FREE WHITEWATER

Author Archive for JOHN ADAMS

‘Very Brazen About It’

In the video above, Dr. Sarah Kendzior describes the brazen nature of autocracy: not merely does an autocrat flaunt norms, but he does so to remind others of his power, and to attempt to instill in normal, freedom-loving people a feeling of hopelessness in the face of power aberrantly exercised.

In response to these tactics, one should (1) remind repeatedly how contrary to a well-order society authoritarianism is, (2) prepare for a long campaign in opposition, and (3) apply maximum, collective pressure, at times of one’s own choosing, against an authoritarian’s greatest vulnerabilities.

A longer view is both steadying and rational: one manages reverses more easily, and applies one’s reasoning most effectively. (There is this requirement of a long view: a long memory.)

Video via Sarah Kendzior On The Impending Trump Autocracy: ‘They’re Very Brazen About It.’

Daily Bread for 7.19.17

Good morning.

Midweek in Whitewater will be partly cloudy with a high of eighty-three. Sunrise is 5:34 AM and sunset 8:27 PM, for 14h 53m 18s of daytime. The moon is a waning crescent with 20% of its visible disk illuminated. Today is the {tooltip}two hundred fifty-second day.{end-texte}Days since Trump’s election, with 11.9.16 as the first day.{end-tooltip}

Whitewater’s Parks & Recreation Board meets at 5:30 PM.

On this day in 1961, TWA was “the first American airline with movies aboard its aircraft when it showed By Love Possessed, starring Lana Turner and Efrem Zimbalist, Jr. in the first-class section of a Boeing 707 flying New York to Los Angeles.”  On this day in 1832, General James Henry & Colonel Henry Dodge found “the trail of the British Band and began pursuit of Black Hawk and the Sauk Indians. Before leaving camp, the troops were told to leave behind any items that would slow down the chase. The troops camped that evening at Rock River, 20 miles east of present day Madison. [Some sources place this event on July 18, 1832.]”

Recommended for reading in full — 

David A. Graham writes of The Other Putin-Trump Meeting:

When President Trump’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin went for more than two hours, well past the scheduled half-hour, it was a major news event. But it turns out that wasn’t even the end of the conversation between the two men.

Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group, first reported the second meeting Tuesday. Other outlets also reported the news, and the White House confirmed it to Reuters. (BuzzFeed journalist Alberto Nardelli had previously reported about a meeting.) Trump reportedly met with the Russian leader for an additional hour of informal chats after a dinner of G20 leaders—though the White House in a statement reported late Tuesday by NBC’s Hallie Jackson called the encounter “brief” and denied it constituted a second meeting. While the first meeting was small—the only attendees were Trump, Putin, the Russian foreign minister, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and one interpreter from each country—this was even smaller: just Trump, Putin, and a Russian interpreter. Trump did not have his own interpreter….

It’s all the more significant because it is the second time in less than two weeks that Trump and those close to him have been less than forthcoming about meetings with Russians. As Trump returned to the country, news broke that his son Donald Trump Jr. had met with a Russian lawyer. Trump Jr. initially claimed the meeting had been to discuss adoptions, but he later released emails showing that he believed he was meeting with a Russian government lawyer offering damaging information about Hillary Clinton. “If it’s what you say I love it,” Trump Jr. told an intermediary, though he now says it wasn’t: The lawyer didn’t deliver any dirt, he complained. Since then, the public has learned there were at least eight people present, including Trump Jr.’s brother-in-law, Jared Kushner, now a White House senior adviser, and Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort.

James Kirchick explains How the GOP Became the Party of Putin:

What I never expected was that the Republican Party—which once stood for a muscular, moralistic approach to the world, and which helped bring down the Soviet Union—would become a willing accomplice of what the previous Republican presidential nominee rightly called our No. 1 geopolitical foe: Vladimir Putin’s Russia. My message for today’s GOP is to paraphrase Barack Obama when he mocked Romney for saying precisely that: 2012 called—it wants its foreign policy back.

I should not have been surprised. I’ve been following Russia’s cultivation of the American right for years, long before it became a popular subject, and I have been amazed at just how deep and effective the campaign to shift conservative views on Russia has been. Four years ago, I began writing a series of articles about the growing sympathy for Russia among some American conservatives. Back then, the Putin fan club was limited to seemingly fringe figures like Pat Buchanan (“Is Vladimir Putin a paleoconservative?” he asked, answering in the affirmative), a bunch of cranks organized around the Ron Paul Institute and some anti-gay marriage bitter-enders so resentful at their domestic political loss they would ally themselves with an authoritarian regime that not so long ago they would have condemned for exporting “godless communism.”

Today, these figures are no longer on the fringe of GOP politics. According to a Morning Consult-Politico poll from May, an astonishing 49 percent of Republicans consider Russia an ally. Favorable views of Putin – a career KGB officer who hates America – have nearly tripled among Republicans in the past two years, with 32 percent expressing a positive opinion.

Garry Kasparov writes of Donald’s Pravda: Trump and his apologists spookily echo Vladimir Putin:

There is a clear parallel here to what we have experienced in Russia for the past 17 years under Putin: the intentional conflation of the private interests of the few with the public good. When Putin talks about what’s best for Russia, he always only means what is best for him and his cronies — what keeps them wealthy and in power.

There is now a similar dynamic with Trump, especially where Russia is concerned. His Hamburg meeting with Putin was a great gift to the Russian dictator, who needs prominent photo-ops to reassure his gang back home that he’s still a big boss who can protect their investments abroad.

