Come on, you are all over-stating the seriousness of the Trump business conflicts of interest.
True, he is dancing with dictators and murderers. True, other governments can blackmail the USA now, by leveraging threats to Trump’s business empire. True, his business interests lead to him to conflicts with private not-so-rich citizens, where he uses eminent domain to condemn their property for his business use..and now will possess vast powers to do more of this damage. True, he parleys with Putin, now owing his Presidency to Russian interference, and thus will ignore Russia’s invasion of Crimea, and subsequently ignoring other aggressive acts.
Further, it is certainly true that Trump and his business associations with these other ‘dictators’ threatens massive human rights violations. Trump’s business interests– and now his cabinet– align themselves with climate deniers who will eventually devastate the environment, perhaps making it uninhabitable, while spewing ignorance all the way.
And true….wait. What was my point?
Dang, I guess you all may have actually UNDERSTATED the threat to human life, human rights and the environment that the Trump business empire presents to the people of the USA.
FOR 50 YEARS, DAN RATHER HAS BEEN A JOURNALISTIC CONSCIENCE OF THE COUNTRY. DESPITE HIS RAILROADING BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION (HE WAS CORRECT IN HIS REPORTING OF W’S DESERTION FROM THE NATIONAL GUARD), HE HAS STAYED ACTIVE, INVOLVED, AND HIS VOICE IS NEEDED NOW MORE THAN EVER. HERE’S HIS IDEA TO MEMORIALIZE THOSE WHOSE DENIAL OF SCIENCE ARE CONDEMNING US TO IRREVERSIBLE ECOLOGICAL DAMAGE AND AN UNLIVABLE PLANET.
“I think we should erect a monument built from materials impervious to the elements and list the names of all the elected officials and others in positions of power today in the United States who refuse to stand with the science on climate change.
We can put this monument on the coast – say off Miami – and have its base equal to the lapping waves of high tide. As sea levels rise, the monument will begin to be submerged, at increasingly greater depths. It will become a symbol of the cynicism, stupidity, and folly of our age. And it will be important for future generations to know who was responsible for this failure of action and imagination as this global crisis crescendoed. When I see Donald Trump cast doubt on climate change, I am deeply disappointed. When I see him appoint climate change deniers to key posts in his cabinet, I am deeply worried. When I see those in the scientific community and elsewhere pushing back, I am determined to bring these voices of reason to light.
Science is not a conclusion. It’s a process. It’s also about the real world. Not a post-truth world. If you’re wrong as a scientist, it’s hard to keep that hidden for very long because others will do an experiment and show the limitations of your earlier conclusions.
All these climate change deniers are denigrating the very nature of scientific discovery. It’s the same enterprise that, in biological research, leads to the cures these climate deniers plead from their doctors, or the geological research that finds and extracts the raw materials that power these climate deniers’ lives, or the physics that makes these climate deniers’ modern technology work.
To cherry pick the science you like is to show you really don’t understand much of anything. That is your right. But when it affects my life, that of my family, the future direction of my country, and the health of our planet, than the ignorance is far from harmless. The world must remember what is happening here and perhaps the judgement of history might induce some to the action we so desperately need.”
Good piece of writing about a subject that has been grinding my gears for a long time.
Hair on fire moment in history. The next couple of months will be INTERESTING.
In light of the bombshell article in the Washington Post today revealing the CIA knew that the Russians hacked the DNC and meddled in the election trying to get Trump elected, Trump is now trashing the CIA.
It’s time to find out: who’s pulling Trump’s strings? Is he working for the Russians against the interests of the U.S.? How connected is he to Putin and the Russian government? Trump is about to appoint Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon, as his Secretary of State. He’s at the top of Trump’s list according to the Trump transition team. Tillerson has never held another job outside of Exxon, he started working with the company in the 70s. Tillerson is a longtime friend of Putin’s, met with Putin at his private vacation home to sign a 500 billion dollar deal–BILLION– to blend the biggest state-owned oil company in Russia (ROSNEFT) with Exxon, and operate more than 20 new oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. Putin also awarded Tillerson Russia’s highest medal given to non-Russians, the Order of Friendship.
