Hey! Good Evening!

This evening's music features blues harmonica player Little Walter Jacobs. Enjoy!

"The anti-war wing of both major parties is dead. Your presidential choice is between war and war. There's no faction of Republicans or Democrats which combines real power with a durable, principled interest in turning American foreign policy away from global empire."

-- Bonnie Kristian

News and Opinion

2020 in a single remarkable photo

- by @noahberger3884 in California pic.twitter.com/EpT3SZWLNV

— Rupert Myers (@RupertMyers) August 20, 2020

Western Media Misperceptions About Belarus, Lukashenko & Putin

There is a misperception in western media that Alexander Lukashenko, president of Belarus, is Russian President Vladimir Putin’s man. That is not true; Putin views him as an exasperating and rather dim legacy. There is also a misperception in the West that Lukashenko really lost the recent election. That is not true. He almost certainly won, though the margin is much exaggerated by the official result.

Minsk is not Belarus, just as London is not the U.K. Most of Belarus is pretty backward and heavily influenced by the state machinery. Dictators have all kinds of means at their disposal to make themselves popular. That is why the odd election or plebiscite does not mean that somebody is not a dictator. Lukashenko is a dictator, as I have been saying for nigh on twenty years.

My analysis is that Lukashenko probably won handily, with over 60 percent of the vote. But it was by no means a free and fair election. The media is heavily biased (remember you can also say that of the U.K.), and the weak opposition candidate was only there because, one way or the other, all the important opposition figures are prevented from standing.

The West is trying to engineer popular opinion in Belarus towards a “color revolution,” fairly obviously. But they are on a sticky wicket. Western Ukraine was genuinely enthusiastic to move towards the west and the EU, in the hope of attaining a consumer lifestyle. Outside of central Minsk, there is very little such sentiment in Belarus. Most important of all, Belarus means “White Russia,” and the White Russians very strongly identify themselves as culturally Russian. We will not see a color revolution in Belarus. The West is trying, however. ...

The ideal would be for Lukashenko to go and for there to be fresh elections, as opposed to the Venezuelan tactic of the West just announcing a president who has never won an election. The best result for the people of Belarus and for international stability would be the election of a reform-minded but broadly pro-Russian candidate. Putin has used the crisis to re-assert the “union” of Russia and Belarus – signed 20 years ago this is a single market and free trade area. Few would doubt, crucially including few Belarussians, that the future of Belarus lies with integration with Russia rather than the EU.

Mexico rocked by claims of corruption against three former presidents

Mexico’s political establishment has been shaken by claims that three former Mexican presidents and an all-star cast of lawmakers and aides may have been involved in alleged acts of corruption. The accusations were leveled by Emilio Lozoya, the former head of Mexico’s state oil company Pemex, and will boost efforts by the country’s current president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, to portray himself as an anti-corruption crusader.

López Obrador, a 66-year-old nationalist, swept to power in 2018 pledging to rid Mexico of corruption and unseat the “mafia of power” he claimed had seized control of Latin America’s No 2 economy.

In a leaked 63-page deposition, Lozoya, who was extradited from Spain in July to face corruption charges of his own, dragged some of Mexico’s best-known politicians into a rapidly unfolding scandal. According to the newspaper El Universal, the former Pemex chief implicated Enrique Peña Nieto, Mexico’s president from 2012 until 2018, in multimillion-dollar bribes and illegal campaign financing.

Reuters said Lozoya also claimed that Felipe Calderón – president from 2006 until 2012 – and Carlos Salinas – from 1988 to 1994 – had committed “acts possibly constituting crimes”. Lozoya worked as international relations coordinator of Peña Nieto’s 2012 election campaign, and was later appointed to run Pemex.

Calderón hit back on Twitter claiming Mexico’s president was seeking to weaponize the former oil boss and his “ridiculous accusations” as “an instrument of revenge and political persecution”. “He’s not interested in justice but in a lynching,” Calderón said. Neither Peña Nieto nor Salinas responded immediately to the allegations.

