New Yorker:
TRUMP, PUTIN, AND THE NEW COLD WAR
What lay behind Russia’s interference in the 2016 election—and what lies ahead?
In early January, two weeks before the Inauguration, James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, released a declassified report concluding that Putin had ordered an influence campaign to harm Clinton’s election prospects, fortify Donald Trump’s, and “undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process.” The declassified report provides more assertion than evidence. Intelligence officers say that this was necessary to protect their information-gathering methods.
Critics of the report have repeatedly noted that intelligence agencies, in the months before the Iraq War, endorsed faulty assessments concerning weapons of mass destruction. But the intelligence community was deeply divided over the actual extent of Iraq’s weapons development; the question of Russia’s responsibility for cyberattacks in the 2016 election has produced no such tumult. Seventeen federal intelligence agencies have agreed that Russia was responsible for the hacking.
In testimony before the Senate, Clapper described an unprecedented Russian effort to interfere in the U.S. electoral process. The operation involved hacking Democrats’ e-mails, publicizing the stolen contents through WikiLeaks, and manipulating social media to spread “fake news” and pro-Trump messages.
Rex Huppke/ChiTrib:
But by Thursday, Bannon was smugly taunting the press at the Conservative Political Action Conference, saying: "They're corporatist, globalist media that are adamantly opposed to an economic nationalist agenda like Donald Trump has."
"Globalist media" is a loaded term that bubbled up out of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories of a media controlled by Jewish elites, a concept akin to "international bankers," cabals of wealthy Jews supposedly plotting to take over the world.
Bannon knows this, I have no doubt. He ran Breitbart, a website that caters to white nationalists, many of whom are overtly anti-Semitic.
So why toss out the globalist media canard just days after the executive director of the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect condemned Trump and called the president's late statement about the Jewish center threats a "Band-Aid on the cancer of Antisemitism that has infected his own Administration."
I spoke with Anne Frank Center director Steven Goldstein following Bannon's comment Thursday.
"We are now seeing a pattern," he said. "And during the week in which the Trump administration has been under a microscope for anti-Semitism, this is how you refer to the press? In some of the most unfortunate anti-Semitic terms in history? That doesn't happen by accident."
I agree. Bannon's snarling "globalist media" comment struck me as a rebellious nod to the swath of Trump supporters who believe such nonsense.
Quizlet:
Propaganda Techniques
Propaganda
An organized attempt to influence public opinion on political, religious, social, or cultural issues
Name Calling
Propagandists use this technique to create fear and arouse prejudice by using negative words (bad names) to create an unfavorable opinion or hatred against a group, beliefs, ideas or institutions they would have us denounce. This method calls for a conclusion without examining the evidence. Name Calling is used as a substitute for arguing the merits of an idea, belief, or proposal. It is often employed using sarcasm and ridicule in political cartoons and writing.
Glittering Generalities
Propagandists employ vague, sweeping statements (often slogans or simple catchphrases) using language associated with values and beliefs deeply held by the audience without providing supporting information or reason. They appeal to such notions as honor, glory, love of country, desire for peace, freedom, and family values. The words and phrases are vague and suggest different things to different people but the implication is always favorable. It cannot be proved true or false because it really says little or nothing at all
NY Times with an excellent Magazine look at Labor:
Divisions of Labor
New kinds of work require new ideas — and new ways of organizing.
By BARBARA EHRENREICH
The Future of Not Working
As automation reduces the need for human labor, some Silicon Valley executives think a universal income will be the answer — and the beta test is happening in Kenya.
By ANNIE LOWREY
Learning to Love Our Robot Co-Workers
The most important frontier for robots is not the work they take from humans but the work they do with humans — which requires learning on both sides.
By KIM TINGLEY
This WaPo story claims that Dems won’t push WH on Russia probe because:
“The bigger thing here is, if Democrats want to continue to relive their loss every single day, by doing an investigation or review after review, that’s fine by us,” she added. “We know why we won this race. It’s because we had the better candidate with the better message. They didn’t campaign in the right places. They didn’t have a good candidate, and if they want to continue to relive that loss every single day, then we welcome that.”
Sanders’s boss echoed that sentiment on Twitter on Sunday afternoon, writing: “Russia talk is FAKE NEWS put out by the Dems, and played up by the media, in order to mask the big election defeat and the illegal leaks!”
The WH thinks "eff you you lost" is an answer to everything. Governance. Defense of Russia probe. Policy. Everything. It is up to us to answer that it is not, now and in 2018.
Guardian:
Father of Navy Seal killed in Yemen calls for investigation into 'stupid mission'
Bill Owens says he refused to meet Donald Trump who authorised the special forces raid, in which 25 civilians also died, days after his inauguration
Bill Owens told the Herald that Trump should not “hide behind my son’s death to prevent an investigation”.
He also said he told a chaplain at the airbase: “I’m sorry, I don’t want to see him. I told them I don’t want to meet the president. I told them I didn’t want to make a scene about it, but my conscience wouldn’t let me talk to him.”
Jason Sattler (aka @LOLGOP)/USA Today:
Time to talk Trump impeachment
Ignoring your own party’s transgressions is standard politics, but the GOP has made fine art of it.
When Republicans are out of power they conjure scandals — like #Benghazi, a tragedy in search of a crime. Now that they’re back in charge at the White House, they're trying to set records for how deeply they can push their heads into the sand.
Ethics watchdogs have already filed dozens of complaints against Trump. If Democrats don’t move swiftly, they may find themselves trailing both their base and public opinion, again.
A recent Public Policy Polling poll found 46% in favor of the House calling up the current president on formal charges, a number that Richard Nixon didn’t see, according to historian Kevin M. Kruse, until 16 months into the Watergate crisis. In contrast, only 35% of Americans backed the actual impeachment of Bill Clinton, in the days after the House had passed two charges against him.
Democrats have to set the stakes now for the 2018 election. A minority president with a negative mandate under a cloud of inscrutable suspicion is pursuing a largely unpopular agenda with possibly irreparable consequences.
If Republicans won’t check him, the voters must.
The right “I” word is investigate. The rest will follow.
Comments are closed on this story.