Saturday, February 11, 2017

11 February - Netvibes - oldephartteintraining

Collapse

The Atlantic Wire

The Future of Deportations Under Trump - The deportation of Guadalupe García de Rayos in Phoenix, Arizona, may be giving the undocumented population in the U.S. its first sense of what the next four years will feel like. Rayos is a 35-year-old mother of two who has lived in the U.S. for 21 years. In 2008, local deputies caught her using a fake social security number after they raided her work, and since then she has been required by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to show up at regular interviews. Every year she’s talked to an agent, then been released back to her family in the U.S. But Wednesday Rayos was arrested, and on Thursday agents put her in a van to be deported back to Mexico. In January, President Trump signed an executive order that vastly expands who the U.S. considers a deportation priority. The order received little immediate media attention at the time of signing, likely because of the many other controversial orders the president released simultaneously. The order is full of vague language, and interpreting it has left a lot of questions as to what’s in store for the country’s 11 million undocumented immigrants. Trump’s administration has said the changes were done to make the U.S. safer, ridding communities of criminals. This may, in part, be true, but it will be so because Trump’s order greatly increased the number of people considered criminals worthy of deportation. An estimate from the Los Angeles Times says Trump’s order could include as many as 8 million undocumented immigrants, all of whom would be eligible for deportation at any moment. “This is designed so Kellyanne Conway and [Sean] Spicer can stand up and say, ‘Well, we’re prioritizing criminals,” said David Leopold, an attorney and past president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, referring to the counselor to the president and the White House press secretary, respectively. “But in reality they’re going after anyone they can get their hands on—period. It’s a ruse.” Rayos was 14 when she crossed the border in Nogales, Arizona. In Phoenix, she married, raised two children, and for a while she worked at Golfland Sunsplash, a water park in a city suburb. This was in 2008, when Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s deputies carried out regular immigration raids, and Rayos was one of those arrested. To get the job she used a fake social security number. So, when she was arrested, she was charged with a felony and spent six months in an immigration jail. After this she had an open deportation order, meaning ICE could her back to Mexico at any time. It chose Thursday to act on that order, and as she left the ICE facility in a van a group of protesters blocked its path. One man even tied himself to its tire. People like Rayos were seen as the reason why, in 2014, Obama developed levels deportation priorities. Obama deported more people than any other president—2.5 million—which earned him the nickname “deporter-in-chief” from immigration advocates. But Obama also prioritized who he deported, focusing on the “Bad Hombres,” to use a Trump reference. His plan created three strata of deportable offenses: at the top were violent felony offenders and people apprehended at the border; next were those with multiple misdemeanors, offenses like DUIs and domestic abuse charges, and also recent arrivals; lastly were people who’d come to the U.S. prior to 2014 and who’d been charged nonviolent crimes. The policy left enforcement up to ICE’s discretion, and it seemed for eight years Rayos fell in that lowest priority. Immigration attorneys are still trying to make sense of the Trump’s order, mostly because of its vague language—probably done intentionally. The order, as Leopold pointed out after Trump signed the order, will follow through on Trump’s campaign-promise of mass deportations. There is no priority anymore. The language in the order says that any unauthorized immigrant convicted of any crime can be deported. It makes no distinction between what type of crime this will be, which Leopold said has the potential to put murder on par with rolling through a stop sign. One of the most controversial terms in the order is a line that makes acts that might “constitute a chargeable criminal offense” deportable. This has been interpreted as meaning an immigrant doesn’t have to be convicted of a crime, doesn’t even have to be charged with a crime, they just need to have probably committed one. Lawyers say this will likely be used to deport anyone who crossed the border outside of an immigration checkpoint. The distinction lies in whether someone overstayed a visa, and or if the person crossed the border through the desert. Migrants who come to the U.S. on a visa, then overstay their visa, pass through immigration checks. And because overstaying a visa is a civil offense, this would not be a deportable crime, Leopold said. But migrants who crossed the border through the deserts of any border state, avoiding customs checkpoints, would have committed a criminal offense by entering the U.S. illegally. If ICE agents can get an immigrant to admit they crossed this way, it could be taken as a “chargeable criminal offense,” and therefore a deportable offense. Leopold called it a “tool to criminalize the undocumented population.” Trump’s order could also return the U.S. to a policy not in national use since 2007, when the Bush administration raided worksites and paraded handcuffed migrants in front of national media. These raids were used to reinforce the concept of self-deportation, an immigration philosophy that many Trump officials support. Its weapon is intimidation—creating the fear in undocumented communities at their home, while on the road, or at their job, with the specter that an ICE agent, and ultimately deportation, loom as a constant threat. Another tool implemented by George W. Bush, and that Trump will likely use, is giving back 287 (g) authority to local law enforcement. Trump’s order said explicitly that he wanted “to empower State and local law enforcement agencies across the country to perform the functions of an immigration officer.” The 287 (g) authority enabled any local jurisdiction with the right to question a person on their immigration status. If they couldn’t prove citizenship, local authorities handed them over to ICE. This was used most pervasively, and attracted the most attention nationally, in Phoenix. There the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, led by Arpaio, descended upon mostly-Latino neighborhoods and stopped people for trivial traffic violations, emptied out restaurant kitchens, even arrested workers at local water parks, like in the case of Rayos. This authority was used as a way to question anyone who looked like they might be in the country illegally, and Arpaio’s office was later found by the Justice Department to be in violation of racial profiling laws. Rayos has been called the first display of Trump’s new executive order. If that holds, then the rest of the nation may look a lot like Phoenix did this past decade, a time where undocumented communities lived in constant fear of deportation from local law enforcement, regardless of their crime, or if they were a mother who’d spent their entire adult life in the U.S. 10 Feb
The Atlantic's Week in Culture - Don’t Miss The Imperfect Power of I Am Not Your Negro—Dagmawi Woubshet praises Raoul Peck’s new documentary on James Baldwin, but critiques its omission of the writer’s sexuality. Summit EntertainmentFilm John Wick: Chapter 2 Is More Brilliant, Bloody Fun—David Sims revels in the sequel to the Keanu Reeves-starring cult classic. Fifty Shades Darker: A Spoilereview—Christopher Orr provides a blow-by-blow recounting of the awful, retrograde sequel. Will There Ever Be a Great Video-Game Movie?—David Sims examines the artistic potential of the derided subgenre of films. The Lego Batman Movie Is the Funniest Superhero Movie in Years—David Sims enjoys the new animated film, which deconstructs pop culture’s angriest comic-book character. NBCTelevision The Genius of Melissa McCarthy as Sean Spicer on Saturday Night Live—Sophie Gilbert pinpoints why the actress’s surprise appearance on the sketch show was so hilarious and effective. The Mary Tyler Moore Show and How Sitcoms Moved to the City—Kay Hymowitz explains how the influence of the 1970s, which was one of the first to recognize a changing socio-economic reality. Legion Is Visually Dazzling, but Little Else—David Sims argues that the new FX superhero series is more style than substance, so far. Netflix and Chill With a Michael Bolton Valentine’s Day Special—Sophie Gilbert watches the surreal comedy that tasks the ’80s soft-rock god with saving romance. ‘Recruit Rosie’: When Satire Joins the Resistance—Megan Garber discusses the possibility and implications of the comedian playing Steve Bannon on SNL. Stephen Colbert’s New Approach to Trump Is Working—David Sims explains why the Late Show host’s ratings are finally taking a turn for the better. What Is CNN For? (Samantha Bee Edition)—Megan Garber recaps the Full Frontal host’s tips on making the cable-news network great again. The Wistful, Sharp Return of Girls—Sophie Gilbert argues that the HBO show is considering a deeper purpose in its sixth and final season. Mark J. Rebilas / USA Today Sports / ReutersSuper Bowl The Super Bowl That Felt Like Destiny—Robert O’Connell recaps an incredible win for the New England Patriots, who overcame a huge lead to beat the Atlanta Falcons and make history. Lady Gaga Made America Spectacular Again—Spencer Kornhaber unpacks the singer’s dazzling halftime show at the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl LI Ads Sold an Escape to the Future—Sophie Gilbert analyzes the overarching desire to move forward expressed in this year’s commercials. Doug McLeanBooks The Key to Writing a Mystery Is Asking the Perfect Question—Joe Fassler talks to the veteran author John Rechy about the powerful enigma of William Faulkner and the beauty of an unsolved narrative, as part of The Atlantic’s ongoing “By Heart” series. Andrew Harnik / APMedia ‘Nevertheless, She Persisted’ and the Age of the Weaponized Meme—Megan Garber weighs in on the power of Elizabeth Warren’s refusal to be silenced by Mitch McConnell in the Senate chamber. Matt Sayles / APMusic Your 2017 Grammys Cheat Sheet—Spencer Kornhaber lays out the categories, performances, and artists to look out for at this year’s ceremony. Migos the Pioneers—Spencer Kornhaber demystifies the surprising success of the Atlanta rap trio’s new number-one album, Culture. Katy Perry Proclaims a New Era of ‘Purposeful Pop’—Spencer Kornhaber explains how the singer’s latest release is a cheerfully depressing indictment of society. Sandy Huffaker / ReutersFood The Political Saga of Avocados—Sophie Gilbert traces the surprisingly contentious history of the popular fruit. 10 Feb
Katy Perry Proclaims a New Era of 'Purposeful Pop' - Lo, the singer most associated with poorly trained shark dancers and weaponized bras and the last forthright celebration of homophobia on the pop charts has mentally molted: “Artist. Activist. Conscious,” reads Katy Perry’s recently updated Twitter bio. In late January she hinted at a change, writing, “Sometimes it’s scary opening up to consciousness… makes you realize how asleep you were, and how ok you were with it...” Now comes her new single, “Chained to the Rhythm,” released to the world with Perry announcing, “We gonna call this era Purposeful Pop,” adding an eyeball emoji at the end. A tropical-inflected disco anthem imploring the listener to dance, dance, dance, “Chained to the Rhythm” can pass into and out of the ears without forcing its Purpose on you. But listen close—maybe while watching the lyrics video about a hamster gourmand—and the politics are clear. It’s not just that Hillary Clinton’s No. 1 pop surrogate is mourning the election; it’s not just that she hired Skip Marley to sing “it is my desire to break down the walls / inspire,” which can’t help but be read as a Trump dig. It’s that Perry’s fed up with the complacency of the capitalist entertainment culture that she has thrived off—though, of course, she is going to try and keep thriving off it. Perry’s gift for mixing metaphors, refined so exquisitely on “Roar,” returns within the first moments of the song: “Are we crazy? / Living our lives through a lens / Trapped in our white-picket fence / Like ornaments.” On a literal level, each line has nothing to do with the last, but taken together thematically, it’s Babbit. The pre-chorus makes like any given Atlantic columnist post-election and laments people “living in a bubble,” and the chorus says we sheeple “think we’re free free” but remain “chained to the rhythm.” Singalongs, the daily grind, social convention—all collapsed into one numbing hum. How to break out? An alt-righter might call the solution in Marley’s bridge downright antifas: “Up in your high place, liars / Time is ticking for the empire.” Perry always celebrated the image of a plastered-on smile, but now the cheer is meant to read as false.A song like this was inevitable: Amid the ongoing drama of the Trump era, pop’s biggest stars have become more activist, headlining rallies and sending tweets of protest. Wouldn’t it be hypocritical for them to keep serving up the same distracting confections as before? Perry’s solution is to make music as perky as ever, and videos as cheeky-cute as ever, but to ladle in some malaise. Hit-making legends Max Martin and Ali Payami co-wrote the song, and the way you can tell is that within three listens it becomes clear this song will be in heavy rotation at grocery stores for the next 16 months. But Sia also co-wrote, and the way you can tell is that something is going on with the chords so that even as you tap your toe you may also feel pangs of dread and consider the inevitability of death. But it’s Perry’s involvement that is the most interesting. Her work always evoked a plastered-on smile, but despite her winks to the camera there was little irony within her music itself. This time, though, the false cheer is definitely meant to read false. It’s a vision of how liberals might be able to keep partying in the Trump era: sadly. 10 Feb
Who Will Be the First Victim of White House Chaos? - It is a truth universally peddled by wisemen and -women in Washington, though not necessarily obeyed by presidents, that when the White House is in trouble, the best cure is to hoist the head of an adviser on a spike of the fence encircling the executive mansion. Firing—sorry, accepting the resignation of—an adviser makes for an easy way to demonstrate that the administration understands it has a problem and is working to fix it. That person doesn’t necessarily need to be the root of the problem, though it’s helpful if they’re at least somewhat involved. Other times, some bad press offers a useful pretext for pushing out someone who was already on thin ice. Related Story Michael Flynn's Disaster If President Trump wants to find a sacrificial lamb, he’s got options. There’s Sean Spicer, whose bumbling performances as press secretary have earned him a brutal mockery on Saturday Night Live and, reportedly, the dissatisfaction of the president. There’s Kellyanne Conway, who has proven a more effective spokesperson for the Oval Office but it also more prone to major blunders, and who finds herself in the crosshairs of congressional overseers after exhorting people to buy Ivanka Trump’s line of clothing. But as of Thursday evening, the betting pool for who gets voted off the island first has a new favorite: National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. It had long been known that Flynn had spoken with Russian Ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak prior to Trump’s inauguration. That raised eyebrows, given Trump’s positive comment about Vladimir Putin’s regime, Putin’s more or less open cheerleading for Trump, and what the U.S. intelligence community says was Russian hacking intended to help Trump during the campaign. Flynn confirmed the conversations, but insisted he had not discussed sanctions that the Obama administration levied on Russia in retaliation for that hacking. Such a conversation would risk violating the Logan Act, which bars citizens from negotiating with foreign governments without authorization. The Washington Post now reports that Flynn did, in fact, discuss the sanctions with Kislyak. The paper’s sources are anonymous but numerous: “Nine current and former officials, who were in senior positions at multiple agencies at the time of the calls, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.” They told the Post that Flynn explicitly discussed elections-related sanctions, and some of them said that Flynn had given the impression that the penalties would be reversed or lightened once Trump entered office. Flynn long denied any discussion of sanctions, including as late as Wednesday. What he should have known, as a former intelligence official, is that American intelligence operatives track phone calls by people like Kislyak, so they were listening in. On Thursday, a spokesman told the Post that while Flynn “had no recollection of discussing sanctions, he couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up.” Even worse for Flynn, he seems to have allowed Vice President Mike Pence to make misleading statements publicly. Pence, prior to the inauguration said that there had been no contact between campaign officials and Russia during the campaign, and as for Flynn’s talks with Kislyak, “They did not discuss anything having to do with the United States’ decision to expel diplomats or impose censure against Russia.” It now appears both those statements are false. (The Kremlin, for whatever it’s worth, says sanctions were not discussed.) The retired general has always been a lightning rod. He was fired as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency during the Obama administration for, reportedly, being a mercurial and difficult manager, though most people who have worked with him agree he is a brilliant intelligence officer, if one prone to conspiracy theories. He was a strange fit on the Trump campaign, a registered Democrat, but one who was willing to say what other Trump allies would never say publicly or in such blunt terms. (“Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL,” he once tweeted.) On the campaign trail, he happily led “Lock her up!” chants. Since the national security adviser position is not subject to Senate confirmation, Flynn avoided the same gauntlet that other top Trump aides have faced, but his spell in the White House has already been rocky. His son, also Michael Flynn, was pushed out of the Trump transition team after spreading bizarre conspiracy theories. Flynn père reportedly clashed with Secretary of Defense James Mattis, another former general, over staffing at the Pentagon. When senior Trump aide Steve Bannon was added to the National Security Council—a move that drew a sharp backlash, given Bannon’s lack of national-security expertise—some reports said the move was mostly intended to shore up Flynn’s mismanagement of the council. David Ignatius reported earlier this week that 60 positions on Flynn’s staff are still open, a fact “that may reflect wariness at the State Department and CIA, where many career officials are reluctant to work for Trump.” Given the widespread reservations about Flynn, his reversal—and the fact that he allowed Pence to make a false denial on national television—might present a good opportunity to push him out and move on. But Flynn is hardly the only candidate for scapegoat. Take Sean Spicer, the press secretary. Spicer’s shaky tenure began on January 21, when he trotted out, or was trotted out, to insist that the crowds at Trump’s inauguration the day before had been of record size—despite copious, clear evidence to the contrary. That may have been the low point, but Spicer hasn’t yet found his sea legs. Recently, for example, he said of a raid in Yemen, “I think it's hard to ever say something was successful when you lose a life.” But when Senator John McCain criticized the same raid, Spicer said that anyone who criticized the raid as a less than a success was doing a “disservice” to the life Ryan Owens, the Navy SEAL who died in the raid. It’s hard to imagine Spicer is having much fun defending a president whose views can change from day to day, and who has no compunctions about lying or simply making things up. Meanwhile, there have been so many leaks about Trump’s views on Spicer that it’s impossible to recall them all. The New York Times reports that Trump thought Spicer’s post-inauguration performance was too strong; the Post reports Trump thought it too weak. Axios reports that Trump just hates Spicer’s wardrobe. CNN says Trump regrets choosing Spicer for the job, and is seeking to layer over him with a new communications director. One Politico report so outlandish it beggars belief said that Trump was rattled by SNL’s spoof of Spicer—more than anything because a woman was portraying him. With so many leaks directed at Spicer, it seems practically futile to try to suss out which are real and which are not. But the gusher shows that Spicer has enemies who are seeking to undermine him with the leaks. The White House seems to have two major power centers, one an establishment pod around Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and the other an insurgent pod focused on Bannon. The two men recently gave a painfully protesting-too-much dual interview to New York denying any rivalry. Flynn hails from the Bannon side of the White House, while Spicer, who previously worked for the chief of staff at the Republican National Committee, is part of the Priebus orbit. A firing of either man would represent a victory for the rival team in the power struggle. That brings us to the third potential scapegoat, Conway, who publicly at least seems to have avoided the factional war. She’s also been subject to few of the sniping leaks that have afflicted Flynn and Spicer. Her problems are essentially public. It was Conway who defended Spicer’s inauguration debacle by insisting he was offering “alternative facts,” which is one of the more creative terms for lies to emerge from Washington in decades. She’s offered her own alternative facts, such as her invocation of a fictional “Bowling Green massacre” to justify Trump’s immigration ban. Somewhat improbably, the real danger to Conway right now comes after she recommended that people go and buy Ivanka Trump’s line of clothing, following Nordstrom’s decision to drop the line. That appears to violate a federal law that bars government employees from using their office to boost private companies. (Trump did the same, but as president, he is exempt.) Spicer said in Thursday’s briefing that Conway had been “counseled” about her statement, and Conway herself declined to comment during a Fox News interview Thursday evening. But Representatives Jason Chaffetz and Elijah Cummings, the top Republican and Democrat, respectively, on the House Oversight Committee, sent a letter to the head of the Office of Government Ethics, expressing “extremely serious concerns” about Conway’s statement and asking that OGE recommend a punishment. As Chaffetz and Cummings acknowledged in their letter, it’s a touchy situation, since the person who would have to execute any penalty would be Conway’s boss—i.e., Trump. But the fact that Congress is getting involved, as it has declined to do in other cases so far, is notable, and puts some pressure on the White House, perhaps even to fire Conway. Although the White House firing is a time-honored ritual, it seldom occurs this soon in an administration. George W. Bush’s first major firing was Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neil, that came after nearly two years, and amid serious policy disputes. The Clinton administration fired several employees of the White House travel office in May 1993, amid the “Travelgate” scandal, though they were career employees, rather than political appointees. White House Counsel Vince Foster committed suicide in July 1993, apparently disconsolate over the scandal. Of course, Trump could simply choose to fire no one. He shows little regard for public pressure and trusts his base to back him up. When he’s not on the set of The Apprentice, he doesn’t demonstrate a great appetite for firing people. Although he went through two campaign teams before settling on the Bannon and Conway duo that led him to victory in November, both previous campaign managers—Corey Lewandowski and Paul Manafort—were allowed to linger well past their expiration dates, and were finally pushed out after other insiders, and particularly Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, pushed for their firings. In other words, a firing would likely require some sort of even more heated factional battle inside the White House, before a clear winner emerged. Given the pace of leaks from the West Wing, there could be plenty more anonymously sourced stories to come before anyone is forced off the island. 10 Feb
Your 2017 Grammys Cheat Sheet - Faced with the unenviable task of summing up an entire year in a huge art form, “Music’s Biggest Night” is often music’s awkwardest night. The 59th Grammy Awards may be even weirder than usual: Some stars are sitting it out for “irrelevance,” and Donald Trump’s culture-warrior presidency has made events like this feel more fraught than ever. Nevertheless, the Grammys command an audience of millions for good reason: The show can deliver great performances, kick off fascinating conversations, and expose new talents to a wide audience. Below are thoughts on the four general awards categories, a few of the genre-specific categories of particular note this year, and the likely trends of the night’s performances. The Big Four Awards Album of the Year Contenders: Adele, 25; Beyoncé, Lemonade; Justin Bieber, Purpose; Drake, Views; Sturgill Simpson, A Sailor’s Guide to EarthLast year’s winner: Taylor Swift, 1989The state of play: The conventional wisdom says that this year’s ceremony is a clash between two recent Grammy titans, Adele and Beyoncé—and that Adele’s best-selling but unspectacular 25 is a safer bet than Beyonce’s provocative Lemonade. But watch for Sturgill Simpson. Though the relatively unfamous alt-country singer seems like an underdog, as the sole white guy with a guitar he may benefit from a split vote among the four commercially minded radio stars, recalling when Beck beat Beyoncé’s self-titled release in 2014. A Sturgill win wouldn’t be undeserved; A Sailor’s Guide to Earth is gobsmackingly beautiful, a bittersweet chronicle of new fatherhood. But Beyoncé’s politically charged, sonically diverse, and tabloid-scrambling Lemonade was a seismic cultural event, and the album’s celebration of identity in the face of disrespect would resonate even in loss: The Grammys haven’t selected a young black artist’s album as best since 2004, and they haven’t picked a black woman since 1999. Record of the Year Contenders: Adele, “Hello”; Beyoncé, “Formation”; Lukas Graham, “7 Years”; Rihanna ft. Drake, “Work”; Twenty One Pilots, “Stressed Out”Last year’s winner: Bruno Mars and Mark Ronson, “Uptown Funk”The state of play: If there’s ever been a hit that’s more a great recording than a great song, it’s Adele’s “Hello,” whose repetition on the page becomes an avalanche in the ear thanks to Adele’s pipes and Greg Kurstin’s production. Nightmare scenario: Grammy voters’ fetish for old-timey authenticity rewards the Danish band Lukas Graham’s “7 Years,” a bit of treacle that uses old-timey authenticity as affectation. Song of the Year Contenders: Beyoncé, “Formation”; Adele, “Hello”; Justin Bieber, “Love Yourself”; Lukas Graham, “7 Years”Last year’s winner: Ed Sheeran, “Thinking Out Loud”The state of play: There are two brilliant pop songs in this category, “Formation” and “Love Yourself.” Beyoncé’s melds rap swagger and pop flash and social subversion. Bieber’s inverts campfire strum-along tropes for a nasty kiss-off that’s perfect for a performer whose persona continually flits between angelic and demonic. Between those two, “Love Yourself” has the better shot; Fox News never declared war on it. Best New Artist Contenders: Kelsea Ballerini, The Chainsmokers, Chance the Rapper, Maren Morris, Anderson .PaakLast year’s winner: Meghan TrainorThe state of play: In this class of legitimately promising young stars, the legitimately irritating electronic-dance bros of The Chainsmokers may be hard to beat. Even if you set aside their insane chart success and factor in the “EDM Nickelback” backlash against them, the “Closer” duo benefit from vote splitting: Ballerini and Morris are climbing up the rungs of country music, and Chance the Rapper and Anderson .Paak have fired up the hip-hop/R&B world. Other interesting categories Best Rock Performance Contenders: Alabama Shakes, “Joe (Live From Austin City Limits)”; Beyoncé ft. Jack White, “Don’t Hurt Yourself”; David Bowie, “Blackstar”; Disturbed, “The Sound of Silence (Live on Conan)”; Twenty One Pilots, “Heathens”Last year’s winner: Alabama Shakes, “Don’t Wanna Fight”The state of play: In perhaps a sign of commercial rock’s malaise, this is one of the strangest nomination fields in Grammy history: Alabama Shakes performing a song they released two years ago, Disturbed turning Paul Simon into nu-metal on late-night TV, Beyoncé in Led Zeppelin drag, Bowie dabbling in jazz and musical theater for six minutes. Even Twenty One Pilots, the closest thing to new rock stars in a while, draw heavily from hip-hop and reggae. Personally, I can’t get enough of their spooky-catchy “Heathens,” though a Beyoncé victory might deliver a much-needed jolt to the genre.   Best Alternative Music Album Contenders: Bon Iver, 22, a Million; David Bowie, Blackstar; PJ Harvey, The Hope Six Demolition Project; Iggy Pop, Post Pop Depression; Radiohead, A Moon Shaped Pool.Last year’s winner: Alabama Shakes, Sound and ColorThe state of play: Bon Iver had his mainstream coming-out at the 2012 ceremony (remember “Bonnie Bear”?), and Radiohead are competing for their fourth trophy in this category. But Bowie’s masterful final release, Blackstar, was snubbed in the Album of the Year category, and he only won two Grammys over the course of his entire career. The space aliens will riot if he doesn’t triumph here. Best Rap Song Contenders: Fat Joe & Remy Ma, “All the Way Up”; Kanye West, “Famous”: Drake, “Hotline Bling”; Chance the Rapper, “No Problem”; Kanye West, “Ultralight Beam”Last year’s winner: Kendrick Lamar, “Alright”The state of play: Kanye West perpetually feuds with the Grammys over shutting him out of the general categories, but maybe he takes comfort in dominating the rap field. Two of his own works are up for best rap song, plus one from his protégé Chance, who also features on “Ultralight Beam,” the best and most forward-thinking tune of the category. Drake is a real contender, though: Though “Hotline Bling” might scan more as wedding-dance fare than great rap, and though it peaked ages ago (it’s eligible because it was tacked onto his 2016 album Views after becoming a hit), it’s the category’s only crossover smash. Best Country Solo Performance Contenders: Brandy Clark, “Love Can Go to Hell”; Miranda Lambert, “Vice”; Maren Morris, “My Church”; Carrie Underwood, “Church Bells”; Keith Urban, “Blue Ain’t Your Color”The state of play: Country music recently waged a very public battle of the sexes over radio programmers hesitating to promote female artists. So it’s remarkable to see four out of these five contenders be women, representing both established talents (Lambert, Underwood) and exciting new ones (Clark, Morris). Clark’s song is particularly gorgeous, but there’s a strong Nashville push to make Morris a Taylor Swift-level star—a win here could reflect and boost that effort. The Performances The divas The firmament of young female pop superstars has remained more or less unchanged from around 2011, and many of its members will be trying to keep it that way on Sunday. After a period of radio absence, the newly woke Katy Perry will launch a new disco-tastic single. Lady Gaga shall follow up the Super Bowl by playing with Metallica for some reason, possibly pushing “John Wayne,” the new video for which resurrects vintage gonzo-pop Gaga. Beyoncé will show off her new baby bump, perhaps while trying to introduce Lemonade’s lovey-dovey ballad “All Night” to the charts. And Adele will take the stage a year after technical glitches marred her last Grammys performance. The team-ups The Grammys will continue their tradition of often-dubious, sometimes inspired collaborations. On the less surprising side of the ledger: The Weeknd with Daft Punk, who produced two standout tracks from his smooth-and-fun album Starboy; A Tribe Called Quest will play with R&B newcomer Anderson .Paak, who sang on their brilliant 2016 farewell release. On the stranger side: The aforementioned Gaga/Metallica gig that follows the metal band’s 2014 Grammys with pianist Lang Lang; the established R&B singer Alicia Keys teaming up with the new country talent Maren Morris; a Bee Gees covers medley, mentioned below. The tributes After a year of major losses for music, Bruno Mars and The Time have been in talks to tackle Prince, and some yet-unannounced performers will memorialize George Michael. Odder: a Saturday Night Fever anniversary Bee Gees spectacle featuring Little Big Town, Demi Lovato, Andra Day, and Tori Kelly. John Legend and Cynthia Erivo will take the general in-memoriam segment, and there’s no reason to think it won’t be cryworthy. The Trump factor It sounds like the Grammys are nervous that Meryl Streep’s anti-Trump speech at the Golden Globes may have set the new template for awards-show conduct. Rolling Stone reports that CBS execs “are scrutinizing scripts and award introductions more closely than in past years and ‘going out of their way to not inadvertently shoot the first bullet’ against the Trump administration.” Longtime Grammys executive producer Ken Ehrlich said, “We expect that artists will have things to say and while we’re not a forum for that, we also don’t feel that it’s right to censor them." “We’re not a forum for that” is a funny thing to say given that awards shows have long benefited from the potential for controversy. The Grammys’ political history includes Kendrick Lamar’s black-liberation bonfire, Madonna and Macklemore’s mass gay marriage, and Bruce Springsteen shouting “Bring ‘em home” amid the Iraq War. With Democratic campaigners like Beyoncé, Q-Tip, Chance the Rapper, John Legend, Katy Perry, and Lady Gaga taking the stage, will this year be the protest-music Grammys? Or will these often-outspoken stars cause controversy simply by remaining silent? 10 Feb