Gina Haspel Hangs on at CIA, With Little Support From Trump or Democrats

Central Intelligence Agency Director Gina Haspel is a rarity in the Trump administration’s national security apparatus: a career professional who has beaten the odds and survived repeated personnel purges. The president is on his fourth director of national intelligence and sixth national security adviser, including all the “acting” officials to hold those positions. But while he traffics in conspiracy theories about the so-called deep state and often says the U.S. intelligence community is out to get him, Trump has never fired a CIA director.

Still, Haspel’s hold on her job now appears tenuous. Until recently, in fact, several current and former government officials suggested that Trump was likely to fire her sometime before the election, adding that Haspel privately shared those fears. Earlier this summer, Haspel confided to a former colleague that she wouldn’t be surprised if Trump replaced her by September, according to the person who spoke with her.

Haspel has apparently angered Trump by being unwilling to publicly dispute reports about intelligence and national security matters that have made him look bad, including refusing to deny reports that Russia paid bounties to the Taliban to kill American troops in Afghanistan, the current and former officials said. She has also upset the president by failing to publicly discredit intelligence reports showing that Russia has interfered in the U.S. electoral system to help him win reelection in 2020, a repeat of Moscow’s 2016 intervention.

Haspel has no significant support among Democrats either, because of her involvement in the CIA’s torture program during the George W. Bush administration. Sen. Kamala Harris was one of her biggest critics during her 2018 confirmation hearings, and if Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and Harris, now his vice presidential running mate, win the election, Haspel will certainly be out.

Crushing US sanctions devastate Syria's people and post-war reconstruction

Critics Say Trump Push to Sell Fighter Jets and Armed Drones to Emirates Confirms US-Israel-UAE Deal 'Was Never About Peace'

Middle East experts voiced fresh skepticism Wednesday about the supposed peace agreement the U.S. brokered between Israel and the United Arab Emirates after reports emerged that the Trump administration is ramping up an effort to sell advanced weaponry—including armed drones and F-35 stealth fighter jets—to the UAE.

The New York Times reported Wednesday that the Trump administration "has accelerated a push to sell the F-35 stealth fighter and advanced armed drones to the United Arab Emirates, at a time when the Gulf nation is working with the Trump administration on a historic plan to formalize diplomatic ties with Israel."

"American officials deny that the new push to sell the advanced weapons is a direct reward for the Emirates role in a diplomatic breakthrough, announced by President Trump last week, where the Emirates would become just the third Arab nation to recognize Israel," the Times reported. "But officials do not dispute that the new momentum on the arms sale—after years of stalled requests by the Emirates to buy the fighter jet—is linked to the broader diplomatic initiative."

According to the Times, Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, is spearheading the effort to sell American weaponry to the UAE, which is part of the U.S.-backed Saudi-led coalition that has been bombing Yemen for years.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday called reports that the U.S. is planning to sell F-35s to the UAE "fake news," but Trump acknowledged the potential weapons sale during a press briefing that same day, telling reporters that the Emirates "would like to order quite a few F-35s." Israel is currently the only country in the Middle East that possesses F-35s.

"They have the money," Trump said of the UAE. "It's the greatest fighter jet in the world, as you know, by far. Stealth. Totally stealth. You can't see it. Makes it very difficult."

"So, yeah, they'd like to buy F-35s," the president continued. "We'll see what happens. It's under review, but they made a great—a great advance in peace in the Middle East."

Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said Trump's push to sell advanced weaponry to the Emirates just days after announcing the "peace" agreement between the UAE and Israel further demonstrates that the deal "was never about peace."

Foreign policy analyst Rula Jebreal expressed a similar sentiment on Twitter earlier this week.

"Peace is not an arms deal to be made between anti-democratic regimes," Jebreal wrote. "It must be made between peoples."

Warnings of DeJoy Scheme to 'Kill Postal Banking' as USPS Reportedly Considering Plan to Let Wall St Set Up ATMs in Post Offices

JPMorgan Chase, the largest financial institution in the United States, is reportedly in talks with the U.S. Postal Service about a proposal to set up ATMs in post offices in several states across the country—a plan critics warned is an effort to eliminate the possibility of a public postal banking system.

