Hey! Good Evening!

This evening's music features country blues mandolin player, singer and songwriter, Yank Rachell. Enjoy!

"You didn't hate Russia six months ago. Fight the fog of gaslighting and remember — you know you didn't. It all started when Donna Brazile got caught giving Hillary a CNN debate question. She started ranting about Russia then. We laughed.

But they just doubled down. And doubled down. And doubled down. And now, here we are.

They made this in you. And you don't even know why you hate Russia. You can repeat stuff about election hacking but when presented with the actual charge stripped of the incendiary words, that is, the US got to see the inner workings of a political party and decided that it was too corrupt to lead, you can't really say why that's a bad thing. You just know you're meant to think that way.

Very soon you'll be expected to send your sons and daughters to war for them. Very soon you'll be expected to turn up with your flags to a war that started over a few embarrassing emails from the marketing department of a political party. Oh it won't be about that by then, I know. It will be because Israel needs our help and this and that and blah de blah de blah."

-- Caitlin Johnstone

News and Opinion

Jeremy Corbyn Accused of Being Russian “Collaborator” for Questioning NATO Troop Build-Up on Border

The leader of the UK’s Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, called for a “de-escalation” of tensions between NATO and Russia, adding in a BBC interview on Thursday: “I want to see a de-militarisation of the border between them.” Along with the U.S., the UK has been rapidly building up its military presence in the Baltic region, including states which border Russia, and is now about to send another 800 troops to Estonia, 500 of which will be permanently based. ...

The response to Corbyn’s call for better relations and de-escalation of tensions with Moscow was swift and predictable. The armed forces minister for Britain’s right-wing government, Mike Penning, accused Corbyn of being a collaborator with the Kremlin:

“These comments suggest that the Labour leader would rather collaborate with Russian aggression than mutually support Britain’s Nato allies. As with Trident, everything Labour says and does shows that they cannot be trusted with Britain’s national security.”

This is the same propagandistic formulation that has been used for decades in the west to equate opposition to militarism with some form of disloyalty or treason. ...

The compelling justifications for Corbyn’s concerns about NATO/Russia tensions are self-evident. The U.S. and Russia have massive arsenals of nuclear weapons. ... It is not hyperbole to say that perhaps nothing is more reckless, more dangerous, than ratcheting up tensions between these two countries. That’s what makes it so repellent and toxic to demonize those such as Corbyn as “collaborators” or traitors merely because they oppose this escalation and belligerence. But this is the script that – once again – is quickly becoming mainstream orthodoxy in both Washington and London.

Trump’s foreign policy team disagrees with him on Russia and torture

By the end of the day Thursday, the most notable revelation after hours of testimony from men like James Mattis, the retired Marine general who was nominated for Secretary of Defense, and Mike Pompeo, the Kansas congressman tapped for director of the Central Intelligence Agency, was how much they disagree with Trump on key policies, including ones that were central to his populist campaign. ...

The biggest break came over Russia, a subject where Trump’s foreign policy views are most out of step with mainstream thinking. ... Mattis, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, took a starkly different view. “I’m all for engagement, but we also have to recognize reality,” Mattis said. “There’s a decreasing number of areas where we can engage cooperatively and increasing numbers of areas where we’re going to have to confront Russia.”

These divergent stances may have been nothing more than tactical — meant to ease the way through an otherwise tough confirmation process. But Tom Wright, a fellow at the Brookings Institution who has been studying Trump’s foreign policy philosophies for more than a year, says these inconsistencies follow a more longstanding trend in Trump’s foreign policy, and aren’t likely to resolve soon.

“We may see two different strands of foreign policy in the administration,” Wright said. “There will be the foreign policy the president will say — a roller coaster of tweets and off-handed comments — and then you’ll have a steadier ship in departments and agencies, where they’re trying to blunt the worst aspects of what the White House does. It’s all very unusual.”

Trump’s foreign policy team does seem split broadly in two: the confirmation camp, who had to appear before Congress, and see Russia as an adversary; and the adviser camp, people like National Security Adviser Mike Flynn, who do not need congressional confirmation, and share Trump’s views on Russia.

As president, Trump will have to arbitrate between their competing visions.

Donald Trump's busy weekend

Interesting differences in tone and content between the three following stories about the same event from Vice, The Guardian and Reuters.