Fifty Shades Darker: A Spoilereview - “I want you back. We can renegotiate terms.” Ah, love. The above line is delivered to Anastasia Steele by Christian Grey near the beginning of Fifty Shades Darker, the second movie adaptation of the trilogy of zillion-selling erotic novels by Erika Mitchell (pen name E. L. James). But one imagines similar words being spoken by executives of Universal Pictures to Mitchell herself following the completion of the first installment in the series, Fifty Shades of Grey. That film was directed by the respected artist Sam (short for Samantha) Taylor-Jones, and she and Mitchell reportedly fought over almost every aspect of the production, the latter having been granted uncommon creative control when she signed over the rights to her books. The result was a very bad movie, but one considerably less bad than the book it was based on. This time out, Taylor-Jones has been replaced with gun-for-hire James Foley, best known for directing Glengarry Glen Ross a very long time ago; meanwhile, the previous screenwriter, Kelly Marcel (Saving Mr. Banks), has been replaced by Niall Leonard, a television writer who also happens to be Mitchell’s husband. The result is that there is no one to mediate or improve Mitchell’s appallingly crass, childish, and retrograde exercise in wish fulfillment. A movie this bad deserves to have its flaws enunciated clearly, so what follows is one in a periodic series of spoilereviews. (Past examples of the genre included Lucy, Fantastic Four, The Happening, and The Gunman.) Those who would prefer to avoid spoilers should stop reading now; those who want a sense of the awfulness to come, or would rather spend a few minutes reading about that awfulness than two hours experiencing it firsthand, read on. 1. A brief catchup for those joining the story midstream. In the last movie, Anastasia (Dakota Johnson), a virginal 21-year-old college student, was swept off her feet by Christian (Jamie Dornan), a 27-year-old billionaire entrepreneur with the abs of an underwear model. An S&M enthusiast, he made her sign a contract to be his “submissive.” Eventually, after a lot of tame bondage sex and one serious whipping, she left him. 2. Which brings us to the present film. Ana, now graduated, has just gotten a job as an assistant at an independent Seattle book publisher. Accordingly, she receives a couple of dozen stunning white roses from Christian in congratulation. She briefly contemplates throwing them out, then changes her mind and keeps them. Get used to this particular two-step when it comes to Ana’s tentative gestures toward almost-independence. 3. Ana attends a photography exhibition by a friend, José (Victor Rasuk), only to find that, to her surprise, it is filled with wall-sized portraits of herself. 3a. This is a good moment to note that virtually all the men in this movie are gross (even when they’re not presented as such) and treat Ana as an object. José is a perfect example. In theory, he’s supposed to be a good guy. Yet he fills his show with pictures of Ana without her knowledge or permission and then sells them for his own considerable profit. Who knows what kind of pervy stalker might be buying those prints? 4. Well, we do, of course: It’s Christian. He shows up at the exhibit, buys all the photos, and begs Ana to go to dinner with him. She agrees, “but only because I’m hungry.” At the restaurant, when he orders steak for her, she contradicts him and asks for the quinoa salad instead. This will prove to be one of vanishingly few occasions on which she gets what she wants, rather than putting up token resistance and then letting Christian have his way. 5. Ana explains that she left him following last movie’s whipping in his Red Room of Pain, because “you were getting off on the pain you inflicted.” I feel obligated to note that this is the exact phrasing used by Steve Martin in the song “Dentist!” from Little Shop of Horrors, making Christian literally a knockoff of a parody of a sadist. 6. Nonetheless, Ana is clearly warming back up. It seems to help that after the dinner date, Christian gives her a brand-new iPhone and MacBook, as if he were some creepy blend of Santa Claus and Steve Jobs. 7. As noted, one way the movie tries to make Christian seem less creepy is by making all the other men creepy, too. Chief among them is Ana’s boss at the publishing house, Jack (Eric Johnson), who leers at her so ostentatiously that he might as well be wearing a T-shirt that says “sexual harasser.” He pressures her to go out for drinks. She declines, citing plans. He takes her out for drinks anyway. 8. At the bar they run into Christian, and he and Jack face off with proprietary zeal. “I’m the boyfriend,” says Christian. “I’m the boss,” says Jack. It is clear at this moment—and will only become clearer over time—that the movie considers these two words completely interchangeable. 9. Christian and Ana leave the bar and she tells him she’s upset with the way he insulted her boss. Christian explains, “He wants what’s mine.” That evening Christian tells her that he plans to buy the publishing house. “So you’ll be my boss?” she asks. (What did I tell you?) He replies, “Technically, I’ll be your boss’s boss’s boss.” Ana is momentarily unhappy about his insinuating himself into her work life. Then they have sex anyway. 10. The next day she asks him to take back a check he gave her for $24,000. He tells her to keep it, as he makes that much money every 15 minutes. She rips up the check. He calls his office and has $24,000 direct-deposited into her checking account. She is briefly upset that he knows her bank account information. But then he invites her to a masked ball his parents are throwing, and everything is okay again. 11. He takes her to have her hair done at a salon run by the older woman, Elena (Kim Basinger), who long ago initiated him into S&M. Ana is furious and wants to go home. He tells her to come to his house instead, adding, “You can either walk or I’ll carry you.” She opts for walking. This is, I kid you not, presented as a victory of self-determination for her. (He will, however, carry her over his shoulder at multiple other points in the movie.) 12. Back at his apartment, she discovers that he’s had private detectives follow her and fill an extensive dossier with her comings and goings. Moreover, he’s done this with other “prospective submissives” as well. In a rare moment of lucidity, she tells him, “This isn’t a relationship, it’s ownership.” He tells her to come to his bedroom. She replies, “Sex is not going to fix this right now. Are you insane?” Still, she goes to his bedroom. Sex fixes it. 13. There are several more such episodes between Christian and Ana, but for the sake of brevity, let’s not belabor the point. He tells her what to do; she rebels halfheartedly for a moment and then settles for 90 to 100 percent of his original demand, however unreasonable. 14. Before taking her to his parents’ Venetian-themed masked ball, he has her insert some ben-wa balls. Because that’s what you do before a fancy event at your parents’ house. 14a. A quick rundown of the sex. In addition to the ben-wa balls, Christian outfits Ana once with a spreader bar. He shows her nipple clamps, though they go unused. He spanks her. He fondles her in an elevator. They have sex in his childhood bedroom. They have sex in the shower, twice. This is all meant to be shocking and transgressive, but it’s about as dull and unsexy as it is possible for sex to be. Basinger herself pushed the envelope further 30 years ago in 9½ Weeks. 15. Christian takes Ana out on his grand three-masted yacht. She is amazed when he lets her hold the wheel while she sits on his lap and he guides her hands. “I can’t believe I’m doing this! I’m the captain!” she enthuses. A reminder: This character is meant to be in her twenties, not eight years old. 16. Back at work, Ana’s boss Jack tells her she has to go on a business trip with him to New York. When she tells Christian, he forbids it. She explains that it’s necessary for her job. He says that if anyone is going to take her to New York it will be him. I initially took this to be a compromise in which she would go on her business trip and Christian would accompany her. (Yes: domineering, possessive, and mistrustful—but still a compromise.) 17. I was, of course, wrong. The next day Ana tells Jack that she can’t go to New York, pretending that she has a prior commitment. 18. Lest we start to believe that Christian’s jealous sabotaging of Ana’s career makes him a bad guy, Jack shows what a real bad guy looks. The long-awaited sexual harassment and assault take place, with Jack telling Ana, “I just think if you’re going to fuck your way to prominence you do it with someone who makes you smarter, not just richer.” 19. Ana knees Jack in the balls and rushes out of her office into Christian’s arms. Christian immediately calls in a favor from a friend and has Jack fired. No one spends one second wondering whether this is the best way—as opposed to, say, filing a report, talking to HR, or pressing charges—to deal with workplace assault. 20. But now that Jack’s been fired, who will take over as fiction editor? His assistant Ana, of course. After one staff meeting in which she recommends that the publishing house seek out “new voices,” she’s given the job by the editor-in-chief. 20a. Said editor-in-chief is, of course, a man. I’ve wracked my brains without luck to come up with a single moment in the film in which a man is presented as subordinate to a woman. Men are bosses; women are assistants and housekeepers and submissives. 20b. Everyone celebrates Ana’s great achievement in becoming fiction editor. No one seems to recall or care that it was the direct result of Christian having had her boss fired. 21. A former submissive of Christian’s (Bella Heathcote) who’s been stalking the couple shows up at Ana’s apartment with a gun. The two women take turns trying to be more pitiable than one another. Ana: “I’m nothing.” Stalker: “I know you love him. I do, too. We all do.” 22. Christian again arrives to save the day. He commands the stalker to kneel, and when she obeys, he puts his hand on her head as one might on a disobedient dog’s. He orders Ana to go to his apartment. 23. Ana goes to his apartment, but not for a couple of hours. “Where the fuck were you?” Christian demands, expressing his tender concern for her well-being. 24. Christian explains to Ana, “I’m not a dominant. The correct word is a sadist. I get off on punishing women that look like you, that look like—” Ana interrupts him: “Your mother.” Later, Christian asks Ana to marry him. There is no sign that she considers the former admission any serious obstacle to the latter proposition. 25. When Christian repeats his proposal a second time, Ana replies “Why me?” This is in fact an excellent question. In the books, it essentially answers itself: She is the first-person narrator, and as such implicitly rooted for. (We are all our own first-person narrators, and for the most part imagine we have due whatever might come to us.) Onscreen it’s harder to say, except that she seems to have the precise ratio of momentary defiance followed by total capitulation that Christian requires. 26. Christian has to take a business trip to Portland with a female subordinate (I know: redundant). While he’s flying his own helicopter back, the engine explodes and the chopper begins falling out of the sky. Back in Seattle, his friends and family are horrified by TV news reports that Christian is missing and presumed dead. Oh no! This isn’t going to be like season three of Downton Abbey, where the happy ending is spoiled in the final minutes by the leading man’s sudden, completely accidental demise? 27. Of course it’s not. Christian walks in the front door unscathed. Everyone is so happy that nobody even thinks to ask why he didn’t phone ahead to say he was safe, or alert the authorities who, according to the television, are still searching for his remains in the woods of Washington state. This may be the single feeblest late-act bid for suspense I’ve ever seen. 28. Ana accepts Christian’s proposal by giving him a keychain that says “yes” on the back. She asks him to take her back to the Red Room of Pain. There, with great ceremony, he subjects her to … massage oil? Really? Is that the naughtiest concluding kink this franchise can come up with? Ana may need to find herself a more committed pervert. 29. At his birthday party, Christian tells everyone they’re getting married. All are overjoyed, except for the wicked Elena, who confronts Ana. Christian again comes to the rescue, declaring, “You taught me how to fuck, Elena. She taught me how to love.” I can see the Hallmark card already. Christian takes Ana to a greenhouse filled with flowers to offer a proper proposal, including a ring with a diamond the size of a nickel. There are fireworks. Literally. 30. But danger still looms for next year’s upcoming sequel, Fifty Shades Freed. Watching the fireworks from a nearby hill is Ana’s old boss, Jack. Now you might think that an unemployed former book editor does not really make for the most terrifying of villains. But he’s smoking a cigarette. And it looks like he hasn’t shaved for days … 10 Feb
The Lego Batman Movie Is the Funniest Superhero Movie in Years - Moviegoers’ first look at the Caped Crusader in Tim Burton’s 1992 gothic masterpiece Batman Returns was a peculiar one. Bruce Wayne (Michael Keaton) sits in his desk chair, brooding silently in a giant, dark office, with seemingly nothing to do. Suddenly, the Bat-signal flashes into the sky; Bruce’s head jerks up, and he leaps into action, energized by the grim purpose of his secret crime-fighting identity. It’s a brilliant gag on Burton and Keaton’s part—a sly nod to the reality that, when he’s not cleaning up the streets of Gotham, Batman is a sad, lonely man, a billionaire unfulfilled by anything except putting on the mask. The Lego Batman Movie is, on one level, a work of crass commercialism, just like its predecessor The Lego Movie. It is also, however, a terrific adaptation of Tim Burton’s gag—a take on Batman that sees the sitcom humor in his absurd lifestyle, brutalizing criminals by night and wasting his days in a cavernous mansion with only an elderly butler to talk to. It’s a one-joke movie that’s based on a really funny joke. As such, it’s a wry piece of meta-commentary that deconstructs (no pun intended) everyone’s favorite moody hero using the anarchic animated style of the Lego world. As the film begins, Batman (given the same gravelly voice that Will Arnett ably provided in The Lego Movie) is the hero of Gotham—always handily defeating a familiar list of supervillains led by the demented Joker (a gleeful Zach Galifianakis). When he’s not out in Gotham, though, he’s whiling away the time in the gilded cage that is his mansion, watching romantic comedies alone (Jerry Maguire is a perpetual favorite), warming up lobster thermidor in the microwave, and barking at his butler Alfred, waiting desperately for that Bat-signal to show up in the sky again. Moviegoers have been besieged with Bat-content in recent years. There was Christopher Nolan’s gritty Dark Knight (Christian Bale), a practical, grounded, yet still undeniably unhinged vigilante far removed from Burton’s pulpier excesses—who starred in three films. Last year, we saw Zack Snyder somehow attempt to combine Nolan’s forbidding darkness and Burton’s cartoonishness into one hero (played by Ben Affleck) in Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. How much more Batman could anyone possibly stand? But The Lego Batman Movie works precisely because it knows audiences are sick of its hero. It’s a reassessment, an intervention, an effort to try and remember what’s fun about him and what maybe needs to remain on the cutting-room floor. The film’s story, such as it is, is rooted in Batman’s obsessive desire to be left alone. When the Joker proclaims himself Batman’s arch-nemesis, the hero blanches, not willing to commit to such a label. When the new police commissioner Barbara Gordon (Rosario Dawson) suggests that the Gotham cops partner with Batman, rather than simply turning on the Bat-signal whenever they need him to deal with a supervillain, he scoffs. And when young orphan Dick Grayson (Michael Cera) ends up in his care, it takes Batman a week to even notice he’s living in the mansion. So Batman, over about an hour and 45 minutes, has to learn to let people in, even the villains who clearly bring him great joy. Somehow, the film (credited to a horde of writers including Community’s Chris McKenna and the novelist Seth Grahame-Smith) stretches this into a feature-length story, though it feels a little thin at times. The film works best when it’s furiously lobbing jokes at the screen, a la Airplane!, rather than trying to construct a meaningful action-movie narrative. The expected happy ending feels a bit more pat than The Lego Movie’s radical meta-twist, but it’s largely earned (partly because Cera’s voice work as young Robin is surprisingly, and hilariously, heartfelt). The director Chris McKay, the animation supervisor on The Lego Movie, retains that film’s look and feel. Every action sequence crackles with childlike energy, making viewers feel as if they’re in the hands of a kid playing with his toys. That rebellious delight is somewhat counterbalanced by the extreme, and somewhat disturbing, brand management on display—the studio, Warner Bros., finds a way to cram all of its big-name titles, from Harry Potter to The Lord of the Rings, into the film. But The Lego Batman Movie is so eager to pop its egotistical hero’s bubble that it’s easy to be won over. I’ll save my revulsion for whenever the Lego brand wears out its welcome—as of right now, there’s still plenty to love about it. 10 Feb
The Wistful, Sharp Return of Girls - In “American Bitch,” the remarkable third episode of the sixth and final season of HBO’s Girls, Hannah (Lena Dunham) has a confrontation with a writer (Matthew Rhys) who’s been outed online as a sexual predator by several female college students. He insists that the women all pursued him, followed him to his hotel room, saw a sexual encounter with him as something they could bank internally as life experience. “What do writers need?” he says. “Money,” Hannah replies. “Stories,” he counters. But Hannah disagrees. The woman who published the most scathing takedown didn’t sleep with him “so she has a story,” she argues. “It’s so she feels like she exists.” Throughout its five years on television, Girls has shown Hannah pursuing degrading life experiences while telling herself it’s in the service of art. Like doing cocaine and having sex with her ex-junkie downstairs neighbor Laird so she can write about it for a $200 assignment from a website called JazzHate, or following a buff, manic yoga instructor into a sauna at a women’s consciousness-raising weekend. But in its last season, in an episode that deliberately echoes a number of the show’s finer moments, she seems to have finally achieved an amount of self-realization. While Hannah still doesn’t reliably feel or act like a grownup—and who among us ever really does?—her mission has evolved, from living out bizarre experiences so other people can read about them to writing “stories that make people feel less alone than I did.” The first three episodes provided for critics diverge wildly in terms of topic and tone, with the first acting as a swift re-immersion in the lives of people who appear largely unchanged since last season. Hannah’s reached a professional milestone by selling a Modern Love column to The New York Times about Jessa and Adam; Marnie (Allison Williams) reads it on the toilet, pumping her fist triumphantly for her friend; Adam (Adam Driver) reads it while gnawing his fingers; Jessa (Jemima Kirke) doesn’t read it at all. Jessa and Adam are still living together in an environment Ray (Alex Karpovsky) describes poetically as “a boundary-less hinterland of sexuality and emotion, it’s disturbing, and they’re always somehow reheating fish.” Hannah meets an editor who tells her, “You’re just perfect for the aesthetic of Slag Mag,” and gives her an assignment—to attend a yuppie female surf camp in the Hamptons that’s “super chill but disgusting.” The 42-minute episode is an extended showcase for Hannah at her worst: lazy (she won’t even try to surf), slovenly (she spills drinks everywhere and barfs all over someone else’s bedroom), and manipulative. But then she forms an unlikely bond with a surf instructor (Riz Ahmed, trying manfully to play a spacey, dumb beach god) and starts to wonder why her immediate instinct is to try to hate things. “All my friends in New York define themselves by what they hate,” she explains. “It’s like everyone’s so busy chasing success and defining themselves they can’t experience pleasure.” More than once, her face forms itself into a smile before relaxing into something more like wistfulness. There are other lightbulb moments like this that seem to point to Hannah’s future being outside New York, like an encounter with a woman in an antique shop who left her stressed-out life in Queens after she fainted on a subway platform and was pulled from the tracks by Chris Noth. And if the first three episodes of the new season have anything in common, it’s that they benefit hugely from leaving Brooklyn, even if it’s only for locales as perilous and unfamiliar as Montauk, upstate, and the Upper East Side. When Hannah, Marnie, and Desi (Ebon Moss-Bachrach) end up on a trip to Poughkeepsie in the second episode, the show flirts with the conventions of horror, although it’s laced throughout with Girls’s more typical bravado. (Infuriated with Desi, Hannah at one point says, “He looks like someone in the Pacific Northwest knit a man.”) But it’s the third episode that stands out, and that seems most poised to provoke a maelstrom of responses. Like the second-season episode “One Man’s Trash,” set almost entirely in a Brooklyn townhouse owned by a divorced doctor (Patrick Wilson), it takes place in a vast, gorgeous apartment owned by Chuck Palmer (Rhys), a Serious American Novelist whose more dubious sexual exploits have been recounted all over the internet in first-person form. Hannah, who’s written about the furor, is summoned as a kind of representative of young female writerhood, although exactly why is unclear. The two engage in a thoughtful, nuanced debate about reputation, art, and consent that seems like an effort to engage with the potential and the limitations of online discourse—something Dunham herself has frequently experienced. “People don’t talk about this shit for fun—it ruins their lives!” Hannah says. Palmer is more concerned with his own pain, and how “a website called The Awl called me ‘Throatpiercer.’” Like “One Man’s Trash,” the episode functions as a kind of one-act play, removed from the typical context of the show but informed by it (it also shares the same director, Richard Shepard). But it displays, too, some of Hannah’s more intriguing contradictions: her rudeness coupled with her odd sense of propriety, her surprising strength with her terrible decision-making. And it’s enormously striking from a visual perspective, setting up shots of Palmer’s apartment that look almost like optical illusions and lingering on the art on his walls. In its final stretch of episodes, Girls still contains all the perfect details that have defined its world in the past—Shoshanna (Zosia Mamet) expounding on the limitations of Paul Krugman, Ray reading Hanya Yanagihara’s A Little Life. But its ambitions, like Hannah’s, seem to have benefited from realizing that the best stories have a deeper purpose than simple entertainment. 10 Feb
Trump's Illusory Answers to Imaginary Crime Problems - Jeff Sessions issued a de facto mission statement within moments of being sworn in attorney general on Thursday. “We have a crime problem,” the former Alabama senator said. “I wish the rise we were seeing in crime in American today were a blip. My best judgment, having been involved in criminal law enforcement for many years, is that this is a dangerous permanent trend.” Years of experience or not, Sessions’s statement is belied by the facts at worst, or wildly premature at best. The violent crime rate did tick up in 2015, the latest available year, coming in slightly higher than 2014. But it remains more than 16 percent below where it was in 2006, and far below its peak in the early 1990s. Despite the fact that there’s reliable data, gathered by the federal government, Trump and members of his administration keep misleading with their statements on crime. During the presidential campaign, Trump claimed repeatedly that the streets of the nation were in chaos. On Tuesday, while meeting with members of the National Sheriffs’ Association, the president falsely claimed, as he has repeatedly before, that the national murder rate is at its highest point in 47 years. Murder rates increased in 2015, too, but they also remain well below their recent peaks. What is true is that violent-crime rates in some places are extremely high. Chicago is dealing with a consistently high rate of gun violence. Baltimore is averaging a murder a day in 2017, after a bloody 2016. Yet New York City saw a historic low murder rate in January. The high rate of violence in some places is cause for concern, but it’s simply not the case that it equates to a national crime wave like the one that began in the 1970s and crested in the early 1990s. These willful misstatements of fact are not harmful simply because they’re false. Overheated rhetoric about rising crime tends to inflame the populace, and indeed, concern about violent crime has increased far faster than the rate of violent crime. Gallup finds that there is little direct relation between the rate of violent crime and citizens’ concern about it. That in turn creates a demand for action to meet the illusory skyrocketing threat of crime—demand that can produce policies that distract from bigger problems at best and are counterproductive at worst. Enter the three executive orders that Trump signed Thursday, at the same event where Sessions was sworn in. According to the new White House’s custom, the text of the orders was not released until hours after they’d been signed. One simply creates a task force to study crime-reduction and public safety, though it offers some sense of what to expect among enforcement priorities of the Sessions-led Justice Department, especially “illegal immigration, drug trafficking, and violent crime.” A second emphasizes the importance of enforcing the law on transnational cartels. The order reflects Trump’s view, expounded frequently on the campaign trail, that drug cartels are a major source of crime in the United States, thus necessitating stronger controls on the border. The order says the executive branch will “pursue and support additional efforts to prevent the operational success of transnational criminal organizations and subsidiary organizations within and beyond the United States, to include prosecution of ancillary criminal offenses, such as immigration fraud and visa fraud.” Examining immigration fraud and visa fraud could be a central element of creating the lists of crimes by illegal immigrants that Trump mandated in an earlier executive order. The third order focuses on violence against police officers. The order says the Justice Department will develop strategies to improve protection of officers, including proposing legislation creating new federal crimes for perpetrating violence against officers. This order also offers little that is concrete, but Congress could take up legislation that emerges from its recommendations. (Former Attorney General Eric Holder tartly noted on Twitter that his Justice Department had pursued some protections for officers years ago.) During the presidential campaign, Trump promised to make killing a police officer a death-penalty offense, although that would probably not be legally feasible. Protecting police against violence is politically popular, but it’s not clear that it addresses a worsening problem. In 2016, according to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, 135 officers were killed in the line of duty—the highest number since 2011, but still lower than any year between 1964 and 2008. That is surely too high, but it is not clear what this latest initiative will do to reduce it. It’s also not the only problem facing law enforcement, but the Trump administration has not been as eager to address others. There are multiple examples of egregious, systemic abuse of civilians being perpetrated by police departments in cities like Baltimore, Ferguson, Cleveland, and Chicago. During his confirmation hearings, Sessions expressed misgivings about the Justice Department’s investigations into those departments, arguing that a few bad apples were to blame. He said that federal lawsuits “undermine the respect for police officers and create an impression that the entire department is not doing their work consistent with fidelity to law and fairness.” One thing that’s disconcerting about the overall downward trend in crime over the last two decades (sorry, Attorney General Sessions) is how little is understood about—there’s no clear explanation for the dive. Given how mysterious crime rates are, it’s hard enough to make good crime-fighting policy. Making it based on false and misleading statements about that data is nigh unto impossible. 9 Feb
Will There Ever Be a Great Video-Game Movie? - Video games have perhaps never been as embedded in mainstream culture as they are now. It’s become almost a cliché to note that the video-game industry has equaled, if not surpassed Hollywood in terms of sheer profitability in recent years. Technology has improved to make games feel like immersive, cinematic experiences. Virtual reality is on its way to becoming a household item, and the grand debate over whether games can be considered “art” now seems passé. In 1993, Hollywood took its first crack at the video-game market with Super Mario Bros., a steampunk film adaptation of the colorful Nintendo game starring Bob Hoskins as the titular plumber. Unfortunately, it was a financial bomb, a critical disaster, and eventually disowned by everyone involved. In the intervening decades, Hollywood has tried again and again to bring video games to the screen, with at least 40 major adaptations over the last 25 years. Exactly one, the Angelina Jolie-starring Lara Croft: Tomb Raider in 2001, was a genuine hit, grossing $131 million domestically. Others have been cult sensations, or popular overseas, where video-game brand recognition is enough to sell tickets. But the video-game movie remains a neglected subgenre in the action-movie world, still largely greeted with derision by critics. That said, there have been small signs of life in the genre recently—namely, efforts to engage with the act of gaming itself, rather than just trying to replicate the bloody shoot-em-ups and bombastic set pieces of the source material. After a real fallow period for gaming films in the last five years (unless you count the success of The Angry Birds Movie, a children’s cartoon based on a cellphone app), two movies in the last two months glanced up against greatness, at least within the limited bounds of video-game cinema. The first, and more frustrating, was Assassin’s Creed, Justin Kurzel’s adaptation of the wildly successful franchise that transposes stealthy action with various historical settings. In the Assassin’s Creed games, the player’s character uses a device called the Animus which allows him to project his mind back in time, to play as one of his ancestors, an assassin operating in the past (say, during the French Revolution, or the Crusades). It’s the kind of bonkers made-up technology that games use all the time as a simple story crutch. Except Kurzel not only kept the Animus for the film, he made it the central focus of the story, which followed petty criminal Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender), a descendant of a famous assassin, being strapped into the device to experience the exploits of his murderous forefather. In the film, Callum plugs in, Matrix­-style, to a giant spinal tap attached to a crane, and leaps and jumps around in an empty warehouse, mimicking the memories of a murderous hero in 15th-century Spain, while lab assistants (led by Marion Cotillard) around him take notes. It was a broad metaphor for the act of gaming itself—Callum lives an action-packed, but consequence-free, life of bloody mayhem within his own mind. And eventually, as with the other lab rats around him, it begins to take a strange mental toll. The problem with Assassin’s Creed, strangely enough, was that the action itself was muddy-looking and dull; every time the film cut to Callum’s historical visions, it was hard to stay invested. Kurzel is an Australian director who had previously worked on the dark true-story drama Snowtown and a grim, but well-received adaptation of Macbeth also starring Fassbender and Cotillard. He was better suited to the blurry morality of Assassin’s Creed than to the convoluted video-game logic of its plot or the sweeping vistas of its set-pieces. It was an unusual inversion of the typical problem with video-game films, which emphasize crisp action over deeper philosophizing. Kurzel was also one of the only directors with any hint of prestige filmmaking in his resume that dared take on video games. Usually, such films are handed to relative neophytes or filmmakers with a background in music videos or commercials. There’s a reason more established directors stay away—Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral, Donnie Brasco, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire) saw his reputation permanently dinged by the box-office failure of Prince of Persia, a Disney adaptation of a famed platform game, while Duncan Jones (Moon, Source Code) took on the mighty task of adapting Warcraft to the screen and was greeted by punishing reviews for his years of work. The Resident Evil films are some of the only video-game movies that have come close to capturing the joy of the medium.Those aforementioned films were embarrassments at the U.S. box office that nonetheless earned their money back worldwide, thanks to the global appeal of gaming’s biggest brands. Warcraft, an epic fantasy adventure that cost $160 million to make, grossed a pitiful $47 million from American audiences, but a staggering $220 million just in China, where the game it’s based on is hugely popular. And if you’ve ever wondered why six Resident Evil films have been made over the last 15 years, despite no discernible interest from U.S. viewers, it’s because those action-packed zombie dramas are consistent earners overseas. That bring us to Resident Evil: The Final Chapter, the latest in the long-running series that has quietly become a cult sensation over the years. Shepherded to screen by the director-writer-producer Paul W. S. Anderson (the king of video-game films, having also made 1995’s Mortal Kombat) and starring his wife and muse Milla Jovovich (a deeply underrated, immensely charismatic on-screen presence), the Resident Evil films are the only other video-game movies that have come close to capturing the joy of the medium. The first Resident Evil (2002), starring Jovovich and Michelle Rodriguez, was a claustrophobic adventure set in an underground facility crawling with zombies, an evil computer, and various deathtraps. The characters literally moved from room to room dealing with new obstacles, progressing incrementally as one might through a mid-’90s horror game. As the years have passed, the films have expanded their scope, but remained similarly reliant on video-gamey plotting. Apocalypse (2004) was set in a city overrun with zombies; Extinction (2007) saw Jovovich’s Alice traversing a blasted, post-apocalyptic desert, Mad Max-style; Afterlife (2010) returned her to the setting of the first film, this time equipped with institutional memories (a player’s guide, if you will). In Anderson’s most ambitious effort, 2012’s Resident Evil: Retribution, Alice woke up in a simulation that revisited moments and revived characters from previous films, as if she was re-loading a save point and getting different chances to replay her life. Some cineastes have grown to appreciate the weird artistry of Anderson’s work, even though the Resident Evil films are still laden with cheap CGI, wooden supporting characters, and buckets of gory action. Anderson’s been called a “vulgar auteur,” along with other B-movie action directors like Justin Lin (the Fast & Furious franchise) and the self-branded duo of Neveldine/Taylor (the Crank films). All of them owe some indirect debt to the world of video games, as their films combine intense action set-pieces with ridiculous, convoluted plotting that only the most die-hard fans can keep straight, but only Anderson has directly adapted games to the screen. So many of the most hallowed titles—Nintendo’s Zelda franchise, the dystopian masterpiece Bioshock, or legendary PC games like Half-Life or Portal—have never made it to screen, despite frequent rumors over the years. It will always be difficult to find a way to adapt games that thrive on the user’s experience of exploring and existing in a world; it’s a fundamentally different experience from seeing a film, one that forgives more basic, derivative storytelling. Video games are not usually narrative media. Even the ones that are (like 2013’s apocalyptic The Last of Us) feel heavily indebted to films like 28 Days Later or I Am Legend, and are notable for putting players inside the story rather than making them spectators. Right now, the only adaptations worth any serious discussion are the ones that engage with that fact—that games succeed by inserting us into the action. But until others begin to do the same, movies like Resident Evil will never be widely seen as “great.” 9 Feb