Meanwhile, the U.S. needs nothing from Russia. No, despite Trump claims to the contrary, we’re not really on the same side in Syria. And U.S. sanctions are locked to Russia’s exit from Crimea, which is not going to happen any time soon.

So why the meeting? It’s a case of “Ask not what Russia can do for America, ask what Putin can do for Trump — and what has he been doing for him already?”

Trump also loves photo ops and feeling like a big man on the international stage, especially with his domestic agenda of health care, tax reform, infrastructure and immigration foundering.

John Dickerson considers All the Presidents’ Dirty Tricks (describing several adminsitations):

Whatever one may think of how Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, and Jared Kushner should have behaved in accepting the June 2016 meeting, President Trump has updated its relevance to the present. It is now a moral benchmark for the president and his team. Despite the moral and national security reasons to be wary of such a meeting, by the president’s rules of politics it was still a fine thing to do.

NASA has now released the closest-ever images of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot:

Appeasement or Atrophy

I wrote last week about local newspaper demographics, positing that “local readership of these publications [Gazette, Daily Union] is probably similar to that of Fox News. Nationally, newspaper readership skews to older Americans: half of newspaper readers in 2015 were over 65 years old. For Fox News, it’s a similar, if even older, demographic: half of Fox News viewers in 2015 were over 68. These are nationwide, rather than local, readership and viewership data.”

Those demographics are different from America’s, from Wisconsin’s, and from Whitewater & the towns nearby. Publications that rely on so homogeneous a readership rely on only of slice of America (demographically & culturally).

A recent editorial in the Gazette shows how bad this problem is. Following officials’ concerns that race & ethnicity were a cause of open-enrollment decisions in the Delavan-Darien School District, the Gazette wrote to argue against a consideration of race and ethnicity. SeeOur Views: Delavan-Darien School District’s problems go beyond racism (subscription req’d.).

In a 591-word editorial, the Gazette early on acknowledges that “Racism is likely part of [the] problem,” offers not one word more in consideration of that problem, and then spends the next 528 words looking for other explanations.

The Gazette wants to go beyond racism, but someone should remind the paper that one cannot go beyond a topic that one has scarcely reached.

Funnier still is the Gazette‘s prim declaration that “blaming each other or assigning ulterior motives to parents’ enrollment decisions is not helpful” when the paper itself admits early in the editorial that racism is likely a part of parental decisions.

The Gazette‘s editorials are poorly written because they’re poorly considered. They’re poorly considered either because the Gazette panders to a cosseted, echo-chamber readership or because it has, itself, succumbed to the atrophy that comes from being cosseted and in an echo chamber.

The gentlemen of the Gazette needn’t worry that one will assign a particular cause to their work, as one wouldn’t wish to be not helpful, and because it doesn’t immediately matter.

Appeasement or atrophy?

The result is mediocrity, either way.

Daily Bread for 7.18.17

Good morning.

Tuesday in Whitewater will be partly cloudy with a high of eighty-six. Sunrise is 5:33 AM and sunset 8:28 PM, for 14h 55m 01s of daytime. The moon is a waning crescent with 30.1% of its visible disk illuminated. Today is the {tooltip}two hundred fifty-first day.{end-texte}Days since Trump’s election, with 11.9.16 as the first day.{end-tooltip}

Whitewater’s Alcohol Licensing Committee meets at 5:45 PM, and Common Council at 6:30 PM.

On this day in 1865, successful in their defense of the Union, the 3rd and 18th Wisconsin Infantry regiments and the 1st and 6th Wisconsin Light Artillery batteries muster out.

Recommended for reading in full —

The Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal’s editorial page has been pro-Trump, but even that editorial board now addresses The Trumps and the Truth:

Don’t you get it, guys? Special counsel Robert Mueller and the House and Senate intelligence committees are investigating the Russia story. Everything that is potentially damaging to the Trumps will come out, one way or another. Everything. Denouncing leaks as “fake news” won’t wash as a counter-strategy beyond the President’s base, as Mr. Trump’s latest 36% approval rating shows.

Mr. Trump seems to realize he has a problem because the White House has announced the hiring of white-collar Washington lawyer Ty Cobb to manage its Russia defense. He’ll presumably supersede the White House counsel, whom Mr. Trump ignores, and New York outside counsel Marc Kasowitz, who is out of his political depth.

Mr. Cobb has an opening to change the Trump strategy to one with the best chance of saving his Presidency: radical transparency. Release everything to the public ahead of the inevitable leaks. Mr. Cobb and his team should tell every Trump family member, campaign operative and White House aide to disclose every detail that might be relevant to the Russian investigations.

That means every meeting with any Russian or any American with Russian business ties. Every phone call or email. And every Trump business relationship with Russians going back years. This should include every relevant part of Mr. Trump’s tax returns, which the President will resist but Mr. Mueller is sure to seek anyway.

Then release it all to the public. Whatever short-term political damage this might cause couldn’t be worse than the death by a thousand cuts of selective leaks, often out of context, from political opponents in Congress or the special counsel’s office. If there really is nothing to the Russia collusion allegations, transparency will prove it. Americans will give Mr. Trump credit for trusting their ability to make a fair judgment. Pre-emptive disclosure is the only chance to contain the political harm from future revelations.

(This editorial position, of course, assumes that Trump’s Russia contacts are politically manageable; this will come to matter less as a political problem than as a legal and moral one. Stains of that kind, to be sure, will prove indelible. The editorial is significant mostly because it shows that even defenders of Trump see his situation as dire.)