Capitol Forum reported Wednesday that the Postal Service—currently headed by Louis DeJoy, a Republican megadonor to President Donald Trump—is "considering a proposal from JPMorgan Chase (JPM) to offer banking services in post offices in a move that could give the Wall Street giant an exclusive right to solicit postal customers."

A recent internal USPS planning document obtained by Capitol Forum says "the Postal Service is in discussions with JPMorgan Chase concerning a potential limited pilot test of ATM and other banking services located on Postal Service premises in several states." One anonymous source told Capitol Forum that the pilot would involve the Wall Street giant "leasing space from the Postal Service."

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee and author of postal banking legislation, slammed the reported plan as yet another destructive Wall Street power-grab.

"What JPMorgan Chase wants to do looks like another attempt for big banks and corporations to privatize our public infrastructure so their shareholders gain while working families suffer," Brown told the New York Times, which confirmed Capitol Forum's reporting on the talks between USPS and JPMorgan Chase.

Times reporter Emily Flitter noted that big banks have long been fervently opposed to the idea of a USPS-provided banking system. "If JPMorgan had ATMs and other facilities in post offices, it could make it harder for postal banking to become a reality," Flitter tweeted Wednesday. "Banks oppose the idea of postal banking because it would represent another source of competition for them."

David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect, warned that the plan being explored by JPMorgan Chase and the USPS "would be no more than a rental of ATM space in exchange for the elimination of a potential rival before it gets going."

"This wouldn't expand services for the unbanked, wouldn't change the terms that put big bank financial services out of reach for poorer people," said Dayen. "It's designed just to stop postal banking from being offered with an exclusivity agreement. It's more an antitrust violation than a deal."

DNC Highlights, the USPS Crisis, Plus Katie Hill on Her Scandal and New Book | Useful Idiots

Trump Proposed Trading 'Poor' Puerto Ricans for Greenland After Hurricane Maria Devastation, Former DHS Official Says

A former Homeland Security official said this week that in addition to suggesting the U.S. sell Puerto Rico as the island territory was struggling to recover after Hurricane Maria, President Donald Trump proposed "trading" the territory for another island he had previously expressed interest in—Greenland.

Miles Taylor, who served as chief of staff to former Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen from 2017 to 2019, told MSNBC that the president derided Puerto Rico as "dirty" and the people living there as "poor" a year after the hurricane devastated the island.

"The president's talked before about wanting to purchase Greenland, but one time before we went down, he told us not only did he want to purchase Greenland, he actually said he wanted to see if we could sell Puerto Rico. Could we swap Puerto Rico for Greenland," Taylor, who has endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden in the 2020 election, told MSNBC Wednesday. "Because in his words Puerto Rico was dirty and the people were poor."

The president reportedly made the comment in August 2018, Taylor said, a year after Maria and its aftermath left nearly 3,000 people dead and forced 130,000 Puerto Ricans—about 4% of the island's population—to leave their home.

According to Taylor, Trump displayed "deep animus toward the Puerto Rican people behind the scenes" while responding to the crisis, during which he visited the island and casually tossed rolls of paper towels to struggling and traumatized local residents—a moment which one victim viewed as "disrespectful" and a former FEMA official called "belittling."

The Trump Administration Is Giving Political Appointees Power Over Apportioning Federal Funds

In the final months of its first term, the Trump administration is cutting career government employees out of the process of apportioning federal funds, according to a memo reviewed by The Intercept, sent to staff on August 12 by Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought.

OMB sits at the center of the government’s executive branch, serving as a financial clearinghouse for every agency and federal program. The 100-year-old office reviews legislation passed by Congress that authorizes and appropriates federal government spending, and then apportions money to agencies based on those laws. For decades, OMB’s career staff have been responsible for signing off on the legality of the apportionment of funds to agencies and for projects. Political appointees, meanwhile, worked within the bounds the career staff set.

Under the new regime, however, program associate directors — political appointees known as PADs — will sign off on disbursements themselves. The rationale behind the shift is that apportionment decisions are fundamentally policy decisions and therefore, should be the responsibility of political aides who are ostensibly accountable to voters, rather than government bureaucrats immune from such democratic responsiveness. ...