CBC News

China Digital Times (CDT) RSS Feed

Photo: Lantern Festival Fireworks / 玉泉路上的元宵节, by Caitriana Nicholson - Lantern Festival Fireworks / 玉泉路上的元宵节 © Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: Caitriana NicholsonDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall10 Feb
How China Is Remaking the Global Film Industry - China’s influence in Hollywood is growing rapidly as the country’s market becomes ever more vital to the success of Hollywood films. With an eye to profiting from China’s growing middle class, U.S. film studios have become increasingly willing to adjust content and casting to please both Chinese viewers and government censors. Meanwhile, Chinese investment in Hollywood and the U.S. entertainment industry has soared, with large conglomerates such as Dalian Wanda Group financing some of Hollywood’s latest blockbusters. At Time, Hannah Beech looks at the deepening interdependence that characterizes the relationship between Hollywood and China: […] China’s ascent is the economic story of the 21st century, and the entertainment industry is no exception. An average of 22 new screens were unveiled in China in 2015 — each day. That year, the Chinese box office surged by almost 50% over 2014, and Hollywood is counting on an expanding Chinese middle class to make up for vanishing audiences at home. Over the next couple of years, the Chinese box office may well surpass that of North America as the world’s biggest, even if last year’s China numbers fell — as has box-office revenue in Hollywood — amid a general economic slowdown in the country. Still, even Hollywood movies that bomb in the West can be redeemed by Chinese interest. Last summer’s World of Warcraft, which cost $160 million to make, managed less than $25 million at the U.S. box office on its opening weekend. But the video-game adaptation scored $156 million in its first five days in Chinese theaters, on the back of intense gaming interest in China. […] Japanese, Middle Eastern and European companies have long spent big in Hollywood. But China is different. “We have both big pockets and a big stomach,” says Li Ruigang, head of China Media Capital (CMC), a private-equity firm that has partnered with Warner Bros., DreamWorks and Imax, among others. “China has money to spend on Hollywood and this incredible market at home. The China-Hollywood connection will sustain itself for a very long time.” China’s box-office weight has already affected the kind of films Hollywood makes. Pleasing Chinese audiences — and a Chinese central government hyperallergic to criticism — is now part of the Hollywood formula. Remember 2015’s The Martian, in which the Chinese space agency unexpectedly saves the day? Transformers 4 — which shattered Chinese box-office records in 2014 with $320 million in revenues, more than the film made in North America — was partly set in Hong Kong and studded with Chinese product placements. The sci-fi action franchise showed the Chinese Communist Party standing up to invading robots while American authorities floundered. (To be fair, renegade Texans still rescued the human race.) Rogue One: A Star Wars Story features two Chinese actors, director-actor Jiang Wen and Hong Kong martial artist Donnie Yen. “When China was not the market, you just followed the American way,” says Jackie, who was awarded an honorary Oscar last November and ranks No. 2 on Forbes’ list of the world’s best-paid actors. “But these days, they ask me, ‘Do you think the China audience will like it?’ All the writers, producers — they think about China. Now China is the center of everything.” [Source] Under China’s latest film import quota, only 34 foreign films are allowed to be imported into the country each year. This import limit was relaxed last year amid a slowdown in box office earnings. Chinese authorities have also expressed their willingness to double both the number of U.S. movies imported to China and Hollywood’s share of the box office revenue. These positive developments, however, may be thwarted by President Donald Trump’s stance on trade with China. Anousha Sakoui at Bloomberg Businessweek looks at the uncertainty that Trump and his administration has created for the U.S. film industry. During a visit to Los Angeles five years ago this month, China’s Xi Jinping gave Hollywood a much-needed shot in the arm. The incoming Chinese leader agreed to ease an almost 20-year-old quota on American films, nearly doubling both the number of U.S. movies imported to China and Hollywood studios’ share of the box office receipts—a deal that temporarily settled a World Trade Organization case the U.S. brought against China. There was an understanding that in 2017 the two nations would return to the table to increase the compensation to U.S. moviemakers and for China to open its market further. But now President Trump’s rhetoric on China’s trade practices has some executives worried that the film industry won’t get its happy ending after all. […] Under the previous agreement, if this year’s consultations fail to produce a deal by Jan. 1, 2018, the U.S. could pursue procedural action against China in the WTO—a step many in the industry want to avoid. […] It’s unknown just how high a priority Hollywood’s interests will be for the new administration. “There is a disconnect between what Trump and his appointees”—Robert Lighthizer, set to be U.S. trade representative, and Peter Navarro, head of the newly formed White House National Trade Council—“might want to do and what Hollywood wants them to do,” says Stanley Rosen, a University of Southern California political science professor who studies the relationship between the mainland and the U.S. film industry. “They don’t want the government to push China so much that Chinese investment in Hollywood dries up or is blocked. So it’s kind of a delicate dance.” [Source] The large flow of money from China into Hollywood and the rest of the U.S. entertainment industry has also attracted criticism from Congress, with several lawmakers jointly calling for greater scrutiny of Chinese investments due to fear of potential foreign interference and other security risks associated with propaganda and media control. © cindyliuwenxin for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: Chinese investment, donald Trump, film industry, hollywood, moviesDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall10 Feb
Party Inspectors Hail Tycoon’s Gagging as Key Achievement - Almost a year ago, the weibo accounts of property tycoon Ren Zhiqiang were deleted after he challenged Xi Jinping’s call for media organizations to “take ‘Party’ as their surname.” Now, South China Morning Post’s Nectar Gan reports, municipal Party disciplinary authorities in Beijing have cited Ren’s case as one of their key victories in 2016. From SCMP: Beijing’s municipal disciplinary and anticorruption watchdog has boasted in its annual report that its investigation into the outspoken property tycoon Ren Zhiqiang was one of its main achievements last year. Ren, a Communist Party member known as the Big Cannon for his outspoken views, was placed on a year’s probation last May for criticising President Xi Jinping’s demand that the media must show absolute loyalty to the party. […] Ren social media account on Weibo, which had 37 million followers, was shut down and the tycoon was forced to shut up. The annual work report, delivered by Beijing’s municipal disciplinary chief Zhang Fushuo, said the “stern investigation and punishment of Ren Zhiqiang’s public voicing of wrong remarks” was a highlight last year in terms of punishing those who violate “political disciplines and political rules”. [Source] Although the fight against corruption has been one of Xi’s flagship policies, many commentators have noted a shift in the focus of the disciplinary apparatus ahead of a mid-generational leadership shuffle at the 19th Party Congress. The University of Hong Kong law professor Fu Hualing told The Financial Times last month, for example, after the annual number of graft prosecutions fell for the first time under Xi’s rule, “by and large the campaign that we have witnessed against corruption is coming to an end. Now it’s really about political discipline.” Ren’s banishment from social media came soon after new Party regulations forbade “improper discussion” of central government policies. The outspoken tycoon was far from the last to fall. In January alone, a think tank founded by liberal economist Mao Yushi, whose staff includes several other former researchers from the official Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, was stripped of its websites and social media accounts. Mao’s own Sina Weibo account has also been closed. A swiftly deleted Global Times editorial commented that “all the liberals must learn the lesson that openly playing on opposition or [being] a denialist will not work in China.” Earlier in the month, the deputy director of the Shijiazhuang Bureau of Culture, Radio, Film, TV, Press and Publication was fired for labeling Mao Zedong a “devil” on Weibo, and denouncing celebration of this birthday as “the world’s largest cult activity.” A lecturer at a Shandong agricultural college was sacked on similar grounds. Meanwhile, a Party directive ordered “judicial and law enforcement professionals [to] follow the correct political direction and stay absolutely loyal to the party,” while new rules for the media and education sectors made similar demands. Against this background, official social media accounts helped circulate a list of tips on harmonious online activity for Party members and officials. From Sixth Tone’s Lin Qiqing: Party members should see messaging app WeChat’s as a public place and will get punished if they “groundlessly criticize” major policies, an article shared on WeChat by Party mouthpiece People’s Daily warned on Sunday. […] The listicle, also republished by dangjian.cn, a website affiliated with the Party’s central publicity department, originates from a WeChat account called “Keep Up With the Party.” The account, which has nearly 100,000 subscribers, was started in February 2016 by Wang Xiaolian, a 32-year-old doctor from Beijing. […] The article about WeChat was written by a contributor, a 23-year-old university student and Party member. “[The article] aims to clarify some obscure knowledge, remind people to use WeChat Moments properly, and promote positive energy,” Wang said, using a Party buzzword. The guidelines also urge Party members to educate those who distribute “negative energy” on Moments by “taking red faith as the most powerful weapon for resisting the penetration of Western ideologies.” It also warned candidates running for public office against using WeChat to win support. [Source] The online activities of lower-level authorities and officials are not only monitored for political orthodoxy. Sixth Tone reported this week that for the first time, the State Council has disciplined an official for his department’s failure to keep its website up to date. The body started inspecting official sites in 2014, and closed 20,000 substandard ones last year. © Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: Beijing, Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, communist party, corruption, discipline inspection, Mao Yushi, party discipline, party unity, Ren Zhiqiang, sina weibo, social media, WeChat, weibo, Xi anti-corruption campaignDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall10 Feb
“Christian Theme Park” in Changsha Irks Neo-Maoists - A “Christian theme park” in Hunan, the home province of Mao Zedong, is drawing intense criticism from some Chinese web users. The “theme park” recently opened in Changsha—Mao Zedong’s stomping grounds and a city known for being the place that the red revolutionary “converted” to communism. At The Guardian, Tom Phillips surveys some of the online debate that news coverage of the religious site has stirred up, quoting an expert on neo-Maoism on the inevitably of the controversy: [… ] A second article, published on the neo-Maoist website Utopia, called the project an “imperialist cultural invasion”. […] Zhao Danyan, a third critic, called for the immediate demolition of the “unnecessary and inappropriate” structure. At best, it would harm local culture, he argued. At worst, it posed a threat to China’s “ideological security”. Jude Blanchette, a Beijing-based academic who studies China’s resurgent community of neo-Maoists, said the commotion was largely the result of the church’s location in Chinese communism’s answer to Mecca. […] Blanchette said much of the fury was focused on a website called the Red Song Society, which he described as the Drudge Report of neo-Maoism. “The narrative that they are passing around … is that this is just another sign of infiltration by hostile foreign forces and of how tepidly communist and red our officials are that you now get state money going to build a cross on the side of a building.” [Source] Last April, President Xi Jinping himself warned of the ideological dangers posed by foreign religion. During his tenure as president, Xi has also overseen a campaign against Western values, as his administration’s judiciary and state media have regularly blamed “hostile foreign forces” for training human rights activists in an attempt to destabilize China. At What’s on Weibo, Manya Koetse reports further on Chinese media coverage of the so-called Christian theme park and the online debate surrounding it: […] A Hunan TV report showed the park’s purpose as a tourist attraction and wedding photos location, but many netizens stress that China is a secular society and that the park’s construction in Changsha is not in line with the revolutionary history of the city. In a popular WeChat article (link in Chinese) by an account called “Behind the Headlines”, the author also expresses his dismay at the fact that this Christian park, of all places, should be opened in the hometown of Mao, who was a convinced atheist. […] Despite all the criticism, not all netizens think the park is a bad idea. “This is freedom of religion. If you don’t like it, don’t go there,” one netizen said. One commenter complained that the widespread criticism was unfair, saying: “When there are mosques built, nobody dares to say anything, but when other religions make something, you open your mouths. It’s not right.” There are also those who do not necessarily care about the religion, but do care about the money: “What on earth gave the Changsha government the right to use the taxpayers’ money for a Christian project? Should it not be a public park instead of a religious place?” [Source] The Guardian’s Phillips also quoted an anonymous parishioner who says the cause of controversy is not a theme park, but simply a church and Bible study facility built on public land. Coverage from the Global Times cites a Hunan religious affairs official with a similar explanation: The official surnamed Cao also denied the project includes a Christian theme park, adding the approved project only includes a Bible institute and “the work site” of the Christian Council of Hunan Province and Christian Three-self Patriotic Movement Committee of Hunan. Cao refused to elaborate whether the “work site” is a church or an ordinary office building, adding that the project was built in accordance with China’s policy on religious property. […] The Changsha government website said the Xingsha Ecological Park, near which the church park is located, was a government-sponsored project. However, according to a statement jointly released by Hunan’s Christian council and committee on Friday, the project and the ecological park are not related.  [Source] The debate over the high-profile religious site comes amid a years-running campaign against Christianity in historically Christian regions of Zhejiang province, where over 12,000 crosses have been removed since 2013 and several churches have been razed. Authorities have claimed that the campaign is not one against Christianity, but rather part of an urban “beautification” campaign. However, a leaked document from 2014 showed evidence of an official order to crack down on “overly popular” forms of worship. As the Changsha “theme park” debate was unfolding on several online venues, a question on China’s Quora-like Zhihu platform about the possibility of simultaneously being both a Christian and a communist attracted an answer from the Communist Youth League: In the Zhihu post, which first appeared on Jan. 28, an anonymous net user who said to work for the government explains their dilemma: “I graduated with a master’s degree in 2016 and have been a believer in Christ for half a year,” the post begins, “but now my work requires me to join the Party.” […] The CYL stepped up on Friday to provide enlightenment, using simple language and a pictorial peppering of Karl Marx, president and Party leader Xi Jinping with a Tibetan monk, and a black-and-white cartoon of the evolution of human beings. In its answer, the league listed a number of reasons or arguments as to why mixing faith with politics is not a good idea, and proposed some ideas about how Party members should handle the issue of religion within the broader society. For example, the post read, the CCP and State Council, China’s cabinet, had clearly stated that Party members need to prevent their communist convictions from being eroded by religion. In addition, Marx’s teachings state that from their respective inceptions, communism and atheism have gone hand in hand. Furthermore, being an atheist Party member doesn’t mean giving up freedom of belief — rather, good cadres simply choose not to believe in religion, it argued. Still, the post read, that doesn’t mean non-Party members should be discouraged from practicing religion. Marx said one day, religion will disappear, and that until then, it will remain a part of society. In conclusion, the Party and the religious masses can still collaborate, and “roll up our sleeves and work hard,” the post read, quoting President Xi’s recent new year address. […] [Source] Meanwhile, Pope Francis’ ongoing outreach to China—controversial since its start due to China’s concurrent crackdown on foreign religion, including Christianity—appears to have taken another step towards an official agreement. Official relations between the Vatican and the PRC have been non-existant since Beijing cut ties with the Holy See in 1951. In 1957, China set up its own body to oversee domestic Catholicism, the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association, relegating any Catholic in country who did pledge allegiance to the Pope a member of an “underground Church.” Last October, the Wall Street Journal reported (via CDT) that the Vatican and Beijing were close to a deal which would give Beijing say on the ordination of bishops and substantially cool long-fractured relations. Today, the Wall Street Journal’s Chun Han Wong provides an update: Cardinal John Tong, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Hong Kong, has announced that the agreement is now even closer to finalization, “a key step in normalizing bilateral ties marred by six decades of estrangement”: In a recent essay, Cardinal John Tong didn’t give details of the proposed deal, but expressed optimism that Rome wouldn’t compromise on religious principles in trying to resolve disputes over China’s insistence on having a state-controlled body appoint local bishops. The Vatican spokesman, Greg Burke, on Friday said the talks with Beijing were “a work in progress,” declining to comment on any timeline. The continuing dialogue “implies” a shift in Beijing’s policy on the Catholic Church toward recognizing the pope as “the highest and final authority in deciding on the candidates for bishops in China,” wrote Cardinal Tong, the Bishop of Hong Kong, in an essay published on his diocese’s website on Thursday. […] [Source] © josh rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: Changsha, Christianity, communism, foreign hostile forces, Hunan, maoism, Pope Francis I, religionDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall10 Feb
Photo: Untitled (Shanghai), by Liu Xiaoxue - Untitled (Shanghai) © Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: Liu XiaoxueDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall10 Feb
Person of the Week: Ai Xiaoming - CDT is expanding its wiki beyond the Grass-Mud Horse Lexicon to include short biographies of public intellectuals, cartoonists, human rights activists, and other people pushing for change in China. The wiki is a work in progress. 艾晓明 Ai Xiaoming records China’s “barbaric totalitarianism” for future generations. (Source: Ai Xiaoming)  Convert your grief into power; say everything you need to say; keep on walking the road you must travel. —Ai Xiaoming, “Thinking of My Friends in Prison“ Ai Xiaoming is a documentary filmmaker, author, and women’s rights activist. Ai has frequently collaborated with documentary filmmaker Hu Jie. She is professor emerita of literature and women’s studies at Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou. Ai was born in the southern city of Wuhan in 1953. She earned her bachelor’s in Chinese from Central China Normal University in 1981 and her Ph.D. in Modern Chinese Literature from Beijing Normal University in 1987. She was the first woman after the Cultural Revolution to earn her doctoral degree in literature. Ai taught at Lingnan University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong before joining the faculty at Sun Yat-sen University in 1995, where she stayed until her retirement in 2014. In a 2016 interview with Ian Johnson, Ai said that she didn’t participate in the Tiananmen protests, though she did visit the encampment several times. Her activism began later, when she was a visiting professor at Seawanee in the U.S. during the 1999-2000 academic year. She was inspired to research women’s issues, which eventually drew her into China’s once-vibrant circle of rights defenders. The trip also turned her attention away from writing (she is the author of eight books and has translated many others) and towards documentary film making. Ai went on to translate and produce the “Vagina Monologues” at Sun Yat-sen and direct several university projects in women’s and sexuality studies. She has also made films about Tan Zuoren‘s investigation of the “tofu dregs schools” that collapsed in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, villagers in Henan Province infected with HIV after giving blood, the 2011 Wukan protests, and many other cases of injustice. Ai’s films are banned in mainland China, and she is currently unable to leave the country. She was awarded France’s 2010 Simone de Beauvoir Prize for her work on women’s rights, but was not allowed to travel to receive the award. Still, Ai continues to produce films as a record of the “barbaric totalitarianism” she has witnessed in China today. “Investigation by Citizens,” Ai’s film about the aftermath of the Sichuan earthquake, is available with English subtitles on her Vimeo account. Entry written by Anne Henochowicz. Can’t get enough of subversive Chinese netspeak? Check out our latest ebook, “Decoding the Chinese Internet: A Glossary of Political Slang.” Includes dozens of new terms and classic catchphrases, presented in a new, image-rich format. Available for pay-what-you-want (including nothing). All proceeds support CDT. © josh rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: Ai Xiaoming, authors, directors, documentaries, human rights activists, women's rights, word of the weekDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall 9 Feb
Minitrue: Do Not Repost News on Zhejiang HIV Infections - The following censorship instructions, issued to the media by government authorities, have been leaked and distributed online. The name of the issuing body has been omitted to protect the source. Reposting the NetEase article “Five Patients Infected With AIDS After Zhejiang Hospital Staff Violates Rules” is prohibited. (February 8, 2017) [Chinese] The NetEase article above mentioned above covered a case last month at a hospital in Hangzhou, Zhejiang, where staff failure to follow standard procedures resulted in the infection of at least five patients with HIV. The South China Morning Post’s Jun Mai reports: The statement [from the Zhejiang provincial health authority] said a serious medical incident had occurred at the Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Hangzhou and that the cases were first reported to the health authority on January 26. […] The staff member failed to follow procedure by disposing of needles after one use and is now under criminal investigation, according to the statement. The virus was spread from a patient who is already HIV positive through the shared use of needles, according to the health authority. Five officials at the hospital have been sacked, including its president and executive vice-president, the statement added. [Source] At The Wall Street Journal, Fanfan Wang reports on the sensitivity of this story due to previous medical scandals in China—specifically high-profile ones involving HIV/AIDS—and also notes angry netizen reactions to the deletion of the recent news from Zhejiang: China has become more transparent in its handling of epidemics and medical scandals since it was criticized for its tight grip on information during the 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome. But concerns around health safety regularly erupt, eroding trust in government oversight and transparency. Last year, a scandal over improperly handled vaccines exposed weak links in the distribution of vaccines across China. […] In the 1980s and ’90s, Beijing depicted HIV and AIDS as the result of decadent, capitalist lifestyles in the West. Authorities began being more open about the virus after a scandal in the ’90s, in which farmers in Henan province were infected with HIV after selling their blood to unlicensed blood banks, which re-injected red blood cells from a tainted pool to donors after extracting plasma. Henan officials only acknowledged a pattern of unsanitary practices years later. […] On Weibo, users expressed anger at the rapid deletion of the news. One internet user who claimed to be involved in the same treatment as the newly infected patients said it was related to infertility and that dozens of couples were undergoing the same treatment. [Source] Since directives are sometimes communicated orally to journalists and editors, who then leak them online, the wording published here may not be exact. Some instructions are issued by local authorities or to specific sectors, and may not apply universally across China. The date given may indicate when the directive was leaked, rather than when it was issued. CDT does its utmost to verify dates and wording, but also takes precautions to protect the source. See CDT’s collection of Directives from the Ministry of Truth since 2011. © josh rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: aids reporting, Directives from the Ministry of Truth, Hangzhou, HIV/AIDS, medical malpractice, public health, ZhejiangDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall 9 Feb
Trump Attacks and the State of China’s Legal System - Following condemnation of “Western ‘constitutional democracy,’ ‘separation of powers,’ ‘judicial independence’ and other harmful ideas” by China’s top judge, and renewed criticism of the country’s legal system after the reported torture of detained rights lawyers, Rebecca Liao reviews China’s recent judicial reforms at Foreign Affairs and explains how these changes serve the Party: To some observers, Beijing’s recent efforts to professionalize the judiciary have suggested that China was moving toward enshrining the rule of law. Zhou’s remarks, together with his comment last February that China would not match Western notions of judicial independence and the separation of powers, have demonstrated that Beijing’s reform agenda is not quite so straightforward. Judicial independence remains off-limits for discussion, but the Chinese judiciary and legal professions are nevertheless developing at a steady pace. Beijing’s goal is to establish a robust legal system that can effectively govern China’s political and social life without ever challenging the Communist Party’s core policies and ideology. […] The apparent tension between China’s rejection of judicial independence and its work to remove the influence of local officials on courts is best explained by the fact that Beijing believes the national government should not be subject to judicial oversight. Where corruption or injustice exists, the national authorities attribute it to rogue local officials. That is why the party issued regulations last March that require judges to keep records of their communications with all parties who are not court personnel and to report the interference of local officials in their cases to the party’s local political committee or the next level of courts every three months. Party leaders at all levels, however, can still provide their views to judges on specific cases, and they can also broadcast their opinions in the media. Whether the regulations introduced in recent years will lead to less judicial interference by political officials remains to be seen, but the rules certainly represent the party’s acknowledgment that some sort of barrier between judges and politicians is necessary for the public to keep its faith in the legal system. [Source] The view that “the national government should not be subject to judicial oversight” appears to resonate in Donald Trump’s White House. Last weekend, Supreme People’s Court justice He Fan denounced Trump on WeChat as an “enemy of the rule of law” and a “villain with no dignity” following the president’s Twitter attack on a “so-called judge” who ruled against his executive order on immigration. Trump has since continued his campaign against judicial oversight both in the courts and on social media, while his own Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch has reportedly described his tweets as “disheartening” and “demoralizing.” At The New York Times on Tuesday, Michael Forsythe wrote that He’s condemnation of Trump is less surprising than it might appear: The notion of a Chinese jurist remarking on the danger he believes Mr. Trump poses to the separation of powers may seem, at first blush, to smack of hypocrisy. In China, courts are firmly under the command of the Communist Party. Last month, the chief justice publicly condemned the notion of judicial independence, warning judges not to fall into the “trap” of “Western” ideology. But the harsh public face presented last month by the chief justice, Zhou Qiang, obscures what is happening on his watch. Judges like Mr. He admire the American legal system and study it to improve China’s rules, such as how to handle plea bargains or what to do with evidence obtained illegally, said Susan Finder, an American scholar who publishes the Supreme People’s Court Monitor, a blog that focuses on China’s top court. Ms. Finder said that Judge He was an avowed “Scotus junkie” who translates books about the Supreme Court of the United States and works on the court’s judicial reform committee. Works that have been translated by Judge He include “Making Our Democracy Work,” by Justice Stephen G. Breyer, and “Becoming Justice Blackmun,” by Linda Greenhouse, about former Justice Harry A. Blackmun. […] Judge He, who could not be reached for comment, may be using Mr. Trump’s assault on the independence of America’s judiciary to safely and indirectly level some criticism against China’s own system. [Source] Finder also discussed He’s comments on Twitter: @JamesFallows On the contrary, bcse he works in #Chinese system he knows importance of rule of law. — Susan Finder (@SPCmonitor) February 7, 2017 @joshchin there are more like him than you would think — Susan Finder (@SPCmonitor) February 7, 2017 @joshchin unlikely, big interest among Chinese judges in #SCOTUS, many surprising interactions/training sessions w' US federal courts — Susan Finder (@SPCmonitor) February 7, 2017 She also highlighted a 2015 post on her Supreme People’s Court Monitor blog, on China’s selective borrowing from foreign legal systems and the widespread attention paid in Chinese legal circles to a translation of U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ 2014 year-end report. Meanwhile, as Australia appears poised to ratify an extradition treaty with China, Human Rights Watch’s Sophie Richardson asked whether the current state of China’s justice system could justify such a step. The problems involved were previously discussed last September after Canada agreed to hold talks towards a similar agreement. […] Canberra would do well to consider recent legal developments in China before extending such a vote of confidence and adopting the treaty. In mid-January, China’s top judge publicly attacked the concept of judicial independence, a wake-up call for those who still have doubts as to whether China’s legal system is independent of the Chinese Communist Party. In late January, news broke that human rights lawyers who had been forcibly disappeared for more than a year have been badly tortured, one to the point of mental breakdown. The month wrapped up with a billionaire close to China’s leadership being abducted from a luxury hotel in Hong Kong, a special administrative region that has a separate legal system, and taken to the mainland. An honest account of China’s judicial system needs to acknowledge the following: that it chronically denies people basic fair trial rights, even in routine criminal cases. That defendants face ill-treatment and torture – despite policies prohibiting such treatment –with little hope of redress. That Chinese security forces tracking down Chinese citizens suspected of corruption who have fled abroad do so without the permission of other jurisdictions, including Australia. And despite decades of calls for reform both within China and internationally, the government has still not aligned its key criminal laws and policies with international human rights standards, and instead has adopted more abusive laws. [Source] © Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: Australia relations, extradition, extradition treaty, judiciary, Justice System, legal reform, legal system, rule of law, Supreme People's Court, United States, Zhou QiangDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall 9 Feb
Badiucao: VPN Disaster - The latest drawing from CDT’s resident cartoonist, Badiucao, comments on new rules designed to limit the use of VPN services to evade government censorship of foreign websites: VPN Disaster, by Badiucao for CDT: The VPN, depicted as a ladder to help internet users “scale the Great Firewall,” is about to be chopped down by a chainsaw-wielding Xi Jinping. As part of recent efforts to reinforce the Great Firewall, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology announced last month the launch of a 14-month campaign to “clean up” unauthorized internet connections. According to a Reuters report, the rules forbid the “creation or renting” of communication channels, including VPNs, “without government approval.” Many people in China depend on VPNs to access websites that are otherwise blocked in the country. In recent years, both domestic and foreign VPNs have faced periodic interference from government authorities. CDT is now selling t-shirts and iPad covers featuring Badiucao’s work in our Zazzle store. See also a Q&A with Badiucao in which he discusses his artistic and personal influences, and his earlier cartoons for CDT. © Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: badiucao, Great Firewall, political cartoons, VPNsDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall 8 Feb
Ethicists Protest China’s Invite to Vatican Organ Summit - In 2013, after years of policy adjustment and the conclusion of a pilot program, China began an overhaul of its organ transplant system, which had long been criticized for its reliance on organs harvested from executed prisoners. The following year, the Ministry of Health set a January 1, 2015 deadline for the end of the controversial practice. Since the passing of that deadline, there have been multiple reports that China’s system still relies heavily on death row extractions. In 2015, after the New York Times’ Didi Kirsten Tatlow filed one such report, Dr. Huang Jiefu—a health official in charge of the overhaul—denied the allegations; months later though, a separate report claimed that China’s system was still relying heavily on prisoners. This week, controversy was stirred by the Vatican’s inviting Dr. Huang Jiefu to participate in a conference on human organ trafficking amid widespread belief that China continues to harvest prisoners’ organs. The New York Times’ Tatlow reports: In a letter to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in Rome, where the two-day Summit on Organ Trafficking and Transplant Tourism began on Tuesday, 11 ethicists wrote: “Our concern is with the harvesting and trafficking of organs from executed prisoners in China.” […] “We urge the summit to consider the plight of incarcerated prisoners in China who are treated as expendable human organ banks,” wrote the 11 signatories, who included Wendy Rogers of Macquarie University in Australia; Arthur Caplan of the New York University Langone Medical Center; David Matas and David Kilgour, both Canadian human rights lawyers [and co-authors of the 2016 study criticizing China’s system]; and Enver Tohti, a former surgeon from the western Chinese region of Xinjiang. […] In their letter, the ethicists also argued that there was no evidence that China had ended the practice of taking organs from executed prisoners, which they said included prisoners of conscience. “On the contrary, there is evidence that it continues,” they wrote. “Officials from China should not be given the prestigious platform of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences to spread misinformation about reform in China.” [Source] Huang Jiefu did attend the conference, and the Vatican issued a defense of their decision to invite him. This comes as Pope Francis has been working hard to repair long fractured relations between China and the Holy See, to mixed reception from Catholics worldwide. Ahead of the conference, The Guardian’s Stephanie Kirchgaessner reports on the defense, and relays critique from Amnesty International, an organization that has long been advocating for an end to the controversial practice in China. In his response to Rogers’ letter, which was obtained by the Guardian, Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, an Argentine bishop and chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, said the conference was meant to be an “academic exercise and not a reprise of contentious political assertions”. […] Nicholas Bequelin, regional director for East Asia for Amnesty International, said it was known at the time that the vast majority of organ transplants in China came from executed prisoners. The number of prisoners China executes every year is a state secret, but Bequelin said estimates ranged from 3,000 to 7,000 people annually. Bequelin said experts had cast doubt on Huang’s claims that China had outlawed the practice, in large part because the country is yet to develop an effective national donor programme of willing participants. “They haven’t stopped the practice and won’t stop. They have a need for organ transplants that far outpace the availability of organs,” Bequelin said. [Source] More on the Vatican’s defense of their decision from the AP: Monsignor Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, said there was no way to know if China is still harvesting organs from executed prisoners. But he said Tuesday the Vatican wanted to strengthen reformers in China, which has declared that the practice ended in 2015. […] “We believe truly that they want to change, and that they are changing,” he said. [Source] Yesterday, The Guardian’s Kirchgaessner reported that Huang Jiefu admitted on the sidelines of the summit that, despite the illegality of prisoner organ use, some does inevitably occur. Experts, however, suspect the Chinese health official’s statement was disingenuous: “There is zero tolerance. However, China is a big country with a 1.3 billion population so I am sure, definitely, there is some violation of the law,” he [Huang] told reporters at a conference in Rome. […] But experts have questioned Huang’s assessment of the situation, saying China probably still systematically uses the organs of executed prisoners in order to meet an overwhelming demand. […] The Vatican has released new bioethics rules that say organ transplantation must involve the free consent of living donors or their representatives and that in ascertaining the death of a donor, it must be diagnosed with certainty, especially when a child is involved. [Source] The Guardian’s Melissa Davey, meanwhile, reports that the medical journal Liver International has announced plans to retract a scientific paper by Chinese surgeons due to concern that the livers used in the research had been extracted from executed prisoners. The report also quotes Wendy Rogers, the Macquerie University professor who co-authored the letter protesting Huang’s inclusion in the Vatican conference, further explaining researchers’ doubts over the claim that the systematic use of prisoners’ organs has come to an end: According to the study authors, “all organs were procured from donors after cardiac death and no allografts [organs and tissue] obtained from executed prisoners were used”. But Wendy Rogers, a professor of clinical ethics at Macquarie University in Sydney, said it was impossible for one hospital to have obtained so many useable livers in a four-year period from cardiac deaths alone. […] “Given that there were only 2,326 reported voluntary donations in the whole of China during 2011–2014, it is implausible that this small pool could have resulted in 564 livers successfully retrieved … unless the surgeons there had exclusive access to at least 80% of all voluntary donors across the whole of China in this period.” Rogers told the Guardian that China also lacked a coordinated nationwide system of transporting organs within the time frame required for successful liver transplantations. [Source] © josh rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), get_post_time('Y'). | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us Post tags: death penalty, Huang Jiefu, Ministry of Health, organ transplants, Pope Francis I, prisoners' rights, Vatican, Vatican relationsDownload Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall 8 Feb

The Eyeopener from CBC Radio Calgary (Highlights)

Eyeopener Podcast for Feb. 10, 2017 - Today's podcast: John Gilchrist reviews OEB Breakfast Co.; Eya-Hey Nakoda performs at the Block Heater festival; Crown presents closing arguments at Garland trial; parents upset over changes to school programs. 9 Feb
Eyeopener Podcast for Feb. 9, 2017 - Today's podcast: How to use a naloxone kit; Sylvan Lake Mayor Sean McIntyre; Calgary judge to decide whether junior hockey lawsuit can proceed; Tom Keenan on cell phone plans and prices. 8 Feb
Eyeopener Podcast for Feb. 8, 2017 - Today's podcast: Brian Pincott decides against running for re-election; Earls on Stephen Avenue moves away from mandatory tipping; This is That co-host Pat Kelly. 7 Feb
Eyeopener Podcast for Feb. 7, 2017 - Today's podcast: Keystone Excavating closes its doors; Advocates for Alberta transgender youth ask for more support; Marcello di Cintio on “Walls: Travels Along the Barricades." 6 Feb
Eyeopener Podcast for Feb. 6, 2017 - Today's podcast: Olds College student discovers innovative way to grow mushrooms; are RRSPs the best place to put your money; why advocates believe drug users should help create drug policy; Calgary runner conquers Triple 7 Quest. 5 Feb
Eyeopener Podcast for Feb. 2, 2017 - Today's podcast: Rick Hanson on Olympic bid exploration committee; Lethbridge assault victim released from hospital; Calgary Opera presents Filumena; long-time Calgary shoe store closes. 1 Feb
Eyeopener Podcast for Feb. 1, 2017 - Today's podcast: Panel of Calgary Muslims talk about events of the past week; Unconventionals on whether Facebook is bad for your mental health; surprising new discovery at the Burgess Shale.31 Jan
Eyeopener Podcast for Jan. 31, 2017 - Today's podcast: Uncertainty over U.S. travel restrictions; new plan to protect Banff’s Bow Valley wolf pack; Calgary soprano Kathleen Morrison needs vocal cord surgery.30 Jan
Eyeopener Podcast for Jan. 30, 2017 - Today's podcast: Why Orwell is back on top of the best-seller charts; centrist politics in Alberta; Jason Kenney on Trump immigration ban; Jonathan Love reviews ‘The Audience’ at Theatre Calgary; YYC Hot Chocolate Week gets underway.29 Jan
Eyeopener Podcast for Jan. 27, 2017 - Today's podcast: Symons Valley Ranch vendor loses inventory in fire; John Gilchrist visits Rau Bistro; Wildrose leader Brian Jean; Blue Jays broadcaster Buck Martinez.26 Jan

di

Daily Kos

Open thread for night owls: 'They Can't Kill Us All,' Wes Lowery's book about Black Lives Matter - Nathalie Baptiste at The Nation takes a look at Wesley Lowery’s new book, They Can’t Kill Us All: In his new book “They Can’t Kill Us All,” Washington Post reporter Wesley Lowery sets out not only to track the latest developments in Black Lives Matter, but also to search for the movement’s deeper roots. For Lowery, although BLM protests originated with the recent police killings in the United States—his book takes its title from a sign spotted in Ferguson—he also wants us to recognize that the politics animating these protests have long been around. Lowery traces the movement’s origins to the hope of a “post­racial” America that was symbolized by Barack Obama’s election, and which has now proved to be little more than a phantasm of campaign rhetoric and political punditry. Having once hoped that the election of the first black president meant that the tide of race relations in America might begin to turn, many young black Americans were forced to face the reality—by one high-profile police shooting after another—that living in a world in which they’re treated like their white contemporaries remains an impossibility. [...] “They Can’t Kill Us All” is the outcome of Lowery’s past two years covering this anguish. He spends the first three-quarters of his book focused on several high-profile police killings: Brown in Ferguson; Tamir Rice in Cleveland; Walter Scott in North Charleston, South Carolina; and Freddie Gray in Baltimore. But while his book is ostensibly about these deaths and the local protests that they inspired, Lowery also has larger ambitions, ranging widely across race relations and racial violence in the United States, including the slaying of nine black churchgoers in Charleston, South Carolina, by a young white man; the removal of the Confederate flag at the South Carolina statehouse by an African- American woman named Bree Newsome; and the emergence of a national movement, or set of movements, responding to the call to arms of Black Lives Matter. Lowery insists that the story of Black Lives Matter’s roots and intentions is often misunderstood at best and, at worst, purposefully muddied in order to discredit the movement and its leaders. [...] QUOTATION OF THE DAY “The profit motive often is in conflict with the aims of art. We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the Divine Right of Kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art —the art of words.”                     —Ursula K. LeGuin, Speech at the 2014 U.S. National Book Awards, where she received                             the Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters                     TWEET OF THE DAY xpic.twitter.com/nSNiRXCdSM— Thunder Walks About (@notaxiwarrior) February 11, 2017 BLAST FROM THE PAST At Daily Kos on this date in 2010—Medical Error, Liability, and Murtha: An element of healthcare reform, one in which Democrats have acquiesced to Republican demands, is brought into sharper focus this week. The death of Rep. John Murtha, from complication from gallbladder surgery highlights a complex issue that Republicans have framed in terms of "junk lawsuits," but reformers think of it in terms of preventable medical errors. […] What the tort reformers won't tell you is the extent to which medical liability has improved patient safety, including the establishment of organizations like Leapfrog Group. You'll hear all about the complaints of doctors complaining of having to perform "defensive medicine," and often justifiably so. There are additional costs to the system when doctors end up ordering unnecessary tests and procedures. But there are other means of addressing those issues, including a greater reliance on evidence-based care. Removing medical liability--already a minor contributor to out-of-control system costs--would likely come at a high cost for patient safety. HIGH IMPACT STORIES • TOP COMMENTS On today’s Kagro in the Morning show: Flynn flirts with espionage. Trump’s cracking under the pressure. 9th C. pummels Muslim ban. Armando joins in considering how much of our system crumbles if the POTUS just isn’t capable of proper discretion in making presidential determinations. x Embedded Content  YouTube | iTunes | LibSyn | Support the show via Patreon  10 Feb
Donald Trump narrowly lost Minnesota but still carried almost 60 percent of its state House seats - Daily Kos Election’s project to calculate the 2016 presidential results for every state legislative seat in the nation hits Minnesota. You can find our master list of states here, which we’ll be updating as we add new states; you can also find all our data from 2016 and past cycles here. While Trump narrowly lost the Land of 10,000 Lakes 47-45, the court-drawn state legislative maps were very good for Team Red. Trump carried 39 of the 67 state Senate seats and 72 of the 134 state House districts. The GOP won a narrow 34-33 Senate majority in November, and expanded their majority in the House to 77-57. The Senate will next be up in 2020, while the House will be up next year. While the House map wasn’t drawn as a GOP gerrymander, it very much helps the GOP stay in power. Four years ago, Obama defeated Romney by a wide 53-45 margin statewide, but he only carried 68 of the 134 House seats—a bare majority. This time, Clinton traded 13 Obama House seats for seven Romney seats. Crossover voting also helped the House GOP last year quite a bit. While seven Democrats represent Trump constituencies, 12 Republicans hail from Clinton districts. Democratic state Rep. Paul Marquart in the rural northwestern HD-4B managed to win re-election 54-44 even as Trump carried his seat by a massive 57-35 margin, The Donald’s best performance in a Democratic-held seat. Four years before, Romney took this seat by a modest 51-47. The other six Democrats in Trump seats represent districts that backed Obama in 2012. The traditionally Democratic Iron Range in the northwest corner of the state dramatically swung toward Trump last year, but the area hasn’t abandoned Team Blue downballot yet. Clinton’s best GOP-held House seat is HD-49A around Edina, a suburban Twin Cities seat that swung from 52-47 Obama to 60-33 Clinton. Republican Dario Anselmo narrowly unseated Democratic Rep. Ron Erhardt, an incumbent whose problems were largely his own. Of the remaining 11 Republicans in Clinton seats, seven represent districts that backed Romney. 10 Feb
America needs John Dingell now more than ever - Here’s a fun proposal: Since 1966, the news media have granted the opposition party a national platform to deliver a response to the president’s annual State of the Union Address. This attempt to balance our debate must be upgraded for the 21st century, now that we have a new president who tweets like a moody teenager who was just denied a participation award. Democrats should name a Twitter account to issue official responses to President Trump’s tweets, and those rebuttals should be noted in any relevant reporting. There’s one tweeter who has best demonstrated the character and the 140 characters necessary to perform this role. The best way to stop an unstable 70-year-old with an itchy Twitter finger is the world’s greatest 90-year-old Twitter user — @JohnDingell, a former Democratic representative of Michigan. Dingell just keeps coming up with great stuff, week after week. Check out some of his recent wins below, and nominate your favorites in the comments. 10 Feb
Sen. Mike Lee joins House maniacs in demanding Obamacare repeal right nooooooowwwww! - Campaign Action The problems Republicans are having with their Obamacare repeal promise are legion, starting out with the little problem that when they made that promise, they also promised to "replace" it. Seven years later, still nothing on the replacement front. Or to be charitable, lots of little things that don't make up a replacement plan and that they can't get everyone to agree on anyway. That agreeing part is quickly emerging as their big problem. Because the House maniacs have made clear that they don't need no stinkin' plan. Now they've got a senator on their side. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, one of the leading conservative voices in that chamber, said he will vigorously oppose efforts for Republicans to wait until they have a plan ready to replace the law before they repeal it. “There is a lot less agreement about what comes next,” he said. “If we load down the repeal bill with what comes next, it’s harder to get both of them passed.” […] At a minimum, said Lee, Congress should immediately pass the bill it passed in 2015 that was vetoed by President Barack Obama. That partial repeal would have eliminated the expansion of the Medicaid program for the poor, as well as all the insurance subsidies that help people afford coverage and the taxes that pay for the program. “If we can get something more aggressive, then great,” he said. “But we cannot make progress until we first repeal Obamacare.” That'd be a kind of "shock and awe" approach that even Popular Vote Loser Donald Trump isn't down with, probably because he knows enough about what's going to make him "popular" and ripping off the band-aid that is health insurance for more than 30 million people isn't it.  In other words, they're flailing even harder now. 10 Feb
Constituents angry after Ohio Republican raves about 'great town hall' he forgot to tell them about - Another Republican held a super secret, invite-only event and tried to bill it as a “town hall” event. Rep. Jim Renacci (OH-16) shared a photo on his Facebook page this morning touting his “great town hall this morning with concerned citizens about the need for tax reform.”  Tax reform? Really? Because unlike all the other districts in the United States, Jim Renacci’s constituents aren’t focused on the effects of repealing the Affordable Care Act. Or the unconstitutional Muslim travel ban. Or the dangerously unqualified Trump administration and Donald Trump’s infinite conflicts of interest and pathway to corruption. Rep. Renacci’s constituents are intensely focused on tax reform!  Topic aside, constituents angrily responded to the photo because the event was never on his calendar, did not appear open to the public and there was no notification of the event. They let him know they were NOT happy. 10 Feb
Schumer: Puzder is 'most anti-worker nominee' ever for labor secretary and should withdraw - Chuck Schumer speaks the truth on labor secretary nominee and fast food CEO Andy Puzder, though at this point Donald Trump’s amazing gall and hypocrisy have been exposed so thoroughly that no one can really claim to be surprised: Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) on Thursday called Puzder “probably the most anti-worker nominee to the Department of Labor ever.” “Donald Trump campaigned on behalf of the working men and women,” Schumer said. “He said he was going to represent them. The nomination of Mr. Puzder represents broken promise after broken promise. Donald Trump has amazing gall, to have campaigned the way he did, and then put this man as nominee for secretary of Labor. “They ought to withdraw the nomination of Puzder before he further embarrasses this administration and further exposes the hypocrisy of President Trump, saying one thing to the workers of America, and then doing another,” he added. To recap: Puzder’s chains, Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr., specialize in wage theft—making workers work off the clock, denying them overtime pay, making them pay for uniforms that push them below minimum wage—and also face sexual harassment complaints. Puzder’s company sent jobs overseas. Puzder once personally contributed $10,000 to block a $1 minimum wage increase. He loves to run ads featuring bikini-clad women eating hamburgers, because hot babes in bikinis amirite? He employed an undocumented housekeeper, fired her when he found out she was undocumented, but only paid taxes on her employment after he was nominated for labor secretary. As Noam Scheiber points out, “If he thought she was legal, why didn't he pay taxes all along?” Sen. Patty Murray, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, joined Schumer in hitting hard on Puzder’s nomination: “It is shocking that a nominee for this critical position would flout those rules so openly, overlooking the same responsibilities that business owners nationwide manage to uphold,” she said, adding that Puzder’s “decision to pick and choose what laws he himself follows is disqualifying.” Puzder’s spokesman dismissed Schumer and Murray’s concerns as “fake news,” in keeping with the official Trump regime definition of fake news as “news I don’t like but have no strong rebuttal to.” 10 Feb
Trump's border wall might cost taxpayers $50 billion—$10 billion over DHS's entire 2017 budget - Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell have been selling Donald Trump's border wall as a mere (!) $10- to $15-billion project. Now that appears to be an enormous undersell and especially egregious for Ryan, who prides himself on his wonky Midwestern ways. Here's what Politico Playbook Plus is reporting: ACTUALLY -- People on the Hill involved in budgeting think it could be as high as $50 billion when all is said and done. Holy cow—50 billion smackaroos! That is particularly startling given that the entire budget the Department of Homeland requested for 2017 was $40.6 billion. "The President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 Budget Request of $40.6 billion for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reflects our continued commitment to the security of our homeland and the American Public." But that was under President Obama, sans border wall. Better double that number and then some. Man, Republicans are really rolling out the savings here. PPP released a poll Friday showing a majority of Americans oppose building this boondoggle of a wall if they have to pay for it out of their own pocket—which is exactly what will happen. Only 37% of voters want the wall if US taxpayers have to front the cost for it, to 56% who are against that. That was before we knew it could cost $50 billion, with a B! Trump’s stuck a lot of small business owners with the bill for work they did on his properties over the years, now he’s gonna stick American taxpayers with a $50 billion tab for his “big, beautiful” border wall. #MAGA 10 Feb
Cheers and Jeers: Rum and Persistence FRIDAY! - From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE… ”I love the Scotch. I’m Scotch myself.” Samantha Bee ended her first totally-excellent year of Full Frontal with a look at how the Scots who live near Lord Dampnut’s golf course in Aberdeenshire have been mocking, obstructing and trolling the hell out of him. Warning: Not safe for sensitive souls whose heads explode upon hearing cuss words---and there are some amaaazing Scottish cuss words in here: x YouTube Video  As of tonight, farmer Michael Forbes enters the C&J Kiddie Pool Hall of Fame. As inductee #1. Your west coast-friendly edition of Cheers and Jeers starts below the fold... [Swoosh!!] RIGHTNOW! [Gong!!] 10 Feb
So much for Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch's bid for independence from Trump - Campaign Action If Neil Gorsuch wants to emerge from his nomination to the Supreme Court by Popular Vote Loser Donald Trump with his integrity unscathed, he should probably just withdraw now. Because his big effort to distance himself from Trump, undoubtedly orchestrated with help from Senate Republicans, has been slapped down by the White House. Now even Gorsuch's Senate handler, former Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) is on board with the White House line that Gorsuch is not at all "demoralized" and "disheartened" specifically by Trump's attacks on the judiciary, just really unhappy that anyone thinks bad stuff about judges. On Thursday, former Senator Kelly Ayotte, Republican of New Hampshire, who is helping with the confirmation process, issued a statement in which she said of Judge Gorsuch, “While he made clear he was not referring to any specific case, he said that he finds any criticism of a judge’s integrity and independence disheartening and demoralizing.” That leaves Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE), who insisted that Gorsuch got "pretty passionate" about the Trump attacks, hanging out to dry. Not to mention how it hems in Gorsuch who is going to have a much harder time demonstrating that independence from Trump he was going for. 10 Feb
Republican state lawmakers continue their assault on voting rights - Not much new to see here, just a reminder of the GOP's continuing effort to erode voting rights for all groups other than the white folks that vote for them. The fewer voters, the better. The AP writes: As President Donald Trump hurls unfounded allegations of colossal fraud in last fall's election, lawmakers in at least 20 mostly Republican-led states are pushing to make it harder to register or to vote. Efforts are underway in places such as Arkansas, Iowa, Maine, Nebraska and Indiana to adopt or tighten requirements that voters show identification at the polls. There is a move in Iowa and New Hampshire to eliminate Election Day registration. New Hampshire may also make it difficult for college students to vote. And Texas could shorten the early voting period by several days. [...] Research has shown that in-person fraud at the polls is extremely rare, and critics of these restrictions warn that they will hurt mostly poor people, minorities and students — all of whom tend to vote Democratic — as well as the elderly. And let's remember what Coretta Scott King said in 1986 about the work of Jeff Sessions— the new attorney general and supposed defender of civil rights—as a U.S. attorney in Alabama. “Anyone who has used the power of his office as United States Attorney to intimidate and chill the free exercise of the ballot by citizens should not be elevated to our courts. Mr. Sessions has used the awesome powers of his office in a shabby attempt to intimidate and frighten elderly black voters." 10 Feb

Democracy Now!