Benjamin Wittes observes that A New Front Opens in L’Affaire Russe:

Don’t look now, but a new front has opened in L’Affaire Russe. It will be a quiet one at first, but I suspect it won’t stay quiet for long.

The new front is civil litigation.

Last week, a group called United to Protect Democracy filed suit against the Trump campaign and Roger Stone on behalf of three people whose emails and personal information were among the material stolen by the Russians and disclosed to Wikileaks. The suit alleges that the campaign and Stone conspired with the Russians to release information about the plaintiffs—who are not public figures—in a fashion that violates their privacy rights under D.C. law. and intimidates them out of political advocacy.

See, also, a copy of the complaint at Invasion of Privacy Suit Filed against Trump Campaign over Leaked Emails.

Hannah Levintova, Bryan Schatz and AJ Vicens write that Four Spy Experts on Trump Blackmail, WikiLeaks, and Putin’s Long Game:

Steven Hall, who retired in 2015 after a decorated career at the CIA, ran the agency’s Russia operations.

Mother Jones: If you were involved in the Trump-Russia investigation, who or what would you hone in on?

Steven Hall: Mike Flynn, no doubt. It’s fun to think about what I would do if I was a Russian intelligence officer in charge of running these various operations. Not just the influence operation, which it’s quite clear now was pretty successful in increasing the likelihood that Donald Trump would be elected. But if I was the SVR [Russian foreign intelligence] guy who was told, “Okay, your job is to try to find whether there are members of the campaign who would be willing to play ball with us,” No. 1 on my list would be Flynn. First of all, he’s a former chief of the DIA [Defense Intelligence Agency]. He’s an intelligence officer, so he understands how discreet and clandestine you need to be if you’re going to cooperate on that level. And then, there’s the future: He’s probably going to land a pretty good job, assuming Trump wins. So it’s a win-win-win in terms of targeting Flynn. Furthermore, he’s come to Moscow. He’s accepted money from Russian companies, and he’s tried to conceal that. So on paper, he’s a really good-looking candidate for a spy.

MJ: Is there any parallel to this moment that you saw in your 30-plus year career with the CIA?

SH: The short answer is no. There have certainly been big spy cases in the past—Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen. But I can’t think of one that would be as senior a guy as somebody like the national security adviser, or even more unprecedented—if it turns out that the Trump camp had the go-ahead from the big dog to talk to the Russians prior to the election.

Did the Kremlin likely try to collect dirt on Trump? “I think the answer is yes.”
MJ: How likely is it that the Kremlin has collected kompromat on Trump?

SH: I can absolutely tell you that the FSB [Russia’s Federal Security Service] are rigged up to collect as much compromising information against any target they consider to be valuable. So when Trump was there in Russia, would they have collected against him? I think the answer is yes. I think they would have seen Trump for what he was at the time, which to the Russian lens would have just been an American oligarch—a rich guy with considerable power who you might need something on at some point…He’s a good guy to have at your beck and call.

If there was compromising material that had a shot at actually making Trump behave the way the Russians wanted him to, I would imagine it would be something financial—illegal, dirty dealings, or something with legal import.

MJ: Do you think Congress is able to investigate the Trump-Russia allegations effectively?

SH: I don’t think so, given where Congress is right now in terms of partisanship. There might have been a time historically—15, 20 years ago. Short of having an independent investigator or some other mechanism that can get rid of some of the partisanship, I just don’t think it’s going to happen.

Michael Shear and Karen Yourish report that Trump Says He Has Signed More Bills Than Any President, Ever. He Hasn’t:

In fact, as he approaches six months in office on Thursday, Mr. Trump is slightly behind the lawmaking pace for the past six presidents, who as a group signed an average of 43 bills during the same period. And an analysis of the bills Mr. Trump signed shows that about half were minor and inconsequential, passed by Congress with little debate. Among recent presidents, both the total number of bills he signed and the legislation’s substance make Mr. Trump about average.

President Jimmy Carter signed 70 bills in the first six months, according to an analysis of bills signed by previous White House occupants. Bill Clinton signed 50. George W. Bush signed 20 bills into law. Barack Obama signed 39 bills during the period, including an $800 billion stimulus program to confront an economic disaster, legislation to make it easier for women to sue for equal pay, a bill to give the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco and an expansion of the federal health insurance program for children.

Mr. Truman and Franklin Delano Roosevelt both had signed more bills into law by their 100-day mark than Mr. Trump did in almost twice that time. Truman had signed 55 bills and Roosevelt had signed 76 during their first 100 days.

Sarah Kaplan writes that America’s greatest eclipse is coming, and this man wants you to see it:

Mike Kentrianakis is launched. He’s here at the Hayden Planetarium as an emissary of the American Astronomical Society, and his mission is to spread the word: On Aug. 21, the moon will pass between the sun and Earth, casting a shadow across a swath of the United States. The spectacle will be like nothing most people have ever seen….

Kentrianakis would know. He has witnessed 20 solar eclipses in his 52 years, missing work, straining relationships and spending most of his life’s savings to chase the moon’s shadow across the globe. The pursuit has taken him to a mountaintop in Argentina, a jungle in Gabon, an ice field north of the Arctic Circle — exposing him to every type of eclipse there is to see, on every continent except Antarctica. Last year he watched one from an airplane 36,000 feet above the Pacific Ocean. The video of his rapturous reaction went viral, cementing his status as a “crazy eclipse guy,” as he jokingly calls himself. “Oh, my God,” Kentrianakis exclaims 21 times in the 3½ -minute clip. “Totality! Totality! Whooo, yeah!”

