Posts Tagged ‘REPUBLICAN PARTY’
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, ATTORNEYS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, CROSS-EXAMINATION, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, EWS, FACEBOOK, FOX AND FRIENDS, FOX NEWS, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAMES COMEY, JOHN BOEHNER, KEVIN MCCARTHY, MICHAEL COHEN, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, Ronald Reagan, RUDOLPH GIULIANI, SALON, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, SPEAKER OF THE, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, STORMY DANIELS, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, VOLTAIRE
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on May 8, 2018 at 12:02 am
It’s a truth well-known to cross-examining attorneys: The best way to obtain the truth is often to “kill your opponents with kindness.”
Witnesses always expect the opposing counsel to immediately start screaming at them. But that only causes the witness to stay alert and say as little as possible.
So the smart attorney comes on as courteous, friendly, even sympathetic.
A classic example of this: A laborer claimed to have permanently injured his shoulder in a railway accident, leaving him unable to work. He claimed he could no longer raise his arm above a point parallel with his shoulder.
The railway’s attorney asked him a few sympathetic questions about his injuries. And the witness quickly volunteered that he was in constant pain and a near-invalid.
“And, as a result of the accident, how high can you raise your arm?” asked the attorney.
The witness slowly raised his arm parallel with his shoulder.
“Oh, that’s terrible,” said the attorney.
Then: “How high could you get it up before the accident?”
Unthinkingly, the witness extended his arm to its full height above his head—to the laughter of the judge, jury and spectators.
Case dismissed.
In politics, sometimes your best friends turn out to be your worst enemies.
Kevin McCarthy proved this during his September 30, 2015 appearance on Fox News.
McCarthy, the Republican member of the House of Representatives from Bakersfield, California, was undoubtedly feeling relaxed.
After all, he wasn’t being interviewed by such “enemies” of the Right as The New York Times or MSNBC political commentator Rachel Maddow.
He was being interviewed by Sean Hannity, a Right-wing political commentator whose books included Conservative Victory: Defeating Obama’s Radical Agenda and Deliver Us From Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism.
The topic under discussion: Who would be the next Republican Speaker of the House, now that John Boehner had announced his decision to leave not only the Speakership but the House itself in November?
Now Hannity wanted to know what would happen when the next Republican Speaker took office. And McCarthy—who was in the running for the position—was eager to tell him.
“What you’re going to see is a conservative Speaker, that takes a conservative Congress, that puts a strategy to fight and win.
“And let me give you one example. Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?
Kevin McCarthy
“But we put together a Benghazi special committee. A select committee. What are her [poll] numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known that any of that had happened had we not fought to make that happen.”
In 51 words, McCarthy revealed that:
- The House Select Committee on Benghazi was not a legitimate investigative body.
- Its purpose was not to investigate the 2012 deaths of four American diplomats during a terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.
- Its real purpose was to destroy the Presidential candidacy of Hillary Clinton.
- To accomplish this, its members spent 17 months and wasted more than $4.5 million of American taxpayers’ funds.
On October 8, 2015, Republicans were expected to choose their nominee for Speaker. On that same date, McCarthy announced that he was withdrawing his name from consideration:
“Over the last week it has become clear to me that our Conference is deeply divided and needs to unite behind one leader. I have always put this Conference ahead of myself. Therefore I am withdrawing my candidacy for Speaker of the House.”
When reporters asked McCarthy if his revelation was the reason he withdrew, he replied, “Well, that wasn’t helpful.”
But then he quickly replayed the official Republican version: “But this Benghazi committee was only created for one purpose: to find the truth on behalf of the families for the four dead Americans.”
On October 29, 2015, Republicans—holding the majority of House members–elected Paul Ryan, (Wisconsin) the 54th speaker of the United States House of Representatives.
Democrats and Republicans were united in their anger that the real reason for the Benghazi “investigation” had been revealed.
Democrats were furious that McCarthy, in an unguarded moment, had revealed that their major Presidential candidate had been the victim of a Republican smear campaign disguised as a legitimate inquiry.
And Republicans were furious that McCarthy, in an unguarded moment, had revealed that the “legitimate inquiry” had been nothing more than a Republican smear campaign.
For McCarthy, the Benghazi Committee had legitimately served the nation—not by uncovering relevant details about a terrorist act but by causing Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers to drop.
In 1981, President Ronald Reagan had attacked the leaders of the Soviet Union thusly: “They reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat.”
McCarthy’s comments demonstrated that the Republican Party had adopted the same mindset and tactics as the dictators of the former Soviet Union.
Two years and six months after Kevin McCarthy revealed himself and his party as ruthless hypocrites, Republicans suffered a similar outbreak of truth.
But this time, the stakes were higher—involving Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BLACKS, BUZZFEED, C-SPAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FOX NETWORK, FOX NEWS, HILLARY CLINTON, MEDIA, MEGYN KELLY, MEXICANS, MICHELLE WOLF, MIKE TYSON, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSPAPERS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RICK WILSON, RUSSIA, SALON, SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, USA TODAY DONALD TRUMP, USA TODAY SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENTS DINNER
In History, Politics, Social commentary, Uncategorized on May 7, 2018 at 12:25 am
On April 28, comedian Michelle Wolf skewered high-ranking Trump administration officials and members of the nation’s elite media.
She did so as the host of the annual White House Correspondents Dinner in Washington, D.C.
As a result, she has been furiously attacked by Right-wing defenders of the Trump administration and some of the nation’s most prominent media.
Almost all of their attention has focused on the Trump officials she ridiculed—especially Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
Michelle Wolf
But Wolf threw a series of sharp-edged zingers at some of the Nation’s most prominent media. And these comments have gone largely ignored.
They are, however, well worth examining—for the uncomfortable truths they reveal about much of the news being served up under the guise of fearless objectivity.
On little-watched C-SPAN: This is on C-SPAN; no one watches that. Trump is president; it’s not ideal.
On liberal media’s obsession with “Russiagate”: I know there’s a lot of people that want me to talk about Russia and Putin and collusion, but I’m not going to do that because there’s also a lot of liberal media here. And I’ve never really wanted to know what any of you look like when you orgasm.
On CNN—where “news” now consists of a series of “talking heads” pontificating about stories that other journalists have dug up: We’ve got our friends at CNN here. You guys love breaking news, and you did it. You broke it. Good work. The most useful information on CNN is when Anthony Bourdain tells me where to eat noodles.
On Fox News’ sexual harassment scandals involving such prominent (and former) members as CEO Roger Ailes and commentator Bill O’Reilly: Fox News is here. So, you know what that means, ladies: Cover your drinks. Seriously.
On Fox News’ actual role as the propaganda organ of the Republican party: People want me to make fun of [Fox News commentator] Sean Hannity tonight, but I cannot do that; this dinner is for journalists.