In Real Bowling Green Massacre, a White Supremacist Planned Attack Against African Americans & Jews - As the nonexistent terrorist attack manufactured by Donald Trump’s counselor Kellyanne Conway makes headlines, we look at an actual threat by an extremist in Bowling Green, Ohio. In 2012, an FBI raid uncovered a full arsenal of assault rifles, firearms, body armor and ammunition amassed by the suspect, who prosecutors later determined was planning to carry out mass killings. But the suspect is not a radical Muslim. He is white supremacist Richard Schmidt, who federal authorities say was planning targeted attacks on African Americans and Jews. Investigators found a list of names and addresses of people to be assassinated, including the leaders of NAACP chapters in Michigan and Ohio. Schmidt was sentenced to less than six years in prison after a federal judge said prosecutors had failed to adequately establish that he was a political terrorist. He is scheduled for release in February 2018. His case isn’t the only one involving terror threats by a white supremacist that received little coverage by mainstream media. On Monday, the trial of Christian minister Robert Doggart began in Tennessee federal district court. Undercover FBI agents allege that Doggart was plotting to travel to upstate New York to kill Muslims there, using explosives, an M-4 assault rifle and a machete. According to a federal investigation, Doggart saw himself as a religious "warrior" and wanted to kill Muslims to show his commitment to his Christian god. We speak with ProPublica’s A.C. Thompson, whose recent article is "When the Government Really Did Fear a Bowling Green Massacre—From a White Supremacist," and with Dean Obeidallah, a columnist for The Daily Beast writing about the Doggart case.10 Feb
ICE Raids Speed into Overdrive: Advocates Say Obama's Deportations Reaching "100 MPH" Under Trump - We are joined from Phoenix by Aarón Rayos, the husband of a mother of two U.S.-born children who is at the center of an immigration fight in Arizona and has been deported to Mexico. Guadalupe García de Rayos was arrested and detained Wednesday during a routine check-in with immigration officials. She had been living in the United States for the past 21 years, but had been arrested in 2008 during a raid on a water park in Maricopa County and convicted of a felony for using forged documents in order to get a job. Advocates say her arrest signals a clear shift by the Trump administration to deport people considered a "low priority" for removal under President Obama. We also speak with Francisca Porchas, organizing director of Puente Arizona.10 Feb
Trump Launches "Blue Lives Matter Regime" with Three New Executive Orders on Law Enforcement - On Thursday, President Trump signed three new executive orders addressing crime and immigration. One seeks to increase penalties on those found guilty of assaulting police officers. A second order directs law enforcement agencies to increase intelligence sharing while going after drug cartels. A third order directs Attorney General Sessions to prioritize fighting "illegal immigration" alongside drug trafficking and violent crime. This is "the beginnings of what we are calling a blue lives matter regime," explains our guest, Vincent Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights.10 Feb
Court Refuses to Reinstate Trump's Muslim Ban, Says "No Evidence" of Attacks from 7 Listed Countries - In a major victory for civil rights advocates, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has unanimously refused to reinstate Donald Trump’s executive order that banned people from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States and sparked nationwide protests. The judges ruled that the administration "has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States." Trump has vowed to appeal the case, possibly to the U.S. Supreme Court. We get reaction from Vincent Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. "It is the veracity of the administration that is at stake," Warren says.10 Feb
Headlines for February 10, 2017 - Appeals Court Upholds Injunction on Trump Travel and Refugee BanReport: Threats Against At Least One Judge Weighing Trump BanJeff Sessions Sworn In as U.S. Attorney GeneralPresident Trump Signs New Executive Orders on Crime, ImmigrationProtests Erupt in Los Angeles After Reports of ICE Home RaidsArizona Mother of Two Deported Under Trump's New OrdersWhite House Warns Journalists and Lawmakers over Botched Yemen RaidSenate Confirms Tom Price as Health and Human Services SecretaryIn Reversal, Trump Commits U.S. to "One China" PolicyReport: Michael Flynn Discussed Sanctions with Russian Ambassador in DecemberPresident Trump to Host Japanese Leader at Trump PropertiesReport: Trump Tells Russia's President the U.S. Won't Renew Nuclear TreatyEthics Probe for Kellyanne Conway to Follow Ivanka Trump Product EndorsementRep. Jason Chaffetz Protested at Raucous Town Hall MeetingConstruction Begins on Final Section of Dakota Access PipelineSyria: Russian "Friendly Fire" Kills Three Turkish SoldiersSouth Africa: Fistfights Erupt at President Zuma's National AddressIndependence Activist Oscar López Rivera Returns to Puerto Rico10 Feb
"Made Me Feel We Were Back in 1950s" Coretta Scott King Memoirist on Silencing of Elizabeth Warren - The Senate has confirmed Jeff Sessions as the United States attorney general after a 52-47 vote Wednesday evening. Sessions’s confirmation has faced widespread protests over his opposition to the Voting Rights Act and his history of making racist comments. The vote capped a contentious 24 hours that began Tuesday night, when Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren was silenced and rebuked by the Senate for reading a 1986 letter written by Coretta Scott King denouncing Sessions, who was at the time being considered for a federal judgeship. For more, we speak with Rev. Dr. Barbara A. Reynolds. She worked with Coretta Scott King on her memoir, "Coretta Scott King: My Life, My Love, My Legacy." 9 Feb
Which Foreign Group Will the Trump Administration Designate as a Terrorist Organization Next? - The White House is considering officially designating more groups as foreign terrorist organizations, including the Muslim Brotherhood—one of the Middle East’s oldest and most influential Islamic groups. We speak to Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU’s National Security Project. 9 Feb
Meet the ACLU Attorney Interrogated by Border Agents About Her Work, Nationality & More - An appeals court is expected to rule as early as today on President Trump’s ban on refugees and people from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. On Wednesday morning, Trump accused the judges on the court of being "so political" and described the legal process as "disgraceful." For more updates on the legal fight over the executive order, we speak with Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project. Although she is a legal permanent resident of the United States, Shamsi was stopped and questioned about her Pakistani citizenship and her work with the ACLU, when she flew back into the country last week. 9 Feb
Syrian Refugee Crisis Linked to Rampant Torture, Disappearances & Arrests of Civilian Population - Amnesty International’s report on prison hangings at Saydnaya prison was published less than two weeks after President Trump signed an executive order banning refugees indefinitely and temporarily barring entry to all citizens from Syria and six other Muslim-majority nations. We speak to Nicolette Waldman about the root causes of the Syrian refugee crisis. 9 Feb
Human Slaughterhouse: Amnesty International Says Up to 13,000 Hanged at Syrian Prison - Amnesty International has released a shocking report claiming as many as 13,000 people—mostly civilians—have been hanged in a Syrian government military prison in recent years. Amnesty accuses the Assad government of running a human slaughterhouse and engaging in a deliberate policy of extermination by hanging thousands of civilians at a prison near Damascus. Amnesty says the killings amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity. We speak to the co-author of the report, Nicolette Waldman, an Amnesty International researcher specializing in detention issues. 9 Feb

John Perkins

This Spring: A Special Webinar for Writers - How to Write a Bestseller in Times of Crises: Using the Power of Story to Accelerate Change By John Perkins We’ve entered the greatest revolution in history: The Consciousness Revolution. People around the world are waking up to the fact that we are facing huge crises. We must change. What is your role in this revolution? If you are a writer, you have an incredible opportunity to spread important messages, share thought-provoking ideas, and inspire revolutionary change through the power of story. Fiction and non-fiction. In addition to doing my own writing, I decided to create a small community of writers who intend to use their medium to accelerate change. We will come together in this Spring’s webinar: How to Write a Bestseller in Times of Crises: Using the Power of Story to Accelerate Change. Limited to just 2 dozen participants, this course is uniquely designed to help you hone your skills through writing exercises and discussions in an intimate salon. As a New York Times bestselling author, I will share my experiences of decades of writing bestsellers to help you improve your skills, get published, and reach large audiences. The webinar will take place every Tuesday evening over the course of one month, making it easy for you to journey into this portal of writing your bestseller. You will learn how to: Hone your skills to inspire, entertain, and motivate audiences; Open your heart and soul to the muses of writing; Utilize effective techniques to captivate audiences – as well as agents and publishers; Learn the pros and cons of marketing tools, including the use of publicists and social networking; Work with an intimate salon of talented writers; and Much more. You will have the option of breaking into smaller groups to discuss and critique each other’s work and spend an additional hour-long session with me. At the end of the course, you will also have the opportunity to arrange to join me in private mentoring sessions. Session Dates & Times: Session 1: Tuesday May 30 – 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM EST Session 2: Tuesday June 6 – 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM EST Session 3: Tuesday June 13 – 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM EST Session 4: Tuesday June 20 – 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM EST This webinar is for people who want to be part of a powerful salon of writers and who intend to channel their passions and skills into articles, books, and blogs that will inspire transformation. If you are such a person, please sign up now. Space is limited. Cost:  $780 for all 4 sessions. To see the course syllabus and purchase your tickets, click here. 9 Feb
How to Be a Democracy Under Trump - I watched President Trump’s inauguration from an airport TV in Guatemala. I’d just finished leading 22 people on a pilgrimage to live, study and participate in ceremonies with Mayan shamans at sacred sites. For me, it was the first leg of a two-month working-journey. I am still in Latin America, teaching and speaking at a variety of venues. In the days since that inauguration, I, like so many, have felt the horror of the emerging Trump policies. Latin Americans cannot understand why so few of us voted in the last election and why so many who did, voted for Trump. A larger percentage of people vote in most Latin American countries than in the US; in several countries, voter turnout exceeds 90%. Many of these countries have a history of brutal dictatorships. Once free of these dictatorships, they revel in their rights to hold democratic elections; they see their ability to vote for their leaders as both a responsibility and a privilege. They wonder why such a relatively small percentage of voters would elect a potential dictator. And moreover, why those non-voters did not vote against him. The participants on the Guatemala trip ranged from successful business executives to community organizers and healers – with lots of other professions in between. They came from Canada, Ecuador, England, France, Indonesia, Italy, the United States, and Guatemala. Many – especially those from the US – arrived in Guatemala feeling disenfranchised, disempowered, depressed, and – yes, horrified – by the election. However, as we moved through the shamanic ceremonies, they grew increasingly convinced that the election is a wakeup call for Americans. We have been lethargic and allowed our country to continue with policies that hurt so many people and destroy environments around the world (including Washington’s involvement in the genocidal Guatemalan Civil War against the Mayas that raged for more than three decades). This election exposed a shadow side. It stepped us out of the closet. Many people expressed the realization that Americans had failed to demand that President Obama fight harder to end the wars in the Middle East, vacate Guantánamo, reign in Wall Street, confront a global economic system where eight men have as much wealth as half the world’s population, and honor so many of the other promises he had made. They recognized that he was up against strong Republican opposition and yet it was he who continued to send more troops and mercenaries to the Middle East and Africa, brought Wall Street insiders into his inner circle, and failed to inspire his party to rally voters to defeat Trump and what is now a Republican majority in both houses. We talked about how throughout the world, the US is seen as history’s first truly global empire. Scholars point out that it meets the basic definition of empire: a nation 1) whose currency reigns supreme, 2) whose language is the language of diplomacy and commerce everywhere, 3) whose economic expansions and values are enforced through military actions or threats of action, and 4) whose armies are stationed in many nations. The message became clear: we must end this radical form of global feudalism and imperialism. Those who had arrived in Guatemala disillusioned and depressed now found themselves committed to transforming their sense of disempowerment into actions. At the end of WWII, Prime Minister Churchill told his people that England could choose the course of empire or democracy, but not both.  We in the US are at such a crossroads today. For far too long we have allowed our leaders to take us down the path of empire. President Franklin Roosevelt ended a meeting with union leaders by telling them that now they knew he agreed with them, it was their job to get their members to force him to do the right thing. FDR understood that democracy depends on We the People insisting that our leaders do what they promise to do. We failed with our last president. Let’s not repeat that mistake with the new one. It is extremely important that We the People force Trump and his band of corporatocracy henchmen to keep the promises we heard in his inaugural address.  Let us hear “making America great” as “making America a true democracy!”  Let us hear “we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People” and “we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to follow” as an echo of Prime Minister Churchill’s contention that a country cannot be both a democracy and an empire. It is up to us to insist upon democracy. It is essential that we continue to demonstrate and march, to bombard Trump and our other elected officials with tweets, posts, phone calls, and emails; to rally, clamor, and shout; and in every way to get out the word that we must end the wars, feudalism, economic and social inequality, and environmental destruction; we must become the model democracy the world expects of us. When General George Washington was hunkered down with extremely depressed troops at Valley Forge in the bleak winter of 1777, he ordered that an essay by Thomas Paine be read to all his men. Some of the most famous lines are as applicable today as they were then: These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he who stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.  .  . A generous parent should say, “If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace” . . .I love the man who can smile in trouble, who can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection.  By perseverance and fortitude we have the prospect of a glorious future. We have arrived at such a time again. We must each do our part. Let’s here and now commit to taking positive actions. I commit to writing and speaking out at a wide variety of venues. I commit to supporting the Love Summit business conference, a powerful event that is committed to bringing love and compassion into business and politics, to transforming a Death Economy into a Life (Love) Economy. What are your commitments? We have arrived at a time that tries our souls. We must gather strength from distress, grow brave by reflection, and know that by perseverance and fortitude we can achieve a glorious future. Let’s make sure that the combined legacies of Presidents Obama and Trump will create the opportunity – indeed the mandate – to show the world how a country can be a true democracy. These are the times. . . Featured Event: Writing a Bestseller: How to Tell & Sell Your Story with John Perkins 4 Sessions | May 30-June 20, 2017 | Limited to 24 Participants | Register Here31 Jan
What Will 2017 Bring? - It’s a question on many minds as we begin this new year. It is perhaps asked more now than ever before in my life-time – and that spans 7 decades. All we can say for sure is that we are in for big changes . . . on many fronts. Each of us is faced with the decision: Will we sit back and accept changes imposed by Washington, Moscow, Beijing, and Big Business? Or will we take actions that guide humanity to a saner world? I’ve had the opportunity to travel across this magnificent planet, speaking at a wide variety of events and talking with individuals from a multitude of jobs and lifestyles. Everywhere, I encounter more and more people who are committed to taking actions that will change consciousness. They realize that consciousness change is the key to altering what we call objective reality. They know that the big events in this world are molded by the ways we perceive ourselves and our relationship to all that is around us. By changing perceptions, we change the world. In a few days, I leave for a two-month journey that will take me to venues in the United States, Guatemala, Costa Rica, the Bahamas, and Ecuador. I will be speaking at the Conscious Life Expo, the Heartbeat Summit, and many other places. Every one of these is oriented toward using changes in our perceived reality to influence the way human beings impact each other and the world. What will 2017 bring? That depends on you. I encourage each and every one of you to make a New Year’s resolution right now that will commit you to taking the path that leads to action. The events of this past year, including those in the Middle East, Europe, Latin America, and the US serve as wakeup calls. One of the facts we awaken to is that business is the driving force behind politics and governments. Whether a leader’s name is Trump or Putin, Merkel or Xi Jinping, he or she serves at the pleasure of banks and other global corporations. And those banks and corporations depend on us – you and me – to buy their goods and services, work for, manage, and invest in them. Without us, they go the way of Woolworth’s, Polaroid, Pan Am, Bethlehem Steel, and so many others that have become corporate dinosaurs. However you feel about the new Oval Office occupant, know that his power base is the business community. However you feel about climate change, pipelines, vanishing forests, urban violence, wars, and just about every other issue, know that the twists and turns of that issue are shaped by business. However you feel about Monsanto, Exxon, Nike or any other business know that that business depends on its customers, workers, managers, and investors – us. Consumer movements work. They ended apartheid, installed seat belts, cleaned up polluted rivers, labelled fats, sugars, calories, and proteins in our foods, opened corporate doors wider to women and minorities, and so much more. In each of these areas we need to go further and we also need to expend these movements. We must insist that every company we support in any way be committed to serving us, the public, the world, future generations – not simply the bottom line. We must change the perception of what it means to be successful. That is our job and our pleasure. You have the power. Social networking makes it easier – and more fun – than ever to launch campaigns that will change the perception of what it means to be “successful.” It’s time for you and me to use all the tools at our disposal to show those who would drive us down a path of distraction, lethargy, depression, and mayhem that we simply will not stand for it. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for and we are here now. 2017 is our year! It will bring what we demand. Best wishes, John The Love Summit organized by the nonprofit Dream Change that John founded nearly 30 years ago is a powerful example of a movement that is going global to change businesses. 1 Jan
Message from the Legendary Elder Siblings - I write this in-flight, returning from a magical trip to the Kogi of Colombia. I write this having seen and heard the airport TV reports of the trauma that continues to dominate US politics, as well as those in many other countries. Last year my Ecuadorian partner, Daniel Koupermann, and I took a group to the amazing lands of the Kogi – people who have a message for us all. They came down from their mountain hideaways to meet us and to spread their message of the need for change. They were so impressed by the deep spirituality and commitment of that 2015 group that they invited us to bring another similar group – and this time to be the first ever to live among them, to sleep in their community, and to sit in their sacred ceremonial lodges. For the 19 of us it was a life-changing trip. We were surrounded by breathtaking scenes: the emerald Caribbean and palm-fringed beaches, the Sierra Nevada mountains that rise 18,000 feet up from the ocean to glacier-covered peaks, the rain forests, and the sparkling rivers that cascade from the glaciers into the Caribbean. But most of all it was the Kogi who impressed us! I have to admit that I was shocked – ecstatically – by the extent to which the Kogi invited us to share their lives and ceremonies. These up-til-now illusive people totally opened the doors to their homes and hearts to us. They invited us to come and learn from their Mamos (wise elders/teachers/shamans/spiritual leaders), to answer a call that dates back to a time when their forefathers retreated from the onslaught of Spanish conquistadors and the destructive nature of European cultures. Their Mamos told us of how their ancestors had fled up the valleys of the glacial rivers into the mountains. Choosing to remain isolated for centuries, they developed a new dream of the Earth, a revelation that balances the brilliant potential of the human mind, heart and spirit with all the forces of nature. To this day they remain true to their ancient laws and traditions—the moral, ecological, and spiritual dictates of a force they identify as “the Mother”—and are still led by sacred rituals. In the late 1900s, their Mamos understood that they are the Elder Siblings and that they had to come down and share that powerful message with the modern world, the people they call the Younger Siblings – us. They have shared their history with others. What was unique this time was their enthusiasm for embracing this group on very personal levels. I write this while flying home and it is all too close to me to be able to express in detail at this moment (a book to come, I think!) but I will say that the bonding we all felt is symbolized by a ceremony when a Mamo and his wife in whose community we had spent the night invited us to witness their 5-year-old son training to become a Mamo. We traveled many miles down from their community and stood with them on the bank of a glacial river where it meets the Caribbean while the young man gently offered the river the commitments we had all made and blown into tiny pieces of cotton from a local plant. The Kogi message, although similar to the one I received more than 40 years ago when I was a Peace Corps volunteer living with the Shuar in the Amazon and then again 20 years later from the Achuar, is more urgent now than ever. It is the message that birthed nonprofits, including Dream Change and the Pachamama Alliance. It is the message of the North American indigenous people and all those who join them at Standing Rock. It is a message that now has issued forth from indigenous cultures and organizations around the world. It is a message of hope, one that says we can transformer ourselves from societies that adhere to systems that threaten to destroy us to ones that will sustain us and future generations. I’ve written many times about the necessity to move from a Death Economy, based on warfare and ravaging the very resources upon which it depends, to a Life Economy, based on cleaning up pollution, regenerating destroyed environments, and developing new technologies that recycle and life-styles that give back more than they take from our Living Earth. Now, flying back from the Kogi, I feel rejuvenated and recommitted to spreading the message that is the underlying principle behind that economic shapeshift that needs to happen. We know we are facing severe crises. We know the climate is changing and that we humans are devastating the air, water, and land that support all life on this planet. We know that our government is incapable or unwilling to turn things around. It is easy to be discouraged. EXCEPT we also now know what our Elder Siblings understood long ago, that We the People must transform ourselves and our institutions. That is the message of the Kogi. It is the message of the Shuar, the Achuar, the people at Standing Rock and all our brothers and sisters around the globe. It is the message of the rising oceans, flooding rivers, melting glaciers, the hurricanes, the political traumas, and all the other crises. We are blessed to be hearing this message, to be inhabitants of this incredible organism that is our Living Earth and to be able to understand that the crises are themselves the message that it is time for us to come out of our isolation and create the change we want and know in our hearts, minds, and souls is necessary.13 Dec 16

Channel NewsAsia Singapore News

Cross boundary artists: She’s into Chinese ink painting, he’s into Malay silat - Meet two young artists who cross boundaries and expand horizons with their art of choice. NAFA student Nur Hikmah is the only non-Chinese student majoring in Chinese ink painting, while Eurasian theatre actor Lian Sutton champions the Malay martial art of silat in the world of theatre.10 Feb
7,500 children to benefit from S$1.5m milk powder scheme - A new S$1.5 million scheme to help needy families across Singapore pay for milk powder was on Saturday (11 Feb). Up to 7,500 children are expected to benefit.10 Feb
Personal robotics the next technological revolution: Dr Vivian Balakrishnan - Much like how personal computers transformed the way people saw and used technology, Minister-in-charge of the Smart Nation Programme Office Dr Vivian Balakrishnan said the personal, general-purpose robots would revolutionise the way such technologies feature in people's lives.10 Feb
Personal robotics the next technological revolution: Dr Vivian Balakrishnan - Much like personal computers transformed how people saw and used technology, Minister-in-charge of the Smart Nation Programme Office Dr Vivian Balakrishnan said the personal, general-purpose robots would revolutionise the way such technologies feature in people's lives. 10 Feb
Cross boundary artists: She’s into Chinese ink painting, he’s into Malay silat - Meet two young artists who cross boundaries and expand horizons with their art of choice. NAFA student Nur Hikmah is the only non-Chinese student majoring in Chinese ink painting, while Eurasian theatre actor Lian Sutton champions the Malay martial art of silat in the world of theatre.10 Feb
First compilation of local fatwas launched, gathering rulings on science and medicine - The first compilation of Singaporean fatwas – the religious rulings from Islamic authorities that provide guidance – was launched on Saturday (11 Feb) at the inaugural Conference on Fatwa in Contemporary Societies. 10 Feb
Leave property cooling measures for the HDB, not high-end market: Rhonda Wong, CEO, Ohmyhome - Rhonda Wong is the co-founder and CEO of Ohmyhome, and sees her business as fulfilling a social mission for homebuyers across Singapore.10 Feb
Timing of Malaysian challenge on Pedra Branca could be way of 'garnering votes' ahead of elections: Experts - Analysts point to a political dimension in Malaysia’s attempt to challenge Singapore’s sovereignty of the island. 10 Feb
Services along Sengkang LRT disrupted due to power fault - Residents near Bakau station reported hearing a loud "boom" at around 8pm, while commuters said there was no power at the station. 10 Feb
Certis Cisco officer dies after accident at Tuas Checkpoint - A 28-year-old driver has been arrested for causing death by a rash act. 10 Feb

Channel NewsAsia Front Page News

Activists on both sides of abortion issue to protest across US - Anti-abortion groups have called demonstrations at more than 200 Planned Parenthood locations throughout the United States on Saturday to urge Congress and President Donald Trump to strip the women's health provider of federal funding.8 min
Iraq says will stay clear of US-Iran tensions - Iraq won't take part in any regional or international conflicts, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi told state TV on Saturday.13 min
Tembusu tree falls at Singapore Botanic Gardens, at least 1 injured - The incident interrupted an event organised by the High Commission of Canada. 15 min
Activists on both sides of abortion issue to protest across U.S - Anti-abortion groups have called demonstrations at more than 200 Planned Parenthood locations throughout the United States on Saturday to urge Congress and President Donald Trump to strip the women's health provider of federal funding.17 min
Ford to invest US$1b in artificial intelligence startup - Ford will invest US$1 billion over five years in an artificial intelligence startup with the aim of developing an autonomous vehicle by 2021, the auto giant said Friday.18 min
Missing China billionaire taken from Hong Kong hotel in wheelchair -source - Missing China-born billionaire Xiao Jianhua was whisked in a wheelchair from a luxury Hong Kong hotel in the early hours of Jan 27 with his head covered, a source close to the businessman told Reuters.38 min
Tembusu tree falls at Singapore Botanic Gardens, at least 1 injured - The incident interrupted an event organised by the High Commission of Canada. 41 min
Missing China billionaire taken from Hong Kong hotel in wheelchair - source - Missing China-born billionaire Xiao Jianhua was whisked in a wheelchair from a luxury Hong Kong hotel in the early hours of Jan 27 with his head covered, a source close to the businessman told Reuters.48 min
South Sudan general quits, cites army abuses and ethnic bias - A South Sudanese general has resigned, citing abuses by the security forces against civilians and what he called increasing ethnic favouritism in the military, according to a letter seen by Reuters on Saturday.53 min
Saudi Crown prince says US-Saudi ties strong - Saudi Arabia's relations with the United States are "historic and strategic", Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef said on the occasion of the visit of CIA director Mike Pompeo to Riyadh.02:25

Channel NewsAsia World News

Activists on both sides of abortion issue to protest across U.S - Anti-abortion groups have called demonstrations at more than 200 Planned Parenthood locations throughout the United States on Saturday to urge Congress and President Donald Trump to strip the women's health provider of federal funding.17 min
South Sudan general quits, cites army abuses and ethnic bias - A South Sudanese general has resigned, citing abuses by the security forces against civilians and what he called increasing ethnic favouritism in the military, according to a letter seen by Reuters on Saturday.53 min
Saudi Crown prince says US-Saudi ties strong - Saudi Arabia's relations with the United States are "historic and strategic", Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef said on the occasion of the visit of CIA director Mike Pompeo to Riyadh.02:25
China expels 32 South Korea missionaries amid missile defence tension - China has expelled 32 South Korean Christian missionaries, a Korean government official said on Saturday, amid diplomatic tension between the two countries over the planned deployment of a U.S. missile defence system in the South.01:50
UK to close Iraq war abuse unit, citing false claims - Britain's government has said it will shut down a unit investigating claims of torture and unlawful killing by British soldiers in Iraq after a law firm representing alleged victims was found to have made false claims.01:45
Angola's president orders inquiry into stadium stampede that killed 17 - Angolan President Jose Eduardo dos Santos has ordered an investigation into the cause of a stampede at a football match in which at least 17 people were killed.01:25
Trump welcomes Abe with warm White House embrace - US President Donald Trump welcomed Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to the White House Friday, greeting him with a brotherly hug, as the pair try to build a personal rapport.01:20
Elections official asks Trump for evidence of voter fraud - A member of the Federal Election Commission on Friday called on President Donald Trump to share any evidence he has to support a statement that voter fraud caused him and former Senator Kelly Ayotte to lose in New Hampshire in the 2016 U.S. election.00:45
US expresses objection to Palestinian as UN envoy to Libya - The United States objected on Friday to United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres' choice of former Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad as the body's new representative to Libya.10 Feb
India's Modi faces biggest election test since 2014 landslide - Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi faces his biggest electoral test since coming to power when the battleground state of Uttar Pradesh, which he swept three years ago, holds an election starting on Saturday.10 Feb

Channel NewsAsia Asia Pacific News

Missing China billionaire taken from Hong Kong hotel in wheelchair - source - Missing China-born billionaire Xiao Jianhua was whisked in a wheelchair from a luxury Hong Kong hotel in the early hours of Jan 27 with his head covered, a source close to the businessman told Reuters.48 min
China expels 32 South Korea missionaries amid missile defence tension - China has expelled 32 South Korean Christian missionaries, a Korean government official said on Saturday, amid diplomatic tension between the two countries over the planned deployment of a U.S. missile defence system in the South.01:50
Trump welcomes Abe with warm White House embrace - US President Donald Trump welcomed Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to the White House Friday, greeting him with a brotherly hug, as the pair try to build a personal rapport.01:20
6 dead after strong quake shakes southern Philippines - Residents of the southern town of Surigao in Mindanao island spent the night huddled in fear as aftershocks rocked the city following the 6.5-magnitude quake which struck late Friday when many people were already in bed.01:10
New Zealand rescuers form human chain to help stranded whales - Whale rescuers in New Zealand linked arms in neck-deep water on Saturday to try and prevent about 200 pilot whales from stranding themselves again in a remote bay, where 300 of the animals died this week.01:03
Thousands gathered at Jakarta mosque urged to vote for Muslim governor - Thousands of Indonesians gathered on Saturday at a mosque in central Jakarta, where religious leaders urged them to support a Muslim candidate during next week's contentious election to select the capital's governor.00:16
Big China city says many poultry markets infected with bird flu - media - Authorities in China's third-largest city warned that about 30 percent of its live poultry markets were contaminated with the H7N9 avian flu virus, the China Daily reported on Saturday.00:05
Many poultry markets in Guangzhou infected with bird flu: Report - Authorities in China's third-largest city warned that about 30 percent of its live poultry markets were contaminated with the H7N9 avian flu virus, the China Daily reported on Saturday.00:02
China gets an early win off Trump, but many battles remain - Combining public bluster with behind-the-scenes diplomacy, China wrested a concession from the United States as the two presidents spoke for the first time this week, but Beijing may not be able to derive much comfort from the win on U.S. policy toward Taiwan.10 Feb
Islamic State fighter is first Australian stripped of citizenship - report - Australian Islamic State fighter Khaled Sharrouf has become the country's first dual nationality individual to be stripped of Australian citizenship under anti-terrorism laws, the Australian newspaper said on Saturday.10 Feb

Media Monarchy

#PumpUpThaVolume: February 10, 2017 - Media Monarchy plays The Sweeps, Electric Floor, Sundays & Cybele and more on #PumpUpThaVolume for February 10, 2017. ♬10 Feb
#MorningMonarchy: February 10, 2017 - Believable ads, movie ops and comically "BrainDead" + this day in history w/Ziggy Stardust's premiere and our song of the day by De La Soul on your Morning Monarchy for February 10, 2017.10 Feb
Statists Are Comically “BrainDead” - Airing alongside "America's Next Top President" last year, the single season satire from CBS called "BrainDead" shined a spotlight on the left/right paradigm and the "Scanners"-like effect it has on the masses.10 Feb
#NewWorldNextWeek: India Kicks Out Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (Audio) - This week on the New World Next Week: Media provides more grist for the phoney left/right divide and conquer mill; the firm that the US gov used to hack iPhone gets hacked; and India's immunisation program slams Gates. 9 Feb
#NewWorldNextWeek: India Kicks Out Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (Video) - This week on the New World Next Week: Media provides more grist for the phoney left/right divide and conquer mill; the firm that the US gov used to hack iPhone gets hacked; and India's immunisation program slams Gates. 9 Feb
#PumpUpThaVolume: February 9, 2017 - Media Monarchy plays Air, Kinks, Prong and more on #PumpUpThaVolume for February 9, 2017. ♬ 9 Feb
#MorningMonarchy: February 9, 2017 - Cosmic triggers, meme magic and the snow moon + this day in history w/McCarthy Commies and our song of the day by Moon Duo on your Morning Monarchy for February 9, 2017. 9 Feb
#PumpUpThaVolume: February 8, 2017 - Media Monarchy plays Blank Square, Dire Wolves, Wild Skies and more on #PumpUpThaVolume for February 8, 2017. ♬ 8 Feb
#MorningMonarchy: February 8, 2017 - Pacemaker panopticon, tiny house help and the Dakota Garbage Pipeline + this day in history w/"Birth Of A Nation" and our song of the day by Childish Gambino on your Morning Monarchy for February 8, 2017. 8 Feb
#PumpUpThaVolume: February 7, 2017 - Media Monarchy plays Adult Karate, Grim Avenue, Dazeases and more on #PumpUpThaVolume for February 7, 2017. ♬ 7 Feb

