really?

Your reliance on brand names is part of the problem.

up
Voting closed 0

I don't have any problems with them skipping the inauguration. I don't expect Trump to want to unite the country. He's read his cards correctly so far and knows he can advance his agenda with only the people who supported him this time around. Look at who he's surrounded himself with so far. His entire Cabinet is white men with two token gimmes for supporters Ben Carson and Elaine Chao who helps bring the Senate majority leader along. Does that look like someone who's looking to heal, build bridges, etc. by reaching out to demographics that did not support him? Do you think the Supreme Court will be supportive of a more socially just agenda after he's done with it in 8 years?

As Obama has pointed out, if you don't like the way the government is running right now you need to engage and participate. I think open office hours are a good way to accommodate that on day 1 of an administration that has made it clear that certain segments of the population are not and will not be included in the process.

up
Voting closed 0

Might want to read up on this:

Cognitive Dissonance:

http://galaxyveracity.com/index.php/human-behavior/90-psychology/111-cognitive-dissonance-or-how-one-cant-admit-they-made-a-mistake

Last paragraph is interesting, i.e. politics.

And also Narcissistic Disorder
http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/narcissistic-personality-disorder-traits-no-accountability-0

This is so plain in everyday news that I am surprised that it is not in the forefront of discussion and debate at-large. Someone has had to figure this out somewhere.

If you really want to know what kind of a s_%$%^&_it -show is coming, wait till boundaries are set and some people are told, "No, you cannot do that because..." Enter here the customary reasons such as being unconstitutional, against local or higher statute laws, violates treaties with foreign nations, etc.

It's coming.

up
Voting closed 0