On weak-rated MSNBC, which is the liberal version of Fox News: We’ve got MSNBC here. MSNBC’s news slogan is, “This is who we are.” Guys, it’s not a good slogan. “This is who we are” is what your mom thinks the sad show on NBC is called. “Did you watch ‘This Is Who We Are’ this week? Someone left on a Crockpot, and everyone died.”
On Megyn Kelly, who rose to fame and fortune as a Right-wing propaganda shill on Fox News: And, of course, Megyn Kelly. What would I do without Megyn Kelly? You know, probably be more proud of women.
And, by the way, Megyn, Santa’s black. The weird old guy going through your chimney was Bill O’Reilly. You might want to put a flue on it or something.
[This last jibe centered on Kelly’s infamous December 11, 2013 Fox broadcast where she claimed: “I kind of laughed and said this is so ridiculous. Yet another person claiming it’s racist to have a white Santa. For all you kids watching at home, Santa just is white….Just because it makes you uncomfortable doesn’t mean it has to change. Jesus was a white man too.”]
On the continuing demise of newspapers—on which TV “news reporters” depend for their information: There’s a lot of print media here. There’s a ton of you guys, but I’m not going to go after print media tonight because it’s illegal to attack an endangered species. Buy newspapers.
On the media’s—especially the television media’s—morbid obsession with Donald Trump: There’s a ton of news right now; a lot is going on, and we have all these 24-hour news networks, and we could be covering everything. But, instead, we’re covering like three topics. Every hour, it’s Trump, Russia, Hillary and a panel of four people who remind you why you don’t go home for Thanksgiving.
On the media’s responsibility for the rise of a President they now detest: You guys are obsessed with Trump. Did you used to date him? Because you pretend like you hate him, but I think you love him. I think what no one in this room wants to admit is that Trump has helped all of you. He couldn’t sell steaks or vodka or water or college or ties or Eric, but he has helped you.
He’s helped you sell your papers and your books and your TV. You helped create this monster, and now you’re profiting off of him. And if you’re gonna profit off of Trump, you should at least give him some money because he doesn’t have any.
Donald Trump
[This last joke was probably the most painful the assembled media bigwigs had to endure. Because it’s undeniably true.
Trump’s campaign was saved from spending millions on TV advertising because the major TV news networks covered his every word. This was especially true when he was attacking women, blacks, Mexicans, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama—and even beauty pageant contestants.
For the media, Trump was “good for ratings”—in the same way that Mike Tyson was “good for boxing.” Both were seen as freaks—and thus guaranteed to lure viewers eager to find out: “What outrageous thing has he done now?”]
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANCHOR BABIES, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BERLIN AIRLIFT, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, EGYPT, FACEBOOK, FRANCISCO SANCHEZ, ILLEGAL ALIENS, illegal immigration, IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, ISRAEL, MEXICO, MITCH MCCONNELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OPERATION NICKEL GRASS, OUTER LIMITS "ZANTI MISFITS" EPISODE, POLITICO, RACIAL PROFILING, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, RICK SANTORUM, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, SYRIA, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE OUTER LIMITS, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, YOM KIPPUR WAR
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Military, Politics, Social commentary on May 4, 2018 at 12:09 am
Republican Presidential candidates like Donald Trump, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have long demanded an end to illegal immigration.
Their, now chief proposed solution: Wholesale deportation of millions of illegal aliens from the United States.
But even if Trump, now President, dared to take such a politically controversial step, could it actually succeed?
Suppose the Federal Government could identify and arrest all or most of the estimated 11 to 20 million illegal aliens now living in the United States. Then what?
Sending them back to their native countries would prove a colossal failure.
Most of America’s illegals come from neighboring Hispanic countries in Central and South America. Which means that as soon as they are deported, most of them cross the Mexican border again.
More importantly: The governments of those Central and South American countries use the United States as a dumping ground—of those citizens who might demand reforms in their political and economic institutions.
But there is one approach that could strike a meaningful blow against illegal immigration. It might well be called “The Zanti Option.”
Viewers of the 1960s sci-fi series, The Outer Limits, will vividly recall its classic 1963 episode, “The Zanti Misfits.”
In this, soldiers at an American Army base in a California ghost town nervously await first-contact with an alien race that has landed a space ship nearby.
The soldiers are warned to steer clear of the ship, and they do. But then an escaped convict (Bruce Dern, in an early role) happens upon the scene—and the ship.
The Zantis, enraged, emerge—and soon the soldiers at the military base find themselves under attack.
A “Zanti”
The soldiers desperately fight back–-with flamethrowers, machineguns or just rifle butts. Finally the soldiers win, wiping out the Zantis.
But now the base—and probably America—faces a wholesale invasion from the planet Zanti to avenge the deaths of their comrades.
So the soldiers wait anxiously for their next transmission from Zanti—which soon arrives.
To their surprise—and relief—it’s a message of thanks: “We will not retaliate. We never intended to. We knew that you could not live with such aliens in your midst.
“It was always our intention that you destroy them…We are incapable of executing our own species, but you are not. You are practiced executioners. We thank you.”
A Republican President could deal with the tsunami of illegal aliens by launching what might be called “Operation Zanti.”
Rather than deport them to countries in Central America—from which they would easily sneak back into the United States—the Federal Government could ship them off to more distant lands.
Like Afghanistan. Or Iraq. Or Syria.
It’s unlikely they would sneak back across the American border from the Middle East.
Such a policy change would:
- Close the Mexican revolving door, which keeps illegal immigration flowing; and
- Send an unmistakably blunt message to other would-be illegals: “The same fate awaits you.”
Although this might seem a far-fetched proposal, it could be easily carried out by the United States Air Force.
According to this agency’s website: “The C-5 Galaxy is one of the largest aircraft in the world and the largest airlifter in the Air Force inventory.
“The C-5 has a greater capacity than any other airlifter. It [can] carry 36 standard pallets and 81 troops simultaneously.
C-5 transport plane
“[It can also carry] any of the Army’s air-transportable combat equipment, including such bulky items as the 74-ton mobile scissors bridge.
“It can also carry outsize and oversize cargo over intercontinental ranges and can take off or land in relatively short distances.”
The C-5 Galaxy’s maximum cargo weight: 281,001 pounds
Click here: C-5 A/B/C Galaxy and C-5M Super Galaxy > U.S. Air Force > Fact Sheet Display
Instead of stuffing these planes with cargo, they could be stuffed wall-to-wall with illegal aliens.
The United States Air Force has a proud history of successfully providing America’s soldiers—and allies—with the supplies they need.
From June 24, 1948 to May 12, 1949, only the Berlin Airlift stood between German citizens and starvation.
The Soviet Union had blocked the railway, road, and canal access to the Berlin sectors under allied control. Their goal: Force the western powers to allow the Soviet zone to supply Berlin with food, fuel, and aid.
This would have given the Soviets control over the entire city.
Air forces from the United States, England, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa flew over 200,000 flights in one year, dropping more than 4,700 tons of necessities daily to the besiged Berliners.