NATO Latest News

Deputy Secretary General highlights NATO-UN efforts to protect children affected by armed conflict - Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller addressed the serious threats against children in war zones during talks with the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, Ms. Leila Zerrougui, on Friday (10 February 2017). The two leaders met at the Palais d’Egmont to attend the International Conference on Children and Armed Conflict, hosted by the Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs with Queen Mathilde of Belgium. In her conference remarks, Ms. Gottemoeller stressed the importance of strengthening the protection of children in armed conflict and highlighted NATO’s work with the UN in this field.10 Feb
NATO reaffirms its unwavering support for Ukraine - Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller welcomed Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman of Ukraine to NATO Headquarters on Thursday (9 February 2017) for talks on the security situation and NATO’s support for Ukraine. Ms. Gottemoeller noted that she chaired a special meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission on Wednesday, at which every single Ally voiced strong support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. She expressed NATO’s concern at the recent spike in violence in and around Avdiivka, and condemned Russia’s continuing destabilisation of eastern Ukraine. 9 Feb
NATO Deputy Secretary General to meet with the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General (SRSG) for Children and Armed Conflict - The NATO Deputy Secretary General, Ms. Rose Gottemoeller, will meet with the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General (SRSG) for Children and Armed Conflict, Ms. Leila Zerrougui at the Palais d’Egmont on Friday, 10 February 2017. 9 Feb
Visit to NATO by the Prime Minister of Ukraine - NATO Deputy Secretary General, Ms. Rose Gottemoeller, will meet with the Prime Minister of Ukraine, Mr. Volodymyr Groysman, at NATO Headquarters on Thursday, 9 February 2017. 8 Feb
Secretary General's pre-ministerial press conference 8 Feb
NATO backs stable, secure and neutral Moldova - NATO Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller welcomed the Moldovan President Igor Dodon to NATO headquarters on Tuesday (7 February 2017) for talks on the partnership between the Alliance and the Republic of Moldova. Ms Gottemoeller thanked Moldova for its contribution to NATO’s KFOR peacekeeping mission, which also gives Moldovan troops valuable practical experience. She explained how the partnership between NATO and the Republic of Moldova helps improve people’s lives, for instance with training for almost 2,000 Moldovans in areas such as fighting corruption in the defence sector, border security and civil emergency planning. The Alliance has spent 4.5 million euros on destroying pesticides, anti-personnel mines, surplus munitions and rocket fuel. The Deputy Secretary General said that NATO will open a new civilian Liaison Office in Chisinau this year to facilitate NATO support for the country’s reforms, as requested by the Moldovan government. She stressed that NATO fully respects Moldova’s constitutional neutrality, as recognised in the Individual Partnership Action Plan. 7 Feb
Visit to NATO by the National Security Advisor of Afghanistan - NATO Deputy Secretary General, Ms. Rose Gottemoeller, will meet with the National Security Advisor for Afghanistan, Mr. Hanif Atmar, at NATO Headquarters on Tuesday, 7 February 2017. 6 Feb
Visit to NATO by the President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly - NATO Deputy Secretary General, Ms. Rose Gottemoeller, will meet with the President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, Mr. Paolo Alli, at NATO Headquarters on Tuesday, 7 February 2017. 6 Feb
Visit to NATO by the President of the Republic of Moldova - NATO Deputy Secretary General, Ms. Rose Gottemoeller, will meet with the President of the Republic of Moldova, H.E. M. Igor Dodon, at NATO Headquarters on Tuesday, 7 February 2017. 6 Feb
Readout of phone call between the NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg ‎and US President Donald J. Trump - NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg had a phone conversation with US President Donald J. Trump on Sunday evening, where they reconfirmed the importance of the Alliance in troubled times. They reviewed progress on the fight against terrorism and on NATO defence spending, and stressed the need for continued efforts to ensure fair burden-sharing among all NATO Allies. They also discussed the uptick in violence in eastern Ukraine, and prospects for a peaceful settlement. The Secretary General recalled NATO's consistent policy of strong defence and dialogue with Russia. The Secretary General and President Trump looked forward to the upcoming NATO Summit in Brussels in late May to discuss these issues. 5 Feb

National Post

Greg Palast

Join NAACP Voter Fund for Facebook LIVE broadcast of my film on How Trump Stole It - I have a simple request. I’m asking that, this Thursday, at 8pm ET/5pm PT, you join the NAACP-National Voter Fund, Rainbow/PUSH, Josh Fox of Climate Revolution and many, many more–and “share” the Facebook LIVE broadcast of my documentary–the film that exposes exactly how Trump and his cronies attacked the voting rights of a million minority voters to steal the White House. That’s all we are asking: Between 8pm and 9pm Eastern, on Inauguration Eve, you “share” the live-stream with your Facebook followers. The Best Democracy Money Can Buy: A Tale of Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, follows my crew’s undercover investigations for Rolling Stone and BBC-TV. "...Mainstream journalism has often struggled to cover the manipulation of data and the distortion of reality driven by billionaires like the Koch brothers or even Donald Trump... Palast slices through all the B.S.”- The Village Voice Pass this on to your friends, your organizations, and anyone who wants to get un-stupid about the theft of the 2016 election. I’ll be leading an online discussion right after the broadcast: What do we do now? Starting now you can share the trailer on Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/GregPalastInvestigates/videos/10154917384607128/ And share the trailer on Twitter simply by retweeting this tweet:https://twitter.com/Greg_Palast/status/820218502405619712 Please also indicate that you are "going" to our virtual event on Facebook — and share it with your friends: https://www.facebook.com/events/980244978772589/ On Thursday, January 19 at 8pm ET, go to https://www.facebook.com/GregPalastInvestigates/. (If you’re late, you can scroll back to the beginning.) The film (with the help of my friends Rosario Dawson, Shailene Woodley Ice-T, Willie Nelson and more), tells the story of the GOP’s weapon of mass vote destruction – and exposes the billionaires behind Trump and the vote trickery. The film was updated just this week. I guarantee: you’ll laugh, you’ll cry, and you’ll get revved up to resist. Trump didn’t win––his billionaire backers swiped it. We can take it back. Will you join me? - Greg Palast and the investigations team Make a tax-deductible donation to our Stolen Election Investigation *  *  *  *  * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie.Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Support The Palast Investigative Fund and keep our work alive. Or support us by shopping with Amazon Smile.AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Sustainable Markets Foundation for the benefit of The Palast Investigative Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info. GregPalast.com The post Join NAACP Voter Fund for Facebook LIVE broadcast of my film on How Trump Stole It appeared first on Greg Palast.17 Jan
I get the Blues too… - A note to all who’ve made a donation to our Investigative Fund You are not only keeping us alive financially, but emotionally. Eventually, our stories make national news, but, in those months while the mainstream resists, your encouragement really means a lot. People ask me how I keep my sense of humor when I see all these horrors, from lost votes to lost lives. The truth is, I get the blues too. Support, good wishes, and remembering the tough world I came from are what gets me back on track. And here’s something they can’t steal from us:  a Happy New Year, from my family to yours. Thank you, Greg Palast, reporting Make a tax-deductible donation to our Stolen Election Investigation *  *  *  *  * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie.Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Support The Palast Investigative Fund and keep our work alive. Or support us by shopping with Amazon Smile.AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Sustainable Markets Foundation for the benefit of The Palast Investigative Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info.   The post I get the Blues too… appeared first on Greg Palast.30 Dec 16
A note in the snow - Last week, I flew to Detroit with my team at the request of a major west coast publication. When I landed, they got cold feet; assignment cancelled. Without funding to continue, I should have headed home. But I was getting tips of nasty doings with the ballots in Motown. I could get the evidence that Trump’s victory was as real as his tan. So I tucked my long-johns under my suit, put on my fedora, and headed out to meet the witnesses, see the evidence and film an investigative report on the Theft of Michigan. With almost no sleep (and no pay), my producer David Ambrose and I put together an investigative film—and donated it, no charge, to Democracy Now! and several other outlets. As to the airfares, hotels, cars, camera batteries, sound equipment, local assistants and the rest, the bills have piled high as the snow and uncounted ballots. So, here I was, literally out in the cold, hoping you'd see the value of top-flight investigative reporting. So, buddy, can you spare a dime? Or $100 or so? For that, I’ll send you my new film, the one that, back in September, told you exactly how Trump would steal it. Or a signed copy of the book that goes with it: The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, a tale of billionaires and ballot bandits. I want to thank all of you who donated to get me to Washington DC to testify at the ad hoc Congressional hearing and to speak with the Justice Department about the suppression of minority votes. (On Monday, I was joined at the Washington Press Club by the nation’s top voting rights attorney, Barbara Arnwine; civil rights legend Ruby Sales; Muslim activist Sameera Khan. They announced plans to take legal and political action against Crosscheck, the Trumpistas’ latest Jim Crow tactic, the one our team uncovered for Rolling Stone. Khan joined me at Justice to present them 50,000 signatures (we unloaded reams of paper on them) gathered by 18 Million Rising, the Asian American advocacy group, to light a fire under Justice. On Tuesday, I joined the presidents of the NAACP chapters of Michigan and Wisconsin and other front-line voting rights leaders, to plan next steps for this week, for this year, for this decade. My presentation to Justice, to Congressmen and rights advocates, to the press, was so much more powerful because I arrived in DC with the goods, the evidence, the film, the facts from Michigan, from the scene of the electoral crime. So, in the end, my assignment wasn’t cancelled: I went to work for YOU. Because I have faith that my readers agree that this work is important, that I’m not on some fool’s errand. The US media doesn’t want to cover the vote theft—because, hey, the count is over—and we should get over it. I am not over it. I am standing my ground. Let me know if you think I’ve made the right decision. Feed the team. I have nothing to offer you in return except some signed discs and books (or the Combo)— and the facts. Continue Supporting the 2016 Stolen Election Investigation because it ain’t over and we’re not done. – Greg Palast   * * * * * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie. Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Visit the Palast Investigative Fund store or simply make a tax-deductible contribution to keep our work alive!  Or support the The Palast Investigative Fund (a project of The Sustainable Markets Foundation) by shopping with Amazon Smile. AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Palast Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info. GregPalast.com   The post A note in the snow appeared first on Greg Palast.18 Dec 16
The Republican Sabotage of the Vote Recounts in Michigan and Wisconsin - By Greg Palast for Truthout Photo of Michigan ballot with bubble. (Image courtesy of Palast Investigative Fund, 2016)Michigan officials declared in late November that Trump won the state's count by 10,704 votes. But hold on – a record 75,355 ballots were not counted. The uncounted ballots came mostly from Detroit and Flint, majority-Black cities that vote Democratic. According to the machines that read their ballots, these voters waited in line, sometimes for hours, yet did not choose a president. Really? This week, I drove through a snowstorm to Lansing to hear the official explanation from Ruth Johnson, the Republican secretary of state. I was directed to official flack-catcher Fred Woodhams who told me, "You know, I think when you look at the unfavorability ratings that were reported for both major-party candidates, it's probably not that surprising." Sleuthing about in Detroit, I found another explanation: bubbles. Bubbles? Michigan votes on paper ballots. If you don't fill the bubble completely, the machine records that you didn't vote for president. Susan, a systems analyst who took part in the hand recount initiated by Jill Stein, told me, "I saw a lot of red ink. I saw a lot of checkmarks. We saw a lot of ballots that weren't originally counted, because those don't scan into the machine." (I can only use her first name because she's terrified of retribution from Trump followers in the white suburb where she lives.) Other ballots were not counted because the machines thought the voter chose two presidential candidates. How come more ballots were uncounted in Detroit and Flint than in the white 'burbs and rural counties? Are the machines themselves racist? No, but they are old, and in some cases, busted. An astonishing 87 machines broke down in Detroit, responsible for counting tens of thousands of ballots. Many more were simply faulty and uncalibrated. I met with Carlos Garcia, University of Michigan multimedia specialist, who, on Election Day, joined a crowd waiting over two hours for the busted machine to be fixed. Some voters left; others filled out ballots that were chucked, uncounted, into the bottom of machine. When the machine was fixed, Carlos explained, "Any new scanned ballots were falling in on top of the old ones." It would not be possible to recount those dumped ballots. This is not an unheard of phenomenon: I know two voters who lost their vote in another state (California) because they didn't fill in the bubble – my parents! Meet mom and dad in my film, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy: How did Detroit end up with the crap machines? Detroit is bankrupt, so every expenditure must be approved by "emergency" overlords appointed by the Republican governor. The GOP operatives refused the city's pre-election pleas to fix and replace the busted machines. "We had the rollout [of new machines] in our budget," Detroit City Clerk Janice Winfrey said. "No money was appropriated by the state." Same in Flint. GOP state officials cut the budget for water service there, resulting in the contamination of the city's water supply with lead. The budget cuts also poisoned the presidential race. The Human Eye Count There is, however, an extraordinary machine that can read the ballots, whether the bubbles are filled or checked, whether in black ink or red, to determine the voters' intent: the human eye. That's why Dr. Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, paid millions of dollars for a human eyeball count of the uncounted votes. While labeled a "recount," its real purpose is to count the 75,355 votes never counted in the first place. Count those ballots, mostly in Detroit and Flint, and Trump's victory could vanish. Adding to the pile of uncounted ballots are the large numbers of invalidated straight-ticket votes in Detroit. In Michigan, you can choose to make one mark that casts your vote for every Democrat (or Republican) for every office. Voters know that they can vote the Democratic ballot but write in a protest name – popular were "Bernie Sanders" and "Mickey Mouse" – but their ballot, they knew, would count for Clinton. However, the Detroit machines simply invalidated the ballots with protest write-ins because the old Opti-Scans wrongly tallied these as "over-votes" (i.e., voting for two candidates). The human eye would catch this mistake. But Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette stymied Stein's human eye count. The Republican pol issued an order saying that no one could look at the ballots cast in precincts where the number of votes and voters did not match – exactly the places where you'd want to look for the missing votes. He also ordered a ban on counting ballots from precincts where the seals on the machines had been broken – in other words, where there is evidence of tampering. Again, those are the machines that most need investigating. The result: The recount crews were denied access to more than half of all Detroit precincts (59 percent). I met with Stein, who told me she was stunned by this overt sabotage of the recount. "It's shocking to think that the discounting of these votes may be making the critical difference in the outcome of the election," she said. This story was repeated in Wisconsin, which uses the same Opti-Scan system as Michigan. There, the uncounted votes, sometimes called "spoiled" or "invalidated" ballots, were concentrated in Black-majority Milwaukee. Stein put up over $3 million of donated funds for the human eye review in Wisconsin, but GOP state officials authorized Milwaukee County to recount simply by running the ballots through the same blind machines. Not surprisingly, this instant replay produced the same questionable result. Adding Un-Votes to the Uncounted Stein was also disturbed by the number of voters who never got to cast ballots. "Whether it's because of the chaos [because] some polling centers are closed, and then some are moved, and there's all kinds of mix-ups," she said. "So, a lot of people are filling out provisional ballots, or they were being tossed off the voter rolls by Interstate Crosscheck." Interstate Crosscheck is a list that was created by Donald Trump supporter and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach to hunt down and imprison voters who illegally voted or registered in two states in one election. An eye-popping 449,092 Michiganders are on the Crosscheck suspect list. The list, which my team uncovered in an investigation for Rolling Stone, cost at least 50,000 of the state's voters their registrations. Disproportionately, the purged voters were Blacks, Latinos and that other solid Democratic demographic, Muslim Americans. (Dearborn, Michigan, has the highest concentration of Arab Americans in the US.) The Michigan Secretary of State's spokesman Woodhams told me the purpose of the mass purge was, "to clean our voter lists and ensure that there's no vulnerability for fraud. We've been very aggressive in closing vulnerabilities and loopholes to fraud." While Woodhams did not know of a single conviction for double-voting in Michigan, the "aggression" in purging the lists was clear. I showed him part of the Michigan purge list that he thought was confidential. The "double voters" are found by simply matching first and last names. Michael Bernard Brown is supposed to be the same voter as Michael Anthony Brown. Michael Timothy Brown is supposed to be the same voter as Michael Johnnie Brown. Woodhams assured me the GOP used the Trump-Kobach list with care, more or less. He said, "I'm sure that there are some false positives. But we go through it thoroughly, and we're not just canceling people." As to the racial profiling inherent in the list? Did he agree with our experts that by tagging thousands of voters named Jose Garcia and Michael Brown there would be a bias in his purge list? The GOP spokesman replied, "I've known a lot of white Browns." Jill Stein didn't buy it. Responding to both Michigan's and Trump's claim that voter rolls are loaded with fraudulent double voters, Stein said, "It's the opposite of what he is saying: not people who are voting fraudulently and illegally, but actually legitimate voters who have had their right to vote taken away from them by Kris Kobach and by Donald Trump." Crosscheck likely cost tens of thousands their vote in Pennsylvania as well. "It is a Jim Crow system, and it all needs to be fixed," Stein concluded. "It's not rocket science. This is just plain, basic democracy." * * * * * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie. Support the 2016 Stolen Election Investigation After investigating the REAL story of the recount, we stopped by the Department of Justice and handed them our Crosscheck petition, signed by 50,000 people. We have a lot more work to do and thankfully, our efforts are starting to get notice. We're not done... Join us bySupporting the Stolen Election Investigation Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Visit the Palast Investigative Fund store or simply make a tax-deductible contribution to keep our work alive!  Or support the The Palast Investigative Fund (a project of The Sustainable Markets Foundation) by shopping with Amazon Smile. AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Palast Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info. GregPalast.com   The post The Republican Sabotage of the Vote Recounts in Michigan and Wisconsin appeared first on Greg Palast.18 Dec 16
Palast Report for Democracy Now!:By Rejecting Recount, Is Michigan Covering up 75,000 Ballots Never Counted? - Investigative reporter Greg Palast has just returned from Michigan, where he went to probe the state’s closely contested election. Trump won Michigan by fewer than 11,000 votes out of nearly 4.8 million votes cast. Green Party presidential contender Dr. Jill Stein attempted to force Michigan to hold a recount, but a federal judge ordered Michigan’s Board of Elections to stop the state’s electoral recount. One big question remains: Why did 75,335 ballots go uncounted? Support the 2016 Stolen Election Investigation My team and I just returned from Michigan to report the REAL story of the recount. I’ve also been responding to urgent requests in the recount states for our technical files and analysis. We're in Washington and stopped by the Department of Justice yesterday and handed them our Crosscheck petition, signed by 50,000 people. Join us by Supporting the Stolen Election Investigation Last stop for Democracy • PLEASE, say, "Count me in to count the votes" by supporting the 2016 Stolen Election Investigation for a donation of any size no matter how small or large • Stay informed and get a signed DVD of my film The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, a signed copy of the book with the same title or better still - get the Book & DVD combo  • Be listed as a producer ($1,000) or co-producer ($500) in the credits of the broadcast version of the updated, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy:  THE THEFT OF 2016. * * * * * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie. Donate to the Palast Investigative Fund and get the signed DVD. Download the FREE Movie Comic Book. Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Visit the Palast Investigative Fund store or simply make a tax-deductible contribution to keep our work alive!  Or support the The Palast Investigative Fund (a project of The Sustainable Markets Foundation) by shopping with Amazon Smile. AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Palast Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info. GregPalast.com   The post Palast Report for Democracy Now!:By Rejecting Recount, Is Michigan Covering up 75,000 Ballots Never Counted? appeared first on Greg Palast.13 Dec 16
Crosscheck Is Not Just Crooked, It’s Criminal - After reading my report on the Kobach/Koch/Trump operation, which has removed tens of thousands of minority voters from the rolls in the swing states that surprisingly shifted to Trump, former federal judge (and now Congressman) Alcee Hastings told me Crosscheck is a criminal violation of federal law. Hastings has called for criminal indictments and written an official Congressional member letter to ask for investigation. hastings-crosscheck-letter-to-ag-lynch Hastings’ demand for justice is backed by a petition to expose and end Crosscheck’s racist attacks on voting rights. So far it's been signed by 50,000 people, including 29,507 members of 18 Million Rising, the Asian-American rights group. The group is joined by co-signers Rep. Keith Ellison, Bill Gallegos of Climate Justice, Martin Luther King III and others. On Tuesday, December 13 I will join the leaders of 18 Million rising in Washington, D.C. to present the petition to Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Stopping Crosscheck is the Standing Rock of racist vote suppression.  If we don’t open the investigations now, by January 21, Kris Kobach will be Homeland Security chief and Jeff Sessions Attorney General. Demand an investigation into Crosscheck, sign our petition — and then share it! For the full story, see the film, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, the story of my investigation of Crosscheck. * * * * * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie. Donate to the Palast Investigative Fund and get the signed DVD. Download the FREE Movie Comic Book. Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Visit the Palast Investigative Fund store or simply make a tax-deductible contribution to keep our work alive!  Or support the The Palast Investigative Fund (a project of The Sustainable Markets Foundation) by shopping with Amazon Smile. AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Palast Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info. The post Crosscheck Is Not Just Crooked, It’s Criminal appeared first on Greg Palast. 5 Dec 16
The No-BS Inside Guide to the Presidential RecountSorry, no Russian hacker hunt - by Greg Palast for Truthout There's been so much complete nonsense since I first broke the news that the Green Party would file for a recount of the presidential vote, I am compelled to write a short guide to flush out the BS and get to just the facts, ma'am. Nope, they’re not hunting for Russian hackers To begin with, the main work of the recount hasn't a damn thing to do with finding out if the software programs for the voting machines have been hacked, whether by Putin’s agents or some guy in a cave flipping your vote from Hillary to The Donald. The Green team does not yet even have the right to get into the codes. But that's just not the core of the work. The ballots in the electoral “dumpster” The nasty little secret of US elections, is that we don't count all the votes. In Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania—and all over America—there were a massive number of votes that were simply rejected, invalidated, and spoiled. They were simply, not counted.  Officially, in a typical presidential election, at least three million votes end up rejected, often for picayune, absurd reasons. The rejects fall into three big categories:  provisional ballots rejected, absentee and mail-in ballots invalidated and in-precinct votes “spoiled,” spit out by a machine or thrown out by a human reader as unreadable or mis-marked. So, as Robert Fitrakis, lead lawyer for the recount tells me, their first job is to pull the votes out of the electoral dumpster—and, one by one, make the case for counting a rejected provisional, absentee or “spoiled” ballot. Spoiled:  over-votes and under-votes How does a vote spoil? Most fall in the categories of “over-votes” and “under-votes.” In Michigan, the Green team has found a whole lot of people who voted for TWO candidates for President.  These are the “over-vote”—votes that will count for neither candidate. How odd.  While the schools in Detroit are not stellar, its graduates do know that they can only have one president. Then, some folks didn’t vote at all.  They are the “under-voter.” But, Fitrakis and team suspect, many of these under- and over-voters meant to vote for a candidate but the robot reader couldn’t understand their choice. Here’s how it happens.  Voters in Michigan and Wisconsin fill in bubbles next to their choice.  The cards, filled up with darkened bubbles for each race, are gathered and fed through an “optical scanner.” These robotic eyeballs mess up all the time. This is what Fitrakis, an old hand at vote-machine failures (both deliberate and benign), calls “the calibration problem.” Are machines calibrated with a Republican or Democratic bias? No, that's not how it works. But just as poor areas get the worst schools and hospitals, they also get the worst voting machines. The key is an ugly statistic not taught in third grade civics class:  According to the US Civil Rights Commission, the chance your vote will be disqualified as “spoiled” is 900% more likely if you’re Black than if you’re white. So the Green Party intends to review every single one of the six million bubble-filled cards. They’ll use the one instrument that can easily tell one bubble from two, or one bubble from none: the human eye. As you can imagine, This will require several thousand eyes.  The good news is, Fitrakis reports, that well over a thousand volunteers have already signed up.  Training by Skype begins Tuesday morning. Support the 2016 Stolen Election Investigation The team and I are off to Ground Zero:  Michigan. Wisconsin. Pennsylvania. To report the REAL story of the recount. I’m also responding to urgent requests in the recount states for our technical files and analysis. And then it’s on to Washington—to the Department of Justice—while there’s a bit of Justice left. Join us by Supporting the Stolen Election Investigation Last stop for Democracy Provisional or “placebo” ballots According to the US Elections Assistance Commission (EAC), Americans cast 2.7 million provisional ballots in the last presidential election.  About a million were simply discarded.  What?! Yes.  Discarded, not counted.  You show up at your normal polling station and they can’t find your name, or they don’t like your ID, or you’re supposed to vote in another precinct.  Instead of letting you vote on a regular ballot, you fill out a “provisional” ballot and place it in an envelope, sign your name, and under penalty of jail time for lying, affirm you’re a properly registered voter. The polls close—then the magic begins.  It’s up to highly partisan election officials to decide if your vote counts.  Hillary Clinton only won one swing state, Virginia, notably, the only one where the vote count was controlled by Democrats.  She lost all swing states—Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arizona, North Carolina and Florida—where the GOP set the rules for counting these ballots and their hacks acted as the judge and jury on whether a ballot should be counted. Wisconsin generally rejects votes cast in the wrong precinct, even if they’re legal voters—and, says Fitrakis, “even if their official precinct was just another table in the same high school gym—and they were mis-directed by poll workers.” (That’s why I sometimes call “provisional” ballots “placebo” ballots.  They let you feel you’ve voted, even if you haven’t.) In Wisconsin, provisional ballots were handed to voters—mostly, it appears, students—who didn’t have the form of ID required under new Wisconsin law. These ballots were disqualified despite zero evidence even one voter was an identity thief. Fitrakis says the Stein campaign will fight for each of these provisional votes where this is clearly no evidence the vote is fraudulent. Mail-in, Early and Absentee Ballots go Absent If you’ve gone postal in this election, good luck!  According to EAC data, at least half a million absentee ballots go absent, that is, just don’t get counted.  The cause: everything from postage due to “suspect signature.” Fitrakis told me that in his home state of Ohio, you need to put your driver’s license number on the envelope, “and if you don’t have a driver’s license and leave the line blank—instead of writing ‘no driver’s license’—they toss your ballot. From Palast's book The Best Democracy Money Can Buy: A Tale of Billionaires & Ballot Bandits by Ted Rall It’s a “gotcha!” system meant to knock out the ballots the officials don’t want to count.  (Remember, your mail-in ballot is anything but secret.)  Team Green will try to fight for each absentee ballot rejected for cockamamie reasons. If the recount doesn’t change the outcome, can we feel assured the election was honest? Sadly, no.  As Fitrakis says, “If a student is given a provisional ballot because they didn’t have the right ID, or the state simply lost their registration, we can fight for the ballot to be counted.  But most students who voted off campus didn’t know their right to get a provisional ballot and most probably didn’t get offered one. Students and others were discouraged from voting because they lacked the proper ID (300,000 by the estimate of the experts with the ACLU—that’s thirty times Trump’s plurality).  But if you didn’t cast any ballot, provisional or otherwise, no one can fight for it. And final decisions may come down to the vote of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, God forbid.  As Norman Stockwell, the editor of Madison-based The Progressive explained to me, formerly, elections law adjudications were made by a panel of non-partisan judges.  These were replaced by this new commission of partisan shills appointed by GOP Governor Scott Walker. Trump says millions voted illegally. Is he crazy? Crazy like a fox.  There’s a method in his madness that affects the recount. While the media dismisses Trump’s claim that there are "millions of people that voted illegally," they have not paid attention to the details of his claim.  