Outgoing CIA chief John Brennan rips into Donald Trump

Outgoing CIA director John Brennan gave President-elect Donald Trump a thorough dressing-down during televised remarks on Sunday, chastising the president-elect for the “spontaneity” in his “words and actions” and for lacking a “full appreciation and understanding” of the threat posed by Russia.

Brennan suggested that Trump had to start looking out for national security, rather than protecting his personal reputation.

“It’s more than just about Mr. Trump,” Brennan said. “It’s about the United States of America.”

Brennan’s remarks were aired during a segment on “Fox News Sunday,” and lay bare the ongoing hostilities between spy agency officials and the president-elect, who has frequently snubbed intelligence findings alleging Russian involvement in the election.

John Brennan: Trump's 'Nazi Germany' tweet to US agencies was 'outrageous'

Departing CIA director John Brennan criticized Donald Trump on Sunday for his approach to national security, saying the president-elect should not be carelessly “talking and tweeting” without understanding Russia’s threat to the US.

Brennan also said he took “great umbrage” at Trump’s suggestion that agencies biased against him were behaving as if the US were “Nazi Germany”. ...

Brennan called the comparison of the CIA, NSA, FBI and the director of national intelligence offensive to American officers.

“What I do find outrageous is equating an intelligence community with Nazi Germany,” he said. “I do take great umbrage at that, and there is no basis for Mr Trump to point fingers at the intelligence community for leaking information that was already available publicly.”

Undaunted, on Sunday Trump used Twitter to comment further on this week’s publication by BuzzFeed of an unsubstantiated intelligence dossier, writing: “Thank you to [journalist] Bob Woodward who said, ‘That is a garbage document … it never should have been presented … Trump’s right to be upset (angry) about that …

“Those Intelligence chiefs made a mistake here, & when people make mistakes, they should APOLOGIZE. Media should also apologize.”

CIA director warns Trump to watch what he says, be careful on Russia

CIA Director John Brennan on Sunday offered a stern parting message for Donald Trump days before the Republican U.S. president-elect takes office, cautioning him against loosening sanctions on Russia and warning him to watch what he says.

Brennan rebuked Trump for comparing U.S. intelligence agencies to Nazi Germany in comments by the outgoing CIA chief that reflected the extraordinary friction between the incoming president and the 17 intelligence agencies he will begin to command once he takes office on Friday.

In an interview with "Fox News Sunday," Brennan questioned the message sent to the world if the president-elect broadcasts that he does not have confidence in the United States' own intelligence agencies. ...

Later on Sunday, Trump took to Twitter to berate Brennan and wrote, "Was this the leaker of Fake News?"

Pilger: Ultimate ambition of hawks in Washington was regime change in Russia

Trump praises Brexit and slams NATO in his first European interview since election

President-elect Donald Trump has granted his first interview to the European media since his election and used the opportunity to call the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) “obsolete,” float the idea of reduced sanctions against Russia, call Brexit “a great thing”, and suggest that more European countries will leave the EU. ...

Trump has long been a critic of NATO and took the opportunity to repeat his views on the international military alliance: “I took such heat, when I said Nato was obsolete. It’s obsolete because it wasn’t taking care of terror.” Trump added that some Nato members were not paying what they should be, which is “very unfair to the United States.” ...

However Trump concluded by saying: “With that being said, NATO is very important to me.”

James Mattis has no new ideas for solving America's most intractable conflicts. Neither does congress.

The most intriguing aspect of the exchange between Mattis and members of the committee was the absolute absence of interest, from either side, in how the armed forces of the United States have performed in recent years. In Afghanistan, in the now-resumed war in Iraq, in U.S. combat operations, large and small, in Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Syria—none has yielded anything approximating conclusive victory. However you define U.S. aims and objectives—promoting stability? Spreading democracy? Reducing the incidence of Islamist terrorism?—they remain unfulfilled. Yet no senator thought to ask Mattis for his views on why that has been the case, what conclusions he draws from that absence of success, and how he might apply those conclusions as defense secretary.

In response to a leading question, Mattis opined that the global order is now being subjected to its “biggest attack since World War II,” with Russia, China, Iran, and terrorism, together, the responsible culprits. Senators neither asked for, nor did Mattis volunteer, any thoughts on whether any correlation might exist between this ostensibly dire situation and the military activism that has been a signature of U.S. national security policy over the past decade or so.