The success of the Berlin Airlift raised American prestige and embarrassed the Soviets, who lifted the blockade.
The Berlin Airlift
A similar triumph came during the Yom Kippur War after Egypt and Syria attacked Israel without warning on October 6, 1973.
A Watergate-embattled President Richard Nixon ordered “Operation Nickel Grass” to deliver urgently-needed weapons and supplies to Israel.
For 32 days, the Air Force shipped 22,325 tons of ammunition, artillery, tanks and other supplies. These proved invaluable in saving Israel from destruction.
So the mass deportation of millions of illegal aliens lies within America’s technological capability. The only uncertainty: Would any American President be willing to give that order?
ABC NEWS, AFGHANISTAN, ALTERNET, ANWAR SADAT, AP, ARAB SPRING, BARACK OBAMA, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHINA, CLASS WARFARE, CNN, CONFRONT AND CONCEAL, CROOKS AND LIARS, CYBER WARFARE, DAILY KOZ, DAVID SANGER, DONALD TRUMP, DRONES, EGYPT, FACEBOOK, HOSNI MUBARAK, INCOME INEQUALITY, IRAN, KOREA, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAKISTAN, POLITICO, POVERTY, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TODAY SHOW, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WALL STREET, WEALTH
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 26, 2018 at 12:07 am
A 2012 book offers timely advice for Republicans who believe that serving the interests of the wealthiest 1% will maintain their party in power.
It’s Confront and Conceal: Obama’s Secret Wars and Surprising use of American Power, by David E. Sanger, the chief Washington correspondent for The New York Times.
Divided into five sections, it dramatically covers the following subjects:
Afghanistan and Pakistan – How Obama sought to disengage from the former while readying plans to occupy the latter should its growing nuclear arsenal pose a threat to America.
Iran – To prevent the Iranians from building nuclear weapons, Obama authorized a malevolent virus to be inserted into that nation’s computer system.
Drones and Cyber – American drone attacks have wiped out much of Al Qaeda’s leadership—but increasingly strained U.S. relations with Pakistan. And while America has launched cyber attacks on Iran, it remains vulnerable to similar attacks—especially by China.
Arab Spring – America was totally surprised by the popular revolts sweeping the Arab world. And Obama had to balance showing support for the revolutionaries against jeopardizing America’s longtime Arab—and dictatorial—allies.
China and North Korea – The United States found itself financially strained to meet its worldwide military commitments. This forced Obama to use a both persuasion and containment against both these potential adversaries.
And in its section on the Arab Spring, there is an unintended warning to Republicans and their Right-wing followers.
David Sanger (Copyright, Creative Commons)
Sanger analyzes why the vast majority of Egyptians felt no solidarity with Hosni Mubarak, the general/dictator who ruled Egypt from 1981 ti 2911.
Mubarak came to power after Islamic fundamentalists assassinated President Anwar Sadat during a military review. They believed that Sadat had committed the unpardonable crime of signing a peace treaty with Israel.
Mubarack often warned Washington that only he could prevent Egypt from being dominated by fundamentalist, anti-American groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood.
But, writes Sanger, he achieved the very opposite:
“By leaving his citizens without a social safety net, by failing to invest in the country’s crumbling infastructure…he paved the way for the Brotherhood’s success….
“In a land where the state delivers so little, even the smallest [medical] clinic” as provided by the Brotherhood “will win respect and loyalty.
“So when it came time to vote, most Egyptians decided to cast their ballots for candidates they knew could provide something—Islamist or not, it almost didn’t matter….”
Hosni Mubarak (Copyright, Presidenza della Repubblica)
One such Brotherhood supporter, who grew up in the poor, agricultural region of Beni Suef, was quoted as saying:
“The Muslim Brotherhood came into my village, and brought lorries of fruits and vegetables,” selling them at discounted prices. “They supported medical clinics”–and thus won the hearts of the people they served.
Fast forward to Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican Presidential nominee, and his vision for America.
As Romney saw it, questions about Wall Street scandals and income inequality were driven only by “envy.”
On January 11, 2012, after winning the New Hampshire primary, Romney appeared on NBC’s “The Today Show.” Host Matt Lauer noted that many Americans were concerned “about the distribution of wealth and power in this country.”
“I think it’s about envy,” replied Romney, whose own fortune has been conservatively estimated at $250 million. “I think it’s about class warfare.
“I think when you have a president encouraging the idea of dividing America based on 99 percent versus one percent… you’ve opened up a whole new wave of approach in this country which is entirely inconsistent with the concept of ‘one nation under God.’”
Romney added that it wasn’t necessary to have a public debate about the inequality of wealth distribution in this country.
“I think it’s fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like,” Romney said. “But the President has made this part of his campaign rally.
“Everywhere he goes we hear him talking about millionaires and billionaires and executives and Wall Street. It’s a very envy-oriented, attack-oriented approach and I think it’ll fail.”
Romney did not mention that, in 2007, the richest 1% of the American populace—of which he is a member—owned 34.6% of the country’s total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%.
Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country’s wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%.
Romney claimed that Obama’s focus on this issue was just “part of his campaign rally.”
Clearly, now-ousted rulers like Mubarak and Muammar Quaddaffi believed “it’s fine to talk about these things” like vast differences in wealth “in quiet rooms.” That is, so long as they and their 1% rich supporters were doing the talking.
But over time their remoteness from the vast majority of their impoverished fellow citizens sealed their doom. When enough people broke into open revolt, even the military decided to change sides.
Mubarack was forced to resign, and Quaddaffi—after waging war against his own people—was captured and murdered.
If Romney’s—and now Donald Trump’s—vision of “everything for the 1%” is allowed to prevail, they and their ultra-privileged supporters may truly learn the lessons of class warfare.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALEXANDER SHUSTOROVICH, ALTERNET, ANDREW INTRATER, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHUCK GRASSLEY, CIA, CITIZENS UNITED, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ELECTIONS COMMISSION, FOX NEWS, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, JAMES COMEY, JOHN KASICH, JOHN MCCAIN, LEN BLAVATNIK, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MARCO RUBIO, MITCH MCCONNELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, OLIGARCHS, PAUL RYAN, POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES (PACS), POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, ROD ROSENSTEIN, RUSSIA, SALON, SCOTT WALKER, SEATTLE TIMES, SENATE LEADERSHIP FUND, SIMON KUKES, SLATE, SUPREME COURT, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TRUMP INAUGURAL COMMITTEE, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, USA TODAY DONALD TRUMP, VLADIMIR PUTIN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 25, 2018 at 12:08 am
Once you have decided on a treason,
Sign on with a man named Donald Trump.
And when you find your hatred is a reason,
Then on your country you can take a dump.
There really isn’t any need for worry,
Just do it and then go ahead and lie.
Like giving Russians secrets in the White House,
And that avoids those pests named “F.B.I.”
House and Senate Republicans have almost universally refused to to speak out against threats by President Donald Trump to fire deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and/or Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
Or, more importantly, to take action to prevent or punish him for doing so.