Meg Reilly, a political appointee at OMB under the Obama administration, said that it was alarming to think of people without training or expertise — or the culture of legal fealty that exists among career staff in the OMB — having power over those numbers. “It’s a meaningful cultural shift,” she said, noting that the career staff and political appointees within OMB physically work in different buildings, a geographic representation of the gulf between their roles.

The Trump administration, through the OMB, has previously worked to circumvent or override decision-making by career appointees, most famously by impounding U.S. military aid to Ukraine in 2019, at the same time that President Donald Trump was pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden — a scandal that resulted in Trump’s impeachment and ultimate acquittal. Given the administration’s handling of the census and the U.S. Postal Service — both of which it has worked to deliberately undermine for political gain — there is reason to suspect that its appointees would not handle the newfound power responsibly.

Our cheap, cynical government is the real threat to recovery, not Covid-19 benefits

In America, it seems, workers always come last. With more than 31 million out-of-work Americans now cut off from enhanced unemployment benefits, and with Washington’s failure to deliver relief, working families and the broader economy are set to fall off a cliff.

Contempt for workers informs Beltway chatter: those on unemployment have been lazy, goes the thinking, forgoing work to indulge in the US Cares Act’s $600-a-week boost in benefits. These people seem to invite suspicion: they are “overpaid”, or, worse, “paid not to work”, and they – not the deadly pandemic – are holding back our economic recovery. Only taking away the extra cash will spur them to once again pack our groceries and serve our burgers. Or, as the marketing department would have it, be heroes. ...

To be clear: the “disincentive” to work is Covid-19, the disease that has killed 170,000 Americans and counting. As it ravages the country, jobs have vanished. There are more than three times as many unemployed Americans as there are job openings. But by all means, let’s blame the workers. Let’s spread the misinformation that the unemployed are lounging around drinking beer and watching Netflix all day as distressed employers pound the pavement for labor. ...

There may be tens of millions unemployed in this country, but there is plenty of work to do. We need more public school teachers, tents for outdoor learning, N95 masks, Covid testing swabs, energy-efficient infrastructure and yes, public art. How about a Pandemic Jobs Program that pulls in big elements of the Green New Deal? With every passing day, more Americans die and more lose jobs that may never come back. Not to mention the climate emergency that is only becoming more urgent. In this unprecedented situation, we have a choice. We can keep debating how to deny unemployed Americans $600 a week, or we can rebuild this country while ensuring it is more humane, productive and sustainable.

US unemployment claims climbed back up over 1m last week

The number of people applying for unemployment benefits climbed back over 1 million last week as the coronavirus continued to take a devastating toll on the job market.

The labor department announced on Friday that it received 1.1m claims for benefits last week, an increase of 135,000 from the previous week’s revised level and suggesting that layoffs increased last week.

Weekly applications for unemployment benefits had dipped below 1m the previous week for the first time since March, amid signs that people were returning to work following the relaxation of quarantine rules. Many economists had predicted a further fall this week and the latest figures show how volatile the situation remains.

Court blinks:

Judge grants Uber and Lyft temporary stay, averting shutdown of California services

A California judge has granted Uber and Lyft a temporary stay, heading off a shutdown by the two platforms at the last minute in an ongoing case that would require the ride-hailing giants to classify drivers as employees. Lyft and Uber have been awaiting a landmark decision from a court in the state, which would enforce a new labor law known as AB5. The law, which went into effect in January, would require the companies to classify its drivers as employees and provide them with a minimum wage and benefits. The decision, which was expected on Thursday, has been postponed until October.

AB5 was passed in 2019 and went into effect in January 2020. Uber and Lyft still have not begun to classify drivers as employees, instead making a series of changes to their apps in an attempt to work around the law. In May, the state of California sued both companies for misclassifying drivers under the new law, compelling them to adhere to AB5.

Relating to that lawsuit, a California judge issued a preliminary injunction in August blocking Uber and Lyft from classifying their drivers as independent contractors rather than employees – essentially forcing them to follow the new law.

The judge gave the companies a 10-day stay during which the injunction would not have immediate effects. During that stay, both companies appealed the decision. On Thursday, instead of ruling on the issue, the judge blocked the order until 13 October, when an oral argument will take place in court. In the meantime, the competitors have been asked to consolidate their appeals into one.