Wow. A stolen election, a man about to be sworn in as POTUS whose connections to our country’s biggest foreign enemy are as yet unknown (he refuses to reveal his tax returns), the CIA proving the election was hacked, Goldman Sachs and Exxon about to manipulate the economic direction and policy of the country with the approval of an avowed friend of Russia—the President-elect— holy fucking shit. This sounds like the plot of a James Bond movie that was rejected as too preposterous.
When the White House called a secret meeting last September to reveal what the CIA knew, they asked congressional leaders for a bipartisan rejection of any Russian involvement in the election–to reassure the public that the election would be above board. Mitch McConnell refused, and told Obama that he would consider any discussion of Russia trying to get Trump elected as partisan politics. As a result of Obama trying to walk a fine line between alarming the nation and being accused of partisan politics during an election, we all went to the polls ignorant and in the dark about the scope of the Russian hack. FBI director Comey–a Republican– jumped in with “Clinton email alerts”to further tip the scales ten days before the election. For McConnell’s loyalty, Trump named his wife to a cabinet position.
Tillerson, Trump, Putin, Manafort, Bannon, McConnell, Comey— the cast of characters is like a coffee klatch for the Kremlin.
Keep your eyes open and watch who fights any investigation, that will tell you who the guilty parties are. And right now Trump and his cronies are fighting tooth and nail to cover it up.
Anybody longing for the days when our biggest worry was what Hillary might be emailing to Huma Abedin?
Holy fucking shit.
This is a warning. When they say they’re going to do it, believe them.
Here’s what I heard in bars and restaurants in Florida and Minnesota before the election:
“How can you vote for Clinton when she gave all those speeches to Goldman Sachs?”
“She talked to Goldman Sachs—she’s doesn’t qualify to even RUN for President.”
“Hillary sucks—she’s corrupt—she’s in bed with Goldman Sachs.”
“How much did she make for those speeches? I want the transcripts!”
“At least by voting for Trump I won’t be giving the keys to the treasury to Goldman Sachs.”
“Trump says it’s either him or Goldman Sachs, I know who I’m voting for.”
I heard that. A lot. Hey Trump Chumps, your con man now has THREE of those Satanic Goldman Sachs boys in his incoming administration, he’s not done yet, and all I hear from you is crickets. Fucking crickets. You still think he gives a rat’s ass about your financial future?
Congratulations, you rubes. Good luck with your health insurance, your social security, a decent life for your gay sons and daughters, and your tax bill.
A new PPP poll coming out tomorrow has some laugh-till-you-cry stats, but I can’t wait till then to preview them. So here’s a peek into the mind of TRUMP VOTERS nationwide, sit back and be afraid…..
UP IS DOWN, DOWN IS UP
51% of the nation has as UNFAVORABLE view of Trump
50% of the nation has a FAVORABLE view of Obama
90% of Trump voters have an UNFAVORABLE view of Obama
Under Obama, the stock market has gone from 7949 to its close today at 19615, more than doubling during his Presidency. But 39% of Trump voters think it has DROPPED during his time in office.
Unemployment under Obama has dropped from 7.8% to 4.6%, and most of America seems to know this. 74% of Clinton voters know it. But 67% of Trump voters think it has gone UP.
Clinton currently holds a nearly 3 million vote margin in the popular vote. 40% of Trump voters think he WON the popular vote.
60% of Trump voters think millions of illegal voters voted in this election.
73% of Trump voters think that George Soros is paying protesters to march against Trump.
29% of Trump voters think votes from California shouldn’t have counted in this election.
And finally, and most scary of all, a big majority of the nation’s voters thinks Trump should immediately release his tax returns, including 92% of Clinton voters. But a full 59% of Trump voters say NO HE SHOULDN’T.
They don’t want to know. They don’t want to find out if he’s corrupt, if he has dealings with Russia, if he’s ever paid taxes, what his business relationships are. They don’t care.