Trump explains that millions of people are “voting many, many times,” that is, voting in two states in the same election. Trump’s claim is based on a list of “potential duplicate voters” created by his operative, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.  Kobach (a top dog in Trump’s transition team)  directs a program for hunting down fraudulent voters using a computer system called, “Crosscheck.” It’s quite a computer:  Crosscheck identified a breathtaking 449,922 Michiganders who are suspected of voting or registering in a second state, a felony crime, as are 371,923 in Pennsylvania. I spent two years investigating the Trump/Kobach claim for Rolling Stone.  We obtained the “confidential” suspect list of several million citizens accused of voting twice.  In fact, it was no more than a list of common names—Maria Hernandez, James Brown, David Lee—that is, common to voters of color.  Read: Democrats.  A true and typical example: Michael James Brown of Michigan is supposed to be the same voter as Michael Kendrick Brown of Georgia. Page from The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (FREE) Comic book penned by Keith Tucker About 54,000 voters in Michigan, five times Trump’s plurality, lost their right to vote based on this nutty double-voter accusation.  In Pennsylvania, about 45,000 were purged. The problem for Fitrakis:  While he eventually plans to file suit against Crosscheck purges, in the meantime, it’s not clear he can challenge someone whose lost their vote because of a false accusation of double voting.  And those who found their names missing and didn’t demand a provisional ballot—there’s no hope at all of recovering their vote. Is Jill Stein going to get rich? Fitrakis laughs at this one.  “The FEC [Federal Elections Commission] has very strict rules on recounts. The donations for the recount are sequestered in a specially designated account and all spending is restricted to the recount.” The big problem is that the cost is somewhat out of Stein’s control.  Each state will bill the campaign for the “pro-rated salaries and benefits” of its county and state officials working on the recount. To add to the cost and just plain drive the Green team crazy, the Wisconsin Election Board announced on Monday that each separate county elections clerk will decide if they’ll even let the Green volunteers directly view the ballots.  Fitrakis and partners will have to get a court order to get into each county.  How does one recount ballots without seeing them?  (Hmm, is the Wisconsin board, stooges appointed by the GOP Governor, fearful that the viewing the ballots will expose the game?) Hillary joins the fray What will the Clinton camp add to the recount? “Lawyers,” said Fitrakis, though he’s yet to see them.  The Clinton campaign is apparently helping find one voter in each Pennsylvania county, as one is required in each jurisdiction to file for a recount of that state. And what about that hack job? While Fitrakis is not looking for Russkies in the computer code, he says, “We’re more concerned with the private companies that control the keys to the kingdom—to match what’s on paper to the official count.”  The “keys” are the little machines, memory cards and other electronic gewgaws that are used to suck the data from the voting machine—which are carried off to another state for tabulation by a private contractor.  Will these tabulations at each step match what the volunteers find in the on-the-ground recount? One problem is that the tabulation software is “proprietary.”  A private company owns the code to the count—and the privateers will fight fiercely, with GOP help, to keep the ballot counting code their commercial secret. Push and Pray Pennsylvania In the end, the single biggest impediment to a full and fair recount is that 70 percent of Pennsylvania voters used what are called, “Push and Pray” voting machines—Direct Recording Electronic touch-screens.  Push the screen next to your choice and pray it gets recorded. Pennsylvania is one of the only states that has yet to require some form of VVPAT (“vee-pat”) or voter-verified paper audit trail that creates an ATM-style receipt. Therefore, the Keystone State recount will have to rely on hopes of access to the code, statistical comparisons to counties that used paper ballots—and prayer. Maybe it IS the Russians The possibility that a Putin pal hacked the machines was championed by University of Michigan computer sciences professor J. Alex Halderman who proposed, “The attackers would probe election offices well in advance in order to find ways to break into their computers…and spread malware into voting machines.” I imagine some squat, middle-pay-scale civil servant in chinos and a pocket protector who works in the Michigan Secretary of State’s office approached, one late overtime night, by some FSB agent in high heels and a slinky dress split halfway up her thigh. The svelte spy would lean against the bureaucrat provocatively and whisper, “My handsome dahling, would you mind sticking this little thumb drive into that big old computer of yours?” Professor Halderman, if you want to help the recount, put down the James Bond novels and pick up some Opti-Scan ballots.  We’ve got a lot of bubbles to read.  End PLEASE, say, "Count me in to count the votes" by supporting the 2016 Stolen Election Investigation for a donation of any size no matter how small or large Stay informed and get a signed DVD of my film The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, a signed copy of the book with the same title or better still - get the Book & DVD combo Be listed as a producer ($1,000) or co-producer ($500) in the credits of the broadcast version of the updated, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy:  THE THEFT OF 2016. * * * * * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie. Donate to the Palast Investigative Fund and get the signed DVD. Download the FREE Movie Comic Book. Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Visit the Palast Investigative Fund store or simply make a tax-deductible contribution to keep our work alive!  Or support the The Palast Investigative Fund (a project of The Sustainable Markets Foundation) by shopping with Amazon Smile. AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Palast Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info. GregPalast.com   The post The No-BS Inside Guide to the Presidential RecountSorry, no Russian hacker hunt appeared first on Greg Palast.30 Nov 16
Exclusive: Jill Stein just called, Green Party filing for recount in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania - by Greg Palast Jill Stein just called to say that I am the first one to be informed that the Green Party is formally petitioning for a recount in 3 states, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Trump’s margin is less than 11,600 in Michigan, 27,200 in Wisconsin and 68,000 in Pennsylvania. If just a few thousand votes are found in Wisconsin and Michigan, Hillary Clinton becomes president by 276 electoral votes verses 264 for Trump. Support the 2016 Stolen Election Investigation Stein told me “We’re filing in Wisconsin Friday because the votes were cast on proven hack-prone machines. This has been a hack-ridden election.” She said that it will be most difficult to recount the machines in Pennsylvania. When asked why the democrats are not bringing this action, Stein told this reporter that “Democrats do not act to protect the vote even when there is dramatic evidence” of tampering. The Green Party told us that Stein will be represented by experienced voting rights attorney’s John Bonifaz, Boston, MA and Robert Fitrakis, Columbus, OH. Stein said, “our voting system is on life support.” The presidential candidate also said, “The Green Party will continue to be the go to advocate for voting rights. That includes fighting vote suppression tactics such as the Interstate Crosscheck system.” Interstate Crosscheck is the program which wrongly purged hundreds of thousand of minority voters in this election, according to the investigation this reporter fro Rolling Stone Magazine. Stein received 50,700 votes in Michigan, five times Trump’s winning plurality, and 30,980 in Wisconsin, more than Trump’s margin. When asked the "Nader" question, "Isn’t it true that your votes in Wisconsin and Michigan, if they went to Clinton, would have blocked Trump?", Stein answered, "Not at all. Our polls showed that 61% of our voters would have simply sat out the election, and one-third of the remaining voters would have voted Trump." The candidate insisted, "We are the ‘un-spoilers.’" Stein said she acted when Clinton turned silent because, "Only candidates may formally demand a re-count and we have standing." * * * * * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie. Donate to the Palast Investigative Fund and get the signed DVD. Download the FREE Movie Comic Book. Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Visit the Palast Investigative Fund store or simply make a tax-deductible contribution to keep our work alive!  Or support the The Palast Investigative Fund (a project of The Sustainable Markets Foundation) by shopping with Amazon Smile. AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Palast Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info. GregPalast.com   The post Exclusive: Jill Stein just called, Green Party filing for recount in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania appeared first on Greg Palast.23 Nov 16
Here’s what we do now A personal note by Greg Palast - Being right never felt so horrid. “This is the story of the theft of the 2016 election. It’s a crime still in progress.” So opens my film, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. And on Election night I waited for the returns to make a fool of me. Instead, the returns made the fool a President. And so, my vacation’s cancelled. My life’s cancelled; that is, a life of anything but sleuthing and exposing the details of the heist of our democracy. What’s at stake? No way around it, this is one frightening moment. Decades of progress created with sweat and determination face destruction.  Within the next six months, we may see the Voting Rights Act repealed—and civil rights set back 50 years; the entirety of our environmental protection laws burnt in a coal pit; police cruelty made our urban policy; the Education Department closed to give billionaires a tax holiday; and a howling anti-Semite as White House Senior Counselor. But the horror we face is countered by this one hard and hopeful fact:  Donald Trump did NOT win this election. Trump not only lost the popular vote by millions — he did not legitimately win the swing states of the Electoral College. Michigan, Florida, North Carolina, Arizona, Ohio:  every one was stolen through sophisticated, and sickeningly racist vote suppression tactics. If you saw my report for Democracy Now! on election morning, it revealed that Ohio GOP officials turned off anti-hacking software on voting machines, forced Black voters to wait hours in line (while whites had no wait). And, crucially, I confirmed that purged tens of thousands of minority voters on fake accusations they’d voted twice.  I first exposed this bogus double-voter blacklist called Crosscheck, in Rolling Stone. It’s the sick excrescence crafted by Kris Kobach, the Trump transition team's maven who also created the Muslim-tracker software he’s bringing to the Trump administration. What can we do now? I have been INUNDATED with requests for my factual reports and findings by media and, most important, the front-line activist groups preparing for the fierce fight to protect our votes. Some examples: Rev. William Barber of the NAACP filed a suit based in North Carolina,  hoping to overturn the Trump "victory" — and protect the tiny margin of the Democrat’s win of the Governor’s mansion.  The NAACP cites my discovery of "Crosscheck" — in which North Carolina removed upwards of 190,000 voters on false charges they voted twice. They now need my facts. Congressmen Keith Ellison and Alcee Hastings of the Congressional Black Caucus, personally presented Attorney General Loretta Lynch with my investigative reports and demanded investigation — "and indictments."  That investigation must kick off immediately. They now need my facts. The Asian-American civil rights group 18 Million Rising has gathered 50,000 signatures to push the Justice Department to investigate my evidence of a massive attack on the Asian-American vote. They now need my facts. In Michigan, the ACLU is ready to take action on the purge scheme I uncovered, "Crosscheck," that wrongly gave the state to Trump. In Ohio, voting rights attorney Robert Fitrakis is going into court with evidence, much that I uncovered, of racist voting games — from 5-hour-long lines in Black precincts to shutting off ballot security measures on the voting machines. The team need my facts. I expect to be in Washington at the Justice Dept and meeting with civil rights groups in December before the Electoral College meets. Information—plus film, video, investigative reports And beyond the voluminous files and confidential documents my team has uncovered that is sought by activists, we are deluged with requests for our film, videos, writings and more. And now we have US networks, even major comedy shows, asking for our material and, of course, new investigative findings. Information and facts make a difference With our investigative reports, with our hard and unassailable evidence, we can challenge the legitimacy of the Trump "election."  Most important, we must begin the difficult but necessary work of protecting and restoring voting rights.  The 2018 Election — and the threat of more stolen elections — is upon us. What we need to keep going...  Your extraordinary support and faith in our work funded my film The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, which is now more relevant than ever and being seen by ever more audiences. Now we need your financial support again to keep this fight going. We just did not budget for the GOP's in-your-face steal of the Congress and White House.  All our resources went into raising the alarm before the election. So, now, I have to re-hire the staff, hit the road again. Ohio, North Carolina, Washington DC and who knows where, retain attorneys—and retain our team of technicians from cameramen to outreach organizers. Can this new work be done? Is there any choice? Honestly and personally, I was hoping for some rest and time off. But a lifetime of your work and mine is now in the balance. ● PLEASE, say, "Count me in to count the votes" by supporting the 2016 Stolen Election Investigation for a donation of any size no matter how small or large ● Be listed as a producer ($1,000) or co-producer ($500) in the credits of the broadcast version of my film The Best Democracy Money Can Buy ● Stay informed and get a signed DVD of my film The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, a signed copy of the book with the same title or better still - get the Book & DVD combo. And does an angel have the $8K needed for our Washington work and filming?  If so, flap your wings. I can't thank you enough for all the years of support. Alas... our work is not done. Greg Palast and the Palast Investigations Team * * * * * Greg Palast (Rolling Stone, Guardian, BBC) is the author of The New York Times bestsellers, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Billionaires & Ballot Bandits, now out as major motion non-fiction movie. Donate to the Palast Investigative Fund and get the signed DVD. Download the FREE Movie Comic Book. Rent or buy the film from Amazon or Vimeo. Visit the Palast Investigative Fund store or simply make a tax-deductible contribution to keep our work alive!  Or support the The Palast Investigative Fund (a project of The Sustainable Markets Foundation) by shopping with Amazon Smile. AmazonSmile will donate 0.5% of your purchases to the Palast Fund and you get a tax-deduction! More info. GregPalast.com   The post Here’s what we do now A personal note by Greg Palast appeared first on Greg Palast.20 Nov 16
Ethnic Votes Stolen in Crucial States Help Fix US Election For Trump Reveals Greg Palast - By Ben Gelblum | The London Economic Throughout the US election campaign one of The Donald’s main refrains was “this election is rigged.” Turns out this particular Trump election rallying cry wasn’t a lie… Well, not entirely. Veteran election investigator Greg Palast has uncovered the sickening truth. I spoke to Palast about evidence of widespread systemic election rigging, robbing black, hispanic and asian American voters of their right to vote in crucial states. – Enough votes to swing the election away from the Hillary Clinton victory predicted in polls – explaining suspicious exit polls inconsistencies – and towards a shock result for Trump and Republican victory in the Senate. “Before a single vote was even cast, the election was already fixed by Trump operatives,” explains Palast. “This country is violently divided. There simply aren’t enough white guys to elect Trump nor a Republican Senate. The only way they could win was to eliminate the votes of non-white guys—and they did so by tossing black provisional ballots into the dumpster, new strict voter ID laws that saw students and low income voters turned away—the list goes on.” Palast has spent the past decade and a half investigating and identifying several techniques used to suppress ethnic minority and young votes – the voters that statistically vote Democrat. And this is surely the biggest and most unreported scandal of the most bizarre election any of us can recall. According to The Guardian, Palast is the “most important investigative reporter of our time – up there with Woodward and Bernstein.” The fast-talking fedora-topped reporter has investigated election irregularities for publications such as The Guardian, Rolling Stone, and BBC’s Newsnight, ever since the controversial Bush v Gore election in 2000. The 2000 election was too close to call without Florida, where votes were counted and recounted for weeks before George W Bush won the state by a margin of just 537 votes out of almost 6 million, and as a result the presidency. Palast uncovered the purge of 56,000 black voters in Florida – wrongly deleted from voter rolls as ex-felons. Now Palast’s investigative team are certain that vote suppression techniques were instrumental in last week’s Republican presidential and Senate victory. “For years I have been following the American election process which is nothing like in England,” says Palast. “Election manipulation is a very big factor in US elections. I found we had a massive problem in Florida in 2000, similarly in 2004 in Ohio with tens of thousands of invalidated votes. And now we are back at it again.” So why were Trump and his acolytes constantly drawing attention to vote rigging during the campaign? Trump was constantly banging on about debunked claims of large scale voter fraud, urging supporters to volunteer to monitor the polls, and creating an atmosphere where hysteria and conspiracy theories abounded. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, talked about busloads of people voting numerous times in some big cities. He also quipped that “dead people generally vote for Democrats, rather than Republicans.” Yet truly, you are more likely to be struck by lightning in the next year (a one in 1,042,000 chance, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) than to find a case of voter fraud by impersonation (31 in over a billion ballots cast from 2000 to 2014, according to Loyola law school’s research). Trump allies often cited the fact that Mitt Romney failed to win a single vote in 59 out of 1,687 Philadelphia precincts that happened to be almost entirely black. But with their demographic make up it’s no surprise why and investigations by Philadelphia’s Republican Party and the Philadelphia Inquirer found nothing untoward. Nationwide, 93% of black voters voted for Barack Obama that year. In 2012, an Arizona State University study concluded: “while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal, and in-person voter impersonation on Election Day, which prompted 37 state legislatures to enact or consider tough voter ID laws, is virtually non-existent.” Yet despite the lack of evidence or convictions for the crime of multiple voting, certain Republican figures devised draconian systems to prevent it, which have also served to deny electorally significant sections of the population of their right to vote. – Disproportionately ethnic votes, which are way more likely to be Democrats. And now the election is over, according to Palast, Trump’s increasing hysteria about vote rigging served as the ultimate smokescreen for a systematic denial of hundreds of thousands of crucial votes in the name of preventing fraud. – A ‘bigly’ enough scam to win Trump the Whitehouse. Palast started investigating Donald Trump’s increasingly hysterical claims that the election was rigged by people voting many times for Rolling Stone Magazine, and made some shocking discoveries in his report last August: The GOP’s Stealth War Against Voters. As a response to constant paranoia about voter fraud, 30 mainly Republican states have adopted a system called the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program (Crosscheck), according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. This system was devised in 2005 by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, better known as the anti-immigration fanatic responsible for Trump’s idea of building a wall on the US / Mexico border and getting Mexico to pay for it. Kobach, like Trump, has given lip service to conspiracy theories, especially ones that bolster fears of the growing influence of racial and ethnic minorities in the U.S. And now, interestingly he has been rewarded by Trump with a job on his Transition Team as adviser on immigration. Kobach convinced other states, including crucial swing states such as Michigan and North Carolina, to share their voter lists to look for the same name potentially registered to vote in more than one state. Crosscheck supposedly matches first, middle and last name, plus birth date, and provides the last four digits of a Social Security number for additional verification. Seems like a sensible method to stop people voting more than once in separate states. Only it soon became clear that Crosschecking was neither accurate nor fair and was not being used as it should. Some states including Florida dropped out of the program due to doubts about the reliability of its data — though others joined despite them. Palast’s team discovered Crosscheck had amassed a list of 7.2 million voters accused of being potential double voters.  Yet despite such an enormous list of suspects, there has only been four arrests. “It is a crime to deliberately register to vote twice,” says Palast. “You go to jail for five years. And to organise double voting on a significant scale is practically impossible. They are basically arresting no one – about four arrests out of a list which identified around seven million potential double voters, and I doubt these arrests are even due to the list.” Palast’s team managed (legally) to get hold of over 2 million names identified as potential double voters and soon began to spot obvious mistakes. The failsafes of National Insurance number and date of birth meant to make the system foolproof were not attached and appeared to have been ignored. “The most common name in the world is Mohamed Mohamed,” explains Palast, scanning through the list of names, “so for example under this Trump hit list, Mohamed Said Mohamed is supposed to be the same voter as Mohamed Osman Mohamed – in fact about one out of four middle names don’t match and Jr and Sr don’t match – so for example with James Brown a very common black name – they are matching James Brown Sr to James Brown Jr and saying it’s the same voter and then the middle names don’t even match.” U.S. Census data shows that minorities are overrepresented in 85 of 100 of the most common last names. “If your name is Washington, there’s an 89 percent chance you’re African-American,” says Palast. “If your last name is Hernandez, there’s a 94 percent chance you’re Hispanic.” This inherent bias results in an astonishing one in six Hispanics, one in seven Asian-Americans and one in nine African-Americans in Crosscheck states landing on what Palast dubs “Trump’s hit list.”  Potential double registrants were sent a postcard and asked to verify their address by mailing it back. “The junk mail experts we spoke to said this postcard is meant not to be returned. It’s inscrutable small print, doesn’t mean anything. It doesn’t even say you’re accused of voting twice. It just says, please confirm your voting address,” explains Palast, “and most people of colour, poor voters don’t respond to this sort of mailing and they know that.” According to the Census Bureau, white voters are 21 percent more likely than blacks or Hispanics to respond to official requests; homeowners are 32 percent more likely to respond than renters; and the young are 74 percent less likely than the old to respond. Those on the move – students and the poor, who often shift apartments while hunting for work – might not get the mail in the first place. So if a few older white people, more likely to vote Republican were caught up in the mainly ethnic hit list, they were more likely to return the card and retain their right to vote. If you do not reply to the missive, state officials have discretion over what to do next, and the process varies from state to state. What Palast’s investigation made clear is ethnic voters were disproportionately likely to be targeted and purged from voter lists. All this despite other states choosing a more reliable system to prevent double voting: the Electronic Registration Information Center, (ERIC) – adopted by 20 member states plus the District of Columbia, according to its website. A 2013 report found ERIC actually boosted voter registration and turnout and eliminated errors in voter files. Palast’s investigators calculated 1.1 million people, many spread over crucial swing states were deprived of their right to vote last Tuesday.  According to the exit polls last Tuesday, 88% of black voters voted for Hillary Clinton, as well as  65% of hispanic and asian American voters. “The list is loaded overwhelmingly with voters of colour and the poor,” says Palast. “Many didn’t discover that their vote was stolen until they turned up last Tuesday and found their name missing. In the US they are given something called a provisional ballot, but if your name is not on the voter roll, you can fill out all the provisional votes you like they’re not going to count your vote. – They can’t even if you’re wrongly removed. “Trump’s victory margin in Michigan was 13,107 and the Michigan Crosscheck purge list was 449,922. Trump’s victory margin in Arizona- 85,257, Arizona Crosscheck purge list- 270,824;. Trump’s victory margin in North Carolina was 177,008 and the North Carolina Crosscheck purge list had 589,393 people on it.” Crosscheck was by no means the only method that came to light to disenfranchise voters more likely to vote Democrat. Palast also cites statistics on vote spoilage – “In the UK, glitches, spoiled or empty ballots are random,  but here, the US Civil Rights Commission found in Florida you are 900% more likely to lose your vote to spoilage if you are black than if you are white.” Statistician Philip Clinker author of the study, has said that this is typical nationwide, and according to Palast, if anything, the situation has got worse since the 2000 study. In 2013, the Supreme Court overturned part of the Voting Rights Act enacted in 1965 at the heart of the Civil Right Movement to prohibit racial discrimination in voting. This allowed all kinds of shenanigans in the lead up to last week that previously could have been challenged by the Department of Justice. In North Carolina, for example, Republicans even bragged: “African American Early Voting is Down.” – This after a federal court federal court found their voting restrictions “target African-Americans with almost surgical precision.” States, particularly those controlled by Republicans, made several changes this year, such as stricter voter ID laws and restricting polling booths, to make voting harder in a way that targeted generally Democrat-voting ethnic minority voters. There were reports of ridiculously long queues. As this is not the first election this has happened in, it appears to be a deliberate tactic. Harvard’s Stephen Pettigrew who studies polling lines found that ethnic minority voters were six times more likely to have to stand in line for over an hour. And losing out on work from disproportionately long queues costs people in ethnic minority areas proportionately more in lost income, which also puts them off voting next time. Pettigrew estimated that 200,000 people did not vote in 2014 because of queues encountered in 2012. “Election day was marred by long lines due to cuts in early voting and 868 fewer polling places,” adds Palast, “to say nothing of the untold millions who were unable to vote due to restrictive voter ID and felon disenfranchisement laws.” During the election last week, Palast also made a shocking discovery about voting machines in Ohio – one of the states in which he found many black voters were disenfranchised by a mixture of the Crosscheck and other systems, and exit polls differed markedly from the counted votes. “In the state of Ohio they have fancy new machines which can record an image of your vote and an anti-hacking function. They were turned off,” explains Palast. “I went to court with Bob Fitrakis a law professor in Ohio to have this overturned. I went into the judge’s chamber, and there the Republicans did not deny that it was turned off but they said to turn it back on would create havoc. – This after the FBI had issued a warning that they feared the machines would be hacked. “If you get such a warning, why would you turn off the anti-hacking mechanism? All this means we will never know if the machines were hacked and how many votes were lost if there was a challenge as there was no image of the vote recorded.” Greg Palast’s documentary and book The Best Democracy Money Can Buy  further details his warnings about voter suppression techniques we haven’t even mentioned in this article. “I stuck my neck out last year, saying they would steal this election, and I really hoped I would be left looking like an idiot.  “Turns out I was right though,” he adds. “The problem with the electoral college is a few thousand votes in tiny states can flip an election.” – An election President Elect Donald J Trump won despite still trailing nationwide in the popular vote. – A problem Donald Trump railed about too in the past, calling it “a disaster for democracy.” Civil rights organisation NAACP, which nine times managed to see off voter suppression of hundreds of thousands of votes in the federal courts over the past few months, is now mounting a legal battle to reinstate fully the Voter Registration Act. Palast and his team are certain that the chicanery they and others uncovered more than explains the difference between the outcome polls predicted and the result of the presidential and senate elections – especially when it comes to the exit polls taken as people had just voted. “Crosscheck does not account for all the shoplifting, but if you put it together with the other nine methods to steal votes that I identified, there’s little question that the exit polls were correct and Hillary Clinton won, or at least more voters voted for her in the swing states. Obviously she won the popular vote, but we have an electoral college system. If they counted all the votes in all the swing states the traditionally highly accurate exit polls would have been accurate,” adds Palast. Electoral Integrity blogger Theodore de Macedo Soares drew attention to the bizarre discrepancy between computer counted official vote counts and exit polls last week, writing: “According to the exit polls conducted by Edison Research, Clinton won four key battleground states (NC, PA, WI, and FL) in the 2016 Presidential Election that she went on to lose in the computerized vote counts.  With these states Clinton wins the Electoral College with a count of 302 versus 205 for Trump.  Clinton also won the national exit poll by 3.2% and holds a narrow lead in the national vote count still in progress. Exit polls were conducted in 28 states. In 23 states the discrepancies between the exit polls and the vote count favored Trump. In 13 of these states the discrepancies favoring Trump exceeded the margin of error of the state.” Palast believes such discrepancies, some far greater than any acceptable margin of error are indicative of systematic electoral rigging to steal Democrat votes: “The bane of pre-election polling is that pollsters must adjust for the likelihood of a person voting.  Exit polls solve the problem. The US State Department uses exit polling to determine whether you accept the outcome of a foreign election. The Brexit exit polls were extremely accurate. Yet in the Ukraine the US does not accept the result of the 2004 election because of the exit poll mismatch with the final official count. “And here for example in North Carolina we have the exit poll raw data at 2.1% favouring victory by Clinton, yet she loses by 3.8% in the final count. In Pennsylvania 4.4% victory suddenly became a 1.2 % loss; Wisconsin: 3.9% victory becomes a 1% loss; Florida: 1.1% victory becomes a 1% loss. “In the swing States we have this massive red shift because when people come out of the votes, exit pollsters can only ask, “How did you vote?” What they don’t ask, and can’t, is, “Was your vote counted?”” Kris Kobach did not give us a comment, but a statement from Kris Kobach’s office on the Crosscheck program said the Crosscheck program had been used for over a decade, and insisted “merely appearing as a potential match does not subject a voter to removal from a participating states’ voter registration roll/record.  Ineligible and/or unqualified persons who are registered voters are only removed from a states’ voter registration roll/record if the person is subject to removal pursuant to applicable state and federal elections provisions.”           The post Ethnic Votes Stolen in Crucial States Help Fix US Election For Trump Reveals Greg Palast appeared first on Greg Palast.15 Nov 16