Ahead of the decision on Thursday, both Uber and Lyft threatened to suspend services in the state of California, their largest market in the US and the state where both companies were founded. Both have leveraged their large user base, sending push notifications in the app to millions of people, attempting to promote their views that drivers should not be paid full-time wages.

Footage of black Muslim man who died in police custody renews calls for justice

The family of Muhammad Muhaymin Jr, an unarmed black Muslim man who died in police custody in 2017, has issued a renewed plea for justice as video footage was released showing him screaming “I can’t breathe” and calling “Please Allah” in the minutes before he died.

The 43-year-old died after being held down by at least four Phoenix police officers – one of whom put their knee on his neck – for nearly eight minutes as he cried out in pain. The incident started after Muhaymin, who was homeless at the time and suffered from mental illness, tried to bring his chihuahua, a service dog, into a public bathroom at a community centre in Maricopa county in Arizona and an employee called 911. Minutes later, he was dead.

None of the officers have faced any disciplinary measures or been charged and they all still work for Phoenix police. ...

The family is in the process of a civil lawsuit for which they expect to have a trial date in early spring. Their lawyer, David Chami, managing partner of litigation at Price Law Group, called for the investigation to be reopened. He said: “If the investigation was reopened based on what we’ve now uncovered in our civil lawsuit, we do believe that some of the officers, not all of them, but that some of the officers would warrant criminal prosecution.”

Cornel West & Ben Jealous on the DNC and Whether Progressives Can Push Joe Biden Leftward

Trump Comes Up Empty When Pressed for Evidence of Election Fraud in Court

President Donald Trump’s campaign, ordered by a federal court judge in Pennsylvania to back up its claims of fraud in the state’s vote-by-mail system, has documented only a handful of cases of election fraud in recent years — none of which involved mail-in ballots. The revelation, which came in the form of a partially redacted 524-page document produced by the Trump campaign last week, undermines the claim by Trump team operatives that mail-in ballot fraud is a grave risk to Pennsylvania voters.

The campaign is suing Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth Kathy Boockvar and each of the state’s county election boards to prevent election administrators from providing secure drop boxes for mail-in ballot returns. These drop boxes allow voters to return their mail-in ballots by hand, without sending them through the postal system and risking delays. The Trump campaign alleges that the practice “provides fraudsters an easy opportunity to engage in ballot harvesting, manipulate or destroy ballots, manufacture duplicitous votes, and sow chaos.”

In a motion last week, Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future and the Sierra Club called on the Trump campaign to provide evidence of the existence of voter fraud, arguing that the campaign’s lawsuit was “replete with salacious allegations and dire warnings” about Pennsylvania’s elections and that they “must either be compelled to provide discovery concerning their fraud-based allegations or be precluded from pursuing these claims going forward.” Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan granted the motion, ordering the campaign to “produce such evidence in their possession, and if they have none, state as much.”

The response provided by the Trump campaign to the opposing counsel, which was shared with The Intercept and Type Investigations, contains a few scant examples of election fraud — but none of the instances in the 524-page discovery document involved mail-in ballots.

Nancy Pelosi Endorsing Joe Kennedy Over Ed Markey, Critics Charge, 'Reveals a Ridiculous Double Standard'

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi came under fire from progressive activists and advocacy groups in Massachusetts and nationwide on Thursday for endorsing Rep. Joe Kennedy III in his bid to unseat Sen. Ed Markey—a move that critics said suggests the Democratic establishment's threat to blacklist firms and strategists that help primary challengers to incumbents was always about blocking candidates from running to the left of the party's current members of Congress.

"Never before have the times demanded we elect courageous leaders as today, and that is why I am proud to endorse Joe Kennedy for Senate," Pelosi said in a video Thursday, citing Kennedy's record of campaigning and fundraising across the country during the 2018 midterm cycle, when he served as a mid-Atlantic and New England regional vice chair for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC).