There it is. The alternate reality of the Trump voter. These are the people he’s counting on to support whatever damage he undertakes to do in the next four years. Now you know—statistically— what we’re dealing with.
Sure, all politicians lie. But Orange Hitler is in a class by himself.
He lies strategically. He lies pointlessly. He lies about important things and meaningless things. Above all, he lies frequently. Since he began his campaign last June, the Republican president-elect has subjected America to a daily barrage of inaccuracy and mendacity. Enjoy the read, you may find yourself a bit queasy when you realize once again that he is only six weeks out from being sworn in as POTUS. But there you have it. It’s your country and you live in it, right next door to the people who apparently think it’s just okey-dokey if their President lies virtually every time he opens his mouth.
Please keep in mind that this list goes only up to November 4th. We’ve had a month of lies since, so the actual count is more likely around 800-900. But who’s counting?
A study for Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy put some numbers to what we already knew: media coverage in 2016 was filled with false equivalency.
“False equivalencies abound in today’s reporting,” writes Patterson. “When journalists can’t, or won’t, distinguish between allegations directed at the Trump Foundation and those directed at the Clinton Foundation, there’s something seriously amiss. And false equivalencies are developing on a grand scale as a result of relentlessly negative news. If everything and everyone is portrayed negatively, there’s a leveling effect that opens the door to charlatans.”
A foundation that did genuinely good works and which violated no rules was treated the same—or worse—than a personal foundation that was treated as a slush fund and primarily served to help Donald Trump. Arcane details of handing email were treated as equivalent of … anything at all.
The result was that despite the clear differences, the media coverage came down the same: 87 percent of stories about Trump and Clinton indicated they were not fit for office.
But it was more than just the numbers that Clinton and Trump shared. It was the source. Donald Trump was allowed to define himself. He was also allowed to define Hillary Clinton.
… no one captured the mood of false equivalency more tightly than ABC News chief political analyst Matthew Dowd: “Either you care both about Trump being sexual predator & Clinton emails, or u care about neither. But don’t talk about one without the other,” he wrote in a Nov. 1 tweet.
In the media, no one did. As the range of Trump atrocities rained down, it wasn’t even necessary to find new items to press against Clinton. Accusations of wrongdoing in the Clinton Foundation generated far more stories than actual wrongdoing at the Trump Foundation— enough coverage to equal several additional topics. Even as Trump tossed off regular outrages, the media went back to the well to ensure that the number of negative stories about Clinton never faltered. When the media came up short, it knew where to go for more anti-Clinton rhetoric.
… in a campaign that featured frequent complaints from Trump that the system is “rigged,” perhaps the media should look at its own titled playing ground. As the Patterson report makes clear, outlets all too often allowed Trump — with his repetitive rallies and his nonstop Twitter account — to step in and provide the frame of reference for Hillary Clinton.
All too often, the media didn’t even bother to come up with their own words in making negative reports about Clinton. They just reported what Trump said, without bothering to refute lies and exaggerations. Though Clinton took pains to put out detailed statements on policy while Trump was content to toss out slogans, it didn’t matter, because the media reports on Clinton’s policy positions were just as negative as everything else—because most of these articles only reported on Clinton’s positions in terms of attacks framed by Trump.
There wasn’t much in Clinton’s general election news coverage that worked in her favor….Stories about her personal traits portrayed her as overly cautious and guarded and ran 3-to-1 negative. News reports on her policy positions trended negative by a ratio of 4-to-1. Everything from her position on health care to her position on trade was criticized, often in the form of an attack by Trump or another opponent. Her record of public service, which conceivably should have been a source of positive press, turned out differently. News reports on that topic were 62 percent negative to 38 percent positive, with Trump having a larger voice than she did in defining the meaning of her career. He was widely quoted as saying, “She’s been there 30 years and has nothing to show for it.”
Trump’s constant chatter made the media’s job easy. When it came to Trump, they just repeated what he said. When it came to Clinton, they just … repeated what Trump said.