On April 17, Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he would not allow legislation to protect Robert Mueller’s independent investigation into Russian subversion of the 2016 Presidential election to reach the Senate floor.
Mitch McConnell
“I’m the one who decides what we take to the floor. That’s my responsibility as majority leader. We’ll not be having this on the floor of the Senate,” the Kentucky Republican said in an interview on Fox News.
Earlier in the day, another Republican, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, claimed that legislation to protect Mueller was “unnecessary.”
“It would not be in the President’s interest to [fire Mueller] and I think he knows that,” said the Wisconsin Congressman.
Why have so few Republicans dared to stand against Trump?
Because many House and Senate Republicans received millions of dollars in “campaign contributions” from Russian oligarchs who are answerable to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin.
In short: Bribe monies.
And, thanks to the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, the donations are entirely legal.
‘Cause it’s treason by numbers, 1, 2, 3,
It’s as easy to do as your G.O.P.
It’s treason by numbers, 1, 2, 3,
It’s as easy to do as your G.O.P.
Now if you have a taste for turning traitor
And you find it’s really thrilling as can be,
Then pick up that phone and call the Kremlin
And soon you’ll have a bud named Vladimir P.
The following data comes from the Federal Elections Commission.
One major Russian contributor is Len Blavatnik. During the 2015-16 election cycle, he proved one of the largest donors to GOP Political Action Committees (PACs).
Blavatnik’s net worth is estimated at $20 billion. In 2016, he gave $6.35 million to GOP PACs.
In 2017, he gave millions of dollars to top Republican leaders—such as Senators Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio (Florida) and Lindsey Graham (South Carolina). Specifically, Blavatnik contributed:
- A total of $1.5 million to PACs associated with Rubio.
- $1 million to Trump’s Inaugural Committee.
- $1 million to McConnell’s Senate Leadership Fund.
- $3.5 million to a PAC associated with McConnell.
- $1.1 million to Unintimidated PAC, associated with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.
- $200,000 to the Arizona Grassroots Action PAC, associated with Arizona Senator John McCain.
- $250,000 to New Day for America PAC, associated with Ohio Governor John Kasich.
- $800,000 went to the Security is Strength PAC, associated with Senator Lindsey Graham.
The Kremlin
Another Russian oligarch, Alexander Shustorovich, contributed $1 million to Trump’s Inaugural Committee.
A third oligarch, Andrew Intrater, contributed $250,000 to Trump’s Inaugural Committee.
And a fourth, Simon Kukes, contributed a total of $283,000, much of it to the Trump Victory Fund.
Altogether, four Russian oligarchs—Blavatnik, Shustorovich, Intrater and Kukes––contributed $10.4 million from the start of the 2015-16 election cycle through September 2017. Of this, 99% went to Republicans.
Yes, treason isn’t something that comes easy.
It’s an act that makes most people want to gag.
But you can earn those rubles that you long for
And the Right will back you up and wave the flag.
‘Cause it’s treason by numbers, 1, 2, 3,
It’s as easy to do as your G.O.P.
Treason by numbers, 1, 2, 3,
It’s as easy to do as your G.O.P.
As Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell participated in high-level intelligence briefings in 2016. From agencies such as the FBI, CIA and the code-cracking National Security Agency, he learned that the Russians were trying to subvert the electoral process.
FBI seal
In October, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) issued a joint statement: The Russian government had directed the effort to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
Two weeks later, McConnell’s PAC accepted a $1 million donation from Blavatnik.
On March 30, 2017, McConnell’s PAC accepted another $1 million from Blavatnik. This was just 10 days after former FBI Director James Comey testified before the House Intelligence Committee about Russia’s efforts to subvert the 2016 election.
Billionaires don’t give huge sums to politicians without expecting to get something in return. And this is especially true—and frightening—when the contributors are linked to a former KGB agent like Vladimir Putin, whose aggressive intentions are increasingly on display.
Now you can join the list of Right-wing traitors
In history’s dark and evil hall of shame.
Their ranks are filled with greedy, racist haters.
At least the ones that we all know by name.
But if you can con you way into the White House
If you become the leader of the land,
Then treason is the sport of the elected,
And Republicans will give you a big hand.
‘Cause it’s treason by numbers,1, 2, 3,
It’s as easy to do as your G.O.P.
Treason by numbers, 1, 2, 3,
It’s as easy to do
As your God-damned G.O.P.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALEXANDER SHUSTOROVICH, ALTERNET, ANDREW INTRATER, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHUCK GRASSLEY, CIA, CITIZENS UNITED, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ELECTIONS COMMISSION, FOX NEWS, JAMES COMEY, JOHN KASICH, JOHN MCCAIN, LEN BLAVATNIK, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MARCO RUBIO, MITCH MCCONNELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, OLIGARCHS, ORRIN HATCH, PAUL RYAN, POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES (PACS), POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, ROD ROSENSTEIN, RUSSIA, SALON, SCOTT WALKER, SEATTLE TIMES, SENATE LEADERSHIP FUND, SIMON KUKES, SLATE, SUPREME COURT, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TRUMP INAUGURAL COMMITTEE, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, USA TODAY DONALD TRUMP, VLADIMIR PUTIN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 19, 2018 at 1:36 am
On April 16, the New York Times published an editorial taking direct aim at the vast majority of Congressional Republicans.
Specifically, it noted their unwillingness to speak out against threats by President Donald Trump to fire deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and/or Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
Robert Mueller
Its key paragraph:
“Make no mistake: If Mr. Trump takes such drastic action, he will be striking at the foundation of the American government, attempting to set a precedent that a president, alone among American citizens, is above the law. What can seem now like a political sideshow will instantly become a constitutional crisis, and history will come calling for Mr. [Orrin] Hatch and his colleagues.”
Orrin Hatch is the Republican United States Senator from Utah. He and Republican Senators Lindsey Graham (South Carolina) and Chuck Grassley (Iowa) have warned Trump not to fire Rosenstein or Mueller. But most Republicans have held silent.
Why?
The Times editorial offers two reasons:
First, Republicans fear enraging an easily infuriated Trump—who might aim his Twitter account at them and cost them votes in the upcoming fall elections.
Second, Republicans fear enraging Trump’s fanatical base—which, in this instance, has two meanings:
- “something (as a group of people) that reliably provides support (such as for a business or political candidate)”—Merriam Webster; and
- “Without moral principles; ignoble”—Oxford Living Dictionaries
Republicans content themselves with this rationalization:
- It hasn’t happened yet;
- It might not happen; and
- If it does happen, we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.
And how have Republicans reacted to the Times editorial?
On April 17, Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he would not allow legislation to protect Mueller’s independent investigation to reach the Senate floor.
Mitch McConnell
“I’m the one who decides what we take to the floor. That’s my responsibility as majority leader. We’ll not be having this on the floor of the Senate,” the Kentucky Republican said in an interview on Fox News.