Chasing the dark: The man who’s spent a lifetime pursuing solar eclipses presents Kentrianakis’s fascination:

MH17, Three Years On

What exactly do we know about the events of July 17, 2014, when Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was blown out of the sky over Ukraine, killing 298 people?

Film: Wednesday, July 19th, 12:30 PM @ Seniors in the Park: Silence

This Wednesday, July 19th at 12:30 PM, there will be a showing of Martin Scorsese’s Silence @ Seniors in the Park, in the Starin community building.

Silence (2017) is a historical drama about two 17th-century Portuguese Jesuits who travel to Japan in an attempt to find their mentor, who is reported to have abandoned the faith.

Martin Scorsese directs the two hour, forty-one minute  film, starring Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, Liam Neeson. Silence received an Academy Award nomination for Best Achievement in Cinematography. The film carries an R rating from the MPAA.

One can find more information about Silence at the Internet Movie Database.

Enjoy.

Daily Bread for 7.17.17

Good morning.

Monday in Whitewater will be sunny with a high of eighty. Sunrise is 5:32 AM and sunset 8:29 PM, for 14h 56m 41s of daytime. The moon is a waning crescent with 41.5% of its visible disk illuminated. Today is the {tooltip}two hundred fiftieth day.{end-texte}Days since Trump’s election, with 11.9.16 as the first day.{end-tooltip}

Whitewater’s Library Board is scheduled to meet at 6:30 PM.

On this day in 1918, the Bolsheviks execute Nicholas II of Russia and several members of his immediate family, after which their “bodies were then mutilated,[1] burned and buried in a field called Porosenkov Log in the Koptyaki forest.[3] 

Recommended for reading in full — 

Anne Applebaum observes that It’s now clear: The most dangerous threats to the West are not external:

Just over a week has passed since President Trump offered, in Warsaw, a very particular defense of Western civilization. He praised Poland for its fight against Nazism and Soviet communism long ago, though he said little about the country’s success since 1989. He spoke of the things that hold the West together, including classical music and God, but made only glancing references to democracy. He also spoke of the threats to the West, alluding to dangers from the “South or the East” as well as from an “oppressive ideology,” radical Islam, that “seeks to export terrorism and extremism all around the globe.”

In the days since that speech, rapidly moving events in Warsaw have proved him wrong: As I write this, Poland is proving that the greatest threat to the West is not radical Islam. The greatest threat is not even external: It is internal. In Poland, a democratically elected but illiberal government has, in the past few days, escalated its attack on its own constitution, pushing new laws openly designed to create a politicized judiciary. And it feels emboldened to do so by the visit of the U.S. president….

Vann R. Newkirk writes about What The ‘Crack Baby’ Panic Reveals About The Opioid Epidemic:

….I was struck by a recent article in the New York Times by Catherine Saint Louis that chronicles approaches for caring for newborns born to mothers who are addicted to opioids. The article is remarkable in its command and explanation of the medical and policy issues at play in the ongoing epidemic, but its success derives from something more than that. Saint Louis expertly captures the human stories at the intersection of the wonder of childbirth and the grip of drug dependency in a Kentucky hospital, all while keeping the epidemic in view….

The article is an exemplar in a field of public-health-oriented writing about the opioid crisis—the most deadly and pervasive drug epidemic in American history—that has shaped popular and policy attitudes about the crisis. But the wisdom of that field has not been applied equally in recent history. The story of Jamie Clay and Jay’la Cy’anne stood out to me because it is so incongruous with the stories of “crack babies” and their mothers that I’d grown up reading and watching.

The term itself still stings. “Crack baby” brings to mind hopeless, damaged children with birth defects and intellectual disabilities who would inevitably grow into criminals. It connotes inner-city blackness, and also brings to mind careless, unthinking black mothers who’d knowingly exposed their children to the ravages of cocaine. Although the science that gave the world the term was based on a weak proto-study of only 23 children and has been thoroughly debunked since, the panic about “crack babies” stuck. The term made brutes out of people of color who were living through wave after waves of what were then the deadliest drug epidemics in history.

Of Trump, Jay Rosen writes His campaign to discredit the press is a permanent feature of Trump’s political style (article has detail around each point):

Which is to say this “war” (terrible term, clumsy and lazy) will almost certainly continue, despite the periodic discovery by journalists that Trump loves to banter with reporters, and that he lives and dies by the very media coverage that he poisonously calls fake. 

The campaign to discredit mainstream journalism is thus a permanent feature of Trump’s political style. Why? I have some ideas. But I probably missed a few. If you point them out in the comments (or by social media) I will add the best ones to this post, with credit. 

1. Because it’s a base-only presidency with a niche, not a broadcasting strategy….

2. Because this is what they have; they don’t have much else….

3. Because Trump is a creature of media— and its creation….

4. Because people in the White House think “media” warring is governing….

5. Because turning reporters into ritualized hate objects is easy to do, supporters love it, and it meets Trump’s need for public displays of dominance….

6. Because it’s the one campaign promise he can definitely keep….

7. Because with the Federal government in Republican hands there is an “enemy gap”….

8. Because it binds him to the base, which has been tutored in this resentment since 1969….

9. Because they know a lot of bad news has yet to emerge….

10. Because the sheer ugliness of the spectacle repels the uncommitted, persuading them that there’s no point in paying attention….

11. Because his fantasy claims during the campaign pre-ordained critical coverage if Trump won….

Avi Selk writes that Trump praised a woman’s body. A foreign minister wondered ‘if she could say the same of him’:

But, speaking of allies, what did they think of what Trump said in Australia, which has its own history of awkward diplomacy with the president?