"Pelosi's endorsement is both a boon to Kennedy and a snub of Markey, who was an ally of the California Democrat during his long tenure in the House," reported the Boston Globe. "In 2007, during her first turn as speaker, Pelosi chose Markey over several other prominent lawmakers to head a select committee dedicated to energy and global warming issues, and then supported the 2009 climate legislation he co-wrote, bringing it to a vote on the House floor."

In response to the endorsement, Markey—who represented Massachusetts' 7th Congressional District from 1976 to 2013 before being elected to the Senate—tweeted: "Speaker Pelosi is an effective leader who has shattered glass ceilings throughout her career. I had the privilege to work alongside Nancy in the House for decades and any candidate would be proud to have her endorsement. I congratulate Joe Kennedy on securing her support."

However, some of Markey's supporters and groups that have worked to elect progressives expressed frustration with Pelosi's decision to get involved in the high-profile, tight race ahead of the September 1 primary election—particularly given the DCCC's incumbent-favoring blacklist policy, which Pelosi and other party leaders have stood behind despite criticism that it blocks progressives from replicating primary victories like that of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) in 2018.

Justice Democrats, which backed Ocasio-Cortez's 2018 challenge to a longtime Democratic congressman, called Pelosi's decision to endorse Kennedy "outrageous" in an email Thursday, declaring that "this move reeks of hypocrisy: the party is setting one standard for progressives and one entirely different standard for the establishment."

Ilhan’s multimillion challenge was bankrolled by DC lobbyists & dark money groups.

He blatantly admitted to using shell corporations to get around the DCCC blacklist, which all but means his vendors work w/ the Democratic Party.

Yet DCCC hasn’t enforced policy. I wonder why

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) August 20, 2020

The New York congresswoman was far from alone in mentioning the policy. The youth-led Sunrise Movement, which advocates for a Green New Deal and is among the activists and groups backing Markey, pointed to it in a statement Thursday.

"This endorsement is an embarrassment for Speaker Pelosi, and we're honestly shocked she had the gall to invoke social movements in endorsing Joe Kennedy," Sunrise said. "Despite millions of dollars from Joe Kennedy's family, Ed Markey is surging because his movement-connected campaign has inspired genuine grassroots support and because voters have seen him show throughout the years that he's willing to stand up for working people and movements when it counts."

"This endorsement is embarrassing because it plainly reveals a ridiculous double standard," the group continued. "When progressives challenge incumbent Democratic lawmakers who vote with Trump two-thirds of the time, Nancy Pelosi cries foul and works with the DCCC to make a blacklist for anyone helping the challenger. But with today's announcement, Speaker Pelosi is saying that when she likes the challenger, or the challenger has a rich and wealthy family, helping challengers is okay."

David Sirota CATCHES Top Biden Aide Saying They Won't Pursue MAJOR Economic Policy

Team Biden Now Signals Austerity, Despite Campaign Pledges

The Democratic convention has sucked up all the political oxygen in America — so much so, that most people missed Team Biden signaling that it may back off the entire agenda it is campaigning on. This monumental declaration went almost completely unnoticed for an entire day — which is a genuinely disturbing commentary on how the biggest of big political news gets routinely ignored.

To review the situation: earlier this month, Bloomberg News reported that Biden’s “campaign rolled out a $3.5 trillion economic program over the past month” — one that “promises to invest in clean energy and caregiving, buy more made-in-America goods, and start narrowing the country’s racial wealth gaps.” This, said the news service, was proof that Biden no longer adhered to an ideology of austerity and deficit hawkery — which would be good news.

But then on the eve of Biden’s convention speech, the Democratic nominee’s top aide suggested to Washington reporters that, in fact, that’s not true. Here’s the key excerpt:

Former Delaware Sen. Ted Kaufman, a Biden confidant who succeeded him in the Senate, predicted during a Wall Street Journal Newsmakers Live interview Tuesday that a large increase in federal spending would be difficult to achieve in 2021.

“When we get in, the pantry is going to be bare,” said Mr. Kaufman, who is leading Mr. Biden’s transition team. “When you see what Trump’s done to the deficit…forget about Covid-19, all the deficits that he built with the incredible tax cuts. So we’re going to be limited.”

... What I find particularly troubling is that Kaufman’s quote made it into the Wall Street Journal yesterday. The newspaper tweeted it out early in the morning. It sat out there for almost 24 hours — an eternity in the current news ecosystem. And yet, as far as I can tell, nobody noticed. Hell, the Journal’s tweet had all of 1 retweets on it as of this morning. ...

This monumental declaration was in a major newspaper — it should have set off immediate alarm bells from all the think tanks, unions and advocacy groups in Washington whose job is to make sure that this kind of destructive austerity ideology does not once again take hold in the Democratic Party. There should have been press releases, and statements of outrage and congresspeople on TV talking about it.

But for an entire day, there was nothing, until it was shamed into the conversation.

Krystal and Saagar: Cory Booker SHAMES Voters, Says They're 'Privileged' If They Don't Vote

Michigan to pay $600m to Flint residents following drinking water disaster

Michigan will pay $600m to compensate Flint residents whose health was damaged by lead-tainted drinking water after the city heeded state regulators’ advice not to treat it properly, an attorney involved in the negotiations told the Associated Press.

Details will be released later this week, according to the attorney, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak about it ahead of an official announcement. The settlement was first reported by the Detroit News, MLive.com and WXZY-TV.

It is intended to resolve all legal actions against the state for its role in a disaster that made the impoverished, majority-black city a nationwide symbol of governmental mismanagement, the attorney said.

The offices of the governor, Gretchen Whitmer, and attorney general, Dana Nessel, have been negotiating for more than 18 months with lawyers for thousands of Flint residents who have filed suits against the state. ... Lawsuits against the state are being overseen by US district Judge Judith Levy, who would have to approve the settlement.

Under the deal, the state would establish a $600m fund and Flint residents could file claims for compensation. The amount awarded per applicant would be based on how badly they were harmed, the attorney told AP. It calls for devoting 80% of the money to people who were under age 18 during the period when Flint was using river water, the attorney said.

Californian blazes result of climate change, governor says

Fight to protect Joshua trees faces stiff local opposition in California

Efforts to win endangered species protections for the imperiled Joshua tree in California are encountering entrenched opposition from local officials, who say the added protections may prevent real estate development and economic growth. On Thursday, the California fish and game commission (FGC) will vote on a petition that, if approved, will grant the yucca plants temporary protected status for a year while the agency conducts a study. ...

The petition was authored by a local conservationist and grew out of increasing scientific evidence that Joshua trees face existential threats, from urban development and climate change. Brendan Cummings, the conservation director for the Center for Biological Diversity and author of the petition, believes local protections for the Joshua tree are superficial at best and often ignored.

He believes local officials’ opposition to granting the Joshua endangered status in the state stems from deference to real estate developments. ...

The Joshua tree – which is not a tree at all but actually a succulent called Yucca brevifolia – grows and reproduces slowly. They are associated with the Mojave desert, and millions of tourists flock annually to see them in national parks and wildlife preserves.

But the moths the plants rely on for pollination are becoming more scarce. Wildfires are shrinking the areas where Joshua trees remain. This week, the Dome fire, which sparked on Saturday in the Mojave national preserve, incinerated more than 43,000 acres in some of the world’s densest old-growth Joshua tree forest. Some models predict the plant could be virtually eradicated by the end of the century.

Corrupt DNC Secretly Cuts Ending Fossil Fuel Industry Subsidies!

'They're owned by all Alaskans': salmon free-for-all draws throngs

Hundreds of fishermen stood chest deep in the brisk Alaskan river. Each held a five-foot net attached to a long metal pole. The only sounds were the quacks of seabirds and occasionally a new angler plodding into the water and asking, “have you caught anything yet?” Down the beach, someone shouted, “They’re running!” As she and others began dragging their poles through the current they felt the familiar thumping of a sockeye salmon bouncing around in their nets.

In Alaska, out-of-staters often pay $200 to $500 for an afternoon of guided fishing. But, if you’ve lived in the state for a full calendar year, you gain a rare privilege, one that is proving all the more essential as the pandemic causes a spike in unemployment and hunger. For a few weeks in July and August, all resident Alaskans are permitted to catch multiple coolers-full of sockeye for free. All they need is a net.

Amid a festival atmosphere, Alaskans by their thousands wade with their dip nets into the mouth of the Kenai River, a few hours’ drive from Anchorage, known for its prolific quantity of sockeye, and into its twin, the Kasilof River, just down the road. They’re allowed to take home 25 sockeyes for the head of household, plus 10 more for each additional family member. A family of four, for instance, may collect a total of 55. (The rest of the salmon season, where only rod and reel fishing is allowed, anglers are limited to just six salmon a day.)

“The fish are owned by all Alaskans equally,” said Rick Green, special assistant to the commissioner of the Alaska department of fish and game. “It’s a really cool, unique benefit that Alaskan residents get. It’s a way to use the resource owned by the people for the benefit of the people."

Long, but worth a scan:

Revealed: how the gas industry is waging war against climate action

When progressive Seattle decided last year to wipe out its climate pollution within the decade, the city council vote in favor was unsurprisingly unanimous, and the easiest first step on that path was clear. About one-third of the city’s climate footprint comes from buildings, in large part from burning “natural” gas for heating and cooking. Gas is a fossil fuel that releases carbon dioxide and far more potent methane into the atmosphere and heats the planet. It is plentiful and cheap, and it’s also a huge and increasing part of America’s climate challenge.

So, a city councilman drafted legislation to stop the problem from growing by banning gas hookups in new buildings. Suddenly, the first step didn’t look so easy. “From there, we just ran into a wall of opposition,” said Alec Connon, a campaigner with the climate group 350 Seattle. Local plumbers and pipe fitters warned of job losses. Realtors complained their clients would still want gas fireplaces. Building owners feared utility bills could soar. The effort died. The ban wasn’t politically tenable, it seemed.

But internal records obtained by the Guardian show the measure’s defeat and the “wall of opposition” that advocates experienced were part of a sophisticated pushback plan from Seattle’s gas supplier, Puget Sound Energy.

Seattle’s story isn’t unique. In fact, it’s representative of a nationwide blitz by gas companies and their allies to beat back climate action they consider an existential threat to their business, according to emails, meeting agendas and public records reviewed by the Guardian. The documents show the multibillion-dollar gas industry has built crucial local coalitions and hired high-powered operatives to torpedo cities’ anti-gas policies – sometimes assisted by money those same cities have paid into gas trade associations. ...

“The gas utilities are facing an existential threat, and instead of approaching a decarbonizing economy as an opportunity to reinvent themselves, they’re digging their heels in and going back to the age-old tactics of [the fossil fuel industry],” said Charlie Spatz, a researcher at the Climate Investigations Center. “These public records show just a fraction of a much larger effort to slow down critical climate solutions.”

Also of Interest

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

Effort to Spread Alex Morse Accusations Was Wider Than Previously Known

The anti-war wing of both parties is dead

There’s Enough Blame to Go Around in Belarus

Trump: US Troops in Iraq Will Return Home Soon

'Big Mistake': Progressives Slam Biden Campaign for Dismissal of Muslim-American Advocate Linda Sarsour

White House Accused of Hiding Mnuchin Role in Recruiting Postmaster General DeJoy

3-Time Felon JPMorgan Chase Wants to Burnish Its Image by Co-Branding with the U.S. Postal Service’s 91 Percent Approval Rating

The CIA Democrats in the 2020 elections

Facebook’s Ban on Far-Left Pages Is an Extension of Trump Propaganda

US government built secret iPod with Apple’s help, former engineer says

Cloth Masks Do Protect the Wearer – Breathing in Less Coronavirus Means You Get Less Sick

Millions of Americans scrape by after benefits expire: 'I lost everything'

Krystal and Saagar: Pelosi Endorses JOE KENNEDY While Bernie Stays On Sidelines

A Little Night Music

Little Walter - My Babe

Little Walter - Southern Feeling

Little Walter - Just A Feeling

Little Walter - Evans Shuffle

Little Walter - Last Night

Little Walter - I Don't Play

Little Walter - Juke

Little Walter - Key To The Highway

Little Walter - I Hate To See You Go

Little Walter - Boogie