Public Intelligence » Feed

(U//FOUO) DHS-FBI Intelligence Assessment: Baseline Comparison of US and Foreign Anarchist Extremist Movements - (U//FOUO) This joint DHS and FBI Assessment examines the possible reasons why anarchist extremist attacks in certain countries abroad and in the United States differ in the frequency of incidents and degree of lethality employed in order to determine ways US anarchist extremists actions might become more lethal in the future. This Assessment is intended to establish a baseline comparison of the US and foreign anarchist extremist movements and create new lines of research; follow-on assessments will update the findings identified in the paper, to include the breadth of data after the end of the reporting period (as warranted by new information), and identify new areas for DHS and FBI collaboration on the topic. This Assessment is also produced in anticipation of a heightened threat of anarchist extremist violence in 2016 related to the upcoming Democratic and Republican National Conventions—events historically associated with violence from the movement. By comparing violence in the United States with Greece, Italy, and Mexico—countries historically exhibiting anarchist extremist violence targeting persons—from January 2010–July 2014, we identified factors that could explain differences in targeting and tactics by selected foreign anarchist extremists and United States. The study examines 110 anarchist extremist incidents occurring within the United States and these selected foreign countries. Only those incidents determined to be violent (i.e., involving threats of bodily harm) were included in the dataset. Our ability to analyze relevant details of attacks depended heavily on the quality of sourcing for these incidents—which almost solely derived from the media. Additionally, although US anarchist extremist attacks noted in this study occurred in multiple states, the majority of incidents occurred in the Pacific Northwest region. (U//FOUO) This Assessment was produced to assist federal, state, local, and tribal government agencies and private sector infrastructure and security officers in the deterrence, prevention, preemption of, or response to terrorist attacks against the United States conducted by anarchist extremists. Some of the activities described in the study may involve activities that are, by themselves, lawful or constitutionally protected, and the study’s findings should be considered within the existing framework of laws, regulations, and operating procedures that govern a particular enforcement entity. Additionally, conduct deemed potentially suspicious and indicative of terrorist activity should be taken in conjunction with other indicators and possible preoperational activity. (U) Key Judgments (U//FOUO) Our examination of anarchist extremist violence in the United States and in Greece, Italy, and Mexico revealed several prominent features that may inform strategies to counter domestic terrorism: » (U//FOUO) DHS and FBI assess the primary factor explaining the difference in targets between foreign and US anarchist extremists is foreign anarchist extremists’ focus on specific economic and governance issues relative to their geographic area, while US anarchist extremists tend to focus on symbols of capitalism. We assess the likely primary factor explaining foreign anarchist extremists’ greater willingness to use more violent tactics than their US counterparts is that these foreign anarchist extremist movements are often more organized—allowing for more complex attacks—and have a well-established tradition of lethal violence not currently seen in the United States. » (U//FOUO) The vast majority of US anarchist extremist attacks targeted property likely due to the location’s accessibility and as a symbol of capitalism and globalization. Most foreign anarchist extremist attacks targeted persons likely because of the cohesiveness of the movement and greater emphasis on issues that can be blamed on local, individual targets. US anarchist extremists targeted the banking/finance sector most often, as these perceived soft targets of capitalism are possible to attack with tactics that are non-lethal yet cause significant economic damage and pose significant public safety risks. Foreign anarchist extremists most often targeted government entities, likely due to the emphasis placed on local domestic issues by foreign anarchist extremists and their capabilities to commit attacks against hardened targets. » (U//FOUO) Arson was the most common violent tactic used by US anarchist extremists—approximately 70 percent (19 of 27) of attacks—while foreign anarchist extremists used arson in only a third of their attacks. US anarchist extremists likely use this tactic based on their intention to cause economic and property damage, which can be accomplished by arson with relatively limited resources and specialized skills. Unlike US anarchist extremists, foreign anarchist extremists frequently used explosives, likely due to their capability to develop more advanced explosive devices as a result of their more organized structure, having a history of using such tactics, and because their targets are hardened. … (U) Social Justice (U//FOUO) Social justice issues––specifically opposition to gentrification and opposition to perceived racism and fascism––were the second most common driver of violence for US anarchist extremists, as they accounted for 26 percent (7 of 27) of attacks. Social justice issues accounted for 12 percent of violent foreign anarchist extremist attacks, although these incidents occurred only in Greece and were all against perceived fascism. Although social justice issues can motivate anarchist extremists to violence, they are often a driver for violence if a social justice issue occurs within a location that also has an anarchist extremist presence. (U//FOUO) Social justice issues often result in legal protest activities, and historically, in both the United States and abroad, anarchist extremists have been known to co-opt legal protests as a cover to commit violence against their targets. However, a review of data in this study indicated in the seven social-justice motivated violent incidents committed by US anarchist extremists, only one of those incidents exploited otherwise legal protest activity. The reasons for this finding are currently a reporting gap. … (U//FOUO) Signposts of Change—How US Anarchist Extremists Could Become More Lethal (U//FOUO) We assess the following future occurrences could potentially lead US anarchist extremists to adopt more violent tactics: » (U//FOUO) Fascist, nationalist, racist, or anti-immigrant parties obtain greater prominence or local political power in the United States, leading to anti-racist violent backlash from anarchist extremists. » (U//FOUO) A charismatic leader emerges among US anarchist extremists advocating criminal activity and unifies the movement, possibly increasing motivation to commit violence. » (U//FOUO) Incendiary or explosive devices constructed by anarchist extremist(s) become more sophisticated. » (U//FOUO) Anarchist extremist(s) retaliate violently to a violent act by a white supremacist extremist or group. » (U//FOUO) Anarchist extremist(s) retaliate to a perceived act of violence or lethal action by law enforcement during routine duties, creating a martyr for the movement. » (U//FOUO) Anarchist extremist(s) with financial means travel abroad where they learn and acquire more violent tactics and return to teach others and/or conduct actions on their own. » (U//FOUO) Anarchist extremists acquire or arm themselves with legal and/or illegal weapons. » (U//FOUO) Multinational corporation or bank becomes involved in public scandal, leading to focused targeting campaign by US anarchist extremists against the entity. » (U//FOUO) A successful US or foreign anarchist extremist event disruption such as at the 1999 Seattle WTO riots motivates copycat and/or follow-on actions domestically. » (U//FOUO) A foreign intelligence service attempts to foment US unrest by facilitating anarchist extremist violence domestically. … 4 Feb
(U//FOUO) U.S. Army FM 2-22.2 Counterintelligence - This manual provides doctrinal guidance, techniques, and procedures for the employment of counterintelligence (CI) special agents in the Army. It outlines— • CI investigations and operations. • The CI special agent’s role within the intelligence warfighting function. • The importance of aggressively countering foreign intelligence and security services (FISS) and international terrorist organizations (ITO). • The roles and responsibilities of those providing command, control, and technical support to CI investigations and operations. • The need for effective dissemination of CI reports and products and the importance of cross-cueing other intelligence disciplines. • The significance of cultural awareness as a consideration to counter the foreign intelligence threat. This manual expands upon the information in FM 2-0 and supersedes FM 34-60. It is consistent with doctrine in FM 3-0, FM 5-0, FM 100-15, and JP 2-0. When published, FM 2-22.2 will provide further information on CI activities when Army forces are employed in tactical operations. … ARMY COUNTERINTELLIGENCE 1-1. CI focuses on negating, mitigating, or degrading the foreign intelligence and security services (FISS) and international terrorist organizations (ITO) collection threat that targets Army interests through the conduct of investigations, operations, collection, analysis, production, and technical services and support. 1-2. CI analyzes the threats posed by FISS and the intelligence activities of nonstate actors such as organized crime, terrorist groups, and drug traffickers. CI analysis incorporates all-source information and the results of CI investigations and operations to support a multidiscipline analysis of the force protection threat. COUNTERINTELLIGENCE SPECIAL AGENT 1-3. The CI special agent has the distinct mission of detecting, identifying, countering, and neutralizing FISS and ITO threats directed towards the Army through the execution of all CI functions. CI special agents should not be confused with human intelligence (HUMINT) collectors, military occupational specialty (MOS) 35M, and warrant officer (WO) area of concentration (AOC) 351M. They are specifically trained and certified for, tasked with, and engage in the collection of information from individuals (HUMINT sources) for the purpose of answering HUMINT-specific requirements. Although CI and HUMINT personnel may use similar methods, their missions are separate and distinct. Commanders should not use them interchangeably. Using CI personnel for HUMINT missions degrades the Army’s ability to protect its forces, information, and critical technology that provides the Army operational and technological superiority over existing and future adversaries. … COUNTERINTELLIGENCE MISSION 1-17. The mission of Army CI is to conduct aggressive, comprehensive, and coordinated operations, investigations, collection, analysis and production, and technical services. This CI mission is conducted worldwide to detect, identify, assess, counter, exploit, or neutralize the FISS and ITO collection threat to the Army and DOD to protect the lives, property, or security of Army forces. Army CI has four primary mission areas: • Counterespionage (CE). • Support to protection. • Support to research and technology protection (RTP). • Cyber CI. COUNTERESPIONAGE 1-18. CE detects, identifies, counters, exploits, or neutralizes the FISS and ITO collection threat targeting Army and DOD equities or U.S. interests. CE programs use both investigations and collection operations to conduct long-term operations to undermine, mitigate, or negate the ability of FISS and ITO to collect effectively on Army equities. CE programs also affect the adversarial visualization and decisionmaking concerning the plans, intentions, and capabilities of U.S. policy, goals, and objectives. The goal of CE is to— • Limit the adversary’s knowledge of U.S. forces, plans, intentions, and capabilities through information denial. • Limit the adversary’s ability to target effectively U.S. forces by disrupting their collection capability. COUNTERINTELLIGENCE SUPPORT TO PROTECTION 1-19. CI support to protection ensures the survivability and mission accomplishment of Army and DOD forces. 1-20. CI’s objective in supporting protection is to— • Limit the compromise and exploitation of personnel, facilities, operations, command and control (C2), and operational execution of U.S. forces. • Negate, mitigate, or degrade adversarial planning and targeting of U.S. forces for exploitation or attack. • Support the war on terrorism. SUPPORT TO RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION 1-21. Support to RTP is focused on preventing the illegal diversion or loss of critical technology essential to the strategic advantage of the U.S. 1-22. CI’s objective in supporting RTP is to— • Protect critical technology information from adversarial countermeasures development. • Ensure U.S. technological overmatch against existing and future adversaries. CYBER COUNTERINTELLIGENCE 1-23. Cyber CI protects information networks and provides an offensive exploitation capability against adversarial networks to ensure information superiority of U.S. forces. 1-24. CI’s objective in conducting cyber CI activities is to— • Maintain U.S. forces information dominance and superiority over existing and future adversaries. • Protect critical information networks from adversarial attack or exploitation. • Undermine adversarial information operations, systems, and networks. … COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION OBJECTIVES 2-4. CI investigations are essential to counter threat collection efforts targeting Army equities. CI places emphasis on investigative activity to support force and technology protection, homeland defense, information assurance, and security programs. CI investigations focus on resolving allegations of known or suspected acts that may constitute national security crimes under U.S. law or the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). 2-5. The initial objective of CI investigations is to identify people, organizations, and other entities engaging in national security crimes and to determine the full nature and extent of damage to national security. The intent is to develop information of sufficient value to permit its use in the appropriate civil or military court. However, investigations should not be limited to the production of evidence. Investigative reports should include all relevant information as it pertains to the person or incident involved in the investigation. CI investigations are conducted to— • Identify people, organizations, and other entities engaging in national security crimes that impact Army equities. • Determine the full nature of national security crimes within the authority and jurisdiction of Army CI. • Prove or disprove allegations or indications that person or persons are engaged in national security crimes or incidents of CI interest. • Prevent the loss, control, or compromise of sensitive or classified defense information and technology. • Protect the security of Army personnel, information, operations, installations, and technology. • Acquire and preserve evidence used to support exploitation, prosecution, or any other legal proceedings or punitive measures resulting from CI investigations. • Detect and identify terrorist activities that may present a threat to Army, DOD, and national security. 2-6. CI investigations must conform to applicable U.S. laws and DOD and DA regulations. CI special agents must report information accurately and completely. They maintain files and records to allow transfer of an investigation without loss of control or efficiency. Coordination with other CI or law enforcement organizations ensures that investigations are conducted as rapidly as possible. It also reduces duplication and assists in resolving conflicts when jurisdictional lines are unclear or overlap. CI investigative activity must be discreet, ensuring the rights and privacy of individuals involved, as well as the preservation of all investigative prerogatives. This is required to protect the rights of individuals and to preserve the security of investigative techniques. 2-7. CI special agents need to have a thorough understanding of all investigative techniques and planning, approval processes, and legal requirements before requesting and initiating any type of CI investigative activity. A lack of understanding in any one of these areas may potentially invalidate any investigation from a prosecutorial standard and may jeopardize the ability to exploit a threat to the United States. … PRIMARY AUTHORITY 2-12. Army CI has investigative primacy for the national security crimes and incidents of CI interest listed below when they are committed by persons identified as subjects. If either the subject, potential subject, incident, or crime falls outside Army CI jurisdiction, Army CI may still retain joint investigative responsibilities. • Sedition. • Aiding the enemy by providing intelligence to the enemy. • Spying. • Espionage. • Subversion. • Treason. • Terrorism activities or materiel support to a known or suspected terrorist organization or person (DCS G-2, G-2 Memorandum (S//NF), 24 August 2005). • Incidents of CI interest. … INCIDENTS OF COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INTEREST 2-17. The following is not an all-inclusive list of incidents of CI interest: • The activities of ITO or material support to an ITO or person. Terrorist organizations are specified in DCS, G-2 Memorandum (S//NF), dated 13 February 2007, Operational Planning List (OPL) 2005 (U), as revised. • Unreported contact with foreign government personnel, persons or groups involved in foreign terrorism or intelligence, or unauthorized requests for classified or sensitive unclassified information. • Unauthorized disclosure of classified information or material. Not all incidents in this category may meet the threshold for a CI investigation. However, those that do will often include other indicators of espionage that are identified associated with the incident or when there are acts which are known methods of operations of FISS and ITO entities. Investigations are conducted to ascertain those entities involvement. CI special agents may also act to secure classified material and to determine if the actions of the subject were an act of omission or commission. The command requirements to report compromises or conduct inquiries as specified in AR 380-5, chapter VI, may also apply to these incidents. • Matters developed as a result of counterintelligence scope polygraph (CSP) examination as specified in AR 381-20. • Military personnel or DAC employees who perform unofficial travel to those countries designated in the operational planning list, who have unauthorized contact with official representatives of foreign countries, or who contact or visit foreign diplomatic facilities without authorization. • Attempts by authorized users of information systems to gain unauthorized access. • Known, suspected or attempted intrusions into classified or unclassified information systems when there is reasonable suspicion of foreign involvement or it has not been ruled out. • Unauthorized removal of classified material or possession of classified material in unauthorized locations. • Special category absentees (SCAs), which include those absent without leave (AWOL), deserters defectors, and military absentees who have had access to TS, SCI, SAP information, or TS cryptographic access or an assignment to a special mission unit within the year preceding the absence. CI special agents will conduct investigations of the circumstances surrounding the absences of SCA personnel using the guidelines presented in this manual. • Army military, civilian, or overseas contractor personnel declared AWOL and deserters who had access within the preceding year to TS, SCI, critical military technology as defined in AR 381-20, chapter 7, SAPs; personnel who were assigned to a special mission unit; personnel in the DA Cryptographic Access Program (DACAP); and personnel with access to critical nuclear weapons design technology. • Army military, civilian, or overseas contractor personnel who go absent without authority, AWOL, or deserters who do not have assignments or access; however, there are indications of FISS and ITO contact or involvement in their absence. • DA military and civilian personnel who defect and those persons who are absent without authorization and travel to or through a foreign country other than the one in which they were stationed or assigned. • DA military and civilian personnel detained or captured by a government, group, or adversary with interests inimical to those of the United States. Such personnel will be debriefed upon return to U.S. control. • Attempted or actual suicide or suspicious death of a DA member if they have an intelligence background, were assigned to an SMU, or had access to classified information within the year preceding the incident, or where there are indications of FISS and ITO involvement. • Suspected or actual unauthorized acquisition or illegal diversion of military critical technology, research and development information, or information concerning an Army acquisition program. If required, Army CI will ensure all appropriate military and civilian intelligence and LEAs are notified. Army CI will also ensure Army equities are articulated and either monitor the status of the agency with primary jurisdiction or coordinate for joint investigative authority. • Impersonation of intelligence personnel or unlawful possession or use of Army intelligence identification, such as badge and credentials. • Communications security (COMSEC) insecurities, except those which are administrative in nature. (See AR 380-40, chapter 7.) • Suspected electronic intrusions or eavesdropping devices in secure areas which could be used for technical surveillance. DA personnel discovering such a device will not disturb it or discuss the discovery in the area where the device is located. • Willful compromise of clandestine intelligence personnel and CI activities. … DECEPTION IDENTIFICATION AND DETECTION (BIOMETRICS) 6-38. Biometrics as a characteristic is a measurable biological and behavioral characteristic that can be used for automated recognition. Biometrics as a process is an automated method of recognizing a person based on a physiological or behavioral characteristic. Among the features measured are face, fingerprints, hand geometry, handwriting, iris, retinal, vein, and voice. Biometric technologies are becoming the foundation of an extensive array of highly secure identification and personal verification solutions. As the level of security breaches and transaction fraud increases, the need for highly secure identification and personal verification technologies is becoming apparent. 6-39. Identification specific mission areas that CI detection and identification processes and technologies support include, but are not limited to, the following: • Countering foreign intelligence through the detection, identification, and neutralization of espionage activities. • Support to military readiness and conduct of military operations through protection, including— • Surveillance of air, land, or sea areas adjacent to deployed U.S. forces, sufficient to provide maximum warning of impending attack. • Indication of hostile intelligence penetration or attempts at penetration. • Support to law enforcement efforts to suppress CT. • Identification and affiliation of terrorist groups. • Assessment of group capabilities, including strengths and weaknesses. • Locations of terrorist training camps or bases of operations. • Weapons and technologies associated with identified terrorist elements. … COMPUTER FORENSICS 6-43. Computer forensics is conducted to— • Discover and recover evidence related to espionage, terrorism, or subversion against the Army. • Develop CI investigative leads. • Collect and report intelligence. • Support exploitation efforts. 6-44. Processing and examining digital media evidence is a tedious and time-consuming process which requires specialized training and equipment. Failure to properly process and examine digital media evidence could corrupt the evidence or yield the evidence inadmissible during future legal proceedings. Due to the complexities of cyber investigations, computer forensics support to CI investigations will only be conducted by specially trained and qualified personnel assigned to cyber CI elements in each theater. 6-45. Requests for computer forensic support will be made through the appropriate ATCICA. Requests for assistance will include detailed descriptions of the digital media evidence to be seized and examined and will be germane to the approved CI investigative objectives. 6-46. Every CI special agent is responsible for identifying the need for computer forensics support to their investigations. Computer forensics examinations involve a methodical process which, depending on the size and complexity of the digital media evidence, may take a significant amount of time to complete. Computer forensic operations cannot be rushed and therefore investigative time lines may need to be adjusted to accommodate the time required to complete the support. If a CI special agent is in doubt about the capabilities of, or when to leverage, cyber CI units, the agent should contact his ATCICA for guidance. … COUNTERINTELLIGENCE NETWORK INTRUSION INVESTIGATIONS 7-10. CI network intrusion investigations involve collecting, processing, and analyzing evidence related to adversarial penetrations of Army information systems. These specialized CI investigations are generally conducted independently of other traditional CI investigations. However, given the jurisdictional issues which involve the Internet, network intrusion investigations may require coordination with other U.S. and foreign government intelligence and law enforcement entities. 7-11. Threats to Army information systems can range from exploitation of vulnerabilities in information systems which allow adversaries to penetrate Army computers and collect critical information, to trusted insiders who either willingly or unwittingly enable adversarial forces to exploit these critical infrastructure resources. Any adversary with the motive, means, opportunity, and intent to do harm poses a potential threat. Threats to Army information resources may include disruption, denial degradation, ex-filtration, destruction, corruption, exploitation, or unauthorized access to computer networks and information systems and data. Cyber CI units are uniquely qualified to investigate and counter these threats. 7-12. All CI network intrusion investigations will be coordinated, to the extent necessary, with the USACIDC, specifically the Cyber Criminal Investigations Unit (CCIU). This coordination is necessary to ensure that investigative activities are not duplicated and that each organization does not impede or disrupt each other’s investigative or prosecutorial options. 7-13. A CI network intrusion investigation may be initiated under, but not necessarily be limited to, the following circumstances: • Known, suspected, or attempted intrusions into classified or unclassified information systems by unauthorized persons. • Incidents which involve intrusions into systems containing or processing data on critical military technologies, export controlled technology, or other weapons systems related RDT&E data. • Intrusions which replicate methods associated with foreign intelligence or adversary collection or which involve targeting that parallels known foreign intelligence or adversary collection requirements. 7-14. The purpose for conducting a CI network intrusion investigation will be to— • Fully identify the FISS and ITO entity involved. • Determine the FISS and ITO objectives. • Determine the FISS and ITO tools, techniques, and procedures used. • Assist the appropriate authorities with determining the extent of damage to Army and Department of Defense equities. … 7-32. The trusted insider is the most serious threat to DOD information systems security. The following list of indicators that could be associated with an insider threat should be addressed during threat briefings to CI customers: • Unauthorized attempts to elevate privileges. • Unauthorized sniffers. • Suspicious downloads of sensitive data. • Unauthorized modems. • Unexplained storage of encrypted data. • Anomalous work hours and/or network activity. • Unexplained modification of network security-related operating system settings. • Unexplained modification of network security devices such as routers and firewalls. • Malicious code that attempts to establish communication with systems other than the one which the code resides. • Unexplained external physical network or computer connection. • Unexplained modifications to network hardware. • Unexplained file transfer protocol (FTP) servers on the inside of the security perimeter. • Unexplained hardware or software found on internal networks. • Network interface cards that are set in a “promiscuous” or “sniffer” mode. • Unexpected open maintenance ports on network components. • Any unusual activity associated with network-enabled peripheral devices, such as printers and copiers.29 Jan
U.S. Army War College Strategic Cyberspace Operations Guide - 1. This publication provides a guide for U.S. Army War College students to understand design, planning, and execution of cyberspace operations at combatant commands (CCMDs), joint task forces (JTFs), and joint functional component commands. It combines existing U.S. Government Unclassified and “Releasable to the Public” documents into a single guide. … 1. This guide follows the operational design methodology and the joint operation planning process (JOPP) and applies these principles to the cyberspace domain. Cyberspace is a global domain within the information environment consisting of the interdependent networks of information technology infrastructures and resident data, including the Internet, telecommunications networks, computer systems, and embedded processors and controllers. Cyberspace operations (CO) are the employment of cyberspace capabilities where the primary purpose is to achieve objectives in or through cyberspace. Commanders must develop the capability to direct operations in the cyber domain since strategic mission success increasingly depends on freedom of maneuver in cyberspace (see Figure 1-1). 2. The President and the Secretary of Defense (SecDef) provide strategic guidance to the joint force. This guidance is the common thread that integrates and synchronizes the planning activities and operations. It provides purpose and focus to the planning for employment of military force. 3. The commander and staff develop plans and orders through the application of the operational design methodology and by using JOPP. Operational design results in the commander’s operational approach, which broadly describes the actions the joint force needs to take to reach the end state. The commander and staff translate the broad operational approach into detailed plans and orders using JOPP.5 Planning continues during execution, with an initial emphasis on refining the existing plan and producing the operations order and refining the force flow utilizing employed assigned and allocated forces. 4. Commanders integrate cyberspace capabilities at all levels and in all military operations. Plans should address how to effectively integrate cyberspace capabilities, counter an adversary’s use of cyberspace, secure mission critical networks, operate in a degraded environment, efficiently use limited cyberspace assets, and consolidate operational requirements for cyberspace capabilities. While it is possible that some military objectives can be achieved by CO alone, CO capabilities should be integrated into the joint force commander’s plan and synchronized with other operations during execution. … 29 Jan
Department of State International Security Advisory Board Report on Gray Zone Conflict - The study addresses the challenges facing the United States from the increasing use by rivals and adversaries – state and non-state alike – of what have come to be called “Gray Zone” techniques. The term Gray Zone (“GZ”) denotes the use of techniques to achieve a nation’s goals and frustrate those of its rivals by employing instruments of power – often asymmetric and ambiguous in character – that are not direct use of acknowledged regular military forces. The report is organized according to the specific subjects the ISAB was directed to consider by the Terms of Reference (TOR) – Characteristics of GZ Operations, Policy Options and Concepts, and Deterrence/Dissuasion. I. Characteristics of GZ Conflict Perhaps the most widely used definition of Gray Zone conflict is that established by the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM): “gray zone challenges are defined as competitive interaction among and within state and non-state actors that fall between the traditional war and peace duality. They are characterized by ambiguity about the nature of the conflict, opacity of the parties involved, or uncertainty about the relevant policy and legal frameworks.” Read too broadly, this definition would embrace practically all international interaction, most of which is directed in some degree at affecting the actions or view of other countries. However, it is possible to describe the problem without seeking a universal and precise definition. The term “Gray Zone” may be new; the phenomenon is not. Although many of the techniques used now are based on modern technology, notably cyber and networked communication, many are as old as history. What are now being called GZ methods have been conducted in the past under such names as “political warfare,” “covert operations,” “irregular or guerrilla warfare,” “active measures,” and the like. In some sense, the Cold War was one protracted GZ campaign on both sides on a global scale. The Trojan Horse exploited many of the instruments of a GZ operation – creating confusion and division in enemy opinion, extending ostensible inducements, implanting hidden military forces, deception, and clandestine infiltration of enemy territory. The central characteristic of GZ operations is that they involve the use of instruments beyond normal international interactions yet short of overt military force. They occupy a space between normal diplomacy and commercial competition and open military conflict, and while often employing diplomacy and commercial actions, GZ attacks go beyond the forms of political and social action and military operations with which liberal democracies are familiar, to make deliberate use of instruments of violence, terrorism, and dissembling. Moreover, they often involve asymmetry in magnitude of national interests or capabilities between the adversaries. GZ techniques include: Cyber, information operations, efforts to undermine public/allied/local/ regional resistance, and information/propaganda in support of other hybrid instruments; Covert operations under state control, espionage, infiltration, and subversion; Special Operations Forces (SOF) and other state-controlled armed units, and unacknowledged military personnel; Support – logistical, political, and financial – for insurgent and terrorist movements; Enlistment of non-governmental actors, including organized criminal groups, terrorists, and extremist political, religious, and ethnic or sectarian organizations; Assistance to irregular military and paramilitary forces; Economic pressures that go beyond normal economic competition; Manipulation and discrediting of democratic institutions, including electoral system and the judiciary; Calculated ambiguity, use of /covert/unacknowledged operations, and deception and denial; and Explicit or implicit threat use, or threats of use of armed force, terrorism, and abuse of civilian populations and of escalation. Currently, the United States can reasonably be said to face GZ campaigns in a range of theaters: Russia has mounted a variety of GZ operations, not only in Ukraine where it actually employed thinly disguised military force and support for local militias as well as other instruments, but also targeting the Baltics, Eastern Europe, the Balkans, the United States, and a range of European countries with a massive campaign (including expansive use of cyber) to spread its narratives, undermine confidence in legal, economic, and electoral systems, and manipulate political action, exemplified by the FSB/GRU cyber operation that hacked into networks used by U.S. political figures and organizations in what is assessed by the U.S. intelligence community and the FBI as an effort intended to influence the recent U.S. presidential election. China is aggressively advancing its disputed maritime claims in the South and East China Seas, by both incremental establishment of “facts on the ground,” by construction and occupation of disputed features, providing material incentives to accommodate to Chinese desires, and undermining confidence in U.S. credibility by an extensive media effort. Iran in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East, and from Daesh and other radical Islamist groups in Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere using terror, exploiting sectarian and ethnic divisions, and otherwise seeking to disrupt the established order in the region. North Korea has over the years, repeatedly used ostensibly deniable violence, political infiltration, intimidation by threats of massive escalation, and hostage-taking to divide the Republic of Korea and the United States and protect its failing system. 28 Jan
(U//FOUO) DHS Intelligence Note: Germany Christmas Market Attack Underscores Threat to Mass Gatherings and Open-Access Venues - (U) A 25-ton commercial truck transporting steel beams from Poland to Germany plowed into crowds at a Christmas market in Berlin at about 2000 local time on 19 December, killing at least 12 people and injuring 48 others, several critically, according to media reporting citing public security officials involved in the investigation. The truck was reportedly traveling at approximately 40 miles per hour when it rammed the Christmas market stands. Police estimate the vehicle traveled 80 yards into the Christmas market before coming to a halt. (U) German authorities are calling the attack a terrorist incident, with the attacker still at large. German authorities are warning that it is unclear if the attacker was a lone offender, acted as part of a cell, or if he received any sort of direction by a FTO, and expressed concern that additional attacks are possible. An individual who was initially detained on 19 December was released on 20 December, and is no longer considered a suspect, according to German police. The truck may have been stolen or hijacked with the original driver overpowered or murdered. The original driver, found dead in the truck cab, appears to have died from stabbing and shooting wounds, according to media reporting citing law enforcement officials. The truck tracking location system indicated repeated engine stalls in the time leading up to the attack, leading the owner of the vehicle to speculate this was unlikely if a veteran driver was operating the truck, unless there was some sort of mechanical trouble. In response to the incident, German authorities, as part of their heightened security posture, will place concrete barriers around access points at Christmas markets across Germany. … (U//FOUO) Vehicle Ramming Featured in Recent Terrorist Messaging (U//FOUO) I&A assesses that the 19 December likely terrorist attack at one of the largest Christmas markets in Berlin highlights terrorists’ continued use of simple tactics and is consistent with recent calls by the self-proclaimed Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) for attacks in the West using “all available means.” In an early December audio statement, ISIL spokesman Abu Hassan al-Muhajir called for attacks in “their homes, markets, street gatherings and anywhere they do not think of.” Vehicle ramming has been featured in recent violent extremist publications and messaging—including in ISIL’s al Rumiyah magazine and al-Qaʻida in the Arabian Peninsula’s (AQAP) Inspire magazine—especially since the mid-July vehicle ramming attack in Nice, France. The early-November third issue of Rumiyah highlighted applicable targets for vehicle ramming attacks such as “large outdoor conventions and celebrations, pedestrian-congested streets, outdoor markets, festivals, parades, and political rallies.” The most recent Homeland attack featuring this tactic occurred at Ohio State University in Columbus on 28 November, where Abdul Razak Ali Artan ran over pedestrians and then continued the attack with an edged weapon after the vehicle came to a stop. (U//FOUO) On 20 December, ISIL’s A’maq News Agency called the attacker “an Islamic State soldier” consistent with previous instances of quickly posting claims of credit for operations. While the attack bears the hallmarks of ISIL’s tactics and targets, we have not been able to determine a definitive link to the group at this time. … (U//FOUO) I&A has no information indicating a specific or credible threat against individuals, locations or events in the Homeland, but several recent plots and attacks in the United States and overseas involving shopping malls, mass transit, and mass gatherings, including sporting events, have shown that homegrown violent extremists (HVEs) and terrorist groups are interested in attacking these types of targets. I&A assesses that commercial facilities—such as festivals, concerts, outdoor events, and other mass gatherings—remain a potential target for terrorists or HVEs, as they often pursue simple, achievable attacks with an emphasis on economic impact and mass casualties. The most likely tactics in a hypothetical terrorist attack against such events likely would involve edged weapons, small arms, vehicular assaults, and possibly improvised explosive devices. The 19 December events underscore the difficulties the private sector and law enforcement face in securing venues that are pedestrian-friendly, particularly in light of the large number of such areas.16 Jan
National Intelligence Council Global Trends Assessment: Paradox of Progress - We are living a paradox: The achievements of the industrial and information ages are shaping a world to come that is both more dangerous and richer with opportunity than ever before. Whether promise or peril prevails will turn on the choices of humankind. The progress of the past decades is historic—connecting people, empowering individuals, groups, and states, and lifting a billion people out of poverty in the process. But this same progress also spawned shocks like the Arab Spring, the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, and the global rise of populist, anti-establishment politics. These shocks reveal how fragile the achievements have been, underscoring deep shifts in the global landscape that portend a dark and difficult near future. The next five years will see rising tensions within and between countries. Global growth will slow, just as increasingly complex global challenges impend. An ever-widening range of states, organizations, and empowered individuals will shape geopolitics. For better and worse, the emerging global landscape is drawing to a close an era of American dominance following the Cold War. So, too, perhaps is the rules-based international order that emerged after World War II. It will be much harder to cooperate internationally and govern in ways publics expect. Veto players will threaten to block collaboration at every turn, while information “echo chambers” will reinforce countless competing realities, undermining shared understandings of world events. Underlying this crisis in cooperation will be local, national, and international differences about the proper role of government across an array of issues ranging from the economy to the environment, religion, security, and the rights of individuals. Debates over moral boundaries—to whom is owed what—will become more pronounced, while divergence in values and interests among states will threaten international security. It will be tempting to impose order on this apparent chaos, but that ultimately would be too costly in the short run and would fail in the long. Dominating empowered, proliferating actors in multiple domains would require unacceptable resources in an era of slow growth, fiscal limits, and debt burdens. Doing so domestically would be the end of democracy, resulting in authoritarianism or instability or both. Although material strength will remain essential to geopolitical and state power, the most powerful actors of the future will draw on networks, relationships, and information to compete and cooperate. This is the lesson of great power politics in the 1900s, even if those powers had to learn and relearn it. The US and Soviet proxy wars, especially in Vietnam and Afghanistan, were a harbinger of the post-Cold War conflicts and today’s fights in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia in which less powerful adversaries deny victory through asymmetric strategies, ideology, and societal tensions. The threat from terrorism will expand in the coming decades as the growing prominence of small groups and individuals use new technologies, ideas, and relationships to their advantage. Meanwhile, states remain highly relevant. China and Russia will be emboldened, while regional aggressors and nonstate actors will see openings to pursue their interests. Uncertainty about the United States, an inward-looking West, and erosion of norms for conflict prevention and human rights will encourage China and Russia to check US influence. In doing so, their “gray zone” aggression and diverse forms of disruption will stay below the threshold of hot war but bring profound risks of miscalculation. Overconfidence that material strength can manage escalation will increase the risks of interstate conflict to levels not seen since the Cold War. Even if hot war is avoided, the current pattern of “international cooperation where we can get it”—such as on climate change—masks significant differences in values and interests among states and does little to curb assertions of dominance within regions. These trends are leading to a spheres of influence world. … Competing Views on Instability China and Russia portray global disorder as resulting from a Western plot to push what they see as self-serving American concepts and values of freedom to every corner of the planet. Western governments see instability as an underlying condition worsened by the end of the Cold War and incomplete political and economic development. Concerns over weak and fragile states rose more than a generation ago because of beliefs about the externalities they produce—whether disease, refugees, or terrorists in some instances. The growing interconnectedness of the planet, however, makes isolation from the global periphery an illusion, and the rise of human rights norms makes state violence against a governed population an unacceptable option. One consequence of post-Cold War disengagement by the United States and the then-USSR, was a loss of external support for strongmen politics, militaries, and security forces who are no longer able to bargain for patronage. Also working against coercive governments are increased demands for responsive and participatory governance by citizens no longer poor due to the unprecedented scale and speed of economic development in the nonindustrial world. Where political and economic development occurred roughly in tandem or quick succession, modernization and individual empowerment have reinforced political stability. Where economic development outpaced or occurred without political changes—such as in much of the Arab world and the rest of Africa and South Asia—instability ensued. China has been a notable exception. The provision of public goods there so far has bolstered political order but a campaign against corruption is now generating increasing uncertainty and popular protests have grown during the past 15 years. Russia is the other major exception—economic growth—largely the result of high energy and commodity prices—helped solve the disorder of the Yeltsin years. US experience in Iraq and Afghanistan has shown that coercion and infusions of money cannot overcome state weakness. Rather, building a stable political order requires inclusiveness, cooperation among elites, and a state administration that can both control the military and provide public services. This has proved more difficult than expected to provide. … 15 Jan
DoD Cybersecurity Discipline Implementation Plan February 2016 - Inspections and incidents across the Department of Defense (DoD) reveal a need to reinforce basic cybersecurity requirements identified in policies, directives, and orders. In agreement with the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the DoD Chief Information Officer (CIO) identified key tasks needed to ensure those requirements are achieved. The DoD Cybersecurity Campaign reinforces the need to ensure Commanders and Supervisors at all levels, including the operational level, are accountable for key tasks, including those identified in this Implementation Plan. The Campaign does not relieve a Commander’s and Supervisor’s responsibility for compliance with other cybersecurity tasks identified in policies, directives, and orders, but limits the risk assumed by one Commander or Supervisor in key areas in order to reduce the risk to all other DoD missions. As part of the Campaign, this Implementation Plan is grouped into four Lines of Effort. The requirements within each Line of Effort represent a prioritization of all existing DoD cybersecurity requirements. Each Line of Effort focuses on a different aspect of cybersecurity defense-in-depth that is being exploited by our adversaries to gain access to DoD information networks. The four Lines of Effort are: 1. Strong authentication – to degrade the adversaries’ ability to maneuver on DoD information networks; 2. Device hardening – to reduce internal and external attack vectors into DoD information networks; 3. Reduce attack surface – to reduce external attack vectors into DoD information networks; and 4. Alignment to cybersecurity / computer network defense service providers – to improve detection of and response to adversary activity In conjunction with this Implementation Plan, a DoD Cybersecurity Scorecard effort led by the DoD CIO includes prioritized requirements within these Lines of Effort. Although similar to and supportive of one another, they maintain two distinct reporting mechanisms with two distinct targets. Commanders and Supervisors at all levels will report their status with the requirements in this Implementation Plan via the Defense Readiness Reporting System (DRRS), allowing leadership to review compliance down to the tactical level. In contrast, the Cybersecurity Scorecard is a means for the Secretary of Defense to understand cybersecurity compliance at the strategic level by reporting metrics at the service tier. Securing DoD information networks to provide mission assurance requires leadership at all levels to implement cybersecurity discipline, enforce accountability, and manage the shared risk to all DoD missions. By including cybersecurity compliance in readiness reporting, this campaign forces awareness and accountability for these key tasks into the command chains and up to senior leadership, where resourcing decisions can be made to address compliance shortfalls. The Cybersecurity Discipline Implementation Plan and Cybersecurity Scorecard efforts are critical to achieving the strategic goal of Defending DoD information networks, securing DoD data, and mitigating risks to DoD missions as set forth in the 2015 DoD Cyber Strategy. The aforementioned line of efforts and associated tasks shall be linked to DoD Cyber Strategy implementation efforts whenever possible. The DoD Cybersecurity Campaign, reinforced by the USCYBERCOM Orders, will begin as soon as possible. Reporting on cybersecurity readiness in the scorecard and DRRS will begin as soon as possible.15 Jan
(U//LES) Homeland Security Investigations Presentation: Criminal Exploitation of Digital Currencies - What is a Virtual Currency? • An alternative financial value system involving the exchange of funds to purchase precious metals or other value base which can later be used in exchange for products and services. • Is not registered anywhere and it is not governed by any law other than arbitration private forums. • Personal data is not required. • The system focuses strictly on activities of the forum. • Information stored for two months and then permanently deleted. Types of Virtual Currencies E-Currency / E-Wallets Digital Gold Virtual World Virtual Games Merchants (FB, Amazon) Crypto-Currencies ** … 13 Jan
(U//FOUO) U.K. Ministry of Defence Guide: Understanding the Arab People - The Arab World is a vast area which is home to people from diverse cultures. The way in which people behave and interact with you will therefore vary greatly across the region. This guide discusses aspects of Arab culture that you might experience in Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, the Palestinian Territories, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Yemen. Further reading on individual countries is recommended before you deploy. Most Arabs are Sunni Muslims who speak Arabic. However, there are many different religions, ethnic and social groups in the Arab world, among them Christians, Jews, Shi’a and Sunni Muslims, Kurds, Turks and Berbers. Some of these groups have suffered oppression in their countries, but many live happily as Arabs and as part of Arab society. While some Arab countries are very conservative and have strict rules about the role of women, others are more permissive in their approach to issues like alcohol, religion and education. The familiar stereotype of the Bedouin Arab with his camel, tent, robes and blood feuds is only a small part of Arab identity and history. In fact, this traditional way of life has died out in many parts of the Arab world, and is not significant today in areas like North Africa. With the improvement in technology and social media in recent years, people across the Arab World have been exposed to other cultures to a much greater degree than previous generations. Approximately 70% of the Arab World are under the age of 30 and so the entire region is undergoing a transformation as people try to find ways to integrate their traditional cultures into the modern world. … Religious Practice. Islam affects almost every aspect of life as a Muslim Arab. People use Islamic symbols to decorate their homes and cars, carry miniature Qur’ans with them, and go on pilgrimage to various holy shrines around the Arab world. Most Arabs follow a pattern of daily prayer, celebrate Islamic festivals and holidays, and adhere to the rules of Islam. Verses from the Qur’an are memorised. In most Arab countries, Islam also affects politics and law, influencing marriage, inheritance and divorce law, as well as many aspects of business and banking. It is common to see a copy of the qu’ran on car dashboards in Muslim countries. Sharia. Sharia is the law as revealed by God and based on the philosophy laid out in the Qur’an and Hadith (the sayings of the Prophet Muhammed). It provides the legal basis for all public rituals but also guides an individual in their personal life, such as how to wash and how to behave in relationships. Sharia is interpreted for the people by religious scholars (collectively known as an Ulema). In Saudi Arabia and Sudan, sharia is interpreted very strictly and encompasses all aspects of domestic and civil law. In other countries it is integrated with other influences. For example, Tunisia is a former French colony and during that period French civil law applied. Since gaining independence the law has developed and evolved to incorporate sharia into the existing framework, resulting in a more liberal interpretation. Christians. There are an estimated 12-16 million Christians in the Arab world, representing 5-7% of the total population. Larger communities are located in Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Sudan, Jordan and Iraq. The Coptic church is the most important Christian denomination in the Middle East, and suffers from discrimination in Egypt and elsewhere. A significant minority of these Christians do not consider themselves Arabs. … 8 Jan
(U//LES) ATF Chemical Analysis of Exploding Targets - Over the past few months, ATF Agents have contacted the Forensic Lab to inquire about the chemical components of various exploding targets. To assist Agents with their inquiry, exploding targets were purchased (September 2012 to October 2012) from numerous distributors and chemically analyzed. All exploding targets contain an oxidizer and a fuel (catalyst). When these two components are properly mixed, the resulting mixture becomes a shock sensitive explosive. The exploding target oxidizers and fuels were analyzed using Infrared Spectroscopy, Scanning Electron Microscope / Electron Dispersive Spectroscopy (SEM/EDS), and X-Ray Diffraction. All analysis was supervised by Forensic Chemist John Jermain. For additional questions and information, contact John at 925.280.3607. Additional studies dealing with exploding targets will be conducted by Forensic Chemist Brittany Crane and will be published at a later date. … 7 Jan