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation called up the country’s foreign minister to find out.

“You’re in such good shape, such good physical shape, beautiful,” the host told Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, quoting Trump. “Would you be flattered or offended?”

This was arguably a politically sensitive question, what with alliance and all. But the foreign minister didn’t hesitate.

“I’d be taken aback,” Bishop said.

And then this zinger: “I wonder if she could say the same of him?”

(She probably couldn’t — Trump is sedentary to the point of obesity.)

Loren Grush writes that one can Feel like you’re zooming over Pluto and its moon Charon with NASA’s new 3D animations:

Daily Bread for 7.16.17

Good morning.

Sunday in Whitewater will be mostly cloudy with a high of seventy six. Sunrise is 5:31 AM and sunset 8:30 PM, for 14h 58m 18s of daytime. The moon is a waning gibbous with 52.5% of its visible disk illuminated. Today is the {tooltip}two hundred forty-ninth day.{end-texte}Days since Trump’s election, with 11.9.16 as the first day.{end-tooltip}

On this day in 1945, the United States conducted the first detonation of an atomic bomb at “at 5:29 am on July 16, 1945, as part of the Manhattan Project. The test was conducted in the Jornada del Muerto desert about 35 miles (56 km) southeast of Socorro, New Mexico, on what was then the USAAF Alamogordo Bombing and Gunnery Range (now part of White Sands Missile Range). The only structures originally in the vicinity were the McDonald Ranch House and its ancillary buildings, which scientists used as a laboratory for testing bomb components. A base camp was constructed, and there were 425 people present on the weekend of the test.”

Recommended for reading in full — 

Andrew Higgins and Andrew Kramer report that the Soviet Veteran Who Met With Trump Jr. Is a Master of the Dark Arts:

MOSCOW — Rinat Akhmetshin, the Russian-American lobbyist who met with Donald Trump Jr. at Trump Tower in June 2016, had one consistent message for the journalists who met him over the years at the luxury hotels where he stayed in Moscow, London and Paris, or at his home on a leafy street in Washington: Never use email to convey information that needed to be kept secret.

While not, he insisted, an expert in the technical aspects of hacking nor, a spy, Mr. Akhmetshin talked openly about how he had worked with a counterintelligence unit while serving with the Red Army after its 1979 invasion of Afghanistan and how easy it was to find tech-savvy professionals ready and able to plunder just about any email account.

A journalist who visited his home was given a thumb drive containing emails that had apparently been stolen by hackers working for one of his clients.

Christian Caryl explains to his Dear red-state friends: Embracing Russia is not an act of patriotism:

Some of you admire Putin because he’s a “strong leader.” But do you ever discuss the issue of his personal corruption, his alliances with Hezbollah and Iran and North Korea, his gross mismanagement of his state-dominated economy? (Given Russia’s incredible natural wealth, it should be the richest country in the world. Instead, it has a gross domestic product roughly equivalent to Italy’s.) Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were strong leaders: They persuaded by argument and example. Putin operates more like Tony Soprano.

I’ve even heard some of you say that he’s a Christian leader who’s defending “Western civilization” from the threat of liberals and gays and feminists. Really? Putin makes an odd poster boy for the defense of Christianity. He started his political career in the Soviet KGB, a militantly atheistic organization. The present-day Russian Orthodox Church is basically a branch of the Kremlin, locked in a mindset of xenophobia and anti-Western paranoia. It is run by priests who worked as KGB informers in Soviet days, and who are themselves profoundly corrupt.

The kind of Russian political culture that Putin represents today, steeped in centuries of autocracy, has far more in common with places such as China or the Middle East than with any part of the West. But Putin knows what conservatives in the West like to hear, and he’s shrewd enough to give it to them. (Note to you gun fans: Russia is scamming you when it portrays itself as a paradise for gun owners. It has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world.)

Jennifer Rubin (now back from vacation) observes that The GOP’s moral rot is the problem, not Donald Trump Jr.:

Let’s dispense with the “Democrats are just as bad” defense. First, I don’t much care; we collectively face a party in charge of virtually the entire federal government and the vast majority of statehouses and governorships. It’s that party’s inner moral rot that must concern us for now. Second, it’s simply not true, and saying so reveals the origin of the problem — a “woe is me” sense of victimhood that grossly exaggerates the opposition’s ills and in turn justifies its own egregious political judgments and rhetoric. If the GOP had not become unhinged about the Clintons, would it have rationalized Trump as the lesser of two evils? Only in the crazed bubble of right-wing hysteria does an ethically challenged, moderate Democrat become a threat to Western civilization and Trump the salvation of America.

Indeed, for decades now, demonization — of gays, immigrants, Democrats, the media, feminists, etc. — has been the animating spirit behind much of the right. It has distorted its assessment of reality, giving us anti-immigrant hysteria, promulgating disrespect for the law (how many “respectable” conservatives suggested disregarding the Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage?), elevating Fox News hosts’ blatantly false propaganda as the counterweight to liberal media bias and preventing serious policy debate. For seven years, the party vilified Obamacare without an accurate assessment of its faults and feasible alternative plans. “Obama bad” or “Clinton bad” became the only credo — leaving the party, as Brooks said of the Trump clan, with “no attachment to any external moral truth or ethical code” — and no coherent policies for governing.

Peter Beinart explains The Projection President (“Months into his tenure, Trump still responds to controversies by lobbing the same charges at his opponents”):

In Paris on Thursday, Donald Trump said, “A lot of people don’t know” that “France is America’s first and oldest ally.” That may be true. But commentators noted that when Trump uses the “a lot of people don’t know” formulation, it’s usually a sign that he didn’t know himself….