Earlier in the day, another Republican, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, claimed that legislation to protect Mueller was “unnecessary.”
“It would not be in the President’s interest to [fire Mueller] and I think he knows that,” said the Wisconsin Congressman.
But there is an additional reason why so few Republicans have dared to stand up against Trump.
Trump received help from Russian Intelligence agents during the 2016 Presidential campaign. And House and Senate Republicans have received Russian help of another kind: Bribe monies.
Of course, these are not officially classified as bribes. Officially, they are “campaign contributions.”
In recent years, a network of Russian oligarchs—all of them answerable to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin—has been increasingly contributing to top Republicans.
And, thanks to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010, the donations are entirely legal.
The following data comes from the Federal Election Commission.
One such major contributor is Len Blavatnik, who holds citizenship in both the United States and the United Kingdom. During the 2015-16 election cycle, he proved one of the largest donors to GOP Political Action Committees (PACs).
Blavatnik’s net worth is estimated at $20 billion. Before 2016, he donated to both Democrats and Republicans in meager amounts. But in 2016, he gave $6.35 million to GOP PACs.
Millions of dollars went to top Republican leaders—such as Senators Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio (Florida) and Lindsey Graham (South Carolina). Specifically, he contributed
- A total of $1.5 million to PACs associated with Rubio.
- $1 million to Trump’s Inaugural Committee.
- $41,000 to both Republicans and Democrats in 2017.
- $1 million to McConnell’s Senate Leadership Fund.
- $3.5 million to a PAC associated with McConnell.
- $1.1 million to Unintimidated PAC, associated with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.
- $200,000 to the Arizona Grassroots Action PAC, associated with Arizona Senator John McCain.
- $250,000 to New Day for America PAC, associated with Ohio Governor John Kasich.
- $800,000 went to the Security is Strength PAC, associated with Senator Lindsey Graham.
Another Russian oligarch, Alexander Shustorovich, contributed $1 million to Trump’s Inaugural Committee.
Altogether, four Russian oligarchs—Blavatnik, Shustorovich, Andrew Intrater and Simon Kukes––contributed $10.4 million from the start of the 2015-16 election cycle through September 2017. Of this, 99% went to Republicans.
As Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell participated in high-level intelligence briefings in 2016. From agencies such as the FBI, CIA and the code-cracking National Security Agency, he learned that the Russians were trying to subvert the electoral process.
In October, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) issued a joint statement: The Russian government had directed the effort to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
Two weeks later, McConnell’s PAC accepted a $1 million donation from Blavatnik.
On March 30, 2017, McConnell’s PAC accepted another $1 million from Blavatnik. This was just 10 days after former FBI Director James Comey testified before the House Intelligence Committee about Russia’s efforts to subvert the 2016 election.
Millionaires and billionaires don’t give six- or seven-figure monetary contributions to politicians without expecting to get something in return. And this is especially true—and frightening—when the contributors are linked to a former KGB agent like Vladimir Putin, whose aggressive intentions are increasingly on display.
It’s clear that the Republican party has moved from “Better dead than Red” to “My Wallet, First and Always.”
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANTHEM INC., AP, ASHLEY MADISON, BERNIE SANDERS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, CYBERSECURITY, DAILY KOZ, DAIRY QUEEN, DEBBIE WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, HACKING, HILLARY CLINTON, HOME DEPOT, JPMORGAN/CHASE, KMART, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAPOLEON BONAPARTE, NATIONAL LEGAL AND POLICY CENTER, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SONY PICTURES, STAPLES, TARGET, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DISCOURSES, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, THE PENTAGON, THE PRINCE, THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WIKILEAKS
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on April 13, 2018 at 12:06 am
On July 22, 2016, Wikileaks released 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments hacked from computers of the highest-ranking officials of the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
The emails were exchanged from January 2015 through May 2016.
These clearly reveal a bias for Hillary Clinton and against her lone challenger, Vermont United States Senator Bernie Sanders.
One email revealed that Brad Marshall, the chief financial officer of the DNC, suggested that Sanders, who is Jewish, could be portrayed as an atheist.
Sanders’ supporters had long charged that the DNC and its chair, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, were plotting to undercut his campaign. Now thousands of them were outraged to discover that their fears had been confirmed.
The leak came at a disastrous time for Hillary Clinton, the former First Lady, United States Senator from New York and Secretary of State under President Barack Obama.
About to receive the Democratic nomination for President, she found herself charged with undermining the electoral process.
Wasserman-Schultz proved the first casualty of the leak, resigning from her position as chair of the DNC and saying she would not open the Democratic convention as previously scheduled.
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
As for Clinton: Her campaign manager, Bobby Mook, blamed the Russians for the leak. Their alleged motive: To help Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump.
Cyber-security experts believed the hackers originated from Russia—-and that Russian President Vladimir Putin may have authorized it.
His alleged motive: Trump had repeatedly attacked United States’ membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Trump believed the United States was paying an unfairly large portion of the monies needed to maintain this alliance—and he wanted other members to contribute far more. He made it clear that if they didn’t—and if he was elected President—they would be on their own if attacked by Russia.
Trump took to twitter to offer his take on the release: “How much BAD JUDGEMENT was on display by the people in DNC in writing those really dumb e-mails, using even religion, against Bernie!”
Bernie Sanders
Which brings up the obvious question: Why was such sensitive information entrusted to computers that could be hacked?
This is not the first time a major corporation or government agency has fallen prey to hackers.
Name-brand companies, trusted by millions, have been hit with massive data breaches that compromised their customers’ and/or employees’ most sensitive financial and personal information.
Among those companies and agencies:
- Target
- Kmart
- Home Depot
- JPMorgan/Chase
- Staples
- Dairy Queen
- Anthem, Inc.
- Sony Pictures
- The U.S. State Department
- The Pentagon
- The Office of Personnel Management
Perhaps the most notorious target hacked was Ashley Madison, the website for cheating wives and husbands. Launched in 2001, its catchy slogan was: “Life is short. Have an affair.”
On July 15, 2015, its more than 37 million members learned that highly embarrassing secrets they had entrusted to Ashley Madison had been compromised.
This included their sexual fantasies, matching credit card transactions, real names and addresses, and employee documents and emails.
A website offering cheating services to those wealthy enough to afford high-priced fees is an obvious target for hackers. After all, its database is a blackmailer’s dream-come-true.
And the same is true for computers of one of the two major political parties of the United States.
Among the secrets unearthed in the WikiLeaks document-dump: Plans by Democratic party officials to reward large donors and prominent fundraisers with lucrative appointments to federal boards and commissions.
Most of the donors listed gave to Clinton’s campaign. None gave to Sanders.
According to Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, a government watchdog group:
“The disclosed DNC emails sure look like the potential Clinton Administration has intertwined the appointments to federal government boards and commissions with the political and fund raising operations of the Democratic Party. That is unethical, if not illegal.”
Centuries before the invention of computers–and the machinery needed to hack into them–Niccolo Machiavelli offered cautionary advice to those thinking of entering into a conspiracy. He did so in his masterwork on politics, The Discourses.
Niccolo Machiavelli
Unlike his better-known work, The Prince, which deals with how to secure power, The Discourses lays out rules for preserving liberty within a republic.
In Book Three, Chapter Six (“Of Conspiracies”) he writes:
“I have heard many wise men say that you may talk freely with any one man about everything, for unless you have committed yourself in writing, the ‘Yes’ of one man is worth as much as the ‘No’ of another.
“And therefore one should guard most carefully against writing, as against a dangerous rock, for nothing will convict you quicker than your own handwriting.”
In 1804, Napoleon Bonaparte, then First Consul of France, ordered the execution of the popular Louis Antoine de Bourbon, Duke of Enghien, claiming that he had aided Britain and plotted against France.
The aristocracy of Europe, still recalling the slaughters of the French Revolution, was shocked.
Asked for his opinion on the execution, Napoleon’s chief of police, Joseph Fouche, said: “It was worse than a crime; it was a blunder.”
This may prove to be history’s verdict on the storing of so many incriminating computer files by the DNC.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AP, BBC, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, DAILY KOS, DAVID BROOKS, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE C. SCOTT, GEORGE S. PATTON, GESTAPO, HOGAN’S HEROES, JAMES COMEY, JIMMY CARTER, MEL BROOKS, MIKE FLYNN, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAUL RYAN, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RICHARD GRUNBERGER, RICHARD NIXON, ROBERT MEULLER, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, THE 12-YEAR REICH, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WAFFEN-SS, WEHRMACHT
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 12, 2018 at 12:05 am
As President Donald Trump lurches daily from one crisis to another—most of them of his own making—many Americans ask: “Why do Republicans continue to support him?”
The answer lies in what happened 73 years ago in Berlin—when the “Thousand-Year” Third Reich collapsed after little more than 12 years.
While the Nazi Party ruled Germany from 1933 to 1945, its influence over all aspects of Germans’ lives was suffocating.
“Censorship prevailed, education was undermined, family life was idealized, but children were encouraged to turn in disloyal parents,” reads the back cover of Richard Grunberger’s classic 1971 book, The 12-Year Reich.
“‘Volk’ festivals, party rallies, awards, uniforms, pageantry all played a part in the massive effort to shape the mind of a nation.”
And yet, after the Reich surrendered unconditionally to the Allies on May 8, 1945, a strange thing happened: Virtually no German admitted to having been a Nazi—or having even known one.
American and British soldiers couldn’t find any German veterans willing to admit they had ever fought against Western, democratic nations. All the once-proud legionaries of the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS swore they had been fighting “the real enemy”—the Russians—on the Eastern front.
Countless Germans claimed to have hidden Jews in their attics. If so, how had six million Jews died horrifically before the Reich fell?
And almost universally, they blamed the conflict on the man they had embraced as their Fuhrer.
In short: Adolf Hitler had lost the war he started—making him a loser nobody wanted to be identified with.
In the decades since, the “loser” tag has continued to stick with those who once served the Third Reich. Mel Brooks has repeatedly turned German soldiers—once the pride of the battlefield—into idiotic comic foils.
Even the fearsome Gestapo was spoofed for laughs on the long-running TV comedy, “Hogan’s Heroes.”
“Hogan’s Heroes”
“Americans love a winner,” George C. Scott as George S. Patton says at the outset of the classic 1970 movie. “And will not tolerate a loser.”
And that is why Republicans have stuck so closely with President Donald J. Trump.
A typical example of this occurred on June 8, 2017 after former FBI director James Comey testified before the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Comey revealed that, on February 14, Trump had ordered everyone but Comey to leave a crowded meeting in the Oval Office.
Flynn had resigned the previous day from his position as National Security Adviser. The FBI was investigating him for his previously undisclosed ties to Russia.
“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” said Trump. “He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”
This was clearly an attempt by Trump to obstruct the FBI’s investigation.
Yet Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan rushed to excuse his clearly illegal behavior: “He’s new at government, so therefore I think he’s learning as he goes.”
Paul Ryan
David Brooks, the conservative New York Times columnist, offered a more accurate explanation of Trump’s motives. Speaking on The PBS Newshour, Brooks said:
“We are a nation of laws. Donald Trump lives in an entirely different cultural universe. He is more clannist, believing in clan, believing in family, believing in loyalty, not recognizing objective law, not recognizing the procedures that is really how modern government operates….
“It’s not only that he doesn’t know the rules, but at all along and throughout his presidency, he has sort of trampled on the rules almost as a matter of policy, as a matter of character, because he doesn’t believe in that kind of relationships. It’s all personal loyalty, not about laws and norms and standards.”
Republicans don’t fear that Trump will trash the institutions that Americans have cherished for more than 200 years. Institutions like an independent judiciary, a free press, and an incorruptible Justice Department.
He has already attacked all of these—and Republicans have either said nothing or rushed to his defense.
What Republicans truly fear about Donald Trump is that he will finally cross one line too many—like firing Special Counsel Robert Meuller. And that the national outrage following this will force them to launch impeachment proceedings against him.
But it isn’t even Trump they fear will be destroyed.
What they most fear losing is their own hold on nearly absolute power in Congress and the White House.
If Trump is impeached and possibly indicted, he will become a man no one any longer fears. He will be a figure held up to ridicule and condemnation.
Like Adolf Hitler. Like Richard Nixon.
And his Congressional supporters will be branded as losers along with him.
Republicans vividly remember what happened after Nixon was forced to resign on August 9, 1974: Democrats, riding a wave of reform fever, swept Republicans out of the House and Senate—and Jimmy Carter into the White House.
If they are conflicted—whether to continue supporting Trump or desert him—the reason is the same: How can I hold onto my power and all the privileges that go with it?
9/11, ABC NEWS, ABORTION, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, ANTISEMITISM, AP, ARIZONA, BBC, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, DAILY KOS, DAVID HOGG, DISCRIMINATION, FACEBOOK, FASCISM, FBI, FIRST RESPONDERS, GAYS, INDIANA, JEWS, KAREN HANDEL, LAURA INGRAHAM, MARJORY STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, NRA, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, POLITICO, RAW STORY, RELIGIOUS F THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, STALINGRAD, SUSAN G. KOMEN FOUNDATION, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THIRD REICH, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on April 2, 2018 at 12:04 am
In 2014, Arizona Republicans passed Senate Bill 1062.
This allowed business owners to legally discriminate against gay and lesbian customers—including the right to refuse medical care to them.
Its intent: To appease the hatred of gays and lesbians by the religious Right, a key constituency of the Republican party.
Gays and their supporters reacted by threatening a legal business and tourism boycott of Arizona. And the business community and its supporters, alarmed, took notice.
- Large businesses—such as Apple, American Airlines, AT&T, Delta Airlines, Verizon and Intel—publicly opposed the measure.
- With Super Bowl XL1X scheduled to be played in 2015 at the University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Arizona, the Arizona Super Bowl Host Committee expressed concern.
- Arizona’s United States Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake publicly urged Governor Jan Brewer to veto the measure, citing worries about the economic impact on the state’s businesses.
Faced with a choice between monetary greed and ideological fanaticism, Brewer chose to veto the legislation on February 26, 2014.
Governor Jan Brewer
Suddenly, Right-wingers who had anticipated becoming persecutors now claimed themselves to be victims. Among their rants on Twitter:
- “CNN led full court media press to take away rights of Christians. Just the beginning. Using tolerance as weapon against us. Wake up.” –John Nolte(@NolteNC)
- “Not sure what the GOP stands for when it stands against religious freedom out of pure fear of political correctness.” –Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro)
- “Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer makes Christians in her state second class citizens.” –toddstarnes (@toddstarnes)
- “A sad day for Arizonans who cherish and understand religious liberty.” –The Center for Arizona Policy
American Rightists believed they had a right to withhold their business services from those they hated.
But they considered it unfair and even demonic for gays and their supporters to withhold monies from discriminatory Arizona businesses.
Story #3:
On February 14, 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz slaughtered two faculty members and 15 students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. His weapon of choice: An AR-15 assault rifle, often favored by gun massacre killers.
Among the students who survived the carnage: 17-year-old David Hogg. He quickly joined the student-led gun control advocacy group Never Again, becoming one of its best-known spokesmen.
David Hogg
He and his fellow student activists were immediately targeted for vicious insults and even death threats by the National Rifle Association and its shills—especially those in Congress and the Fox News Network.
One of these shills was Fox News host Laura Ingraham. On March 28, not content with attacking Hogg’s efforts to ban assault weaponry, she attacked him personally, tweeting:
“David Hogg Rejected By Four Colleges To Which He Applied and whines about it. (Dinged by UCLA with a 4.1 GPA…totally predictable given acceptance rates.)”
Hogg hadn’t been able to get into UC Los Angeles, UC San Diego, UC Santa Barbara, or UC Irvine, despite having a 4.2 grade point average.
For many Twitter users, this was beyond the pale, and they made their anger known:
“Laura, you’re a parent. This is pretty deplorable.”
“Can’t imagine why any adult would make fun of a kid over college rejections, let alone a kid who’s been through what the Parkland kids have.”
“What is the purpose of this tweet? What is wrong with you? Are you actually proud of this? Regardless of your political beliefs and motivations, THIS is how you choose to present yourself? You must be so sad, angry and scared.”
Laura Ingraham
But it fell to David Hogg to strike back in a way guaranteed to frighten even the most fanatical Rightists.
“I’m not going to stoop to her level and go after her on a personal level,” he said. “I’m going to go after her advertisers.”
He posted the following tweet to his 600,000 Twitter followers:
“Pick a number 1-12 contact the company next to that #
“Top Laura Ingraham Advertisers
1. @sleepnumber
2. @ATT
3. Nutrish
4. @Allstate & @esurance
5. @Bayer
6. @RocketMortgage Mortgage
7. @LibertyMutual
8. @Arbys
9. @TripAdvisor
10. @Nestle
11. @hulu
12. @Wayfair
Nutrish was the first advertiser to drop its sponsorship of Ingraham’s program. Other brands followed.
Suddenly alarmed, Ingraham tweeted the next day: “Any student should be proud of a 4.2 GPA —incl. @DavidHogg111. On reflection, in the spirit of Holy Week, I apologize for any upset or hurt my tweet caused him or any of the brave victims of Parkland. For the record, I believe my show was the first to feature David…”
Hogg dismissed her statement: “She only apologized after we went after her advertisers.” He said that he would accept her apology only if she denounced “the way your network has treated my friends and I in this fight.”
Ingraham isn’t likely to do that. She has stayed silent since her tweet. Meanwhile, her advertisers have continued to fall off:
- The Atlantis
- Bayer
- Paradise Island Resort
- Office Depot
- Jenny Craig Miracle
- Ear
- Honda
- Progressive
- Hulu
- TripAdvisor
- Expedia
- Wayfair
- StitchFix
- Jos A. Bank
- Nestle and
- Johnson & Johnson.
Although only 17, David Hogg knows it’s better to stand up to tyrants than submit to them. He is sending a message that even the most hard-core Fascists can understand: Attack me and you’ll get it right back in your ugly faces.
9/11, ABC NEWS, ABORTION, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, ANTISEMITISM, AP, ARIZONA, BBC, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, DAILY KOS, DAVID HOGG, DISCRIMINATION, FACEBOOK, FASCISM, FBI, FIRST RESPONDERS, GAYS, INDIANA, JEWS, KAREN HANDEL, LAURA INGRAHAM, MARJORY STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, NRA, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, POLITICO, RAW STORY, RELIGIOUS F THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, STALINGRAD, SUSAN G. KOMEN FOUNDATION, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THIRD REICH, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 30, 2018 at 12:24 am
There are two ways to deal with bullies: Submit to them—or stand up to them.
Here are three stories of what happened when intended victims counterattacked their would-be predators.
Story #1:
Karen Handel, vice president of public affairs for Susan G. Komen for the Cure, had it all worked out.
She had fashioned what she believed was a politically viable plan for Komen to pull its grant monies from Planned Parenthood (PP).
Karen Handel
She didn’t care that this money went entirely for breast cancer screenings for poor women. What she did care about was that about 3% of all PP revenues went toward providing abortion services.
Since being hired by Komen as vice president of public affairs, in April, 2011, Handel had pushed to drop PP from grants. She had promised to de-fund PP during her failed 2010 campaign for governor of Georgia.
So, in 2012, she made her move.
The official version, as put out by Handel and the top brass of Komen, went: “We’ve halted grants to Planned Parenthood because it’s under investigation by Congress for misuse of funds.”
Unfortunately for Komen, the public instantly saw through the lie. And the results for Komen were as devastating as those that threatened to engulf Arizona two years later.
Any crank in Congress can start an “investigation” into anything.
And PP was “under investigation” by a crank: Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
Stearns, a fanatical anti-abortionist, claimed he wanted to determine whether PP had spent public money on abortions over the last decade.
But Stearns didn’t hesitate to slander the patriotism of thousands of 9/11 “first responders”–the police, firefighters, construction workers and others who risked their lives to save their fellow Americans.
Rep. Cliff Stearns
He did so by demanding that they submit their names, birthplaces, addresses, government ID numbers and other personal data to the FBI to prove they were not terrorists.
Only then could they receive federally-subsidized medical care for injuries caused by exposure to toxic dust and debris at the site.
Not one terrorist was discovered in the resulting investigations.
Public outrage at Komen was immediate and overwhelming:
- More than 50 members of Congress signed letters asking Komen to reverse course.