Sunlight Foundation Blog

Protecting Data, Protecting Residents - Today, the Sunlight Foundation is publishing a new white paper that lays out ten principles for responsible municipal data management for local government employees who want to be responsible stewards of sensitive data for their communities. Individual residents’ citizenship status, nationality, and religion have all become much more politically salient in 2017. Sharing data with the federal government pertaining to vulnerable members of a community creates new potential risks for local residents. Our principles aim to help local governments craft thoughtful practices and policies to protect their residents in difficult times through appropriately protecting their data. The creation of this resource was driven by increased interest from civil servants about their role and responsibilities under the Trump administration.  If upheld by the courts, President Donald Trump’s January 25 Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States would change the relationship between the federal government and state and local governments on immigration enforcement. Local governments will need to quickly identify the right way to balance local policy obligations and the preferences of their communities with the Trump administration’s expectations for local assistance for federal immigration enforcement. While it’s easy to find an executive order when it’s posted online, processing the actual content of this order is much more complicated. Responding to it will require some immediate and thoughtful work from local governments. We appreciate the magnitude of what local governments and their communities are being called on to do. We hope that this resource proves helpful in that work. We are very grateful to many partners who provided their comments and thoughts on this resource, including staff from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, American Civil Liberties Union, the Georgetown Center on Privacy and Technology, Center for Popular Democracy, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Datamade, and MuckRock. You can read, download and share our paper below. 10 Feb
You don’t have to be tech-savvy to benefit from open data - Open data can help you even if you know nothing about data, because it can power tools and resources that are usable by anyone. This was on clear display recently at TransportationCamp, an unconference that focuses on the intersection of transportation and technology. Several developers from Mapzen ran a session presenting some of the open-source mapping tools they’ve been working on recently. One in particular, the Mobility Explorer, allows users to visualize and understand local transportation networks. For example, here’s a map of all transit lines around Washington, D.C.: Note that this map is showing routes across multiple transit agencies — this is possible thanks to all transit providers using a common data standard for their schedule and route data. My favorite feature is the isochrone generator. Isochrones show you how far you can travel from a given point in a given amount of time. Isochrone maps can be used by businesses, other organizations, and residents to make location decisions — and they can even be considered maps of your freedom. For example, here at Sunlight, we were recently deciding on a new office location. One thing we wanted in our office was accessibility to both current and prospective employees who live all over the city and region. Here’s Mobility Explorer’s isochrone map for our new office: The successive color rings show 15-, 30-, 45- and 60-minute travel times on a weekday morning. So this map shows where in the region employees can live and have a reasonable commute time. What if we had instead located ourselves in suburban Tysons Corner? Our isochrone map would look like this: Our office would be transit-accessible to significantly fewer employees, potentially limiting our hiring pool. These maps could also help someone who’s moving to the region decide where to live based on what jobs and other opportunities they’ll be able to access, or they can tell a prospective business owner what kind of a customer pool would be able to access a given store location. Mobility Explorer can also generate isochrones for driving, biking and walking, and can be produced for any time or day. Here’s the thing: all of these features are powered by open data, but you don’t need to worry about that data! You don’t need to know what GTFS or CSVs are to be able to use these tools. We definitely need to keep working to make open data more accessible to the public, but we should also remember that just because the public may not be directly looking at a certain data set, that doesn’t mean it’s not useful or valuable to the public. Here on Sunlight’s Local team, we’re trying to increasingly focus on open data for impact and not just open data for open data’s sake — so we’re excited to see practical, user-friendly tools that anyone can use, like Mobility Explorer. 7 Feb
State of Open Corporate Data: Wins and Challenges Ahead - For many people working to open data and reduce corruption, the past year could be summed up in two words: “Panama Papers.” The transcontinental investigation by a team from International Center of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) blew open the murky world of offshore company registration. It put corporate transparency high on the agenda of countries all around the world and helped lead to some notable advances in access to official company register data. The Panama Papers is the biggest data leak of our time to date, comprised of 2.6 terabytes of data with 11.5 million files containing information about more than 210,000 companies in 21 offshore jurisdictions. The top jurisdictions for registering shell companies were the British Virgin Islands, Panama, Bahamas, Seychelles, Niue, Samoa, British Anguilla, Nevada, Hong Kong, and the United Kingdom. While most companies are created and operated for legitimate economic activity,  there is a small percentage that aren’t. Entities involved in corruption, money laundering, fraud and tax evasion frequently use such companies as vehicles for their criminal activity. “The Idiot’s Guide to Money Laundering from Global Witness” shows how easy it is to use layer after layer of shell companies to hide the identity of the person who controls and benefits from the activities of the network. The World Bank’s “Puppet Masters” report found that over 70% of grand corruption cases, in fact, involved the use of offshore vehicles. For years, OpenCorporates has advocated for company information to be in the public domain as open data, so it is usable and comparable.  It was the public reaction to Panama Papers, however, that made it clear that due diligence requires global data sets and beneficial registries are key for integrity and progress. The call for accountability and action was clear from the aftermath of the leak. ICIJ, the journalists involved and advocates have called for tougher action on prosecutions and more transparency measures: open corporate registers and beneficial ownership registers. A series of workshops organized by the B20 showed that business also needed public beneficial ownership registers. Progress in 2016 Last year the UK became the first country in the world to collect and publish who controls and benefits from companies in a structured format, and as open data. Just a few days later, we were able to add the information in OpenCorporates. The UK data, therefore, is one of a kind, and has been highly anticipated by transparency skeptics and advocates advocates alike. So fa,r things are looking good. 15 other countries have committed to having a public beneficial ownership register including Nigeria, Afghanistan, Germany, Indonesia, New Zealand and Norway. Denmark has announced its first public beneficial ownership data will be published in June 2017. It’s likely to be open data. This progress isn’t limited to beneficial ownership. It is also being seen in the opening up of corporate registers . These are what OpenCorporates calls “core company data”. In 2016, more countries started releasing company register as open data, including Japan, with over 4.4 million companies, Israel, Virginia, Slovenia, Texas, Singapore and Bulgaria. We’ve also had a great start to 2017 , with France publishing their central company database as open data on January 5th. As more states have embracing open data, the USA jumped from average score of 19/100 to 30/100. Singapore rose from 0 to 20. The Slovak Republic from 20 to 40. Bulgaria wet from 35 to 90.  Japan rose from 0 to 70 — the biggest increase of the year. The rise of open company data to power investigations At OpenCorporates, we are passionate about the potential for open corporate data to create a hostile environment for criminal use of companies and to power investigations, whether into corruption, fraud, organised crime, or asset recovery. Here are some of the highlights. Shortly after the Panama Papers came out, journalists from El Pais broke a story that led to the resignation of José Manuel Soria, the Minister for Trade & Industry of Spain. The story (see details here and here) is that Soria was discovered in the Panama Papers, but denied any connection to the Bahamas company in referenced in them. It turns out that a company of the same name, UK Lines Limited, had been incorporated in the UK, with officerships linked to him and his family. Further investigation into this company and another UK one, Oceanic Lines Limited, used company filings and shareholder documents to show that these were indeed connected with Soria and his family. Newspaper El Mundo nailed the case, showing Soria was also director of a Jersey company when he was already a politician. While the main credit goes to the journalists who tracked the story down, there is an irony in Soria being brought down in part by open data. The Spanish Company Register is locked behind a paywall! You can’t even search to see if a company exists without giving your credit card. They have been adamant that they will not open up the register, much less make it available as open data. Not surprisingly they score zero on the Open Company Data Index. Research by Thomson Reuters and Transparency International UK using OpenCorporates data, data from World-Check, Offshore Leaks from the ICIJ, and the UK Land Registry) found that there is no data available on the real owners of more than half of the 44,022 land titles owned by overseas companies in London. This is concerning. Nine out of ten of these properties were bought through jurisdictions like those found in the Panama Papers. Another powerful story was from La Presse Canada. By running the records of video lottery terminal licenses through the OpenCorporates data, they found organized crime controls parts of the Québec’s video lottery terminal (VLT) industry.  There are an disproportionate amount of terminals in vulnerable communities. This story went viral and led to the government committing to investigate it further. Setbacks Despite such investigations, calls for more transparency into the affairs of the corporate world, and some significant advances, company data continues to be one of the least open datasets in the world. The work of OpenCorporates is changing that, country by country. While we saw many significant advances in access to data in 2016,  there have also been a few backwards steps. This year, for example, Gibraltar and Tanzania shut down their doors to transparency, with the latter moving behind a paywall. With Gibraltar, it’s even worse: not only is it no longer possible to access data from Gibraltar corporate register, they’ve also made it difficult to access gazettes anymore. Gazettes are supposed to be public notices! It’s a highly irregular move. This action should be a red flag to anyone doing business with Gibraltar-incorporated companies. Spain remains a black hole for public access to company data. In October, Spain hosted the International Open Data Conference. Spanish civil society had been skeptical of this move because of the lack of movement from Spain on open data. Despite revelations in Panama Papers and campaigning from civil society , however,  the company register remains closed. Spains open data portal lacks any substantive open data sets and has many PDFs, the lowest form of open data. Despite the signs of lack of commitment and poor performance we observed, speakers from Spanish government at the conference insistedthat  Spain was one of the best performers in Europe. OpenCorporates, Web Foundation, Transparency International joined many Spanish civil society groups, including Civio and Info Access, on an open letter to ask Spain to do more. No official response has been received to this day, despite the letter being hand delivered — twice. In the area of beneficial ownership, often talk by politicians has not been failed followed by actions. After the European Commission recommended that beneficial ownership registers should be public in every European member state as part of the revision to the 4th Anti-Money Laundering Directive, the national governments watered it down.  Notably, the removed mandatory public access, thus enabling precisely the sort of behavior the Panama Papers exposed. This makes life easier for criminals, corrupt politicians and fraudsters, and more difficult for legitimate business. It’s so critical that the world continues to push for genuine corporate transparency and access to company registers as open data in 2017. Hera Hussein is the Community and Partnerships Manager at OpenCorporates, the world’s largest open database of company information. She’s an advocate for open data and open culture. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the guest blogger and those providing comments are theirs alone and do not reflect the opinions of the Sunlight Foundation. Interested in writing a guest post for Sunlight? Email us at guestblog@sunlightfoundation.com 7 Feb
How Data Refuge works, and how YOU can help save federal open data - Editor’s Note: Last week, Sunlight joined Abbie Grotke, a digital library project manager at the Library of Congress, and professor Bethany Wiggin, from the University of Pennsylvania, at a Transparency Caucus briefing in the U.S. House of Representatives to discuss archiving federal open government data. (You can watch video of the event online.) At the event, Wiggin shared what’s happening with Data Refuge, a distributed, grassroots effort around the United States in which scientists, researchers, programmers, librarians and other volunteers are working to preserve government data.  Her prepared remarks are below. Thank you for inviting me; it is an honor to be here. I am an Associate Professor at the University of Pennsylvania, where I teach a seminar on censorship and technology in history; and I also research and write about Philadelphia’s urban waters—including the great lack of much environmental data about those waters. I am also the Founding Director of Penn’s Program in Environmental Humanities. This academic program works at the intersection of the natural and human sciences, otherwise known as the humanities. We take an integrated, interdisciplinary approach spanning the arts and sciences to understand how humans have profoundly remade the natural world, fundamentally altering earth systems. Working at the intersection of academic disciplines, we can foster resilience in era of human-caused global climate change. Public engagement lies at the very heart of the program’s mission. One recent example of our public engagement work is the project called Data Refuge. What is Data Refuge? Working with partners, especially with our librarians at Penn, Data Refuge aims to accomplish three goals: Use our trustworthy system to make research-quality copies of federal climate and environmental data. The types of public data we copy range from satellite imaging to PDFs, and we augment the work of webcrawling by our partners at End of Term Harvest and the Internet Archive by developing tools to download and describe “uncrawlables” that can be put in the public server space available at www.datarefuge.org Advocate for environmental literacy with storytelling projects that showcase how federal environmental data support health and safety in our local communities; and advocate for more robust archiving of born-digital materials as well as for more reliable access to them. They are, after all, paid for by American taxpayers. Build a consortium of research libraries to scale data refuge’s tools and practices to make copies of other kinds of federal data beyond the environment. This budding consortium, supported by the Association of Research Libraries, will supplement the existing system of federal depository libraries, where printed documents are “pushed.” This new consortium could actively “pull” public materials, i.e., copy them, from federal agencies. How much data has Data Refuge archived? Data Rescue events have downloaded roughly 4 terabytes of data. Related libraries’ efforts have captured petabytes of open data. Data Rescue events, as of 1/31/17, have also seeded more than 30,000 urls to put into the Internet Archive’s WayBack Machine. As of 1/31/17, some 800 people have participated in Data Rescue events. Since beginning this project in November of last year, we have helped support six data rescue events, including a two-day event in Philadelphia, the first to tackle data that cannot go into the Wayback Machine. We’ve now supported a seventh in Cambridge, Mass; an eighth at UC Davis; a ninth in Portland, OR; a tenth in NYC. Data Refuge organizers hosted a webinar for future event organizers attended by well over one hundred participants. More than twenty additional Data Rescue events in locations ranging from the SF Bay area, to Atlanta, Austin, two additional Boston events, Boulder, Chapel Hill, DC, Denver, Haverford (PA), Miami, another NYC event, Seattle, Twin Cities, and Wageningen, Netherlands. How do we know how to prioritize the data to save? Since December, with the help of the Union of Concerned Scientists, we have circulated a survey that invites researchers to identify those data sets most valuable for their work. It also asks them to consider how vulnerable those data sets might be. If they are stored in multiple locations, they are less vulnerable; if in only one location, it is far easier to limit or even block their access. Data Rescue events also use a comprehensive approach to webcrawling developed by the Environmental Data Governance Initiative, a newly-formed coalition of individual researchers: surveying climate and environmental data across multiple locations. (I serve on the steering committee). This method allows people without deep content knowledge to participate in data rescue events, as does the work of the storytelling teams. What happens at a Data Rescue event? Participants select one of “Four Trails” through the Refuge. These trails are in essence working groups, with trained Trail Guides coordinating the work across the different local Data Rescue events. The Trails are: Feed Internet Archive Federal Internet materials that can go to the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine go there. Feed Data Refuge Suspected “uncrawlables” are added to a master list on a spreadsheet the Data Refuge team manages and project participants do additional research. (An app will soon replace the spreadsheet and the associated workflow with its multiple checks for quality assurance.) Storytellers and Documentarians Create social media about data rescuers and events. Develop use cases in partnership with city and municipal government partners as well as other community partners and NGOs. The Long Trail Build a library consortium and advocacy for better policy on federal open data management Why good copies of data are so important Data Refuge Rests on a Clear Chain of Custody. The documentation of a clear “chain of custody” is the cornerstone of Data Refuge. Without it, trust in data collapses; without it, trustworthy, research-quality copies of digital datasets cannot be created. Libraries always say: “Lots of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe” (LOCKSS). That’s very true. But consider what happens if a faulty copy is made — whether by accident or technical error or deliberate action–and then proliferates. Especially in a digital world, an epidemic can be the result. Instead of keeping “stuff safe,” we have spread lots of bad copies. Factual-looking data can in fact easily be fake data. But how do we safeguard data and ensure that a copy is true to the original? Especially if the original is no longer available, we must find another way to verify the copy’s accuracy. This is where a clear, well-documented “chain of custody” comes in. By documenting this chain–where the data comes from originally, who copied them and how, and then who and how they are re-distributed–the Data Refuge project relies on multiple checks by trained librarians and archivists providing quality assurance along every link in the chain. Consider this extreme case: What happens if an original dataset disappears, and the only copy has passed through unverified hands and processes? Even a system that relies on multiple unverified copies can be gamed if many copies of bad data proliferate. This practice of documenting whose hands have been on information goes back across hundreds, even thousands, of years. Instilling trust in information is a universal human concern. Unfortunately, it’s imperfect. The workflow devised for data refuge is similarly not 100% foolproof. But we can increase our trust in the copies by including librarians trained in digital archiving and metadata as the final instance of quality control before we make anything public. At this end link in the chain, we verify the quality with the Data Refuge stamp of approval. How we verify data for Data Refugue After the data is harvested, it gets checked against the original website copy of the datay by an expert who can answer: “Will this data make sense to a scientist or other researcher who might want to use it.” This guarantees the data are useable. Then, digital preservation experts check the data again, make sure that the metadata reflect the right information, and create a manifest of technical checksums to enclose with the data in a bagit file so that any future changes to the data will be easily recognizable. The bagit files move to the describers who open them, spot check for errors, and create records in the datarefuge.org catalog, adding still more metadata. Each actor in this chain is recorded. Each actor in effect signs off, saying yes, this data matches the original. And each actor also checks the work of the previous actor and signs off on it. This is the best way we have to ensure this copy is the same as the original, even if the original goes away. Libraries Today, building on decades of work, many libraries are taking fast action to advocate for open data and to promote better access. Many libraries have hosted Data Rescue events and are working quickly with their communities to harvest and save data. But, the fragility of government information on the internet is a problem that has already gained considerable traction in the library community. Coordinated efforts, like EoT, but also less well-known consortia are actively working to map the landscape of new government information. Together, with various research communities, we are strategizing on how to manage that information landscape responsibly and systematically. This will require deep and sustained collaboration of the type that is difficult to create quickly. Nonetheless, Data Refuge has done much to accelerate, responsibly, those collaborations. Last week, with two librarians from Penn, I met with the Association of Research Libraries headquartered here in Washington. In response to the overwhelming number of requests that we’ve received from colleagues at universities across the US who want to help, we propose an additional scaling strategy: Leveraging existing capacity within libraries — in staff and expertise — to archive web sites immediately. Many academic research libraries have web archiving systems in place with knowledgeable librarians engaged in this work. If a fraction of those skills and systems are directed to address a small slice of this challenge, together we can make substantive and critical progress toward preserving federal websites. You can learn more about out Data Refuge at ppehlab.org, including how to get involved as an individual. If you want to host a Data Rescue event, check our guide “How to Host a Data Rescue Event” which also includes a useful Toolkit. Bethany Wiggin is the Founding Director of the University of Pennsylvania’s Program in Environmental Humanities and holds appointments in German, English, and Comparative Literature. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the guest blogger and those providing comments are theirs alone and do not reflect the opinions of the Sunlight Foundation. Interested in writing a guest blog for Sunlight? Email us at guestblog@sunlightfoundation.com 6 Feb
Crowsourcing a Constitution: Mexico City’s experiment in collaborative drafting - Editor’s Note: In 2016, Mexico City had the opportunity to collect a public input on a 142 page-long draft constitution that was delivered to the city’s first Constitutional Assembly. One of the the world’s largeest, busiest cities then set up about collaboratively editing the draft. Over the course of the year, traditional institutions and political practices clashed using the new tools, in the midst of a generalized public distrust in the constitutional process itself. This is the story of Mexico City’s efforts to crowdsource a constitution, as told by Bernardo Rivera-Muñozcano, a political advisor in General Counselor’s Office. The essence of any constitution is to capture a set of fundamental principles and rules that will shape public life and interactions within a society for any given moment in time. Drafting Mexico City’s constitution required a collective reflection on who we are as a city, and what we imagine for our city’s future. Having the same rights and liberties as any other State in the Republic has been a long fought social and political battle in the democratization process of Mexico’s capital city. It was not until 1997, that chilangos – as locals of Mexico City are called – got to elect their Mayor for the very first time (the head of government was previously appointed by the President) and their first local Congress. Twenty years later, the promulgation of the first local Constitution was supposed to be seen as another milestone towards the democratization of the city. But a complex local political scenario and a nationwide distrust in government raised some questions about the real utility of a new constitution for Mexico’s biggest city. In January 2016, both chambers of Congress approved a Constitutional amendment, presented by Mayor Miguel Ángel Mancera, that would grant Mexico City more autonomy regarding federal authorities (though not sovereignty), through its first Constitution. This achievement was the result of a questionable negotiation process between political parties with almost no civic participation that threatened a lack of legitimacy of the Constitutional Assembly, and in general, in the whole constitutional process.  We knew that having people to participate and get involved in any public interest issues might be complicated in a society where 77% of its members don’t trust at all or show little trust in its government. Engaging people in the analysis and proposal of constitutional topics was a huge challenge given the current political and social circumstances. Acknowledging there was some public distrust in the process, the Mayor’s first action in drafting a constitution was to appoint a group of 30 individuals representing diverse spheres of the City’s life, that during 7 months would discuss and work in the first constitutional draft (called the Drafting Group). Our initial approach to generate social participation in the drafting process was to develop a collaborative editing tool where members of the Drafting Group would post essays on specific subjects with the comments and feedback generated by citizens and other experts. The Mayor instructed the city’s General Counsel to develop a mechanism that would channel opinions, ideas, and proposals generated by the people about the Constitution, with assistance from the Laboratorio para la Ciudad, Mexico City’s innovation and creativity department. The outcome was a digital platform we used for our first approach, designed both as an informative resource on the constitutional process and as a tool that would promote civic participation and systematize all citizen input on the constitution. Through an iteration process, the essays would eventually give way to the articles of the constitutional project. The support of the MIT Media Lab and the IT team of the Laboratorio was essential in adapting the PubPub platform for this task.   But the members of the Drafting Group weren’t fully convinced of the usefulness and reliability of the digital tool, and we found that essays on subjects as complex as constitutional topics proved to be unappealing to a general public. If we wanted to generate a broad and rich call for proposals,  we had to explore alternative participation channels besides the traditional collaborative editing approach to crowdsourcing. We then proposed the survey Imagina tu Ciudad as a way to materialize a collective reflection process and generate systematic inputs for the constitutional draft. In a 15-question survey, we asked participants to describe the three things that came to their minds when they thought about Mexico City. After they had identified the main obstacles for their ideal city to become a reality, the participant was asked to describe what they had to do for this vision of the City to become a reality. As expected, the results showed a big distrust in government; corruption, transportation and air pollution were identified as the city’s main challenges; and cultural sites, history and diversity, as Mexico City’s most valuable assets. Even though we thought the survey would gather the highest number of participants for our constitutional project, it was our collaboration scheme with Change.org Mexico that got the most participation. The idea behind the Change.org movement “Voces Ciudadanas en la Constitución CDMX” was simple: the Drafting Group would consider petitions launched through the Change.org platform and would give different levels of feedback to the petition-maker based on the number of signatures the petition gathered. At 5,000 signatures, the Group would send a legal and constitutional analysis of the proposal to the petition-maker. At 10,000, the participant could present their proposal to three members of the Drafting Group. The four petitions that exceeded 50,000 signatures were presented to the Mayor. This threshold-based scheme represented the first time in Mexican history that any government agency or authority had committed to react to online petitions. As of December 2016, there were more than 279,000 unique signers on more than 340 petitions with specific proposals for the Constitution. This feedback loop we generated between petition makers and top-level government officials, was highly appreciated and recognized by the participants. The collective reflection process we intended to start in our platform materialized in 76 articles of a constitutional project. Our original idea for an innovative collaborative editing tool ended up becoming a platform that would funnel different kinds of citizen input towards the co-creation of a constitutional project. During the seven months the platform was active, we learned that even if participatory channels are open, people won’t occupy them unless they’re given different mechanisms to express their opinions – participatory mechanisms that match their levels of public engagement and interest in public affairs. To me, a strong believer in open government, the lack of widespread interest in the collaborative editing tool came as disappointing but somewhat unsurprising news. When talking about the future of co-creation tools and processes in public affairs, and maybe the future of open government itself, we might want take some time to think who these tools and processes are intended for. If we don’t, the gap between the sophistication of our tools and the real interest they generate in the general public will just keep getting bigger, and the open government agenda might burst to disappointment in times of democratic effervescence, just when it is needed the most. Bernardo Rivera-Muñozcano is a Political Advisor in Mexico City’s General Counselor’s Office, where he is part of the team that oversaw the city’s first Constitution drafting. Bernardo has, as a public servant, designed and promoted innovation and open government projects, both in the legislative and executive branches. He’s a keen runner and passionate cities enthusiast. You can reach him at bernardo.riveramunozcano@gmail.com. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the guest blogger and those providing comments are theirs alone and do not reflect the opinions of the Sunlight Foundation. If you’re interested in writing a guest post for Sunlight, please email us at guestblog@sunlightfoundation.com 3 Feb
What we told Congress about oversight, ethics and open government - This week, the Sunlight Foundation joined a roundtable of nonprofits, Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, and their staff in Congress to discuss ethics and open government. Sunlight has spoken out repeatedly on these issues in recent months, calling for the House Oversight Committee to do oversight, not threaten the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) and the presidential candidates to adopt ethical code of conduct prior to the election, as well as advocating for President Donald Trump to address his global conflicts of interest by disclosing and divesting. We were honored to be invited to share our views and hear from the Committee and other open government advocates on Tuesday. We were pleased to hear Chairman Jason Chaffetz and Ranking Member Elijah Cummings agree that the Office of Government should be fully funded, staffed and reauthorized. The House Oversight Committee has asked for specific recommendations to improve the OGE. We intend to do exactly that in the near future. Following is a summary of what Sunlight told the roundtable on Tuesday. First, we spoke about the chilling effects that comments by White House chief of staff Reince Priebus and the letter from the committee have on OGE specifically and federal civil servants in general, as documented in our list of agencies secretly directed not communicate with the public. Part of OGE’s mission is to inform the public about ethics, a matter of considerable public concern, given the number of billionaires nominated to lead agencies and the president’s conflicts of interest. We also opposed the Trump administration’s is attacks on the American free press, including repeated public attempts to delegitimize the New York Times and other publishers and media outlets as “fake news.”   Second, we said that President Trump’s recent executive order on ethics was a step backwards for open government, as it removed a mechanism requiring ethics waivers to be publicly disclosed and published online and allowed former executive branch officials to lobby the agencies they served in.   Third, we highlighted how the Trump administration’s initial approach to WhiteHouse.gov has not only failed to provide information about government staff, operations or policy, but lagged in disclosing executive actions to the public and affected government agencies when the president signs them, leading to misreporting and confusion, as the world saw this past weekend.   Finally, we brought up how President Trump’s decision to break four decades of democratic norms by refusing to disclose his tax returns set a diminished tone on ethics from the top of the federal government. We noted that without full disclosure, neither the public nor Congress will know whether the president has addressed his known conflicts or if hidden foreign entanglements have followed him into the White House. As a remedy, we recommended what we advocated for since May 2016: Congress should mandate tax return disclosure for presidential candidates. What the American public sees today in the Trump administration is the appearance of corruption created by the failure of President Trump to address the unprecedented conflicts of interest with which he entered the White House. We urged the House Oversight Committee to take preventative actions to ensure that the public does not see the reality of corruption in our federal government tomorrow. 2 Feb
Tracking collaborative policy for open data - Buffalo used the OpenGov Foundation’s Madison platform to solicit public feedback on their draft open data policy.There’s a rising trend in municipal open data. Local governments are increasingly looking for substantive ways to engage stakeholders online in the collaborative design and drafting of open data policy and programs. Sunlight has created an open spreadsheet — our Open Data Policy Crowdlaw Tracker — for tracking cases of these types of collaborative efforts (also called “crowdlaw”), and we hope this will provide inspiring examples for government officials. In 2016, Sunlight’s work on the What Works Cities initiative has included responding to local governments’ desire for support in undertaking crowdlaw practices, and we are excited to continue researching and supporting this work in 2017 and beyond! From access to collaboration As we think critically about the open data movement’s spread across US cities, it’s clear that significant progress has been made in increasing both technical and legal access to government data in cities across the country. However, the promise of open data has always been about more than simply access to datasets; it’s been about a new kind of relationship between city hall and the public, one that breeds positive community outcomes through collaboration. While we are not always seeing as many compelling examples as we would like of open data programs going beyond mere access toward something more like substantive collaboration for impact, one arena where this ethos is playing out successfully is in the collaborative development of open data policy and program-design through practices known (at least in the wonkish corner of the world that Sunlight inhabits) as “crowdlaw”. Open data crowdlaw on the rise According to the NYU GovLab, crowdlaw is “open, collaborative crowdsourced lawmaking”, further defined as “a tech-enabled approach for drafting [public policy], that offers an alternative to the traditional method of policymaking, which typically occurs behind closed doors and with little input from the people it affects.” As we have written previously, Sunlight believes that crowdlaw and open data policy make a perfect match, and, if 2016 is any indication, local governments agree. In 2016 alone, we saw examples of six local jurisdictions undertaking open data crowdlaw efforts, resulting in eight collaboratively developed open data policy drafts, nearly as many as the nine open data policy documents we had seen opened up for online feedback and co-creation in all local US governments prior to 2016. Here are those jurisdictions and the relevant policy drafts: Washington, D.C. – Although none have been adopted as of writing, in 2016 the District shared three draft open data policies online for collaborative public feedback via drafts.dc.gov, an instance of the OpenGov Foundation’s Madison tool: the Office of the Chief Technology Officer (OCTO)’s “Draft Open Data Policy”, Councilman David Grosso’s “Strengthening Transparency and Open Access to Government Amendment Act”, and the OCTO’s “District of Columbia Data Policy 0.1 (Draft)”. Las Vegas, Nev. – Adopted in April, Las Vegas’s “Policy and Procedure on Open Data” was first developed online as an open policy draft on Google Docs to allow for collaborative public feedback. Wichita, Kan. – Adopted in early September, Wichita’s “Administrative Regulation 8.4 – IT Open Data Policy” was first developed online with a “Draft Open Data Policy” version available for collaborative public feedback on drafts.wichita.gov, an instance of OpenGov Foundation’s Madison. Naperville, Ill. – Adopted in mid September, Naperville’s Open Data Policy City Council Resolution was first developed online with a draft “Open Data Policy” shared online via Madison for collaborative public and internal feedback. Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) – Adopted in October, the “San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Open Data Resolution” was shared online in draft form via Madison for collaborative public feedback. Buffalo, N.Y. – Having made plans for online collaborative open data policy development in late 2016, the draft “City of Buffalo Open Data Policy” is now available online via Madison for collaborative public feedback, with Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown set to join city staff (as well as Sunlight and What Works Cities experts) to read, consider, and respond to public feedback during a televised work session. Largely thanks to our work on the What Works Cities initiative, Sunlight is thrilled to have been involved in directly facilitating and indirectly advising/contributing in all six of these jurisdictions’ open data crowdlaw efforts. Because of the success of this involvement, we have worked hard in 2016 to position our team to continue support for this practice in 2017 and beyond. Help us keep track of open data crowdlaw! Part and parcel with supporting open data crowdlaw practice is understanding open data crowdlaw practice and how it is shaping out in the real world. To that end, we are excited to share that Sunlight is now tracking all instances of online collaborative open data policy making in US local governments from the very first example we could find (Cook County, Ill. and Smart Chicago Collaborative’s use of RapGenius–now simply Genius–to annotate the county’s open data policy online in 2011) to the most contemporary (Buffalo, N.Y.’s use of Madison as part of a collaborative policy development process that is ongoing through January of 2017) and everything in between. Fittingly, we’d love to collaborate online with any and everyone interested as we continue to document these efforts, so we’ve compiled each instance of open data crowdlaw in an open google sheet we’re calling our “Open Data Policy Crowdlaw Tracker”. Take a look below, and please don’t hesitate to comment or email us at local@sunlightfoundation.com if you know of any instances of open data crowdlaw that we may have missed! It is our goal that in documenting this practice we will not only help our team better understand the trends, best practices, and benefits of open data crowdlaw, but will also help inspire other jurisdictions to join the list of places making online collaboration with public stakeholders an increasingly standard practice in open data policy and program design. 30 Jan
White House Office of Management and Budget missing from Trump WhiteHouse.gov - Every new administration has put its own spin on Whitehouse.gov since the website first went online way back in the 1990s. When a new President swings in, an archived version of the old site maintained by the National Archives and Records Administration remains online, but the incoming administration takes over the domain. President Donald Trump’s transition team decided to stick with the same design developed by his predecessor, but fill it with information about his administration and its policy priorities, which are — unsurprisingly — pretty different from those espoused on the Obama administration-era version of the site. But the Trump team did make at least one pretty shocking change to Whitehouse.gov: they appear to have banished some basic information about how the government works from the site — including the White House Open Government Initiative. Here’s one striking example: the entire section of the White House website devoted to the Office of Management and Budget was digitally wiped off the map. Trying to find OMB’s homepage now returns a page unavailable message urging visitors to “stay tuned” as the administration continues to update the website. Trying to navigate to the site via budget.gov re-directs to the same error message. That’s a big deal because OMB isn’t some minor part of the White House universe — it’s traditionally the largest entity within the Executive Office of the President. While OMB’s most prominent job is helping the President develop a budget, it also issues memorandums that advise federal agencies on how to carry out their roles in compliance with administration policies. Those memos provide key insights into how the government functioned in the past and still functions today. But when the Trump administration took the digital reins on January 20th, a digital archive of select memos going back to 1995 was removed from the White House website, along with everything else related to OMB other than two scant mentions on a page generally outlining the Executive Branch. This is a massive departure from how information about the office was handled over the past eight years. OMB’s online home was available via Obama’s version of Whitehouse.gov from the first day of his presidency, as shown by snapshots collected by the Internet Archive. Archives from near the beginning of President George W. Bush’s first term suggest his office also preserved a place for OMB when he took over the site, even though the Internet wasn’t yet the juggernaut it became by the time Obama took over. To be fair to Trump’s digital transition team, it’s not clear if they actually meant to erase OMB’s primary digital presence. The White House press team did not respond to an inquiry about if the office’s pages were removed on purpose and if the administration has plans to restore the information. The evidence available so far suggests that Trump’s digital team wasn’t equipped to handle the basics of transitioning the White House website — leaving open the possibility that they just didn’t realize they left out something important. For one thing, the site launched without a Spanish-language version and the related Twitter account — @LaCasaBlanca — has been silent since the inauguration. The transcripts of the three press briefings aren’t up: there is only the statement delivered by the Press Secretary on January 21st. Archived video of the briefings are available on the White House YouTube channel, as you can see below. Some features of the new Whitehouse.gov also have problems. Take the email button that appears on the Press Briefing page and some other places throughout the site, for example: clicking it turns up a “page unavailable” message rather than offering a way to sign up for email updates. (Sunlight asked a White House press secretary directly to add us to this list. We did not receive confirmation.) Broken jump links on the Executive Branch section, meant to help users more easily navigate to different parts of the page, suffer from the same problem. The White House “We the People” epetition platform remains live but there’s no associated Twitter account or comms channel. User accounts for the site also appear to have been deleted and new users have reported problems signing new petitions. Although previous administrations marked inaugurations with freshly designed digital digs, Trump’s Whitehouse.gov continues to use an open source code dubbed “FourtyFour” designed for the Obama WhiteHouse.gov. That last part isn’t necessarily a problem on its own– after all, why fix something that isn’t broken? But in the first few days of Trumps’ presidency, the administration seemed to have a hard time disclosing information about presidential actions online to the public in a timely manner. For example, although President Trump signed two executive orders on his first day in office, it took until January 23rd for even one of them to be published on Whitehouse.gov. Things had improved as of Wednesday evening — by that point information about two executive orders and eight memoranda were up — but the fact that they appear to have launched without a process for making basic online updates does not inspire confidence.  And — as the OMB example shows — the Trump transition team didn’t prioritize keeping non-political content that provides important transparency about government operations online when they inherited Whitehouse.gov. Besides OMB, pages for the President’s Council of Economic Advisers and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) also do not appear to exist — meaning there’s no real public record of who, if anyone, actually works on those teams or is leading them now. Some of those decisions have broken incoming links from external government sites — such as those that relied on the OMB memo archive — and the broader World Wide Web, causing disruptions that ripple out beyond just Whitehouse.gov. All of those hiccups point to a new administration that wasn’t prepared to digitally hit the ground running. That said, the Trump administration reportedly does have plans to give Whitehouse.gov a facelift  —  eventually. Ory Rinat, who provided digital strategy advice to Trump’s transition team, recently told Politico that the redesign in the works will take months because the team “wanted to make sure this was done right and with the people who are going to be running the website involved.” Getting the redesign “done right” will means returning things like the OMB memos purged from Whitehouse.gov in the initial digital transition online and either using the previous URLs or setting up redirects. If it doesn’t, the good news is that the information is still available elsewhere through online caches and archives, perhaps most easily through the National Archives and Records Administration’s archive of Obama’s version of Whitehouse.gov. The bad news is that the Trump administration started its digital tenure by making it much harder for average citizens to find information about how our government actually works directly from the source. That’s a major step back for transparency. It’s a series of decisions that are stark against the background of how the Trump administration is approaching communications and disclosure of actions with the public so far. The White House and President of the United States are making claims that are baseless or easily proven false. Transition officials have issued directives for media blackouts to federal agencies, only for the Press Secretary to deny them to reporters after the directives have already been publicly confirmed by transition officials and disavowed or clarified by agencies. The Internet has an amazing capacity to open up governments to their citizens. Modern technology enables transparency, accountability, participation and engagement that was impossible before every connected person could look up information with just a few keystrokes or taps. Every administration in the Internet-era has taken some steps to expand the government’s engagement with the digital world, building on the progress of their predecessors. Continued progress in open government in the United States depends on having an administration with both the political will and the technical ability to not only be good stewards of platforms, processes and policies that make our government more accessible and accountable to the public. Judging by the Trump’s version of Whitehouse.gov to date, it’s unclear whether the new administration has either.26 Jan
Open Data Policy Wizard helps you create your own policy - One of the hardest parts of creating an open-data policy is figuring out where to start. Here at Sunlight, we have several resources to help with this, including our Open Data Policy Wizard. We already have a sample “firestarter” policy that incorporates our guidelines for open-data policies. This policy was developed in 2015 with feedback from many experts on open data, including Mark Headd, Josh Tauberer, Abhi Nemani, Ben Wellington, Joel Natividad, and Andrew Nicklin. The Wizard asks you several basic questions about your city (or other place) and then emails you a version of the sample policy that has your place’s information included in it. You also get a link to a Google Doc version of the policy, which you can directly edit. This is a starting point, not an ending point. In particular, we advise you make sure you fully understand how this policy incorporates our policy guidelines, explore other places’ policies and (perhaps most importantly) work together with community stakeholders to make sure the policy meets local needs, desires and concerns. In addition to using our sample policy, we strongly encourage people looking at create an open-data policy to check out our OpenDataPolicies.org site, which is a repository of municipal open-data policies from around the country. It's a great way to see real-world policies that have been implemented. --> We created the Wizard to support our work on the What Works Cities initiative. Several of our partners — including Salinas, Calif. — have already made use of it. We see this Wizard as a step toward our broader vision of democratic policymaking whereby citizens have tools that allow them to engage in the process more easily, and citizens, stakeholders and government officials have tools that allow for collaborative drafting of public policy.26 Jan
How federal agencies and Congress pass laws to deny individual FOIA requests - There’s a hidden process of lawmaking that is sabotaging Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Here’s how it works: Someone requests documents that a government agency does not want to release. Under current law, a judge may force an agency to comply. But, while the FOIA is pending, the agency asks Congress to pass a law allowing it to withhold the requested information. In 2014, I wanted to know if U.S. businesses had attempted to sell dangerous items, like surveillance equipment to foreign countries. If so, who was selling? And who was buying? To answer those questions, I turned to public records. To sell certain items abroad to certain countries, U.S. businesses apply for an export license from the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS).  Sometimes those requests are denied. A 2015 annual report from the BIS, in fact, showed 339 denials for the year. On October 22, 2014, I submitted a FOIA request to BIS for all export licenses that had been denied from 2000-2014. The agency, however, denied my request. While my appeal was being processed, Congress passed a law that authorized BIS to withhold my requested information. “Since you filed your appeal,” their letter read, “Congress has specifically recognized that Section 12(c) of the Export Administration Act (EAA) of 1979 is a statute covered by section 552(b)(3) of title 5, United States Code.” In their response, the Department of Commerce, of which BIS is a part, argued the EAA prohibited disclosure of the export license applications I sought. They were right. According to the Department of Justice, license applications under the EAA are exempt from disclosure. This exemption may be justified as a way to protect the integrity of the system. If export licenses become public, then that may be an incentive for businesses to withhold information from agencies like BIS, making it harder for BIS to its job. I didn’t dispute the wisdom of that, nor did I dispute the Justice Department’s interpretation of the EAA. Instead, I argued in my appeal that the EAA was expired law. I sent along a 2013 California Federal District Court decision to prove it. In that case, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit civil liberties group, had requested “records concerning the export of devices, software, or technology used to intercept or block communication.” EFF then sued for the documents. The U.S. District Court in California ruled that the EAA was a “temporary measure” that had expired in 2001. It had been reinstated many times, but it was not in effect during the trial nor when I sent my FOIA appeal on Nov. 25, 2014. The EFF’s suit is still on appeal. On Dec. 18, 2015, as part of a bill transferring U.S. naval vessels to Mexico, Congress passed a two-paragraph provision aimed at the FOIA argument I’d taken from EFF. “Certain confidentiality of information requirements of the Export Administration Act of 1979 have been in effect from August 20, 2001,” the new law stated. This was the same law that had been cited in the BIS denial letter sent to me. Eight days before the law passed, Representative Edward Royce revealed how the law was introduced on the U.S. House floor: Finally, the bill included a provision requested by the Department of Commerce to ensure that our export control regime will continue to protect sensitive information related to export licensing. In particular, it clarified that the business confidentiality protections of the lapsed Export Administration Act would remain in effect under another provision of the law and would continue to protect information related to export licensing. I emailed and called Congressman Royce’s office to ask why he believed the provision would, in his words, “protect U.S. national security and the competitiveness of American exporters.” I received no reply. I also emailed and called the Office of Information Policy, the agency responsible for FOIA compliance, and was directed to the Department of Justice spokesperson. I called and emailed the DoJ. I received no reply. I emailed and called the Department of Commerce and the Bureau of Industry and Security, asking why they had requested the provision. I received no reply. I asked EFF for comment. “The law was definitely passed with EFF’s FOIA case in mind,” Mark Rumold, an EFF staff attorney, told me in an email. “We’ve had Congress pass laws in response to our lawsuits before, but never in a FOIA lawsuit,” he added. This is not the only time Congress has intervened in public records requests. The American Civil Liberties Union sued the Department of Defense over a decade ago for photographs showing abuse and torture of detainees in U.S. overseas detention centers. In 2009, while the ACLU and DoD fought in court, Congress passed the Protected National Security Document Act, authorizing the DOD to withhold the photographs. In 2009, after an appeals court had ordered the photographs disclosed, former Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri-al-Maliki “urged President Obama not to release them,” said Josh Bell, a strategist at the American Civil Liberties Union’s Center for Democracy Media. The law passed. The Secretary of Defense can now temporarily deny disclosure if a case can be made that disclosure might somehow seriously endanger national security. Some photos were released in February 2016. Then, on January 18, 2017, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein said the government had not adequately shown how its threat assessment was made, concluding the Secretary of Defense’s method and standards for withholding must be explained. The lawsuit is ongoing. There may be other cases, but establishing a causal link between a single FOIA request and a provision that appears to target that FOIA is difficult. In 1998, the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmentalist nonprofit, sued for information that the Forest Service had collected on a rare bird. While the case was in federal district court, Congress passed the 1998 Parks Act, part of which states, “information concerning the nature and specific location of a National Park System resource which is endangered, threatened, or rare…may be withheld from the public in response to a request under FOIA.” The request and response appears to fit the profile of the ACLU and EFF cases. The Center for Biological Diversity, however, does not believe that to be true. “We don’t have reason to believe that it was a retaliatory measure to prevent disclosure of records specifically to the Center,” Margaret Townsend, an open government staff attorney at the center, told me. There’s also the problem of discerning motive. It’s possible, though unlikely, that the ACLU and EFF’s FOIA lawsuits were collateral damage, where Congress unintentionally denied a FOIA request as an accidental cost of doing business. This obscure process poses a problem for more than journalists and civil liberties nonprofits: it’s also a matter of judicial integrity. In April 2016, when the United States Supreme Court ruled 6-2 that an Iranian bank must pay nearly $2 million to the victims of a terror attack, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts dissented, arguing that Congress had overstepped its authority in passing a law that decided a case before the high court. “No less than if it had passed a law saying ‘respondents win,’ Congress has decided this case by enacting a bespoke statute tailored to this case that resolves the parties’ specific legal disputes to guarantee respondents’ victory,” he wrote, as reported by CNN. The law “violates the bedrock rule” that the “judicial power is vested in the judicial branch alone,” Roberts added.“The entire constitutional enterprise depends on there being such a line” between the legislative and judicial branches of government. In 2011, the Sunshine in Government Initiative compiled data showing that federal agencies had invoked more than 240 statutes to withhold information from FOIA requesters. In reporting on the data, ProPublica, a nonprofit news outlet, noted, “for years such provisions could be easily slipped into legislation without notice.” How many of those provisions were passed to disrupt pending FOIA requests is unclear, but my experience suggests there’s at least one. Daniel DeFraia is a freelance journalist and American Studies PhD student at Boston University. Previously, he worked for the Committee to Protect Journalists and before that GlobalPost.25 Jan
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)