First under George W. Bush and then Barack Obama, that penchant for activism has found U.S. forces continuously in combat. How can it be that their many sacrifices and the hundreds of billions of dollars expended have landed the United States in such a precarious predicament? Has America dropped an insufficient number of bombs? Have U.S. troops invaded, occupied, or raided too few countries?

None of the lawmakers present—several of whom made a point of promoting weapons systems produced in their state, or engaged in politically correct posturing—thought to solicit Mattis’s views on the this gap between effort and outcomes. Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut elicited ironclad assurances that Mattis favored modernizing the navy’s submarine fleet, subs being made—surprise—in Connecticut. And Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York was able to advertise her credentials as a champion of women serving as combat infantrypersons. So of senatorial preening, there was plenty on display. Of questions touching on core issues of national security, there were next to none.

1 million signatures collected in support of Snowden pardon

A group hoping to secure a presidential pardon for National Security Agency (NSA) leaker Edward Snowden delivered a petition with more than 1 million signatures to President Obama on Friday.

"Pardoning Snowden would show the world the U.S. cares [about] human rights at a time of great concern,” said Ben Wizner, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney working on behalf of Snowden, about the Pardon Snowden Campaign petition. ...

Wizner said a backup plan if Obama were to decline the petition might be finding a new home for Snowden in Europe. But he also said that the positive results of the disclosures should be indisputable, even to the Obama administration. ...

Similar campaigns have been launched for fellow leaker Chelsea Manning, also represented by the ACLU.

The Color of Surveillance

The FBI has a lead. A prominent religious leader and community advocate is in contact with a suspected sleeper agent of foreign radicals. The attorney general is briefed and personally approves wiretaps of his home and offices. The man was born in the United States, the son of a popular cleric. Even though he’s an American citizen, he’s placed on a watchlist to be summarily detained in the event of a national emergency. Of all similar suspects, the head of FBI domestic intelligence thinks he’s “the most dangerous,” at least “from the standpoint of … national security.”

Is this a lone wolf in league with foreign sponsors of terrorism? No: This was the life of Martin Luther King Jr. That FBI assessment was dated Aug. 30, 1963—two days after King told our country that he had a dream.

We now find ourselves in a new surveillance debate—and the lessons of the King scandal should weigh heavy on our minds. A few months after the first Edward Snowden revelation, the National Security Agency disclosed that it had itself wiretapped King in the late 1960s. Yet what happened to King is almost entirely absent from our current conversation. In NSA reform debates in the House of Representatives, King was mentioned only a handful of times, usually in passing. And notwithstanding a few brave speeches by senators such as Patrick Leahy and Rand Paul outside of the Senate, the available Senate record suggests that in two years of actual hearings and floor debates, no one ever spoke his name.  

There is a myth in this country that in a world where everyone is watched, everyone is watched equally. It’s as if an old and racist J. Edgar Hoover has been replaced by the race-blind magic of computers, mathematicians, and Big Data. The truth is more uncomfortable. Across our history and to this day, people of color have been the disproportionate victims of unjust surveillance; Hoover was no aberration. And while racism has played its ugly part, the justification for this monitoring was the same we hear today: national security.

Erik Prince’s Mercenaries Are Bombing Libya

On Jan. 11, 2017, Intelligence Online — a professional journal covering the world’s intelligence services — revealed that the pilots of Air Tractor attack planes flying from Al Khadim air base in Libya are private contractors working for Erik Prince, the founder of the company formerly known as Blackwater. ...

The United Arab Emirates strongly supports Gen. Khalifa Haftar and his regime in Tobruk, one of two major factions vying for power in Libya. ... Now it’s increasingly evident that Prince, a former U.S. Navy SEAL officer, is behind the air raids. Prince’s ties to the United Arab Emirates are strong. He moved to Abu Dhabi in 2010, the same year he sold his stake in scandal-riven Blackwater. In Abu Dhabi, Prince founded Reflex Responses Company, also known as R2.

In January 2011, several Arab countries hired Prince to help train a private army of 2,000 Somali recruits. And in May 2011, The New York Times reported that the UAE had signed a $529-million contract with Reflex Responses to recruit and train the so-called “Security Support Group,” an 800-member “foreign legion” for counterterrorism and internal security missions.

Prince currently heads Frontier Resource Group, a logistics and transport company that’s investing in Africa with cash from Asian investors. Prince’s sister Betsy DeVos is U.S. president-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to be secretary of education.

US transfers 10 Guantánamo prisoners to Oman

Oman has received 10 inmates from the US military prison at Guantánamo Bay, in a move to reduce their numbers days before the US president, Barack Obama, leaves office.

A statement from the sultanate’s foreign ministry did not disclose the nationality of the prisoners who would reside in the Gulf country on a temporary basis.

“At the request of Sultan Qaboos and the US government for a solution to the question of Guantánamo detainees, 10 of these detainees arrived today in the sultanate to reside here temporarily,” the ministry said, quoted by the official ONA news agency.

The US defense department did not immediately respond to questions about the transfer. A US defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity as the transfer had yet to be publicly announced by the US, confirmed to the Associated Press that the prisoners had been sent to Oman. The official declined to elaborate.

The latest transfers would leave the number of Guantánamo detainees at 45, based on figures the Pentagon issued when four Yemenis were sent to Saudi Arabia on 6 January.

Israeli publisher questioned after talks with Netanyahu leaked

The publisher of one of Israel’s largest newspapers has been interviewed for eight hours as part of a sprawling police investigation into the country’s embattled prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

The mammoth questioning of Arnon “Noni” Mozes, owner of the critical Yedioth Ahronoth tabloid, came as Netanyahu accused the country’s media – which has been publishing almost daily leaks from the case – of trying to “topple” his government.

Central to the affair, which police have called Case 2000, is the allegation that Netanyahu tried to ensure more positive coverage in the Israeli media by offering to reduce the circulation of a rival, pro-government paper in exchange for kinder coverage from Yedioth Ahronoth. ...

Media interest in Case 2000 has revolved around leaks of reported transcripts of recordings of Netanyahu and Mozes found at the home of Netanyahu’s former chief of staff, in which the two men appear to discuss a deal to keep Netanyahu in power by shifting the long-critical Yedioth Ahronoth behind him.

US - Congress approves measures to end Obamacare

House Republicans vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act without a plan to replace it

Republicans moved a step closer to dismantling the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, after the House of Representatives voted to repeal the law without a replacement one day after the Senate did the same.

Acting under pressure from President-elect Donald Trump and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, the House on Friday passed a budget resolution to defund the healthcare legislation by a near-party [line] vote of 227 Republicans to 198 Democrats. On Thursday, the Senate voted to do the same by a razor-thin margin of 51 to 48 votes.

But if you’re one of the approximately 20 millions of Americans who rely on the Affordable Care Act, you haven’t quite lost your health insurance — yet. The House and Senate votes are the beginning of a long process of dismantling the law and sets the stage for lawmakers to draft full repeal legislation by Jan. 27. ...

“This is a critical first step toward delivering relief to Americans struggling under this law,” Speaker Ryan said on the House floor. He added that there would a replacement drafted “in the next couple of weeks” and ensured there would be “a stable transition period” but did not go into specifics. Ryan said at a press conference Thursday, “We’re not holding hard deadlines, only because we want to get it right.”

The "Unaffordable" Care Act will soon be history!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 13, 2017

Democrats turn to American people to protect Obamacare from looming repeal

The Affordable Care Act, which ushered in the most significant changes to the US healthcare system in half a century, has been placed on life support. But the healthcare law is not dead yet, and Democrats are turning to the public to save it.

On Sunday, liberal groups joined congressional Democrats for a “day of action”, holding dozens of rallies across the country in a show of support for the law that has come to be known, both affectionately and disparagingly, as Obamacare.

“You look great from up here,” said Senator Bernie Sanders, marveling at the large turnout for the “Our First Stand” rally in Warren, Michigan, where the temperature hovered near freezing. ...

“What we are saying to the Republicans: ‘If you want to improve the Affordable Care Act, let’s work together,’” said Sanders, who is playing a major role in the coordinated effort against its repeal.

“But if you think you’re simply going to throw millions off of health insurance, you’ve got another guess coming.”

Democrats have long-struggled to market the 2,000-page law to the public. Many of its major provisions, such as banning insurers from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions and allowing young people to stay on their parents’ health insurance until 26, are popular. But polling shows a majority of Americans disapprove of the law as a whole.

Overwhelmed by Voters Angry About ACA Repeal, GOP Rep Sneaks Out Backdoor

One day after voting to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA), a Republican Congressman in Colorado was caught sneaking out the backdoor of a community meeting on Saturday after being overwhelmed by constituents concerned over the future of their healthcare.

U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman had invited Colorado voters to the Aurora Central Library in suburban Denver to meet "one-on-one" with the lawmaker and "discuss the issues that are important to them."

However, with the meeting scheduled one day after Coffman voted in favor of a budget resolution that paves the way for ACA repeal and co-authored a Denver Post op-ed defending the move, the congressman was apparently overwhelmed by hundreds of constituents who wanted answers regarding the healthcare cuts.

According to reporting, people were kept in a waiting area while only four at a time were allowed to meet with the representative. After Coffman spoke with roughly 70 individuals, he reportedly snuck out the back door.

Milestone:

World's eight richest people have same wealth as poorest 50%

The world’s eight richest billionaires control the same wealth between them as the poorest half of the globe’s population, according to a charity warning of an ever-increasing and dangerous concentration of wealth.

In a report published to coincide with the start of the week-long World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Oxfam said it was “beyond grotesque” that a handful of rich men headed by the Microsoft founder Bill Gates are worth $426bn (£350bn), equivalent to the wealth of 3.6 billion people.

Oxfam blamed rising inequality on aggressive wage restraint, tax dodging and the squeezing of producers by companies, adding that businesses were too focused on delivering ever-higher returns to wealthy owners and top executives.

Oxfam said the world’s poorest 50% owned the same in assets as the $426bn owned by a group headed by Bill Gates, Amancio Ortega, the founder of the Spanish fashion chain Zara, and Warren Buffett, the renowned investor and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.

The others are Carlos Slim Helú: the Mexican telecoms tycoon and owner of conglomerate Grupo Carso; Jeff Bezos: the founder of Amazon; Mark Zuckerberg: the founder of Facebook; Larry Ellison, chief executive of US tech firm Oracle; and Michael Bloomberg; a former mayor of New York and founder and owner of the Bloomberg news and financial information service.

Last year, Oxfam said the world’s 62 richest billionaires were as wealthy as half the world’s population. However, the number has dropped to eight in 2017 because new information shows that poverty in China and India is worse than previously thought, making the bottom 50% even worse off and widening the gap between rich and poor.

Hackles are rising all over America. Has the outrage meter pegged yet? If this keeps up, trolling will replace baseball as the national pastime.

Trump insults civil rights hero and cancels MLK Day plans

President-elect Donald Trump has cancelled plans to visit the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington D.C. in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day on Monday, ABC News reported, citing transition sources. The scheduling flip-flop comes as Trump is under fire for comments he made on Twitter criticizing civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis. ...

The president-elect unleashed his tweetstorm in response to remarks made by Lewis on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” where he said, “I don’t see this President-elect as a legitimate president.”

“I think the Russians participated in helping this man get elected,” Lewis said, “And they helped destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.”

Clips from the segment, which aired Sunday, got under the president-elect’s skin, and he fired off a series of tweets accusing Lewis of being “all talk, talk, talk” and “no action.”

Many on social media, including lawmakers, were quick to point out that Trump’s comments were particularly egregious considering that he made them on Martin Luther King Jr. weekend, which honors the courageous actions taken by Lewis and others in the struggle for civil rights and an end to legal racial segregation.

Complaints Describe Border Agents Interrogating Muslim Americans, Asking for Social Media Accounts

Customs and Border Protection agents have been invasively questioning Muslim-Americans at U.S. border crossings about their political and religious beliefs, asking for their social media information, and demanding passwords to open mobile phones, according to a set of complaints filed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

In one case, a 23-year old American citizen alleges that he was choked by a CBP agent after declining to hand over his phone for inspection while crossing the border back from Canada.

The complaints deal with the cases of nine people who have been stopped at various U.S. border crossings, eight of whom are American citizens, and one Canadian. They were filed to the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection and the Department of Justice. ...

The complaints filed by CAIR allege that CBP agents have been asking travelers questions including, “are you a devout Muslim”, “what do you think of the United States”, and “what are your views about jihad?” The complaints also say that people have reported being asked whether they attend a mosque and what their opinions are about various terrorist groups.

The complaints also allege that border agents have asked American citizens to provide their social media information at the border.