- New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg publicly rebuked Komen and pledged $250,000 to PP.
- Approximately 37,000 people from all over the country signed a petition demanding Handel’s resignation.
- PP raised nearly $3 million in contributions.
Reeling before this onslaught of criticism, Komen issued a statement: “We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants.”
Having failed in their latest assault on women’s rights, the Right’s would-be predators now portrayed themselves as victims:
- “The last time I checked,” Handel told Right-wing Fox News, “private non-profit organizations have a right and a responsibility to be able to set the highest standards and criteria on their own without interference, let alone the level of vicious attacks and coercion that has occurred by Planned Parenthood. It’s simply outrageous.”
- “Planned Parenthood campaigns to destroy anyone who questions them,” charged Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List.
- “Their attitude is that of an immature teenager with an enormous sense of entitlement. This is just more proof that Planned Parenthood will pulverize anyone who dares to question them,” Dannenfelser said.
- “What Planned Parenthood did to that venerable and honorable organization [Komen Foundation] is nothing less than a Mafia-style shakedown,” said Steven H. Aden, senior counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund. The Fund bitterly opposes abortion, gay marriage, birth control and the separation of church and state.
Many conservatives correctly defended Komen’s right, as a private charitable organization, to give—or withhold—its money as it saw fit.
But these same conservatives refused to grant PP’s outraged supporters the same right: To withhold their own monies from Komen.
National Review’s Daniel Foster called the backlash to Komen “disgusting,” attacking PP and “the Left” for their “gangsterism.”
Story #2:
Two years later, in 2014, the Right made another move to strip Americans it didn’t like of their most basic rights. Their weapon of choice: Arizona Senate Bill 1062.
The legislation had been passed by the Republican-controlled State House of Representatives and Senate. Its intent:
- Allow business owners to turn away gay and lesbian customers.
- Allow employers to deny equal pay to women.
- Allow individuals to renege on contract obligations.
- Allow hospitals to refuse to provide medical care to a gay or lesbian patient.
And all of these actions would have been legally protected—so long as “sincere religious belief” was cited as the reason.
The legislation was written by the Right-wing advocacy group Center for Arizona Policy and the Christian legal organization, Alliance Defending Freedom.
Officially, its intent was to prevent the government from forcing business owners to act in ways contrary to strongly held religious beliefs.
Unofficially, its intent was to appease the hatred of gays and lesbians by the religious Right, a key constituency of the Republican party.
Gays and their supporters reacted by threatening a legal business and tourism boycott of Arizona. And the business community and its supporters, alarmed, took notice.
.jpg)
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, ATTORNEYS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, CROSS-EXAMINATION, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, EWS, FACEBOOK, FOX AND FRIENDS, FOX NEWS, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAMES COMEY, JOHN BOEHNER, KEVIN MCCARTHY, MICHAEL COHEN, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, Ronald Reagan, RUDOLPH GIULIANI, SALON, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, SPEAKER OF THE, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, STORMY DANIELS, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, VOLTAIRE
YOUR FRIENDS AS YOUR WORST ENEMIES: PART ONE (OF TWO)
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on May 8, 2018 at 12:02 amIt’s a truth well-known to cross-examining attorneys: The best way to obtain the truth is often to “kill your opponents with kindness.”
Witnesses always expect the opposing counsel to immediately start screaming at them. But that only causes the witness to stay alert and say as little as possible.
So the smart attorney comes on as courteous, friendly, even sympathetic.
A classic example of this: A laborer claimed to have permanently injured his shoulder in a railway accident, leaving him unable to work. He claimed he could no longer raise his arm above a point parallel with his shoulder.
The railway’s attorney asked him a few sympathetic questions about his injuries. And the witness quickly volunteered that he was in constant pain and a near-invalid.
“And, as a result of the accident, how high can you raise your arm?” asked the attorney.
The witness slowly raised his arm parallel with his shoulder.
“Oh, that’s terrible,” said the attorney.
Then: “How high could you get it up before the accident?”
Unthinkingly, the witness extended his arm to its full height above his head—to the laughter of the judge, jury and spectators.
Case dismissed.
In politics, sometimes your best friends turn out to be your worst enemies.
Kevin McCarthy proved this during his September 30, 2015 appearance on Fox News.
McCarthy, the Republican member of the House of Representatives from Bakersfield, California, was undoubtedly feeling relaxed.
After all, he wasn’t being interviewed by such “enemies” of the Right as The New York Times or MSNBC political commentator Rachel Maddow.
He was being interviewed by Sean Hannity, a Right-wing political commentator whose books included Conservative Victory: Defeating Obama’s Radical Agenda and Deliver Us From Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism.
Sean Hannity
The topic under discussion: Who would be the next Republican Speaker of the House, now that John Boehner had announced his decision to leave not only the Speakership but the House itself in November?
Now Hannity wanted to know what would happen when the next Republican Speaker took office. And McCarthy—who was in the running for the position—was eager to tell him.
“What you’re going to see is a conservative Speaker, that takes a conservative Congress, that puts a strategy to fight and win.
“And let me give you one example. Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?
Kevin McCarthy
“But we put together a Benghazi special committee. A select committee. What are her [poll] numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known that any of that had happened had we not fought to make that happen.”
In 51 words, McCarthy revealed that:
On October 8, 2015, Republicans were expected to choose their nominee for Speaker. On that same date, McCarthy announced that he was withdrawing his name from consideration:
“Over the last week it has become clear to me that our Conference is deeply divided and needs to unite behind one leader. I have always put this Conference ahead of myself. Therefore I am withdrawing my candidacy for Speaker of the House.”
When reporters asked McCarthy if his revelation was the reason he withdrew, he replied, “Well, that wasn’t helpful.”
But then he quickly replayed the official Republican version: “But this Benghazi committee was only created for one purpose: to find the truth on behalf of the families for the four dead Americans.”
On October 29, 2015, Republicans—holding the majority of House members–elected Paul Ryan, (Wisconsin) the 54th speaker of the United States House of Representatives.
Democrats and Republicans were united in their anger that the real reason for the Benghazi “investigation” had been revealed.
Democrats were furious that McCarthy, in an unguarded moment, had revealed that their major Presidential candidate had been the victim of a Republican smear campaign disguised as a legitimate inquiry.
And Republicans were furious that McCarthy, in an unguarded moment, had revealed that the “legitimate inquiry” had been nothing more than a Republican smear campaign.
For McCarthy, the Benghazi Committee had legitimately served the nation—not by uncovering relevant details about a terrorist act but by causing Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers to drop.
In 1981, President Ronald Reagan had attacked the leaders of the Soviet Union thusly: “They reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat.”
McCarthy’s comments demonstrated that the Republican Party had adopted the same mindset and tactics as the dictators of the former Soviet Union.
Two years and six months after Kevin McCarthy revealed himself and his party as ruthless hypocrites, Republicans suffered a similar outbreak of truth.
But this time, the stakes were higher—involving Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States.
Share this: