Hey! Good Evening!

This evening's music features Chicago bluesman Floyd Jones. Enjoy!

“The United States is now a bloated military empire on the cusp of steady and irrevocable economic decline. Historically, the danger in such cases is that when the fiscal stability of the empire begins to weaken, the governing elites double down on the very policies of military profligacy that caused the fiscal crisis in the first place. And that appears to be what the people who run America would like to do.”

-- Mike Lofgren

News and Opinion

Glenn Greenwald has an excellent, important piece up worth reading in full. Here are some excerpts:

What’s Worse: Trump’s Campaign Agenda or Empowering Generals and CIA Operatives to Subvert It?

During his successful 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump, for better and for worse, advocated a slew of policies that attacked the most sacred prongs of long-standing bipartisan Washington consensus. As a result, he was (and continues to be) viewed as uniquely repellent by the neoliberal and neoconservative guardians of that consensus, along with their sprawling network of agencies, think tanks, financial policy organs, and media outlets used to implement their agenda (CIA, NSA, the Brookings/AEI think tank axis, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, etc.). ...

It is often claimed that this trans-partisan, elite coalition assembled against Trump because they are simply American patriots horrified by the threat he poses to America’s noble traditions and institutions. I guess if you want to believe that the CIA, the GOP consulting class, and assorted D.C. imperialists, along with Bush-era neocons like Bill Kristol and David Frum, woke up one day and developed some sort of earnest, patriotic conscience about democracy, ethics, constitutional limits, and basic decency, you’re free to believe that. It makes for a nice, moving story: a film from the “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” genre. But at the very least, Trump’s campaign assaults on their most sacred pieties was, and remains, a major factor in their seething contempt for him.

From the start of Trump’s presidency, it was clear that the permanent national security power structure in Washington was deeply hostile to his presidency and would do what it could to undermine it. Shortly before Trump was inaugurated, I wrote an article noting that many of the most damaging anti-Trump leaks were emanating from anonymous CIA and other Deep State operatives who despised Trump because the policies he vowed to enact — the ones American voters ratified — were so contrary to their agenda and belief system. Indeed, they were even anonymously boasting that they were withholding secrets from Trump’s briefings because they decided the elected president should not have access to them. ...

The last several weeks have ushered in more open acknowledgment of — and cheerleading for — a subversion of Trump’s agenda by unelected military and intelligence officials. Media accounts have been almost unanimous in heralding the arrival of retired Marine Gen. John Kelly as White House chief of staff, widely depicted as a sign that normalcy is returning to the executive branch. “John Kelly Quickly Moves to Impose Military Discipline on White House,” the New York Times headline announced. The current storyline is that Kelly has aligned with Trump’s national security adviser, Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, to bring seriousness and order to the White House. In particular, these two military men are systematically weakening and eliminating many of the White House officials who are true adherents to the domestic and foreign policy worldview on which Trump’s campaign was based.

The military triumvirate of Kelly, Mattis, and McMaster has been cast as the noble defender of American democracy, pitted against those who were actually elected to lead the government. ... It’s hard ... to imagine any group that has done more harm, and ushered in more evil, than the Bush-era neocons with whom Democrats are now openly aligning. And who has brought more death, and suffering, and tyranny to the world over the last six decades than the U.S. national security state? In terms of some of the popular terms that are often thrown around these days — such as “authoritarianism” and “democratic norms” and “U.S. traditions” — it’s hard to imagine many things that would pose a greater threat to all of that than empowering the national security state (what, before Trump, has long been called the Deep State) to exert precisely the power that is supposed to be reserved exclusively for elected officials.

Endangering a Landmark Nuclear Treaty

On Aug. 3, President Trump told millions of Twitter followers to “thank Congress” for the fact that “our relationship with Russia is at an all-time & very dangerous low.” The immediate impetus for his remark was congressional passage of new economic sanctions against Russia, but Trump might just as well have pointed to moves by the body to jeopardize a landmark arms control treaty negotiated in 1987 by President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.

The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty was remarkable for prohibiting an entire class of existing weapons, with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. Ratified by the Senate in 1988, following one of the darkest periods of the Cold War, it led to the destruction of 2,700 missiles, both nuclear and conventional, over a period of about three years.

The treaty also opened the door to on-site inspections and other verification measures that made possible the first Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in 1991, under President George H.W. Bush. Greg Thielmann, a former top State Department intelligence official who advised on the INF treaty negotiations, has called its success “unprecedented” and “one of the world’s most dramatic achievements in curbing the nuclear arms race.”

Putting those great accomplishments at risk, the proposed new National Defense Authorization Act, which passed the House in July, authorizes the development of a new land-based missile banned by the INF treaty. A companion Senate bill, which will be considered after the August recess, would fund initial Pentagon development of a similarly prohibited missile.

In each case, the real target of the new missiles proposed by congressional hawks like Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas isn’t any particular Russian military capability, but the spirit of cooperation and shared interests that made arms control possible in the years from Nixon to Obama.

Neocons Leverage Trump-Hate for More Wars

A savvy Washington observer once told me that the political reality about the neoconservatives is that they alone couldn’t win you a single precinct in the United States. But both Republicans and Democrats still line up to gain neocon support or at least neocon acceptance. Part of the reason for this paradox is the degree of dominance that the neoconservatives have established in the national news media – as op-ed writers and TV commentators – and the neocon ties to the Israel Lobby that is famous for showering contributions on favored politicians and on the opponents of those not favored.

Since the neocons’ emergence as big-time foreign policy players in the Reagan administration, they also have demonstrated extraordinary resilience, receiving a steady flow of money often through U.S. government-funded grants from organizations such as the National Endowment for Democracy and through donations from military contractors to hawkish neocon think tanks.

But neocons’ most astonishing success over the past year may have been how they have pulled liberals and even some progressives into the neocon strategies for war and more war, largely by exploiting the Left’s disgust with President Trump. People who would normally favor international cooperation toward peaceful resolution of conflicts have joined the neocons in ratcheting up global tensions and making progress toward peace far more difficult.

The provocative “Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act,” which imposes sanctions on Russia, Iran and North Korea while tying President Trump’s hands in removing those penalties, passed the Congress without a single Democrat voting no. The only dissenting votes came from three Republican House members – Justin Amash of Michigan, Jimmy Duncan of Tennessee, and Thomas Massie of Kentucky – and from Republican Rand Paul of Kentucky and Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont in the Senate.

In other words, every Democrat present for the vote adopted the neocon position of escalating tensions with Russia and Iran. The new sanctions appear to close off hopes for a détente with Russia and may torpedo the nuclear agreement with Iran, which would put the bomb-bomb-bomb option back on the table just where the neocons want it.

U.S. Troops Train in Eastern Europe to Echoes of the Cold War

After more than a decade spent fighting Islamic insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States Army is scrambling to relearn Cold War-era skills to confront potential threats from Russia here in Eastern Europe, territory formerly defended by the Soviet Army.

The adjustments to the new threats are wide ranging. Hundreds of desert-tan battle tanks and armored fighting vehicles must be repainted dark green to blend into European terrain. Soldiers accustomed to operating from large, secure bases in Iraq and Afghanistan must now practice using camouflage netting to disguise their positions and dispersing into smaller groups to avoid sophisticated surveillance drones that could direct rocket or missile attacks against personnel or command posts.

American troops no longer have unfettered right of way in the air or priority access on the ground, as they did across Iraqi river valleys and Afghan mountain ranges. In today’s Europe, borders count in all matters military. On a recent Friday, an American Army supply convoy rushing ammunition from Germany to Romania was held up at the Austrian border until the next Monday by restrictions on military convoys during busy summer vacation travel periods.

A 10-day exercise last month involving 25,000 American and allied forces spread across three former Warsaw Pact countries — Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria — offered a window into how a generation of senior Army commanders are rehearsing updated tactics and strategies once used to counter Soviet troops, tanks and artillery, including nighttime aerial assaults by hundreds of paratroopers. The commanders are training a younger force that has mainly faced shadowy terrorist foes in the Middle East and Southwest Asia since the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. ...

The $40 million exercise here, called Saber Guardian, the largest in Europe this year, included driving more than 1,000 troops and hundreds of vehicles about 1,200 miles across Europe, the equivalent of going from St. Louis to Miami. Hundreds of allied troops — including American soldiers with faces painted in green and black camouflage — and their 60-ton tanks crossed the Danube River on temporary bridges, fending off mock attacks on the other side.

Japan marks 72 years since atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima

Is Donald Trump Tweeting the U.S. Into a War on North Korea?

Trump has exhibited a disturbing pattern of reckless spontaneity, usually expressed publicly through his Twitter feed, when announcing what could rightly be construed as new U.S. policies. Indeed, when Trump’s senior adviser Sebastian Gorka was asked on Fox News what leverage Trump has left to pressure China to do more to contain potential threats from North Korea, Gorka shot back: “We have, you know, the president’s Twitter feed.”

Perhaps more disturbing than what Trump tweets publicly is what he is telling influential U.S. senators privately. Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said recently that Trump told him he is willing to militarily obliterate the nation of North Korea if necessary. “There is a military option to destroy North Korea’s program and North Korea itself,” Graham told NBC. Trump, he said, “told me that to my face.”

Trump is doing his best to inflame tensions with North Korea and China. Last weekend, the U.S. flew two B-1 bombers over the Korean Peninsula. It also conducted a ballistic missile test in the region. That followed a July 28 intercontinental ballistic missile test by North Korea. That missile reportedly has a longer range than any previously tested by Pyongyang and in theory, according to experts, could reach the United States. South Korea is now asking the Trump administration for its own new missiles with a capacity to strike deeper into the North. The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Saturday to impose new sanctions on North Korea over its missile tests and nuclear program. ...

Tensions on the Korean peninsula are not new. And every U.S. administration seems to find itself in a similar conundrum with the regime. But Trump is erratic and tends to just spit out whatever he is thinking. And that could prove very dangerous with nuclear weapons and nuclear powers.

U.S. Prepared to Launch ‘Preventive War’ Against North Korea, Says H.R. McMaster

The United States is preparing for all options to counter the growing threat from North Korea, including launching a “preventive war,” national security adviser H.R. McMaster said in an interview with MSNBC that aired Saturday. The comments come following North Korea carrying out two tests of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) last month.

“What you’re asking is are we preparing plans for a preventive war, right?” he said in response to a question from MSNBC’s Hugh Hewitt. “A war that would prevent North Korea from threatening the United States with a nuclear weapon. And the president’s been very clear about it. He said he’s not gonna tolerate North Korea being able to threaten the United States. If they have nuclear weapons that can threaten the United States. It’s intolerable from the president’s perspective. So of course, we have to provide all options to do that. And that includes a military option.”

North Korea vows 'thousands-fold' revenge on US over sanctions

North Korea has vowed to exact “thousands-fold” revenge against the US after the UN imposed new sanctions in response to its recent tests of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

In a statement carried by the official KCNA news agency, the government said the sanctions were a “violent violation of our sovereignty” and part of a “heinous plot to isolate and stifle” the country.

The UN security council unanimously backed new sanctions on Saturday that could slash the regime’s $3bn in annual export revenue by a third. The measures target key revenue earners such as coal, iron, lead and seafood – but not oil.

Pyongyang threatened to take “righteous action”, describing the sanctions as a crime for which the US would pay “thousands of times”.

The US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, said on Monday that North Korea should halt missile launches if it wanted to negotiate.

UN Syria investigator quits over lack of 'political will'

'We are powerless': UN Syria investigator Carla del Ponte quits over lack of political backing

A member of the UN commission of inquiry on Syria said on Sunday she was quitting because a lack of political backing from the security council had made the job impossible, according to reports.

Carla del Ponte, 70, who prosecuted war crimes in Rwanda and former Yugoslavia, told a panel discussion on the sidelines of the Locarno film festival she had already prepared her letter of resignation, said Swiss national news agency SDA. “I am quitting this commission, which is not backed by any political will,” she said, adding that her role was just an “alibi”. “I have no power as long as the security council does nothing,” she said. “We are powerless, there is no justice for Syria.”

Del Ponte, a former Swiss attorney general, joined the three-member Syria inquiry in September 2012, chronicling incidents such as chemical weapons attacks, a genocide against Iraq’s Yazidi population, siege tactics, and the bombing of aid convoys.

The UN commission of inquiry said in a statement del Ponte had informed colleagues in June of her decision to leave in the near future. It said the investigations would continue

Well now, here's something that the remnants of that UN Syria investigation commission could follow up on ...

43 civilians killed in U.S.-led airstrikes in Syria's Raqqa

At least 43 civilians were killed Saturday by a fresh round of U.S.-led airstrikes on the northern city of Raqqa, state news agency SANA reported. ... This comes hours after seven children were killed in Raqqa overnight Friday.

SANA said the U.S. coalition went on a spree of airstrikes targeting the residential areas in the city.

Meanwhile, Dina Asa'ad, a Raqqa-based official in the Syrian Arab Red Crescent (SARC), said the coalition carried out an attack on Thursday evening on Raqqa with white phosphorous. In remarks carried by SANA, Asa'ad said the white phosphorous bombs struck the National Hospital in Raqqa. "Over 20 bombs struck the hospital, which damaged the electricity generators, ambulances and several wards inside the hospital," she was quoted as saying. ...

Asa'ad pointed out that there is no presence of the IS militants in the hospital, adding that what Raqqa is subject to cannot be fighting terrorism, but destruction. "The attacks targeted schools and bakeries. Even the government institutions have been completely destroyed as well as the water wells in the city," she said.

Germany's SPD rejects NATO 2 percent defense spending target

Germany's Social Democrats on Sunday rejected NATO's target of spending 2 percent of national output on defense and accused German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her conservatives of kowtowing to the demands of U.S. President Donald Trump.

With Germans set to vote in a national election next month, SPD leader Martin Schulz and Thomas Oppermann, who heads the center-left party in parliament, issued their strongest criticism to date of Merkel, the NATO spending target and Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen.

"We say a clear no to the 'two-percent target' of Trump and the CDU/CSU," the two leaders wrote in an essay for the Funke Mediengruppe newspaper chain, referring to Merkel's Christian Democrats and their Bavarian sister party.

"It's not only unrealistic, it is simply the wrong goal," they said, in comments aimed at differentiating the SPD from Merkel's conservatives after four years in a "grand coalition".

Trump challenging China on trade would spark 'very aggressive' response, expert predicts

Moves by Donald Trump to confront China on trade would elicit a “very aggressive” response, a former top US trade negotiator has predicted, as Beijing said an upcoming visit from the US president would help “map out” the next half century of ties between the world’s top two economies.

There has been speculation since last week that Trump – who is due to travel to China this year – is preparing to launch a potentially incendiary investigation into its alleged abuse of intellectual property rights.

After China’s decision to back a UN security council resolution against North Korea on Saturday, some reports suggested that inquiry might have been put on ice. The Financial Times called the anticipated move “the trade diplomacy equivalent of a wooden club” and warned it could provoke “a full-blown trade war”.

In an interview with the Guardian, Charlene Barshefsky, the US trade representative under Bill Clinton, agreed challenging Beijing could “engender a downward spiral” in relations.

“When China is displeased with US actions … you see China act in ways that are very aggressive, designed to intimidate, designed to force the US to back down,” said the veteran lawyer, who negotiated China’s 2001 entry into the World Trade Organisation (WTO) with its then premier Zhu Rongji.

As Downtown Detroit Gentrifies, Longtime Black Residents Fight Illegal Tax Foreclosures

Federal Bank Regulator Drops a Bombshell as Corporate Media Snoozes

Last Monday, Thomas Hoenig, the Vice Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), sent a stunning letter to the Chair and Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee. The letter contained information that should have become front page news at every business wire service and the leading business newspapers. But with the exception of Reuters, major corporate media like the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News, the Business section of the New York Times and Washington Post ignored the bombshell story, according to our search at Google News.

What the fearless Hoenig told the Senate Banking Committee was effectively this: the biggest Wall Street banks have been lying to the American people that overly stringent capital rules by their regulators are constraining their ability to lend to consumers and businesses. What’s really behind their inability to make more loans is the documented fact that the 10 largest banks in the country “will distribute, in aggregate, 99 percent of their net income on an annualized basis,” by paying out dividends to shareholders and buying back excessive amounts of their own stock.

Hoenig writes that the banks are starving the U.S. economy through these practices and if “the 10 largest U.S. Bank Holding Companies were to retain a greater share of their earnings earmarked for dividends and share buybacks in 2017 they would be able to increase loans by more than $1 trillion, which is greater than 5 percent of annual U.S. GDP.”

Backing up his assertions, Hoenig provided a chart showing payouts on a bank-by-bank basis. Highlighted in yellow on Hoenig’s chart is the fact that four of the big Wall Street banks are set to pay out more than 100 percent of earnings: Citigroup 127 percent; Bank of New York Mellon 108 percent; JPMorgan Chase 107 percent and Morgan Stanley 103 percent.

Wall Street Fines Down 66% Under Trump's Goldman Sachs-Filled Administration

Since taking office in January, President Donald Trump has chosen ex-Goldman Sachs bankers to fill several key positions within his administration. According to a Wall Street Journal analysis published Sunday, it appears that the nation's largest financial institutions are benefiting greatly from having their friends in government.

"Wall Street regulators have imposed far lower penalties in the first six months of Donald Trump's presidency than they did during the first six months of 2016, a comparable period in the Obama administration," the Journal reported.

Throughout his campaign for the presidency, Trump promised to loosen regulations on big banks by dismantling Dodd-Frank, which was established following the financial crisis of 2008. But the Journal's report indicates that the Trump team has found another way to ease up on Wall Street: namely, by not levying hefty fines for wrongdoing.

Attributing the rapid drop in fines to the "shift to a business-friendly stance at regulatory agencies," the Journal notes that "[p]enalties levied against firms and individuals by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority in the first half of 2017 were down nearly two-thirds compared with the first half of 2016."

Second body camera video ‘appears to depict’ Baltimore officers manufacturing evidence

The Baltimore Public Defender’s office said Monday that it has a second police body-camera video that “appears to depict multiple officers working together to manufacture evidence.” It said related charges against one of its clients were dropped Monday in Baltimore Circuit Court.

The same office recently released a body camera video that it said showed an officer planting a bag of drugs in a back yard as two other officers looked on. Police and prosecutors both launched investigations into that footage. The police department suspended Officer Richard Pinheiro, whose camera was recording and who was handling the alleged drugs in the video, and placed the two others — Officers Hovhannes Simonyan and Jamal Brunson — on administrative duty.

The new video involves different officers, the public defender’s office said. The officers were not named.

Charlottesville VA Backs "Reparations" Fund for Black Residents & Votes to Sell Robert E. Lee Statue

Jeff Sessions Promises to Crack Down on Leaks, Threatening to Subpoena Reporters

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a dramatic escalation in the U.S. government’s crackdown on leaks on Friday, threatening to subpoena news organizations for information about their sources even more frequently than the Obama administration.

Sessions described the Trump administration’s plans at a press conference just a day after the Washington Post published embarrassing transcripts of phone calls between Donald Trump and two foreign leaders, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

Sessions said that the Justice Department was reviewing Obama-era policies that set limits on its ability to subpoena journalists. ...

“The Department of Justice is explicitly threatening to haul journalists before grand juries and force them to testify about their confidential sources or face jail time,” said Peter Sterne, a senior reporter at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. “Sessions’s comments seem intended to have a chilling effect on journalism, by making reporters and their sources think twice before publishing information that the government does not like.”

Fossil fuel subsidies are a staggering $5 tn per year

Fossil fuels have two major problems that paint a dim picture for their future energy dominance. These problems are inter-related but still should be discussed separately. First, they cause climate change. We know that, we’ve known it for decades, and we know that continued use of fossil fuels will cause enormous worldwide economic and social consequences. Second, fossil fuels are expensive. Much of their costs are hidden, however, as subsidies. If people knew how large their subsidies were, there would be a backlash against them from so-called financial conservatives.

A study was just published in the journal World Development that quantifies the amount of subsidies directed toward fossil fuels globally, and the results are shocking. The authors work at the IMF and are well-skilled to quantify the subsidies discussed in the paper. The subsidies were $4.9 tn in 2013 and they rose to $5.3 tn just two years later. According to the authors, these subsidies are important because first, they promote fossil fuel use which damages the environment. Second, these are fiscally costly. Third, the subsidies discourage investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy that compete with the subsidized fossil fuels. Finally, subsidies are very inefficient means to support low-income households. ...

Interested readers are directed to the paper for further details, but the results are what surprised me. Pre-tax (the narrow view of subsidies) subsidies amount to 0.7% of global GDP in 2011 and 2013. But the more appropriate definition of subsidies is much larger (8 times larger than the pre-tax subsidies). We are talking enormous values of 5.8% of global GDP in 2011, rising to 6.5% in 2013.

USDA has begun censoring use of the term 'climate change', emails reveal

Staff at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) have been told to avoid using the term climate change in their work, with the officials instructed to reference “weather extremes” instead.

A series of emails obtained by the Guardian between staff at the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), a USDA unit that oversees farmers’ land conservation, show that the incoming Trump administration has had a stark impact on the language used by some federal employees around climate change.

A missive from Bianca Moebius-Clune, director of soil health, lists terms that should be avoided by staff and those that should replace them. “Climate change” is in the “avoid” category, to be replaced by “weather extremes”. Instead of “climate change adaption”, staff are asked to use “resilience to weather extremes”.

The primary cause of human-driven climate change is also targeted, with the term “reduce greenhouse gases” blacklisted in favor of “build soil organic matter, increase nutrient use efficiency”. Meanwhile, “sequester carbon” is ruled out and replaced by “build soil organic matter”.

"We're Ready to Stop It Again": KXL Opponents Flood Nebraska's Capitol

Hundreds demonstrated in Lincoln, Nebraska, on Sunday as part of the March to Give Keystone XL the Boot. The protest of TransCanada's proposed pipeline kicked off a week of events planned to coincide with public hearings, set to begin Monday, by the Nebraska Public Service Commission about the pipeline, which would run 275 miles across the state.

Locals farmers and ranchers as well as members of the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska and Yankton Sioux Tribe marched with a coalition of environmentalists from Bold Nebraska, 350.org, Sierra Club, Indigenous Environmental Network, CREDO, Greenpeace, Oil Change International, and MoveOn. Some even rode on horseback through Omaha's streets.

The coalition has collected thousands of written public comments expressing concerns about Keystone XL's threats to climate, water, and property rights, which will be delivered to the commission Thursday morning. "The Nebraska Public Service Commission has an immense responsibility. Not only does it have the responsibility to act in the best interest of Nebraska but also bear the trust responsibility the federal government chooses to ignore," said Harold Frazier, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe chairman.  "Approving the permit for TransCanada would send a message that Nebraska supports the damage that has already happened to our environment from the tar sands oil."

"Keystone XL never has been and never will be in Nebraska's public interest. This is a foreign pipeline, headed to the foreign export market, wanting to use eminent domain for private gain on Nebraska landowners," said Bold Alliance president Jane Kleeb, who also noted that the proposed pipeline route crosses the Sand Hills and the Ogallala Aquifer.

Also of Interest

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

Democrats Pushing the “Compete” Word to Justify Doubling Down on Failed, Middle-Class Destroying Neoliberal Policies

How Serious Is The Possibility of a Constitutional Convention?

The Instability of Britain and the US: How Do We Come Back From This?

Even More Evidence the US Is a Kleptocracy, Not a Meritocracy

With Al Aqsa Protests, a Popular Mass Movement Is Again Taking the Lead in Palestinian Resistance

In 1967, they watched their city erupt. Fifty years on, how has Detroit changed?

How Do Chicago Police Treat Mental Health? With SWAT Raids

A Little Night Music

Floyd Jones - On The Road Again

Floyd Jones and Eddie Taylor - Dark Road

Floyd Jones, Eddie Taylor & Big Walter Horton - Take Your Hand Down

Floyd Jones - Stockyard Blues

Floyd Jones - You can't live long

Floyd Jones - Playhouse

Floyd Jones - Early Morning

Floyd Jones + Eddie Taylor- Hard Times

Floyd Jones - Any Old Lonesome Day

Floyd Jones - Keep What You Got