Down to the Wire: Obama’s DOJ Issues Scathing Report on Systemic Abuse Within Chicago Police

The Justice Department released a blistering report on Friday concluding what many in Chicago have been saying for years: that the city’s police officers routinely use excessive and deadly force, particularly against black and Latino residents; that they systematically violate civil rights; and that the department consistently fails to hold officers accountable for abuse and misconduct.

With one week to go before the beginning of the Trump administration — which is widely expected to take a considerably less aggressive approach toward police abuse — federal officials this week tied up the loose ends on some of the department’s most high profile investigations of police departments.

On Thursday, Justice Department officials signed a consent decree with the city of Baltimore, outlining reforms the city will be required to undertake after a scathing report published last August found a pattern of stops, searches, arrests and use of force that violated the First and Fourth Amendments as well as federal anti-discrimination laws.

Then on Friday, the department released one of its most anticipated reports yet, based on the investigation of the Chicago Police Department that it launched in 2015 on the heels of protest and a public scandal over the 2014 police killing of Laquan McDonald.

As it did in Baltimore, the DOJ found that the Chicago Police Department — which, with 12,000 officers, is the country’s second largest police department, after the NYPD — regularly engaged in a pattern of abuse, excessive force, and racial discrimination.

Despite Growing Disapproval and Protest, Corporate Cash Floods Trump Inauguration

While President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration is facing opposition from Democrats, civil society, and entertainers as the president-elect deals with the disapproval from much of the country, corporate America is outpacing historical records with a flood of private money to fund the inaugural celebrations.

Trump has raised over $100 million from private donors for his inauguration festivities, about twice the amount that President Barack Obama raised in 2008 and 2012, setting a record.

Donations include $500,000 from oil behemoth Chevron and $5 million from gambling magnate Sheldon Adelson.

"No matter which party controls the White House, corporations and wealthy individuals open their checkbooks every four years, and administrations reward their donors with private events and other incentives," writes the New York Times, which reported the record-setting amount on Sunday. "But ethics experts say Mr. Trump's donors are being given greater access and facing fewer limits on donations than those in other recent inaugurations, despite his vow to 'drain the swamp' of special interests in Washington."

Women's March on Washington set to be one of America's biggest protests

It began as a spontaneous feminist rallying cry via social media. It has morphed into what is expected to be one of the largest demonstrations in American history – a boisterous march about a smorgasbord of progressive issues, and an extraordinary display of dissent on a president’s first day in office peppered with knit pink hats.

Before the bunting and barriers are even cleared away from Friday’s inauguration of Donald Trump, hundreds of thousands are likely to attend the Women’s March on Washington the following day, 21 January.

“A march of this magnitude, across this diversity of issues has never happened before,” said Kaylin Whittingham, president of the association of black women attorneys. “We all have to stand together as a force no one can ignore.”

The Women’s March now has almost 200 progressive groups, large and small, signing on as supporting partners. The issues they represent are as varied as the environment, legal abortion, prisoners’ rights, voting rights, a free press, affordable healthcare, gun safety, racial and gender equality and a higher minimum wage. Men are invited.

More than 300 simultaneous local protests will also occur, across all 50 states, and support marches are planned in 30 other countries, organizer Linda Sarsour said.

How Barack Obama paved the way for Donald Trump

There is a deeper connection, however, between Trump’s rise and what Obama did – or rather didn’t do – economically. He entered the White House at a moment of economic crisis, with Democratic majorities in both Houses and bankers on the back foot. Faced with the choice of preserving the financial industry as it was or embracing far-reaching reforms that would have served the interests of those who voted for him, he chose the former. ...

In 2010 Damon Silvers of the independent congressional oversight panel told Treasury officials: “We can either have a rational resolution to the foreclosure crisis, or we can preserve the capital structure of the banks. We can’t do both.” They chose the latter. Not surprisingly, this was not popular. Three years into Obama’s first term 58% of the country – including an overwhelming majority of Democrats and independents – wanted the government to help stop foreclosures. His Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, did the opposite, setting up a programme that would “foam the runway” for the banks.

So when Hillary Clinton stood for Obama’s third term, the problem wasn’t just a lack of imagination: it was that the first two terms had not lived up to their promise.

This time last year, fewer than four in 10 were happy with Obama’s economic policies. When asked last week to assess progress under Obama 56% of Americans said the country had lost ground or stood still on the economy, while 48% said it had lost ground on the gap between the rich and poor – against just 14% who said it gained ground. These were the Obama coalition – black and young and poor – who did not vote in November, making Trump’s victory possible. Those whose hopes are not being met: people more likely to go to the polls because they are inspired about a better future than because they fear a worse one.

Naturally, Trump’s cabinet of billionaires will do no better and will, in all likelihood, do far worse. And even as we protest about the legitimacy of the “new normal”, we should not pretend it is replacing something popular or effective. The old normal was not working. The premature nostalgia for the Obamas in the White House is not a yearning for Obama’s policies.

Obama Delivers Republican Economic Arguments

I am going to have to increase my budget for popcorn.

Democrats found out this week that Bernie Supporters Are Not Going Away Any Time Soon

Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey and other Senate Democrats found out that supporters of Bernie Sanders are not going away now that the election is over after 13 Democrat senators failed to vote in favor of an amendment proposed by Sanders to the 2017 congressional budget allowing the importation of prescription drugs from Canada to help reduce prescription drug costs for Americans. If the Democratic Party had expectations that Sanders supporters were going to simply jump on the anti-Trump bandwagon and fall in line behind Democrats regardless of their deeds, that thought was readily dismissed when Bernie supporters took to social media to criticize Booker and the others over their votes.

Booker took the most heat of the 13 Democrats who voted against the amendment, partly because it’s widely rumored that he’s on the shortlist of potential nominees for the Democratic Party in the 2020 presidential race. The morning after the vote late Wednesday night, Bernie supporters on Facebook and Twitter were collectively focused on pointed attacks against Booker and the other senate Democrats who voted against the amendment: Maria Cantwell of Washington, Thomas Carper of Delaware, Robert Casey of Pennsylvania, Christopher Coons of Delaware, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Robert Menendez of New Jersey, Patty Murray of Washington, Jon Tester of Montana, Michael Bennett of Colorado, and Mark Warner of Virginia.

While supporters of Hillary Clinton and other more traditional Democrats were still largely supportive of Booker for his testimony in Congress against Trump’s attorney general nominee, Jeff Sessions, Bernie supporters spent the day criticizing the New Jersey senator for his vote, and that criticism has still not let up, leading some to speculate to what extent the vote has impacted his chances of being a viable candidate for president in 2020. Jacobin Magazine called Booker “big pharma’s favorite Democrat,” and Farron Cousins of progressive news outlet The Ring of Fire highlighted Booker’s cozy relationship with pharmaceutical industry donors. ...

Given the extremely vocal reaction from Bernie supporters and what can be called the “progressive bloc” of the Democratic Party and the at-large U.S. electorate in response to the amendment not passing, even with bipartisan support (12 Republicans crossed the aisle to support the Sanders amendment, according to CNBC), it’s highly likely that Democratic Party leaders are taking notice. They need those Bernie voters to win future elections and the bad publicity that comes from defying the wishes of a highly active and engaged group of voters is anathema to any politician with ambitions beyond retiring after their current term.

Damn, I hope she's right. I hope that online outrage can translate into real world political power that can take on the Wall Street Corporatist Dems and win.

Cory Booker’s Public Crucifixion Has The Attention Of Every Democrat In DC

Cory Booker can go ahead and bury his presidential ambitions in the backyard, next to his conscience and his childhood goldfish. They are dead. He will never be President. Not in 2020. Not ever. ...

How do I know this? Easy. After being used like store-brand toilet paper by the Democratic establishment throughout the entire election cycle, Berniecrats were hungry for blood. Democrat blood. The first head to stick up on behalf of the plutocrats against Bernie was going to get lopped off and bandied about the village as an example for all to see. That head was Cory Booker’s. There will be others —many others if they take too long to absorb the lesson— but you never forget your first. Cory Booker’s face now permanently occupies the Hillary Clinton slot. The crony capitalism slot. The “I will put the profit margins of my corporate donors before your lives” slot. ...

And we may be certain that every Democrat in DC has taken note of this. The social media hammer that dropped on Booker came down fast and came down hard; very rarely will you see such immense public outrage about the vote of a single particular Senator on a single piece of legislation. Alternative media outlets were quick to follow the zeitgeist, fanning the flames and debunking Booker’s pathetic defenses of his actions, and the typical establishment damage control mechanisms were powerless to stop any of this. It all happened right there online for everyone to see. It’s still going on.

This changes everything. The political force that nearly thrust an outsider progressive into the White House despite every dirty trick in the book being used to sabotage him by the political establishment is still only just beginning to get a feel for its own strength. The Wall Street Democrats who are still reeling from the way their tried-and-true formula failed to work as it should are now realizing that the progressive base of their party can no longer be appeased by a little lip service to social justice and a cute sound bite criticizing Jeff Sessions. They are most definitely going to have to start walking the walk. If they do not, they will be destroyed. Progressives are finally done being doormats, and they’re ready to start kicking ass.

Protests escalate over Louisiana pipeline by company behind Dakota Access

Scott Eustis did not stop smiling for hours. The coastal wetland specialist with the Gulf Restoration Network was attending a public hearing in Baton Rouge. Its subject was a pipeline extension that would run directly through the Atchafalaya Basin, the world’s largest natural swamp. Eustis was surprised to be joined by more than 400 others.

“This is like 50 times the amount of people we have at most of these meetings,” said Eustis, adding that the proposed pipeline was “the biggest and baddest I’ve seen in my career”.

The company behind the pipeline, Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), had seemed to turn its attention to Louisiana just one day after Native American protesters thwarted the company’s Dakota Access project last month.

A spokeswoman for ETP, Vicki Granado, said the Bayou Bridge pipeline extension was announced in June 2015. If approved, the project will run though 11 parishes and cross around 600 acres of wetlands and 700 bodies of water, including wells that reportedly provide drinking water for some 300,000 families.

[Some] attendees applauded in favor of the pipeline, and former US senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, a supporter, was in attendance. But Native Americans also dotted the crowd, many of them fresh from Standing Rock.

“The Native Americans in North Dakota get a lot of credit for showing people their power,” Eustis said.

'Shocking': North Dakota Republicans Want to Legalize Running Over Protesters

Running over protesters may soon be legal in North Dakota, if conservative lawmakers are successful in advancing legislation introduced last week.

House Bill Number 1203 (pdf) states that, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a driver of a motor vehicle who unintentionally causes injury or death to an individual obstructing vehicular traffic on a public road, street, or highway, is not guilty of an offense."

The bill is slated to be heard by the North Dakota's House Transportation Committee on Friday.

Rep. Keith Kempenich (R-Bowman), one of the bill's co-sponsors, told the Bismarck Tribune on Wednesday, "[The roads are] not there for the protesters. They're intentionally putting themselves in danger."

"It's shifting the burden of proof from the motor vehicle driver to the pedestrian," Kempenich said.

Tara Houska, an Indigenous water protector and attorney who has resided at the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) resistance camps since August, told NBC News that the bill was "a direct violation of our First Amendment rights."

"It's shocking to see legislation that allows for people to literally be killed for exercising their right to protest in a public space," said Houska, who also serves as the national campaigns director for Honor the Earth, an Indigenous-focused environmental nonprofit.

Also of Interest

Here are some articles of interest, some which defied fair-use abstraction.

Marcy Wheeler: On “Fake News”

What the “Santa Clausification” of Martin Luther King Jr. Leaves Out

The five most outrageous parts of the DOJ’s report on Chicago Police

FBI's pre-election sweep of Muslim Americans raises surveillance fears

Trump Versus the Deep State

Wait, Why Are We Pretending To Hate Russia Again?

Fake neo-Nazi MLK Day rally wreaked havoc online and off

The Horror of the Iraq War, One Hundred Years From Now

Dow Chemical Wants Farmers to Keep Using a Pesticide Linked to Autism and ADHD

A Little Night Music

Yank Rachell - Going To St. Louis

Yank Rachell - Tappin' That Thing

Sleepy John Estes & Yank Rachell - Expressman Blues

Yank Rachell & Sonny Boy Williamson - Rachell Blues

Yank Rachell - Roll Me Over Baby

Yank Rachell - Up And Down The Line

Yank Rachell - Smokey Joe

Sleepy John Estes & Yank Rachell - Milk Cow Blues

Yank Rachell's Tennessee Jug Busters - Texas Tony

Yank Rachell - Peach Tree Blues

Yank Rachell - Diving Duck

Yank Rachell talks about his first recording