Why does Trump do this? Sigmund Freud believed people project onto others impulses that they cannot accept as their own. Erick Erickson suggested that projection may be a response to crisis or extreme stress. Others have linked it to narcissism….

The more important question is why it works, at least among Trump’s base. One answer may be that Trump supporters embrace his projection because they’re doing it themselves. Consider Trump’s claim that Hillary Clinton is the real bigot. On its face it’s odd given that Clinton enjoyed overwhelming African American support. But it’s easier to understand the statement’s appeal when you realize that, according to a November 2016 Huffington Post/YouGov poll, Trump supporters were twice as likely to say whites face a “lot of discrimination” as they were to say blacks face a lot of discrimination. When it came to bigotry, in other words, Trump’s overwhelmingly white fan base may have been projecting, too.

(The simplest formation of this observation about Trump: Trump falsely accuses others of the very conduct of which he is truly guilty.)

NPR’s Skunk Bear offers Sketchy History Of Pencil Lead:

Daily Bread for 7.15.17

Good morning.

Saturday in Whitewater will be sunny with a high of eighty-two. Sunrise is 5:30 AM and sunset 8:30 PM, for 14h 59m 53s of daytime. The moon is a waning gibbous with 64.4% of its visible disk illuminated.Today is the {tooltip}two hundred forty-eighth day.{end-texte}Days since Trump’s election, with 11.9.16 as the first day.{end-tooltip}

On this day in 1980, the state experiences the Western Wisconsin Derecho, “a severe weather system that moved through several western counties on July 15, 1980. It cut a 20-mile-wide swath through St Croix, Pierce, Dunn, Eau Claire, Chippewa, and Clark counties. Although much of the storm’s damage was caused by straight-line winds in excess of 100 mph, several tornadoes were also reported. The storm caused nearly $160M in damage (1980 dollars) and killed three people.”

Recommended for reading in full —

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, who served for three years as director of intelligence & counterintelligence at the Dept. of Energy and 23 years as a CIA intelligence officer, writes that Trump Jr.’s Russia meeting sure sounds like a Russian intelligence operation:

Donald Trump Jr. is seeking to write off as a nonevent his meeting last year with a Russian lawyer who was said to have damaging information about Hillary Clinton. “It was such a nothing,” he told Fox News’s Sean Hannity on Tuesday. “There was nothing to tell.”

But everything we know about the meeting — from whom it involved to how it was set up to how it unfolded — is in line with what intelligence analysts would expect an overture in a Russian influence operation to look like. It bears all the hallmarks of a professionally planned, carefully orchestrated intelligence soft pitch designed to gauge receptivity, while leaving room for plausible deniability in case the approach is rejected. And the Trump campaign’s willingness to take the meeting — and, more important, its failure to report the episode to U.S. authorities — may have been exactly the green light Russia was looking for to launch a more aggressive phase of intervention in the U.S. election….

Paul Krugman describes The New Climate of Treason:

The radicalization of the GOP began as a top-down affair, driven by big-money interests that financed campaigns and think tanks, pushing the party to the right. But to win elections, the forces engaged in this push cynically appealed to darker impulses – racism first and foremost, but also culture war, anti-intellectualism, and so on. To make this appeal, they created a media establishment – Fox News, talk radio, and so on – which drew in many working-class whites. This meant that a large segment of the population was no longer hearing the same news – basically not experiencing the same account of reality – as the rest of us. So what had been real but not extreme differences became extreme differences in political outlook.

And political figures either adapted or were pushed out. There once were Republicans who would have reacted with horror to Trump’s embrace of Putin, but they’ve left the scene, or are no longer considered Republicans.

Ryan Reilly reports that Judge Tosses Jury’s Conviction Of Woman Who Laughed At Jeff Sessions, Orders New Trial:

WASHINGTON – A D.C. judge has tossed out a jury’s conviction of a protester who laughed during Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Senate confirmation hearing, finding on Friday that the government had improperly argued during the trial that her laughter was enough to merit a guilty verdict. The judge ordered a new trial in the case, setting a court date for Sept. 1.

Desiree Fairooz, 61, who was associated with the group Code Pink, had been convicted of disorderly and disruptive conduct and demonstrating inside the Capitol. Fairooz was taken into custody during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in January after she laughed when Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) claimed Sessions had a “clear and well-documented” record of “treating all Americans equally under the law.” (The Senate rejected Sessions’ nomination for a federal judgeship in the 1980s over concerns about his views on race.)

But Chief Judge Robert E. Morin of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia tossed out the guilty verdict on Friday because the government had argued that the laugh alone was enough to warrant the verdict.

Maureen C. Gilmer writes that in Indiana, a Bride-to-be calls off wedding, invites homeless to her reception:

INDIANAPOLIS — Sarah Cummins was supposed to get married this weekend. The 25-year-old Purdue University pharmacy student had been planning her dream wedding for two years, scrimping and working overtime to save for the $30,000 extravaganza.

A week ago, she called it off (she prefers not to say why) and was left with a broken heart and a nonrefundable contract for a venue and a plated dinner for 170 guests Saturday night at the Ritz Charles in Carmel….

Then she decided to bring some purpose to her pain. She worked with event planner Maddie LaDow at the Ritz Charles to re-arrange the reception area, then started contacting homeless shelters in Indianapolis and Noblesville and inviting residents to her party.

“We’re doing all the same stuff, just arranging the tables differently, so there’s no head table for the bridal party, no cake table or gift table,” she said.

Why is Take Me Out to the Ballgame is Sung During the 7th Inning Stretch? Here’s why:

Where Bannon fits in all this…

Yesterday, as a comment to a post entitled Sarah Kendzior: The Kremlin Spokesman’s Odd Referral, a reader kindly asked a key question: “Where do you feel Bannon fits into all of this?”

It’s a critical question, to be sure. Steve Bannon’s no small figure, so to speak: he plays a role as ideologue, but that’s not all. Bannon has been affiliated with Cambridge Analytica, a data firm that may have a role in microtargeting of illicitly-obtained information in support of Trump.

Here’s my reply to yesterday’s comment:

Good morning, and thanks for your comment.

It’s such a key question, isn’t it? Bannon plays a key role for Trump as an ideologue (fomenting and focusing white nationalist ire against blacks, Muslims, Mexicans, Jews), but has he had a different responsibility, also? Perhaps so – as someone who helped Russia target lies and hacked information to particular communities, to (1) bolster the worst of Trump’s base and (2) to confuse, dispirit, and suppress the vote among those true to America’s democratic ideals.

Over at Brookings, Kate Brannen wrote on this, at the Just Security website, and her assessment seems persuasive to me. Connecting the Dots: Political Microtargeting and the Russia Investigation.

So much more to learn, of course, and sadly I think none of it good.

My best to you —

Adams

Here’s the overall issue concerning Cambridge Analytica, of which Bannon was vice president of the board, and of which the extreme Mercer family were principal owners:

This week, new reporting shined a light on one focus of the congressional investigation: determining how the Russians knew which voters to target with their disinformation campaign. A report from TIME’s Massimo Calabresi on Thursday provided new details: 

As they dig into the viralizing of such stories, congressional investigations are probing not just Russia’s role but whether Moscow had help from the Trump campaign. Sources familiar with the investigations say they are probing two Trump-linked organizations: Cambridge Analytica … and Breitbart News.

Cambridge Analytica is the data mining firm hired by the Trump campaign to help it collect and use social media information to identify and persuade voters to vote (or not vote), through an activity known as political microtargeting….

Kate Brannen asks the fundamental questions about Cambridge Analytica’s operation:

After sifting through these stories and publicly available information, here are a few open questions:

1. How sophisticated are Cambridge Analytica’s capabilities? Is the company really revolutionizing electoral politics, manipulating people through their social media data? Or are their services being exaggerated — by the company and by its critics?

2. Was Cambridge Analytica involved in voter disengagement efforts aimed at Democrats in key states? How successful were these efforts?

3. Were the Russians also carrying out voter disengagement efforts aimed at Democrats? Were they targeting the same voters, or same sort of voters, as Cambridge Analytica?

4. How precisely were the Russians able to target American voters? How were they able to identify these individuals? As Warner puts it: “How did they know to go to that level of detail in those kinds of jurisdictions?”

5. What, if any, were Russia’s capability gaps where they may have needed to seek outside help to conduct their disinformation campaign more effectively?

6. Did Russia extract voter rolls from state computer systems? Where exactly?

7. If Russia did have access to voter rolls, how did they use them for microtargeting?

8. If Russia had online voter rolls, what would it need from the Trump campaign or another third party to put these into effect?

9. What role did far right U.S. news organizations play? Did they knowingly take “any actions to assist Russia’s operatives”?

We’ve so much more yet to learn…

The Fellow Travelers

Jeremy Peters nicely describes the descent of far too many into mere fellow travelers for Putin, a dictator, imperialist, and murderer (Peters is far too mild about Putin, but he’s ably identified the self-hating Americans who support Russian’s dictator, and some of whom are perhaps even fifth columnists for Russia):

WASHINGTON — Years before the words “collusion” and “Russian hacking” became associated with President Vladimir V. Putin, some prominent Republicans found far more laudatory ways to talk about the Russian leader.

“Putin decides what he wants to do, and he does it in half a day,” Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York mayor and longtime friend and adviser to President Trump, gushed in 2014.

Mr. Putin was worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, K. T. McFarland said in 2013, before going on to serve a brief and ill-fated stint as Mr. Trump’s deputy national security adviser.

“A great leader,” “very reasoned,” and “extremely diplomatic,” was how Mr. Trump himself described Mr. Putin that same year.

Though such fondness for Mr. Putin fell outside the Republican Party’s mainstream at the time, it became a widely held sentiment inside the conservative movement by the time Mr. Trump started running for president in 2015. And it persists today, despite evidence of Russian intervention in the 2016 American election and Mr. Putin’s increasingly authoritarian tendencies at home.

Via Reverence for Putin on the Right Buys Trump Cover.

Friday Catblogging: This Bobcat’s Doing Just Fine, Thanks for Asking

Jason Bittel reports that this bobcat brings in $308,000 a year:

Somewhere in Yellowstone National Park, a wildcat is walking around with a little extra swagger in its step today. That’s because a new study estimates the value of one specific bobcat there at a whopping $308,105 a year….

Bobcats are pretty rare in Yellowstone, you see, and even in areas where the cats are common they can be difficult to spot. But in recent years, at least one cat has managed to make a living along the Madison River by ambushing ducks and other birds that ply these waters year-round. What’s more, the bobcat’s exploits have caught the attention of wildlife outfitters and photographers who now schedule entire expeditions around observing and capturing the feline on film….

To get a better idea of just how much money this one animal was generating for the local community, Mark Elbroch, the puma program lead scientist for the global wild cat conservation organization Panthera, started contacting outfitters and photographers to tally up their expenditures and earnings. By crunching costs, from filling up a gas tank and guide fees to gear purchases and revenue earned from photo sales, Elbroch and his colleagues found that the Madison River bobcat brings in well over a quarter of a million dollars each year. Their findings were published last week in the journal Biodiversity and Conservation.

Well done, bobcat, well and nicely done.

Daily Bread for 7.14.17

Good morning.

Bastille Day in Whitewater will be cloudy with a high of seventy-three. Sunrise is 5:30 AM and sunset 8:31 PM, for 15h 01m 24s of daytime. The moon is a waning gibbous with 73% of its visible disk illuminated. Today is the {tooltip}two hundred forty-seventh day.{end-texte}Days since Trump’s election, with 11.9.16 as the first day.{end-tooltip}

Whitewater’s Police & Fire Commission is scheduled to meet at 6 PM this evening.

On this day in 1789, French citizens storm the Bastille, freeing the seven inmates held there, as part of a broader movement against the French monarchy. On this day in 1948, Janesville sprays for bugs: “intending to create a bug-free environment, Janesville tested a DDT fogging machine that quickly emitted a “smokescreen of insect-killing fog.” City officials hoped to persuade the county to buy the machine for use by all municipalities or to buy it jointly with Beloit.”

Recommended for reading in full —

Matt Shuham reports that Trump Changes Tune On Russian Lawyer Meeting: ‘Maybe It Was Mentioned’:

Emails released Tuesday by Donald Trump Jr., ahead of a New York Times story on the same messages, show the President’s son responding enthusiastically to the promise of dirt on Hillary Clinton provided as part of a Russian government effort to aid his father’s campaign.

On Wednesday afternoon, Trump told Reuters that “No. That I didn’t know. Until a couple of days ago, when I heard about this. No I didn’t know about that,” referring to the meeting between Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort.

Trump changed his tune later in the day, when he told reporters on Air Force One: “In fact maybe it was mentioned at some point,” referring to the meeting. (Reporters on the plane initially thought the conversation was off-the-record, but the President said otherwise on Thursday.)

Trump promised America the best people, the best words, but Justin Elliott reports that Trump Lawyer Marc Kasowitz Threatens Stranger in Emails: ‘Watch Your Back , Bitch’:

Marc Kasowitz, President Trump’s personal attorney on the Russia case, threatened a stranger in a string of profanity-laden emails Wednesday night.

The man, a retired public relations professional in the western United States who asked not to be identified, read ProPublica’s story this week on Kasowitz and sent the lawyer an email with the subject line: “Resign Now.’’

Kasowitz replied with series of angry messages sent between 9:30 p.m. and 10 p.m. Eastern time. One read: “I’m on you now.  You are fucking with me now Let’s see who you are Watch your back , bitch.”

In another email, Kasowitz wrote: “Call me.  Don’t be afraid, you piece of shit.  Stand up.  If you don’t call, you’re just afraid.” And later: “I already know where you live, I’m on you.  You might as well call me. You will see me. I promise.  Bro.”

Lloyd Grove explains Why Sean Hannity’s Juiciest Blockbusters [Pro-Trump Distortions] Come From Circa News:

Sean Hannity is a big fan, and its critics say Circa News is a dedicated messenger for the Trump White House. But Circa claims it is aimed at ‘independent-minded millennials’….

In late 2015—less than a year after that Wired valentine [a puff piece on Circa in Wired Magazine]—Circa was purchased for an estimated $800,000 by the Sinclair Broadcast Group, the nation’s biggest owner of local television stations.

Sinclair owns more than 170 stations currently, but if its $3.9 billion acquisition of Tribune Media receives regulatory approval that number could conceivably grow to more than 230 stations across 108 television markets, including the widely watched cable channel WGN.

Sinclair promptly remade Circa in its own image, yet has stoutly denied reports in both Politico and The Washington Post that it cut an access-for-favorable-coverage deal with Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. It was recently the target of a John Oliver takedown as a powerful purveyor of right-wing nonsense.

Discarding the original vision and replacing it with what critics claim is a stealthy emphasis on right-leaning, Trump-friendly content, Sinclair launched Circa News last July and, in recent months, has become a favorite of Sean Hannity among other Fox News personalities, along with embattled presidential son Donald Trump Jr. (a serial retweeter of Circa News stories), tendentious White House talking head Sebastian Gorka, and alt-right populist Trumpkin Mike Cernovich.

Rob Schulz reports that a Jury awards $7 million in damages after finding 2 Madison police officers used unreasonable force in 2014 fatal shooting:

Two Madison police officers used unreasonable force when they shot and killed a 26-year-old woman who was pointing a gun at her head during a 2014 incident, a jury found Thursday, awarding her family $7 million in damages.

The six-woman, two-man jury deliberated for about 3½ hours before ruling in the federal civil lawsuit brought by the family of Ashley DiPiazza against the officers, Justin Bailey and Gary Pihlaja. Bailey is no longer with the department.

After further deliberations, jurors awarded the family $4 million in compensatory and $3 million in punitive damages….

DiPiazza’s family contended that DiPiazza, a forklift operator at Pitney Bowes in Madison who was described by friends and family as fun-loving and loyal, was shot without making any threats to hurt anybody or pointing the gun toward anybody but herself. The suit claimed DiPiazza’s constitutional rights against unreasonable searches and seizures were violated when Bailey and Pihlaja shot her 11 times inside her MacArthur Road apartment. It also alleged Leerek, who was negotiating with DiPiazza, did nothing to stop them.

(Emphasis added.)

PBS NewsHour reports that an Elephant out for a swim gets emergency rescue at sea: