News and Opinion

News and commentary about the world we live in

British Breakfast and Euro-punditry

 

POUTS* has gone abroad to terrorise some other people and won’t be able to play much golf for a bit. Sad!

The places he’s visiting are liable to offer him varying welcomes now that his loose tongue has compromised intelligence-gathering, particularly in the fight against ISIS.

But he will be warmly welcomed at least in his first port of call, as Patrick Cockburn lugubriously observes:

Trump badly needs a success. His three-day visit to Saudi Arabia, before going on to Israel, gives him just such an opportunity. He will probably be able to announce a $110bn weapons sale to the Saudis and emphasise that this means more jobs back in the US. He will be given a welcome of imperial splendour in Riyadh, where there is to be an “Arab Islamic American Summit” and two other summits attended by dozens of Muslim leaders. The message is that the US and Saudi Arabia are at one in confronting the evil Iranians.

Events planned for the multiple summits in Riyadh are pretentious and reek of hypocrisy. One of the most distasteful, called “Tweeps 2017” and to be held in the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Riyadh, is designed to appeal to Trump’s addiction to Twitter. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and King Abdullah of Jordan will be there, and there is to be a series of panels on the social media.

This is happening in a country notorious for jailing anybody tweeting the mildest criticism of the government. Amnesty International reports that “the Specialised Criminal Court (SCC) in the capital, Riyadh, sentenced journalist Alaa Brinji to five years in prison and a fine, followed by an eight-year travel ban, for comments he posted on Twitter”. In Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies, critical tweets lead to draconian sentences, ensuring that Twitter is no longer the public forum it was in 2011.

The phoneyness and extravagance of the events in Riyadh are strongly reminiscent of the infamous celebration of 2,500 years of the Iranian monarchy held by the Shah in Persepolis in 1971. The aim was to put on display the achievements and power of Iran under the Shah, whose officials assembled even more royals, presidents and prime ministers in Persepolis than the 55 leaders and representatives gathered in Riyadh this weekend. It did not do him a lot of good when seven years later, after his overthrow, almost all his ungrateful guests rejected his pleas for a place of refuge.

Christoph Scheuermann also looks at some of his other stops:

Donald Trump really hates traveling. The many people, the unfamiliar food, the foreign culture. He likes to stay in familiar surroundings, his daughter Ivanka once said, in Trump hotels and Trump golf clubs, and watches football in the evening. His journey, beginning today in the Middle East, is the journey of a man who has never been interested in the world.

On his journey, Trump will give two major speeches, in Riyadh and Jerusalem. He wants to show that he can be presidential, that he has the world under control, that he can leave the Russia affair behind him. In Riyadh, he will talk about Islam, which is awaited with great tension. The speech is being prepared by Trump hardliner Stephen Miller, who has already choreographed the ban on immigration by citizens from Muslim countries. Trump had also claimed in the election campaign: “Islam hates America.”

In Israel , a mixture of skepticism and hope awaits him. For months Trump has been talking about creating peace in the region – a deal that has failed generations of diplomats. The problem is that nobody knows what Trump wants and what he stands for. On the one hand, he has appointed as US ambassador to Israel a man who has supported the radical settler movement in the past. On the other hand, he is surprisingly positive about Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. The best explanation is: Trump is not interested in how peace comes about, which gift he thinks he will definitely present to the people.

Trump’s staff will sell the trip as a success if he does not make a blunder, does not deviate too often from the script and does not have too many new enemies at the end. Expectations are already lower than for any previous president.

For reasons I don’t fully understand, the above piece in a German newspaper suggests that the G7 summit Trump is due to attend is in Sicily. Since the G7 summit is actually in Hamburg, this piece of disinformation may be designed to confuse Trump about his sleeping arrangements even further. Adrian Arab explains the current mystery surrounding them:

For some time there were speculations about where Donald Trump will be staying in Hamburg during the G-20 summit on July 7th and 8th. Already in April it was clear that Hamburg is going to be difficult. For the luxury hotel “Vier Jahreszeiten”, which was favored by Trump, had already refused his booking, the “Hamburger Abendblatt” reported .

Supposedly Trump had found an alternative: according to “Abendblatt” information should be noted that the Berlin “InterContinental”  will accommodate Trump. But from the hotel near the Berlin Zoo came a denial. “Usually, we do not comment on our guests – in this case we say clearly: No, he does not staying with us,” said a spokeswoman.

If Trump stays in Berlin, he automatically decreases the chances of informal talks between him and other leaders at the hotel bar. Almost all of them stay in Hamburg – 9000 rooms will be booked from 6th to 9th July. Chancellor Angela Merkel will check in with her delegation at the hotel “Atlantic Kempinski”, the Chinese in the “Grand Elysée” at the Rothenbaumchaussee and the Saudis at the “Westin” in the Elbphilharmonie.

However, the same fate as Donald Trump has come to another state leader. Vladimir Putin also tried to book a room in the “Vier Jahreszeiten”, according to Abendblatt’s information. He was not successful and was still looking for a hotel.

Before he goes to the G7, there’s also a visit to NATO. It’s already been reported that people have been briefed to keep their speeches short so that Trump doesn’t get bored, but here’s a piece from Martyn McLaughlin about the fallout from Trump’s intelligence indiscretions and what will come of them there:

If you close your eyes and catch a strong northwesterly breeze, you might just be able to hear the grinding sound emanating from Vauxhall Cross. While outbreaks of bruxism have been sporadic at the headquarters of M16 over the years, a full-blown epidemic has developed since last November’s US election, as security operatives gnash their molars following the latest catastrophe across the Atlantic.Even by President Donald Trump’s meagre standards, his decision to shoot his mouth off about highly classified intelligence in the presence of Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, and Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the US, plumbs new depths.

The inglorious episode makes two things abundantly clear. Firstly, it offers resounding proof that Trump’s uniquely toxic blend of carelessness, impulsiveness, and vanity renders him the gravest danger to his own country. He may have the power to declassify whatever information he wants, yet lacks the responsibility to make the necessary judgments. Secondly, after just four months of his presidency, the historic alliance of Britain, the US, and their three fellow members of the Five Eyes intelligence network is in serious danger of collapsing.In hindsight, it seems optimistic, if not hopelessly naive, to think of how we searched in vain for a label to anticipate the hallmarks of the Trump administration. It would, many posited, herald an unprecedented merger of state and corporate power; others thought it would pursue a populist economic nationalism. Neither prediction was rash or misguided, yet neither were they true. Both made the mistake of assuming Trump has a plan of any kind. They were expressions of hope rather than expectation.
All of which should make Trump’s itinerary over the next week particularly interesting. In what will be his first foreign foray, he is due in Saudi Arabia this weekend, travelling on to Israel before meetings with Nato leaders and the G7 summit. There will be stern words exchanged behind closed doors.You can be sure that everyone in attendance, with the notable exception of Trump, will choose them wisely.

He’s also visiting the Pope, but perhaps more significant for US-Vatican relations is the new US Ambassador, Callista Gingrich. Die Welt reports:

The story is more than a footnote in fast-paced Washington. It begins on 18 August 2000. Callista, born Bisek, married Newt Gingrich at that time. The prominent Republican is a typical Southern baptist, she is a convinced Catholic. He is known as the former spokesman for the US Congress (1995-1999). The woman by his side is, until then, an untitled page. But she has influence. Especially on Gingrich’s faith. Nine years later the prominent Republican entered the Catholic Church.

Callista’s sense of sentiment may be a reason why the Trump government was considering early the 51-year-old for the coveted post of the US Ambassador to the Holy See . On Friday evening, just a few days before Trumps’ visit to Franziskus , it became official: the White House confirmed the nomination of Gingrich.

The musical Callista, who also plays on the French horn, in addition to singing and piano, went into politics after graduation as an intern. Until 2007 she worked in the Committee on Agriculture. Not exactly the resume for an ambassador to the Vatican.

But ultimately it is about the contacts. And those the diplomatically inexperienced can certainly bring to the Holy See.

Winters tells an anecdote about how a former Vatican ambassador was summoned by the Cardinal Secretary to an emergency meeting. If she could use the phone on his desk, she asked. Two minutes later she had the then US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on the line. This is what the Vatican expects from an ambassador, concludes Winters. And for this, the well-connected Callista is likely to be fully equipped.

While he’s away, of course, investigations continue into Trump, much of which we’ve already seen reported in the WaPo and other American organs. But here’s a report of something which hasn’t appeared in the US media (at the time of writing, anyway) by Luca Ciarroca:

The impeachment of Donald Trump is approaching apace. After the midterm elections of 2018, the worst US president of all time will hand over to his deputy Michael Pence . An easy prediction? Yes, given that, although slowly, the truth is coming to light : Trump’s affiliate partners are convicted Russian and Mafia-style oligarchs. This could put the former casino operator back in a guilty position for a series of serious allegations.

The first episode of this series of investigative reports , produced by Zembla [a Dutch documentarty-maker], succeeds in doing what no US television network has yet done: to undertake an in-depth analysis of ties with organized crime between Trump and his partners in the management of various properties . The links between Trump, Generous Kushner, Netanyahu, Putin , Chabad Sect , Diamond King Leviev, and many other similar characters are documented with impressive accuracy, with a set of charts, interviews, court documents.

The video highlights another remarkable detail: Trump’s former political mayor, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani , has helped create an ad hoc bank account for the purpose of recycling money through a company in the United States Netherlands. The figure: $ 250 million , coming from Bayrock. Everything documented.

Is it the beginning of the end for the American superpower and its out of control capitalism without restraint? We’ll see. Certainly one like Trump was not to be elected to the White House. Now everything is going wrong and complicating global geopolitics.

That last paragraph alludes to an anti-Americanism which is often found in Italy. Some Italians take this so far that they see Trump as an ally. I’ve already introduced you to the extraordinary Giampaolo Rossi, but now you should read his stablemate Marcello Foa:

Trump appears normalized, swallowed by the establishment. And suddenly Russiagate disappears from the front pages, loses intensity and importance. The president announces the withdrawal of the Nafta Free Trade Agreement, but after a few hours everything remains, confirming his acceptance. The revocation of  Sacramento is reversed with the assent of the Republican Party.

Then, however, something happens. Trump is thinking about it, or at least proves to be taking some space, especially diplomatic. After meeting with the Chinese leader XI with whom he establishes a great personal relationship, he actually overrules the State Department, deciding on his visit to the Pope on May 24 alone and, above all, starting a dialogue with Moscow, talks on the phone with Putin and receives the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov at the White House.

The establishment does not like it and starts to shake. Internal polemics resurface, the newspapers begin to describe a split and chaotic White House. When the president decides to dismiss FBI Comey’s head, the Deep State declares a new and probably definitive, war on  Trump. Following the dictates illustrated by Obama’s former advisor, Kupchan, who called for media and public opinion, the friendly press, or the New York Times and the Washington Post, faded on indiscretions and revelations that were heavy, insinuating and, as always, anonymous, but of secure source: secret services, members of the Administration. The other media amplify. And hysteria mounts.

And now? A long-running critic of US policy, unsuspected because he represents the American Left, Dennis Kucinich, reads the situation with great clarity. Remember he has nothing in common with Trump, but in an interview with Fox News, he thinks this campaign is pretext.

“If the information was so sensitive because it was passed to the Washington Post?”

He asks. It’s still:

“” Something is out of control. There is an attempt to break the relationship with Russia. (…) We need to ask: why is intelligence trying to subvert the US president with these leaks? (…) Look, I’m in disagreement with Trump on many issues but there can be only one president on this and someone in the world of secret services is trying to overthrow this president in pursuit of a political line that puts us in conflict with the Russia. The point is: why? And who? We need to find out. “

Kucinich is almost certainly right. Any pretext is useful to pursue the ultimate goal: overruling the will of the people, hunting Trump and maintaining power in the hands of the establishment, within which the political differences between the right and left are annulled, and which governs the US from the Kennedy era.

Foa believes that it’s all a plot to install Pence. Oliver Georgi doesn’t necessarily believe that, but thinks that if he does succeed to the Presidency, he’ll have a huge task:

On Thursday evening, Donald Trump for once said something very true: “The United States is a “divided, confused, non-united country,” he said at a joint press conference with Colombian President Santos in Washington.
Trump (once again) could not be more wrong: it is not the establishment of a special investigator in the Russia affair that “hurts America”, but Trumps unprecedented, chaotic presidency. Above all, however, it is the uproarious “witch hunt” rhetoric of Trump and his “movement”, whose divisive power each new defense attempt only increases.

Should Trump fail or even fall early, he will become a martyr for many of his followers; another victim of the “swamp” in Washington, who successfully resisted his “draining”. Worse still, Trump will have bathed in dragon blood for his fans – and with him, perhaps, will also disappear his view of politics as a big business, where a good deal is more important than morality and righteousness.

The greatest test for America may not be Donald Trump – but the skill of his successor in the Herculean task of reuniting the nation. 63 million Americans voted for Trump in November, and most of them are not radical right-wingers, but  representatives of a deeply insecure stratum that feels disconnected and ignored by the elites. Giving back the lost confidence in the “system” is a challenge that is not measured in weeks and months, but in years.  Who could lead America after Trump? Not only many Republicans have long hoped for Vice-President Mike Pence , who also enjoys a partly hymnic worship in many Trump supporters…. Pence has been remarkably quiet in these chaotic days. An increasing number of Americans, not only in Washington, are hoping that he is getting ready to hit the ground running.

Le Monde has a bit more on the Trump supporters’ views of the scandals:

But in the opposite camp, that of the conservative press or pro-Trump who carried the billionaire to power , it is a completely different story. President Trump can “find shelter on the right, ” summarizes the New York Times , where the “collective judgment” of the Conservative media, the Republican Party and the voters of Mr. Trump is trying to sweep away the suspicions weighing on the president. For this, they use several tactics, according to the liberal daily: the Pavlovian reflex to shout “fake news” , as Mr. Trump himself so often on Twitter , designate another culprit or simply change the subject.

The media are obviously the first accomplices of this conspiracy against the president. Sean Hannity, a star presenter of Fox News, spent the entire week devoted to Donald Trump’s business. But by systematically turning the situation around, with great help from pro-Trump guests. He described on Wednesday an “alliance to destroy Trump” . The day before, he was interviewing a former editor of Breitbart News, a site close to the far right and founded by Steve Bannon. Sebastian Gorka then asked: “When will all this stop? (…) When will we stop endangering national security and doing real journalism?

A Republican strategist interviewed by the New York Times , Alex Castellanos, explains that Mr. Trump’s voters, who wanted to see the ” system” reversed , do not see  the allegations against Trump as evidence that they were wrong — quite the opposite. “When he is attacked, it validates the idea to his supporters that he is the only one who can protect us from the media elite, ” he explains. For most Loyalists, the question is not whether the Trump Presidency is chaotic or not, but whether anyone else could change things as drastically as he promised.

One of the other shady characters active on Trump’s behalf is the odious Richard Spencer, who is well known to Martin Gelin:

In March last year, Richard Spencer arranged a conference for American nationalists in an office building in Washington DC, a stone’s throw from the White House. Trumps face shone from a big screen in the corner of one room, but it was still far from clear that Trump would become the Republican presidential candidate, even less the next president.

Interest in Spencer’s right-wing business was then quite limited. I was one of half a dozen journalists on site and in total there were almost 100 people who went there for the event. In an interview, Spencer told me that he most viewed Trump as a megaphone for ideas that have long been accepted by the outermost right. Spencer described Trump as a rather banal figure, who did not really seem to understand the ideological depth of the right-wing nationalism he flirted during the election campaign. But for Spencer and his comrades in the so-called alternative world, the informal movement of young right-wing extremists whom Spencer turned out to be unofficial leaders, did not deny that Trump was an unusual asset. With Trump as president, you could begin a long-term project to spread nationalistic ideas all over the world. The real goal was, according to Spencer, to save the white race from a safe fall.

“Trump is the first presidential candidate specifically for the interests of white Americans,” Spencer said.

In the interviews I’ve done with Richard Spencer since 2014, he has consistently described himself as an intellectual creator who sits above the trivial jaws of daily politics. Since he started a debate site called Alternative Right, he has become a self-appointed leader for this loosely defined collection of mostly younger right-wing activists who call themselves all right. The movement includes everything from radical system-critical libertarians to neo-Nazis and teens who most consider it a fun hobby to harass the left-wing people on social media.

Ideologically, Spencer has long been more inspired by European philosophers and political thinkers than politicians at home in the United States. The high-extensional nationalism that Spencer promotes led a peripheral existence in the United States before Trump’s election campaign. Several of Spencer’s colleagues in America’s organized alternative world, like Jared Taylor, long described the United States as a hopeless market for their openly xenophobic ideas. In an interview I did with Taylor 2014, he spoke that a nationalist party in the US could get one-fourth of the votes in a national election. But two years later, Donald Trump succeeded in winning a presidential election with an outdated nationalist agenda. Spencer now feels he has the wind at his back for nationalist and often openly racist ideas. It is with this political energy that he arrives in Sweden to launch a new phase in the right-wing internationalism of right-wing extremism.

Spencer has long talked about Putin’s Russia as a model. He describes Russia as the only country that advocates white nationalism right now. His goal is long-term idea creation, rather than engaging in political campaigns. In our previous interview, Spencer said:

“I do not really care much about political choices. I’m not looking for political office, but I want to gain influence first and foremost. The goal … is to change the culture itself. And it takes time. It always takes time. But my goal is that in ten or twenty years, all that I say to you here, whatever media in the United States thinks is controversial or extreme, are such obviousities that people almost get angry when they hear a politician say that.

I’m finishing this week with another interview with a Trump supporter — Nigel Farage. I intend to devote most of next week’s diary to the British election, in which Farage isn’t standing, but he recently gave an interview to Die Zeit which is a) hilarious and b) already translated into English by the paper:

ZEIT ONLINE: Mr. Farage, parliamentary elections are to be held in your homeland in just a few weeks. Why are you sitting here in Brussels in your British socks instead of helping out with the Brexit negotiations back home?

Nigel Farage: If the British government had asked me to help them in any way with Brexit, I would have done that. But of course, they wouldn’t. They will always hate me. They will always see me as an outsider. They will never forgive me for being successful. I don’t mind.

ZEIT ONLINE: Why did you meet with Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London?Farage stops for a moment to think. Following his visit to the Ecuadorian Embassy not long ago, he told reporters directly after his meeting with Assange that he could no longer remember what he had done in the embassy.

Farage: Oh, for journalistic reasons.

ZEIT ONLINE: What? Because you want to write a story about the WikiLeaks founder?

Farage: For journalistic reasons. I will not say anything more about that. But I did it for journalistic reasons, not for political reasons.

ZEIT ONLINE: What do you mean when you say, “journalistic reasons?”

Farage: I will not say anything more about that. If you look at what I do today, I used to do politics 100 hours a week. But now I do politics for 40 hours a week, so I have got a lot of time to do other things. I am a Fox News contributor. I am an LBC presenter. I write.

Farage’s press spokesman interrupts the interview. He says that the interview had actually been arranged to discuss trade relations between the EU and the UK. Neither he nor Farage, the spokesman says, want to talk about Farage’s connections to the WikiLeaks founder or to Russia.

ZEIT ONLINE: You once said you admire Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Farage: In 2013, as a political operator, he was the best in the world. Yes, this is what I said. But I wouldn’t like to live in his country. I didn’t like a lot of things he did. But as a political operator, he is to be admired.

ZEIT ONLINE: One of Russia’s foreign policy goals is dividing and weakening the EU. Could it be that in the case of Brexit, you were directly or indirectly used for this Russian goal?

Farage: It is obvious that the EU wants to expand to the east and threatens Russia. That’s completely mad.

ZEIT ONLINE: What you say isn’t true. It wasn’t the EU that triggered the revolution in Ukraine, but the Ukrainians who wanted better relations with the EU.

Farage: I want the EU to be destroyed and it doesn’t matter if God or the Dalai Lama wants it as well. The EU is an anti-democratic, failing structure. You know, you are the first person who has asked me if Russia supported me. Maybe you have a special German mindset. No other journalist in the world has asked these questions.

ZEIT ONLINE: I just want to understand your role.

Farage: We have no links to Russia.

ZEIT ONLINE: You didn’t meet with the Russian Embassy’s deputy chief-of-mission in London?

Farage: Nope.

ZEIT ONLINE: Not in 2013, before the Brexit campaign was conceived?

Farage: Ah, hang on. He came to the EP office. Or I met with him in London. So what?

ZEIT ONLINE: Why did you meet with him?

Farage: I think you are a nutcase! You are really a nutcase! Brexit is the best thing to happen: for Russia, for America, for Germany and for democracy. And that’s the key point.

Farage’s press spokesman again interrupts the interview. He says that the interview should focus more on trade relations between Germany and the UK. Farage nods.

The whole thing is a scream. Compared to Spencer, who really is a sinister and dangerous man, Farage is almost as clownish as Trump.

But there are a lot of dangerous people around these days. Trump appears to me to be holed below the waterline, and I’m not at all sure that he’s going to be able to do very much of what he wants to do. But he may well be strongarmed into doing things other people want him to do, and those other people are not at all pleasant, since a lot of them are Republicans.

The priority for non-Congressional Democrats is to organize, register people to vote, and build up the campaigns to oust the Republicans. Those in Congress have to resist Trump as well as the awful bills the other side are putting forward, but those outside need to be putting in the work to swell their ranks come November 2018.

 

It Takes A Village – VNV Monday: We the People – 5/15/17



 

HOPE ALL THE MOTHERS AND MOTHERS TO BE HAD A GREAT MOTHERS DAY. Here is The History of Mother’s Day

Meet Anna Jarvis, the founder — and fighter — of Mother’s Day

2 / 29

Laura T. Coffey

 

.
The Founder Of Mother’s Day Ended Up Hating It
Anna Jarvis founded Mother’s Day to honor her beloved mother, then spent the rest of her life fighting the holiday’s commercial and political exploitation. She died alone in an asylum.Her story — and the modern-day story of Mother’s Day — began, of course, with her own mother. Here’s how it all got started.

1858

In the beginning

Mother of Anna M. Jarvis, Founder of Mother's Day: Anne Reeves Jarvis, mother of Mother's Day founder Anna Jarvis© Bettmann Archive via Getty Images Anne Reeves Jarvis, mother of Mother’s Day founder Anna JarvisIn 1858, Ann Reeves Jarvis (Anna Jarvis’ mother) organizes Mothers’ Day Work Clubs to improve sanitary conditions and stem her community’s appalling infant mortality rates. In her lifetime, Jarvis has 13 children and only sees four of them live to adulthood.

1868

Foes unite

In the wake of the Civil War, Ann Reeves Jarvis (Anna Jarvis’ mother) coordinates a Mothers’ Friendship Day in West Virginia to bring former foes on the battlefield back together again. The initially tense day goes well, with veterans from the North and South weeping and shaking hands for the first time in years.

1870

Sacred right

Julia Ward Howe: American feminist, abolitionist and reformer Julia Ward Howe (1819-1910)© Getty Images American feminist, abolitionist and reformer Julia Ward Howe (1819-1910)Julia Ward Howe, a mother and another forerunner of modern-day Mother’s Day celebrations, suggests a “Mothers’ Peace Day.” She makes the case that war is a preventable evil and mothers have a “sacred right” to protect the lives of their boys.

1873

Howe’s holiday

The inaugural celebration of Howe’s “Mothers’ Day” takes place in June of this year.

1905

Jarvis dies

Ann Reeves Jarvis dies on the second Sunday in May.

1907

Enter Anna

One of Jarvis’ surviving daughters, Anna Jarvis, organizes a small service in honor of her deceased mother on the second Sunday in May at the Andrews Methodist Episcopal Church in Grafton, West Virginia.

1908

This holiday sticks

The first formal “Mother’s Day” commemoration is marked with another service on the second Sunday in May at the same church in Grafton, and with a much larger ceremony in Philadelphia. Jarvis has white carnations distributed to the mothers, sons and daughters in attendance in Grafton.

1910

It’s official in West Virginia

The governor of West Virginia makes Mother’s Day an official holiday on the second Sunday in May.

1912

Vision for Mother’s Day

While waging a relentless letter-writing campaign to drum up support for Mother’s Day, Anna Jarvis creates the Mother’s Day International Association and trademarks the phrases “second Sunday in May” and “Mother’s Day.” “She wanted Mother’s Day to be a very private acknowledgment of all the mother does for the family,” said Katharine Antolini, a history professor at West Virginia Wesleyan College. “It was very sweet.”

1914

National holiday

Woodrow Wilson© Getty Images Woodrow WilsonPresident Woodrow Wilson makes Mother’s Day an official national holiday. Jarvis is gratified by her preferred placement of the apostrophe in “Mother’s Day” — making it singular possessive, not plural possessive, so each family would honor its one and only mother.

1915

Movement spreads

Mother’s Day becomes an official holiday in Canada.

1915

Changing tide

Shortly after 1915, Jarvis begins to sense that she’s created a monster when she sees the florist, card and candy industries cashing in on Mother’s Day and public interest groups using the holiday to make political statements. She rails against exploitation of what was supposed to be a special, reverential day for families.

1922

Battle with florist industry

Jarvis endorses open boycotts against florists who raise the prices of white carnations every May.

1923

Threats of litigation

Jarvis threatens to sue the New York Mother’s Day Committee, of which New York Gov. Al Smith and Mayor John Hylan are members, over plans for a large Mother’s Day celebration. The event is canceled.

1925

Disorderly conduct

Jarvis crashes a Philadelphia convention of the American War Mothers, a group that had its own Mother’s Day commemoration and began using a white carnation as its emblem. The American War Mothers push for Jarvis’ arrest, but charges of disorderly conduct are dismissed.

1934

Commemorative stamp

Jarvis is slighted when the American War Mothers successfully lobby President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Postmaster General James A. Farley to unveil a Mother’s Day stamp. The stamp features a portrait of painter James McNeill Whistler’s mother with white carnations and the words, “In memory and in honor of the Mothers of America.”

1935

Taking on the first lady

Anna Jarvis accuses first lady Eleanor Roosevelt of “crafty plotting” by using Mother’s Day in fundraising material for charities trying to combat high maternal and infant mortality rates.

1940

Increasingly reclusive

Sensing that she can’t contain her creation, Jarvis threatens to end it during the 1940s. “She told me, with terrible bitterness, that she was sorry she had ever started Mother’s Day,” said one journalist who allegedly pretended to be a deliveryman so he could meet the increasingly reclusive Jarvis.

1944

Asylum bound

Jarvis, now 80, is placed in a mental asylum called the Marshall Square Sanitarium.

1948

Jarvis dies at 84

Jarvis dies at age 84, alone and penniless from the various legal battles she waged over the holiday she started. She never made any profit from Mother’s Day, and she never had any children.

2017

Ever since Consumers spend big bucks on their moms each Mother’s Day.

Source: “Memorializing Motherhood: Anna Jarvis and the Struggle for Control of Mother’s Day,” a dissertation by Katharine Lane Antolini
Portrait of mother and baby

CURRENT EVENTS:

THE VAGINA GRABBER IN CHIEF DANCE WITH PUTIN AT A GLANCE:

What we know about investigations into Trump campaign and Russia

Maureen Groppe, Eliza Collins, and Bartholomew D Sullivan7 hrs ago

Comey’s fired. Here’s what we know about probes into Trump campaign and Russia

President Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey raises a ton of questions, including how this will affect the FBI and congressional investigations into Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections.

Here’s what we know — and what we still don’t know.

Why did Trump fire Comey?

First, let’s start off with the basics.

In recommending Comey’s firing, the Justice Department leadership excoriated the FBI director for his handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server during her time as secretary of State.

In a letter released by the White House, Trump said he agreed with Attorney General Jeff Sessions and newly-confirmed Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein that Comey “was not able to effectively lead the bureau.” As Trump told reporters on Wednesday: “Very simply, he was not doing a good job.”

But wasn’t he running the FBI’s Russia investigation?

Yes. Comey in March confirmed publicly the FBI was conducting a counterintelligence investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during last year’s election. Trump has repeatedly denied any connections and has dismissed the Russia story as a “hoax” from Democrats committed to sabotaging his presidency.

White House aides spent all of Wednesday arguing the timing of the firing had nothing to do with the agency’s ongoing investigation.

Where does the FBI’s Russia probe stand now?

That’s what everyone wants to know.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said the Russia investigations will “continue whether Jim Comey is there or not.”

“Any investigation that was happening on Monday, is still happening today. We encourage them to complete this investigation so we can put it behind us,” Sanders told reporters Wednesday. “Nobody wants this to be finished and completed more than us.”

But Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., expressed concern on Wednesday that the investigation would continue in full force, confirming reports that Comey had asked for more money for the FBI’s probe of Russia’s interference in the election days before being fired. “I’m told that as soon as Rosenstein arrived, there was a request for additional resources for the investigation and that a few days afterwards he (Comey) was sacked,” said Durbin, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees the Justice Department and FBI.

Durbin said he did not know the details of the request, which The New York Times reported the FBI director made to Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general overseeing the Russia investigation who also recommended Trump fire Comey. Durbin also said he did not have direct evidence that the request was related to Comey’s firing. But he had a general takeaway: “I think the Comey operation was breathing down the neck of the Trump campaign and their operatives and this was an effort to slow down the investigation.”

Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said Comey made no request for additional funding or personnel in meetings with Rosenstein. “No resources — personnel, money or otherwise,’’ Flores said. “That is false.’’

If the FBI doesn’t investigate, who could?

Democrats are unifying around the call for a special prosecutor. If Trump were truly upset with Comey about his handling of the Clinton probe, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said, he could have fired Comey on his first day in office. Instead, Schumer said, the president waited until Congress and FBI investigations into Russia heated up.

“Given the way the President has fired Director Comey, any person who he appoints to lead the Russia investigation will be concerned that he or she will meet the same fate as Director Comey if they run afoul of the administration,” Schumer said. Without an independent special prosecutor, he added, “every American will rightly suspect that the decision to fire Director Comey was part of a cover-up.”

How would a special prosecutor be appointed?

Not easily, it turns out. 

The responsibility would fall to Rosenstein, who wrote Tuesday’s memo justifying Comey’s firing. While Attorney General Jeff Sessions has legal authority to make the appointment, he has recused himself from investigations relating to the 2016 campaign after his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, came to light.

The post-Watergate independent counsel law that gave Congress the authority to call on the attorney general to appoint a special prosecutor lapsed in 1999. And passing a new version is unlikely in a GOP-controlled Congress.

An independent counsel isn’t needed, Sanders said, because Congress is also investigating — and because Rosenstein, who is overseeing the Justice Department’s probe, “is about as independent as it comes.”

On Wednesday afternoon, Schumer said Rosenstein’s role in Comey’s dismissal had cast “serious doubts” on his impartiality. Democrats now say the authority to name a special prosecutor should fall instead to the highest-ranking career civil servant at the Justice Department.

James Comey pauses as he testifies on Capitol Hill on May 3, 2017.©

Carolyn Kaster, AP James Comey pauses as he testifies on Capitol Hill on May 3, 2017.

So will Congress take any action, then?

There are five key committees looking at aspects of Russia’s involvement in the election.

After the U.S. intelligence community accused Moscow of orchestrating a campaign of cyberattacks against Democratic political organizations, and leaking the stolen information to websites such as WikiLeaks with the goal of undermining public confidence in the election, congressional panels offered to take up the charge.

So far, though, there have been some hearings, but little definitive progress — at least that’s visible to the outside observer.

Here’s where things stand:

Senate Intelligence Committee:

The committee hasn’t held open hearings on its Russia probe since it heard from some academic witnesses on Russian “disinformation” efforts on March 30.

On May 5, committee leaders asked four Trump campaign associates — including former national security adviser Michael Flynn and campaign advisers Carter Page, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone — to provide records of meetings with Russian officials. The committee announced late Wednesday that it sent a subpoena to Flynn for Russia-related documents.

Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C., said Tuesday night that he was “troubled by the timing” of Comey’s firing, adding it “confuses an already difficult investigation.” Vice Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., said it was “shocking” that Comey was fired “during an active counterintelligence investigation into improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia.” He tweeted that the situation “demands the appointment of a Special Counsel.”

But some members of this investigating panel might not support a special prosecutor. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., a member of the panel, said Wednesday such an appointment “would probably shut down our ability to do our work because a significant amount of information would now be denied on the basis of an ongoing investigation.” He urged patience in letting the committee continue its work.

Comey has been invited to testify before the committee during a closed hearing next Tuesday.

House Intelligence Committee:

This panel’s effort is stalled, with staff continuing to go through evidence but no hearings scheduled. After Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., recused himself from the probe and handed the matter over to Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, the committee heard from Comey in a May 4 closed session — but that’s about it.

Nunes stepped aside after reviewing evidence at the White House he said proved some Trump associates were inadvertently caught up in surveillance by the intelligence community of legitimate foreign agents during the presidential transition. Nunes shared that information with Trump — before informing fellow committee members, prompting calls for his ouster.

With this as a backdrop, the panel’s top Democrat, Adam Schiff of California, questioned whether the White House was inappropriately interfering in the probe after Comey’s firing Tuesday. “The decision by a president whose campaign associates are under investigation by the FBI for collusion with Russia to fire the man overseeing that investigation, upon the recommendation of an attorney general who has recused himself from that investigation, raises profound questions about whether the White House is brazenly interfering in a criminal matter,” he said.

Conaway spokeswoman Emily Hytha said he has not addressed the Comey firing, adding the committee’s investigation will continue “as planned.”

Senate Judiciary Committee: 

This committee, which has been one of the most publicly active in its investigation, hosted two hearings that provided critical information in recent days.

The hearing with Comey appeared to be part of the impetus for his eventual firing. On May 3, Comey said in his appearance before the panel that “hundreds and thousands” of emails had ended up on former New York congressman Anthony Weiner’s laptop because of Hillary Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin. Comey said Abedin made a “regular practice” of forwarding emails to her now-estranged husband.

But it turned out that Comey misspoke. After ProPublica reported Monday night that his testimony was not accurate, the FBI issued a statement the next day to the committee attempting to clear things up. That was just hours before Comey’s firing was announced.

Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said Tuesday it was within Trump’s right to fire Comey after the FBI director had lost the public’s trust. Grassley also criticized the way Comey had provided information to the committee. But ranking member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., praised the way Comey had worked with the panel, calling a past briefing “comprehensive” and “precise.”

On Monday, Senate Judiciary panel hosted former acting attorney general Sally Yates and former director of national intelligence James Clapper. In that hearing, Yates told lawmakers that she was so concerned that Flynn had misled Vice President Mike Pence about his communications with the Russian ambassador that she warned the White House counsel he was vulnerable to blackmail and could even face criminal charges. Eighteen days later, Flynn was fired.

House Judiciary Committee: 

In a non-binding list of activities the committee adopted for the year, the panel promised to “continue to conduct oversight into allegations of misconduct” by the executive branch. Other than that, there hasn’t been much public movement.

Following Tuesday’s developments, ranking member John Conyers, D-Mich., said Comey’s firing “obliterates any semblance of an independent investigation into Russian efforts to influence our election, and places our nation on the verge of a constitutional crisis.” Yet Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., pointed to the recommendations of the attorney general and deputy attorney general in encouraging Trump to fire Comey. “The FBI is the premier law enforcement agency in the world and it is critical to have a director who holds the trust of the American people,” he said.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee:

Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, and ranking member Elijah Cummings, D-Md., sent shockwaves through Washington when the they announced last month that Flynn may have broken the law in relation to payments he accepted from Russia for speaking engagements. They came to that conclusion after the committee viewed classified documents related to Flynn.

Cummings said the White House had refused their requests for documents related to Flynn’s tenure. There is “no data to support the notion that Flynn complied with the law,” Chaffetz said at the time. A Chaffetz spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Comey’s firing, while Cummings called for “immediate emergency hearings to obtain testimony directly from Attorney General Sessions, the deputy attorney general, and FBI Director Comey” for answers.

“There is now a crisis of confidence at the Justice Department, and President Trump is not being held accountable because House Republicans refuse to work with us to do our job,” Cummings said Tuesday.

Contributing: Fredreka Schouten, David Jackson, Deirdre Shesgreen

 QUESTION OF THE DAY:

By TOM MURPHY, AP Health Writer5 days ago
Fact Check: Rumors, Claims and Context on G.O.P. Health Bill
Pregnancy, sexual assault and domestic violence could be considered “pre-existing conditions” that make it hard to keep insurance coverage under the Republican health care bill, according to a number of news articles and social media posts.The bill doesn’t specifically refer to any of these things, and headlines suggesting that it does are misleading.

But the bill does allow insurers, in limited circumstances, to charge more for a health condition that existed before the patient’s coverage starts if that person has had a lapse in insurance. Because of that, there might be the potential in some states for a pregnant woman to be charged more for coverage.

THE CLAIM: Twitter is overflowing with lists of pre-existing conditions, patient testimonials and posts with the #iamapreexistingcondition hashtag. People living with a host of medical conditions are worried about the future of their coverage if the Republican plan becomes law. Concern has focused in particular on women’s health issues, and especially pregnancy. And claims that rape victims are singled out has stirred outrage.

THE FACTS: One of the bigger changes to health care under the Republican plan is that it would allow insurers to consider the health risk of customers applying for new coverage if they had a recent gap in coverage. This is possible only if states apply for a federal waiver to allow it. The Affordable Care Act, which remains in place, does not permit this.

Carrying a baby also carries some risk, so insurance companies see pregnant women as risker — and more expensive — customers when they apply for coverage. The same goes for a person who was injured or sickened with a chronic illness. They consider medical conditions, not how they got injured or sick. For example, if someone sees a therapist because they have been raped, the condition that the therapist treats might be considered pre-existing but the rape would not.

Insurers have generally considered conditions treated within three months of the start of coverage to be pre-existing, health care industry consultant Robert Laszewski said.

Before the Affordable Care Act, pregnancy was considered a pre-existing condition, and insurers frequently denied coverage because of it.

They can no longer do that. But, under the Republican bill, insurers may be able to charge higher prices for a limited time due to a person’s recent medical history.

British breakfast and Euro-punditry

It’s been an, er, interesting week, to be sure. European views of what’s happening in America are, I’m afraid, not what you might call particularly varied. Despite Herr Drumpf’s Germano-British ancestry, there seems to be a remarkable lack of trust being shown in the US President pro tem. (Although, to be fair, most of the comment from Britain’s serious Right is paywalled, so I haven’t read it.) Indeed, some even go as far as to say that America’s elected President is a teensy bit odd. I realize that this may well be quite shocking to some of you, but you should perhaps be aware that we don’t have much access to the excellent Fox News Channel over here, and are thus somewhat handicapped in the search for knowledge and understanding.

Laboring under this ignorance, people are liable to come up with strange pieces like this one from Nash Riggins:

We live on a planet bound by resolute, scientific principles and concrete facts. Up is up, down is down and blatant lies are blatant lies. It’s all pretty straightforward, actually. But as the days and weeks slowly wither to ash, it’s become increasingly clear that Donald Trump doesn’t live on the same planet that you and I have been occupying all this time.

You see, in Donald Trump’s dystopian and suspiciously orange world, all truths are totally subjective – and everybody is a pathological liar with the memory of a haggard old goldfish. It’s the only possible explanation left after this week’s anomalous FBI pantomime performance.

In fact, our benevolent alien overlord only gave Comey the heave-ho because the US Attorney General made him do it. If Trump had gotten his way, things could have worked out a lot better for everybody.

Or that was the narrative for about half a day, anyway.

By Thursday night, Donald Trump appeared on the ultra-fake NBC News to tell us “this Russian thing” actually played a huge role in his decision to send Comey packing. But then again, maybe it didn’t – because several minutes into the exact same interview, Trump sternly declared the FBI hadn’t even been investigating him in the first place.

Every time Donald Trump utters a single syllable, he tarnishes the integrity of his sacred station that much more. He treats voters like mindless meat bags incapable of independent thought, and whimsically wields his presidential powers like a toddler might curiously pull a cat’s tail. He’s got no clue how the world is supposed to work – and if nothing else, the repulsive duplicity he’s demonstrated over the past four months has proven he doesn’t very much care how it’s supposed to work, either.

In the Irish Times, Fintan O’Toole says something rather similar:

What do you do if you’re a reality TV star and your show is flagging?

Easy: you generate conflict. Get people up in arms, keep them talking about you.

So what if some of them are apoplectic? – apoplectic is good. But what if you’ve already started lots of fires and they’re spluttering out? You do what everyone in Hollywood or TV land does when things are not going well – you revive an old idea that worked before. If it grabbed the ratings last time, why not roll it out again? This is what Donald Trump has done with the dramatic sacking of the FBI director James Comey. He is trying to keep his fans happy by reviving his catchphrase from the Apprentice: “You’re fired!”

To suggest that there is some method in Trump’s madness is not to deny that the firing of Comey is indeed mad. The chaotic implementation of the move – with Comey learning of his sacking from breaking news stories on TV and Trump’s surrogates utterly unprepared for the task of defending his latest outrage – suggests that it was largely impulsive. The impulse in question is the narcissist’s rage that the world is refusing to conform to his desires.

Trump’s instinctive gamble has always been that his fans would be happy to live vicariously through him. His self-gratification gratifies their own desires. He is for them a kind of wish-fulfillment, a figure of untrammeled power who doesn’t have to abide by rules, who can grope anyone he wants and fire anyone he wants.

It’s an absurd gamble but of course it paid off with the presidency of the US. It ceases to pay off, however, the moment he begins to look like a man who acknowledges ordinary limits and common laws.

Decorum would destroy him.

There may be many reasons why Trump fired Comey but two of them loom largest: he wanted to and he could.

He is entirely incapable of doing his job, but it happens to be a job that allows him to fire missiles and fire people.

For as long as he survives, he will never be able to resist the gesture for which his fans learned to adore him: pointing his stubby finger and saying “You’re fired!”

Or this, from Simon Riesche:

It is no secret that Donald Trump is greatly concerned with the results of  research into his person. “I get very good marks for foreign policy”, he was pleased to say this week in an interview with the magazine “Time” . That his general popularity continues to be very bad, the President did not say. About the unflattering result of a recent survey – according to which the top three concepts Americans have of Donald Trump, “idiot” (1st place), “incompetent” (2nd place) and “liar” (3rd place) — he unsurprisingly uttered not a  syllable.

It is always the same pattern, the author and blogger Paul Waldman analyzed a few weeks ago. First, the President said “something ridiculous”. Then his helpers would come together to assure either that what Trump was saying was true, or at least had a true core. Subsequently, most media would then deconstruct Trump’s alleged truths and even some Republicans would distance themselves from the president. At the same time, right-wing commentators would rush to help Trump and hastily spread conspiracy theories. “When it’s over, we all feel disoriented, as if someone has just awakened us from a deep sleep and tells us that we have two minutes to come up with support for 20 lies and solve a crossword puzzle.” And then comes the next tweet.

Waldman also has a name for Trumps alleged Masterplan: “Bombardment of baloney”.

Der Spiegel’s Veit Medick has this to say:

Trump’s Putsch from above is a sign of how serious the situation is for him. The Russia affair is not only still there, it has now become a rather unpleasant problem. Ex-Justice Minister Sally Yates put the question on Monday on the issue of why the president held his first security adviser Mike Flynn in office, even though there were warnings that he had misrepresented talks with the Russian ambassador. In addition, it became known that the FBI has now also taken action specifically against Flynn’s associates. That now needs to be stopped – Trump’s decision was  driven by this desire.

We should be careful with historical comparisons, but at this point it is difficult not to think of Richard Nixon. In October 1973, Nixon, then himself under pressure, fired Archibald Cox, the special investigator in the Watergate scandal in which the president was so deeply involved. The dismissal was the beginning of Nixon’s end. Trump hopes that he will come through by making his decision. And so the matter becomes a great test for the US.

Trump and his rhetoric have long been a burden on the independence of the institutions. If the Republican majority now nods through a successor to Comey, the president will not only erode this independence, but also the confidence in the rule of law in the United States.

However, if a person who is supported by Republicans and Democrats and is beyond any doubt is found, the system of “checks and balances” endangered under Trump may experience a certain revitalization. This also includes the use of a non-partisan special investigator, who investigates the Russian affair to the last detail.

In the Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Marie-Astrid Langer says all this is endangering the Trump project:

In the past few days, Trump has not only shown how impulsive and thoughtless he is, but also how much he is ignoring the influence of his advisors. He has demonstrated above all his low opinion against the independence of the FBI. His behavior feeds a well-known narrative. Earlier, he had compared CIA’s foreign secret service with the Nazis and threatened uncooperative judges. Those who still needed proof of how Trump stands on the separation of powers and the independence of the institutions received him this week.

This behavior may shock Washington, partly also disgust, and harms America’s reputation as a democracy. But the fact is: it hardly changes the minds of Trump’s base. None of what the President has revealed in the past few days is new, but follows his pattern. A majority of the electoral districts voted for him nonetheless. What interests Trump’s voters are perceptible reforms, especially economic. That is why they carried him to the White House, and they will measure him or the Republicans in the mid-term 2018 elections.

But Trump could stumble here: the Russia affair with its ever-new episodes threatens his reform agenda. Firstly, scandals such as the recent ones soak up resources in Washington and delay the implementation of electoral promises, specifically health reform or new tax legislation. Both Trump and the Republicans want to whip the Congress as soon as possible, as long as they have the majority there. Secondly, Trump risks his backing among Republican Congressmen. So far, many of them have shut their eyes, but the president is likely to overstretch loyalty, especially when it comes to a red flag like Russia. Only a few Republicans would have to turn their backs on him, and the majorities in Congress would be destroyed.

And there’s a lot more in a similar vein.

But the NZZ in particular has some other articles less focused on the immediate problems of the Trump administration.

Ivo Mijnssen has an article about the crisis of democracy:

Presidential candidates generally praise the virtues of their country. Donald Trump is different. His America is so degenerate that it is no longer a model for anyone. Asked whether he would stand like his predecessors for the promotion of democracy, he simply said: “We have no right to give lessons. We must go to our own door. “ The statement is symptomatic of the crisis of the promotion of democracy, especially in the country which for decades, with messianic self-assurance, stood for freedom and human rights worldwide.

Trump meets the Zeitgeist. The one-time hopes for the unstoppable global advance of democracy and market economy have given way to a skepticism that often slips into cynicism. At best, it derives from legitimate criticism of the trench between Western realpolitik and humanitarian ideals. In the worst, rulers in Russia or China abuse this temporising to pursue their goals. More and more populists in Europe are joining the choir. The democratic promise has become a concept of struggle.

The Copenhagen Criteria of 1993 for EU candidate countries provided clear legal and market-based standards. This gave the Union a strong leverage in the democratization and opening up of the post-communist states in the 1990s. In return for the costs, Western companies opened up new markets. Democratization in the course of the EU eastward enlargement was a success.

However, the EU did not welcome the movement of democracy on its eastern edge with open arms. The Europeans supported many citizens’ initiatives and , at the beginning of the millennium, spent almost ten percent of their development aid on democracy projects – about the same as the US . They did not open up a prospect of accession to the poor and politically unstable states.

The cost, lack of consensus, and the consideration for the reviving Russia, they held back. The non-committal neighborhood policy, without any prospect of EU membership, which offered Brussels, for example, to Ukraine, was not enough to democratically sustain them.

The US under George W. Bush also contributed strongly to the crisis of democratic promotion. They discovered this as a means against terror , which they applied independently of whether the prerequisites for a liberal order were given in a country. The disastrous armed democracy campaign in the Middle East and the excesses of the war on terror damaged the credibility and led to quarrel with the Europeans. This played into the hands of the enemies of democracy in Eastern Europe.

These conspiracy theories and merging strategies are still valid today – even with a Western audience. They serve the Putins and Orbans of the world as a general purpose weapon to deprecate criticism. The discussion is hardly ever about the difficult to justify promotion of democracy with weapons. Rather, the autocrats attack civil society, the free media and the independent judiciary. Cynically, they do not argue openly against a free society. They merely undermine the credibility of their bearers by branding them as artificial, imported, and unpatriotic.

Expanding particularly on Putin, Andreas Rüesch discusses the new Russian offensives:

A sigh of relief went through Europe, when Emmanuel Macron won the election to the top of France last weekend. The horror of a seizure of power by the authoritarian nationalist party of Marine Le Pen seems to be defeated; the second largest economy in the euro zone remains on a predictable course However, the feeling of being able to sit back and rest easy is wrong. This is not only due to Macron, who will hardly be able to fulfill his hopes. It is also a matter of concern that France – like before the US – was the victim of an externally-driven campaign to influence the elections. The pattern was the same as in the previous year with the American Democrats: hackers got themselves using fraudulent emails access to computers of the Macron camp, captured internal documents and revealed these shortly before the election with the goal of putting the favorites in a bad light.

Unlike in the USA, the trick did not work this time. The publication was far too near the election to have an effect. But this is only a weak consolation, because the leaders of the disinformation campaign will not be beaten, but will draw from this error the necessary lessons for their next action. Interferences such as these threaten to become a permanent companion of Western election campaigns.

Disinformation is now one of Putin’s favorite occupations. The modern communications society offers resources, of which he could only dream as a young agent. Geographic distances have become irrelevant thanks to the Internet, online platforms such as Wikileaks help uncover discrediting documents, and robot programs ensure that propaganda is automated and spread over social networks. It is no longer enough for the Kremlin to stifle democracy in its own country, but it also wants to manipulate it abroad. This fits into Russia’s goal of weakening the West and causing fear on the world stage as a great power. Putin has billions of dollars in his hacking brigades and propaganda budgets; However, it is a cost-effective instrument, much cheaper than a conventional military deployment

….
Trump would probably have been elected without Putin’s help. But the goal of weakening America from within has reached Moscow. The dispute over the Russian interference in the election campaign is like a long-term poison, which paralyzes American politics. The de facto dubious dismissal of the FBI chief, who wanted to track Trumps Russia’s intertwines, was another omen this week that Washington could slip into a real state crisis.

Against this background, it is tragic that the traditional preeminence of the free world is governed by a president who has no sensitivity to the danger from Moscow and who constantly lies to his people. Nevertheless, it is necessary to put Putin within limits. It is not enough to equip the western cyber defense system technically and with personnel. It also needs a new concept of deterrence. Russia must be credibly aware that further manipulation campaigns would result in painful retaliation. Finally, the West also has a rich arsenal of nonmilitary resources. It is conceivable to strengthen the persecution of Russian hackers, who are often confused with the criminal underworld, as well as the freezing of assets of the Putin regime in the West. A discussion is needed before the Kremlin continues to intensify its unstoppable attacks on the foundations of Western democracy.

But it’s fair to say that neither combatting Putin nor ousting Trump is going to be accomplished within the next few days. Trump is about to do some real Presidenting, taking a tour of various countries which host the headquarters of major religions other than Trumpism. So if you aren’t worried enough yet, read the redoubtable Patrick Cockburn:

Many people view Donald Trump as the most dangerous man on the planet, but next week he flies to Saudi Arabia for a three-day visit during which he will meet a man who surely runs him a close second as a source of instability. This is deputy crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, 31 – the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia since his father King Salman, 81, is incapacitated by old age – who has won a reputation for impulsiveness, aggression and poor judgement in the two-and-half years he has held power. Early on he escalated the Saudi role in Syria, thereby helping to precipitate Russian military intervention, and initiated a war in Yemen that is still going on and has reduced 17 million people to the brink of famine. Combine his failings with those of Trump, a man equally careless or ignorant about the consequence of his actions, and you have an explosive mixture threatening the most volatile region on earth.

Prince Mohammed, who is also defence minister, is not a man who learns from his mistakes or even notices that he has made them. Less than a year after his father became king in January 2015, the BND German intelligence agency issued a warning that Saudi Arabia had adopted “an impulsive policy of intervention” abroad and blamed this on the deputy crown prince whom it portrayed as a naïve political gambler. The degree of alarm within the BND about his impact on the region must have been high for them to release such a document which was swiftly withdrawn at the insistence of the German foreign ministry, but its predictions have been fulfilled disastrously in the following eighteen months.

Trump has already ordered greater US support for the Saudi war effort in Yemen, but the deputy crown prince will be primarily bidding for US backing for his confrontation with Iran. Words are already turning into action with reports of the US and Saudi Arabia being at one in planning to stir up an anti-government insurgency among minorities in Iran such as the Baluchis in the south east, something that has been done before but with limited impact.

Saudi leaders were overjoyed by the election of Trump whom they see as sympathetic to them and the Gulf leaders whom he will meet after he arrives in Saudi Arabia on 19 May, before going on to Israel. It is a chilling tribute to the authoritarian instincts of Trump that his first foreign visit as President should be to the last arbitrary monarchies left on earth and to a state where women are not even allowed to drive. On the question of confronting Iran, he is unlikely to be restrained by his Defence Secretary, James Mattis, and his National Security Adviser, HR McMaster, both former generals scarred by America’s war in Iraq, where they see Iran as the main enemy.

The White House is doubtless conscious that the one-time Trump has won universal plaudits in the US was when he fired missiles in Syria and dropped a big bomb in Afghanistan. Trump and Prince Mohammed may be very different in some respects, but both know that fighting foreign foes and waving the flag shores up crumbling support at home.

So there we are. If the weather is even halfway decent where you are, I strongly advise going outdoors and seeing something uplifting.

It Takes A Village – VNV Monday: We the People – 5/8/17



 

Just like to take a moment of Personal Privilege to first wish my eldest child a Happy 40th Birthday, to the love of my existence my wife a Happy 60th and for 41 years of love and companionship.

Trumpcare Destroys Any Notion That American Conservatism Gives a Damn

By

Image
Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post/Getty Images

A word on Obamacare. I relied on it until just recently when I joined New York’s staff and went on an employer’s plan, and, to tell the truth, part of me didn’t even want to make the change — even though it will obviously save me a lot of money. What Obamacare did for me, living with the preexisting condition of HIV, was, first of all, give me far more independence and freedom. It gave me the confidence to quit a previous job and start my own little media company — my blog, the Dish. It gave me peace of mind when I subsequently shut that business down and was able to stay on the same plan. It allowed me to be a freelance writer without fear of personal bankruptcy. I got no subsidy, but I was glad to pay the premiums for me and my husband because it gave me a sense of control over our finances and our future. I knew I wouldn’t suddenly find myself facing soaring health-care costs or no health care at all — and the premium actually went down a smidgen last year.

The TrumpGOP’s attempt to abolish it is therefore, to my mind, neither conservative nor decent.

You might think Obamacare would violate my generally conservative principles, but it didn’t. In fact, it seemed to me to be an effective marriage of conservative principles and, well, human decency. The decency part comes from not blaming or punishing the sick for their condition. The conservative part comes from the incremental nature of the reform, and its reliance on the private sector to provide a public good. For good measure, it actually saved the government money, and it slowed soaring health-care costs. The exchanges, with predictable early hiccups, largely worked — a case study in the benefits of market competition. The law allowed for experiments to test how efficient health care could be. It even insisted on personal responsibility by mandating individual coverage. And the concept of insurance is not socialism; it’s a matter simply of pooling risk as widely as possible. If any European conservative party were to propose such a system, it would be pilloried as a far-right plot. And yet the Republican Party opposed it with a passion that became very hard for me to disentangle from hatred of Obama himself.

The Trump GOP’s attempt to abolish it is therefore, to my mind, neither conservative nor decent. It’s reactionary and callous. Its effective abandonment of 95 percent of us with preexisting conditions will strike real terror in a lot of people’s hearts. Its gutting of Medicaid will force millions of the poor to lose health care almost altogether. It will bankrupt the struggling members of the working and middle classes who find themselves in a serious health crisis. It could hurt Republicans in the midterms —though that will be cold comfort for the countless forced into penury or sickness because of Trump’s desire for a “win.” But it’s clarifying for me. It forces me to back a Democratic Party I don’t particularly care for. And it destroys any notion I might have had that American conservatism gives a damn about the vulnerable. It really is a deal-breaker for me. I hope many others feel exactly the same way.

AMA Letter to Congressional Leaders on Reform of Health Care System

For immediate release:
Jan 3, 2017

Back to top

CHICAGO – The American Medical Association (AMA) released the following letter today to congressional leadership from Chief Executive Officer and Executive Vice President James L. Madara, M.D., concerning legislative efforts to reform the health care system.

Dear Majority Leader McConnell, Leader Schumer, Speaker Ryan and Leader Pelosi:

On behalf of the physician and medical student members of the American Medical Association (AMA), I am writing regarding our ongoing commitment to reform of the health care system and potential legislative actions during the first months of the 115th Congress.

The AMA has long advocated for health insurance coverage for all Americans, as well as pluralism, freedom of choice, freedom of practice, and universal access for patients. These policy positions are guided by the actions of the AMA House of Delegates, composed of representatives of more than 190 state and national specialty medical associations, and they form the basis for AMA consideration of reforms to our health care system.

Health system reform is an ongoing quest for improvement. The AMA supported passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) because it was a significant improvement on the status quo at that time. We continue to embrace the primary goal of that law—to make high quality, affordable health care coverage accessible to all Americans. We also recognize that the ACA is imperfect and there a number of issues that need to be addressed. As such, we welcome proposals, consistent with the policies of our House of Delegates, to make coverage more affordable, provide greater choice, and increase the number of those insured.

In considering opportunities to make coverage more affordable and accessible to all Americans, it is essential that gains in the number of Americans with health insurance coverage be maintained.

Consistent with this core principle, we believe that before any action is taken through reconciliation or other means that would potentially alter coverage, policymakers should lay out for the American people, in reasonable detail, what will replace current policies. Patients and other stakeholders should be able to clearly compare current policy to new proposals so they can make informed decisions about whether it represents a step forward in the ongoing process of health reform.

We stand ready to work with you to continue the process of improving our health care system and ensuring that all Americans have access to high quality, affordable health care coverage.

Sincerely,
James L. Madara, MD

AUSTRALIA’S Health System

It is not single payer.

Australia has a universal health care structure, with the federal government paying a large part of the cost of health services, including those in public hospitals. The amount paid by the federal government includes:

  1. patient health costs based on the Medicare benefits schedule. Typically, Medicare covers 75% of general practitioner, 85% of specialist and 100% of public in-hospital costs.
  2. patients may be entitled to other concessions or benefits[8]
  3. patients may be entitled to further benefits once they have crossed a so-called safety net threshold, based on total health expenditure for the year.[8]

Government expenditure on healthcare is about 67% of the total, below the OECD average of 72%.[9]

The remainder of health costs (called out of pocket costs or the copayment) are paid by the patient, unless the provider of the service chooses to use bulk billing, charging only the scheduled fee, leaving the patient with no out of pocket costs. Where a particular service is not covered, such as dentistry, optometry, and ambulance transport,[10] patients must pay the full amount, unless they hold a Health Care card, which may entitle them to subsidised access.

Individuals can take out private health insurance to cover out-of-pocket costs, with either a plan that covers just selected services, to a full coverage plan. In practice, a person with private insurance may still be left with out-of-pocket payments, as services in private hospitals often cost more than the insurance payment.

The government encourages individuals with income above a set level to privately insure. This is done by charging these (higher income) individuals a surcharge of 1% to 1.5% of income if they do not take out private health insurance, and a means-tested rebate. This is to encourage individuals who are perceived as able to afford private insurance not to resort to the public health system,[11] even though people with valid private health insurance may still elect to use the public system if they wish.

Insurance[edit]

Medicare is Australia’s publicly funded universal health care system.

Funding of the health system in Australia is a combination of government funding and private health insurance. Government funding is through the Medicare scheme, which subsidises out-of-hospital medical treatment and funds free universal access to hospital treatment. Medicare is funded by a 2% tax levy on taxpayers with incomes above a threshold amount, with an extra 1% levy on high income earners without private health insurance, and the balance being provided by the government from general revenue.[12]

Private health insurance, funds private health and is provided by a number of private health insurance organisations, called health funds. The largest health fund with a 30% market share is Medibank. Medibank was set up to provide competition to private “for-profit” health funds. Although government owned, the fund has operated as a government business enterprise since 2009, operating as a fully commercialised business paying tax and dividends under the same regulatory regime as do all other registered private health funds. Highly regulated regarding the premiums it can set, the fund was designed to put pressure on other health funds to keep premiums at a reasonable level

Petit Déjeuner and other European stuff

Having spent last weekend campaigning, I expected to produce a decent diary this week. However, as I sit down to compile this, I have a streaming cold, so it’s going to be rather less substantial than I’d hoped.

Anyway, today is election day in France, the Presidential run-off between Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen. The polls all expect Macron to win handsomely; Mme Le Pen is naturally saying she can still win, but her campaign staff are saying that they will regard it as a victory if she gets 35%. That may well be pitching expectations so that they can appear jubilant if she hits 40%, but it will take abstentions on a massive scale for her to win. The purity-obsessed Left are encouraging abstention because Macron isn’t sufficiently progressive for their delicate sensibilities, but it would be astounding if that happened. Apart from the far Left and Le Pen’s own party, political figures from the entire political spectrum are urging people to vote for Macron.

It Takes A Village – VNV Monday: We the People – 5/1/17



 

Excellent report I wanted to share with you:

Welcome to the latest issue of Greenlining’s #ResistReport, which appears on our blog every Thursday. With so many harmful policies coming out of Washington, we hope this will help our friends and supporters plug into grassroots activities to resist these policies here in the Bay Area and around the country.

If you find this weekly compilation of actions, updates, and resources useful, please share it with your friends and colleagues.

TAKE ACTION:

  • Individual actions:
    • Resist negative stereotypes and celebrate Muslim and immigrant mamas this Mama’s Day, thanks to these beautiful images from Forward Together.
    • May Day actions to resist dangerous policies and protect communities are coming! Catch up on the latest Beyond the Moment nationwide “road to May Day” call here (discussion actually starts at about 34:50).
    • Resist on May Day! Stand up for immigrants, workers, womxn, and people of color wherever you are! Find local events, digital resources, posters, and other info here.
    • Connect theory with action through Harvard’s free Resistance School videos.
    • Practice self-care — check out wisdom from Jen Hofmann here.
  • Political & Social Justice Events:
    • March for Science on Earth Day, Saturday 4/22! Rallies in Sacramento, San Francisco, Berkeley, and around the U.S. Find local events here.
    • Learn more about sanctuary policies at the Sanctuary Jurisdiction Symposium, hosted by the Santa Clara Law Center for Social Justice and Public Service on Friday 4/21 at 9 a.m.
    • Join Mexican journalist Carmen Aristegui and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Prof. Lowell Bergman for “45 from the Mexican Perspective,” on Friday 4/21 at 6 p.m.
    • Untangle the relationship between (neo)liberalism and Islamophobia at Cal’s 8th Annual International Islamophobia Conference on Friday 4/21-Sunday 4/23.
    • Livestream Sen. Kamala Harris’ first Town Hall as California Senator at Shotgun Players on Friday 4/21 at 3 p.m.
    • Support young people in conversations about race, gender, and power dynamics; attend “Talking with Kids about Race: A Panel Discussion,” hosted by Showing Up for Racial Justice (SURJ), on Saturday 4/22 at 3:30 p.m.
    • Learn to resist unlawful evictions and learn more about your tenants’ rights. Join the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project, the East Bay Community Law Center, and others on Saturday 4/22 at 2 p.m.
    • Join this multigenerational conversation on the LGBTQ movement’s involvement in electoral politics, hosted by the GLBT Historical Society on Tuesday 4/25 at 7 p.m.
    • Protest ICE detentions and deportations in Richmond on Sunday 4/23 at 11 a.m.
    • Discuss Angela Davis’ “Freedom is a Constant Struggle” at a Racial Justice Reading Group. Meets in Alameda on Tuesday 4/25 at 7:30 p.m.
    • Protest Berkeley’s participation in Urban Shield at the Berkeley City Council meeting on Tuesday 4/25 at 7 p.m.
    • Fight for justice and jobs, peace and the planet: Join the People’s Climate Movement Bay Area at Lake Merritt on Saturday 4/29.
    • Explore emerging threats and learn how to resist authoritarian trends at ‘Facing the Right: A Conversation with Tarso Luis Ramos.’ Hosted by the Center for Political Education, featuring Ramos, ED of Political Research Associates, on Tuesday 5/4 at 7 p.m.
  • Trainings and Discussions:
    • Register for a webinar discussion with Gina McCarthy, President Obama’s EPA Administrator from 2013-2016, on Thursday 4/20 at 5 p.m. Thanks to Interfaith Power and Light for hosting this conversation.
    • Explore social justice and the healing power of art at “The Art of Seeing,” a workshop through OneLife Institute with funding from the Akonadi Foundation, Thursday 4/20 at 6:30 p.m.
    • Practice public speaking at the “Speak from Your Strengths” workshop, hosted by the Asian American Women Artists Association on Saturday 4/22 at 1 p.m.
    • Join the Legal Observer Training for a Rapid Response Team, hosted by Sacramento Immigration Coalition on Tuesday 4/25 at 6 p.m.
  • Arts Events:
    • Uplift over 60 art pieces by trans and gender nonconforming artists across the US at the “Trans Life + Liberation Art Opening” on Friday 4/21 and Saturday 4/22.
    • Support local storytelling at “Stranger in a Strange Land,” on Saturday 4/22 at 7 p.m.
    • Cheer on local musicians at a concert benefiting ScienceDebate.org, fiscal partner for the March for Science. Concert on Saturday 4/22 at 7:30 p.m.
    • Screenprint shirts, hoodies, and fabric to support immigrant justice! Join the Berkeley Animal Rights Center and Berkeley Organization for Animal Advocacy on Saturday 4/22 at 1 p.m.
    • Build art for the May Day March and Strike on Monday 4/24 at 4 p.m.
    • Drum alongside BoomShake Music and Batala SF on Monday 4/24 at 7 p.m.
    • Celebrate SF MOMA’s Birthday Bash with Solange on Wednesday 4/26 at 6:30 p.m.

WINS FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR:

  • Thousands March Nationwide to Demand 45’s Taxes:
    • In over 150 cities on Saturday 4/15, people rallied to demand 45’s tax returns. Thousands gathered in San Francisco alone (with over 10,000 marked interested on the FB event). Speakers included SF Supervisor and Greenlining Leadership Academy alum Jane Kim.
  • 45’s Lawyer Retreats on Sanctuary Cities:
    • On Friday 4/14 the Trump administration’s lawyer told a federal judge that 45’s recent executive order doesn’t actually deprive sanctuary cities of funding. SF City Attorney Dennis Herrera said, “President Trump tried to take a scorched-earth approach to immigration, and San Francisco stood up to him. Because San Francisco faced down this bully, and because others like Santa Clara County joined us, President Trump had to back down.” Whether this constitutes a real change or a temporary tactical retreat as cities resist remains to be seen. Read Herrera’s full statement here.
  • Sanctuary Restaurant Movement Sweeps Bay Area and East Coast:
    • The Sanctuary Restaurant movement has swept the Bay as well as cities around the country, including Philadelphia, Boston, L.A., Miami, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. Though lacking legal force, the effort at least symbolically “protects restaurant workers from harassment and [promotes] diverse workplaces and communities regardless of immigration status.”
    • With an estimated 30% of SF restaurant workers undocumented, the Golden Gate Restaurant Association announced last week that it will formally educate its 1,000 member restaurants on immigrants’ rights for employees and patrons alike.
  • New Fruitvale Restaurant and Worker-Owned Cooperative Incubator to Support Workers of Color in Fine Dining:
    • Restaurant Opportunities Center (ROC) and the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights purchased a building in Fruitvale for a new restaurant, Colors, to serve as a training facility and worker-owned cooperative incubator. The effort seeks to usher more workers of color into fine dining and higher-wage restaurant industry jobs by specifically addressing the intersection of race and income inequality.
  • Foundation Earmarks $90 Million to Girls of Color:
    • Executive Director of the NoVo Foundation, Pamela Shifman, noted that “minority girls are disproportionately affected by a number of social ills, including poverty and sexual assault, but are largely overlooked in philanthropic giving.” Over seven years, the $90 million will fund community-based groups that specifically work with girls of color, as well as national policy and research organizations focused on issues for women and girls of color.

RESOURCES:

  • Intro Materials:
    • Explore how one Korean-American woman understands being a woman of color and how a Chinese-American woman grapples with the absence of Asian Americans in U.S. history books.
    • Unpack the ‘Model Minority’ Myth here. Learn how this myth has pitted AAPI communities against black communities in the US here.
    • Check out these “10 Books I Wish My White Teachers Had Read.”
    • Decolonize your history with this article, “8 Times the US Government Gave White People Handouts to Get Ahead”’
    • Listen to Prof. Duchess Harris’ presentation, “Hidden Human Computers: The Black Women of NASA,” the inspiration for the movie Hidden Figures

 

 

Status of the Latest Distraction from Russia– Tax Reform:

The Vagina Grabber In Chief has introduced his “Bernie Madoff” tax reform principle that has the potential to create a black hole of financial debt and send the country into a recession. That bastion of liberalism Jennifer Rubin [snark], even scoffs at the Tax reform effort backed in March.

” In the case of taxes, both Trump and Ryan ignore palpable distaste for widening income inequality and the risk of enlarging the already enormous debt. However, in this case, Ryan is more wrong than the president, if only because Ryan offers the working poor and middle class so little. At least Trump would have the argument that the middle class gets something along with the rich:

Trump’s plan arguably reflects his unique style of conservative populism. The proposal would be extremely costly for the government, and the president’s past comments suggest he would be willing to put the federal government deeper into debt to fund breaks for the middle class.

Ryan’s plan would instead simplify and streamline the tax code in accordance with conservative orthodoxy, eliminating the goodies for households with modest incomes that Trump would preserve or expand.

In all, taxpayers with roughly average incomes could expect a tax cut of around $1,100 a year under Trump’s plan, compared to just $60 under Ryan’s plan once the proposals were fully implemented.

Ryan’s plan gets worse, however. Ryan want to fill the revenue gap created by his plan with a border adjustment tax. That idea makes the Ryan plan even less likely to pass the Senate and less friendly toward middle- and lower-class Americans who spend more of their income on imported necessities (e.g., food, clothing, household goods) that will include a new tax paid by consumers.

Frankly, we don’t think any cut of the top marginal rate for individuals makes sense at a time of huge debt, when neither party has the nerve to address entitlement reform. Revenue-neutral corporate tax reform, pro-growth trade and immigration policies, smart regulatory policy and investment in both worker skills and physical infrastructure have much more appeal politically and are likely to bear equal or better results than another 1980’s-style tax cut for those at the very top.

Most Corrupt ever!

Trump’s White House Family Affair Looks A Lot Like The Most Corrupt Nations In The World

Presidential advisers Ivanka Trump and husband Jared Kushner are still connected to their own businesses.

ILLUSTRATION: JON SHIN/HUFFPOST; PHOTOS: GETTY IMAGES

WASHINGTON ― For decades, the United States has worked with other countries to eliminate nepotism. There’s a good reason for that: Nepotism breeds corruption.

“You’ve seen it in countries all over the world where they’ve appointed family members, whether it’s their son, daughter, in-laws — it provides for tremendous opportunities for corruption,” said Shruti Shah, an international anti-corruption expert at Coalition for Integrity, a good-government nonprofit. “People who want to curry favor find their way to provide favors to family members as a way to get closer to the person in power.”

But President Donald Trump, who has entrusted more power to his family members than any recent president, puts that agenda at risk. “I like nepotism,” Trump told Larry King in 2006, the year he replaced his “Apprentice” costar, Trump company executive Carolyn Kepcher, with his daughter Ivanka Trump.

Ivanka and her husband, Jared Kushner, hold broad portfolios at the White House that include everything from diplomacy with China, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, women’s issues, cybersecurity and reinventing government.

They determine who else has power in the Trump administration. Trump sidelined Steve Bannon, a close adviser, after he butted up against his daughter and adviser-in-law, and he elevated former Goldman Sachs employees Gary Cohn and Dina Powell based in part on their friendly relationships with Ivanka and her husband. And the couple act as presidential emissaries, with Kushner traveling to Iraq at the suggestion of the Pentagon and Ivanka heading to Germany.

Ivanka and Kushner — the two Trump advisers least likely to be fired — now rule the White House. And, although Ivanka and Kushner are not being paid, they maintain ownership stakes in their own businesses. Ivanka owns her own personal brand, which produces shoes, clothing, jewelry and accessories, and has a stake in her father’s businesses, including the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. Kushner, like Trump, is a real estate magnate with numerous holdings throughout the U.S. who inherited his wealth from his father.

The nepotism in the Trump administration would seem familiar in foreign countries with high rates of corruption, according to U.S. diplomats who have served in them.

“For many countries and governments, certainly in the Gulf, in the Middle East, they would recognize this pattern immediately,” Gerald Feierstein, who served as ambassador to Yemen from 2010 to 2013 and worked as a deputy secretary of state in the Obama administration, told HuffPost. “I think that they would find it completely normal that leaders mix personal business interests with government affairs and would use family members in various official responsibilities.”

THE WASHINGTON POST VIA GETTY IMAGES
Jared Kushner, senior adviser and son-in-law, listens to Donald Trump during a White House session with cybersecurity experts.

Joseph C. Wilson IV, former ambassador to Gabon and Sao Tome and Principe from 1992 to 1995 and deputy chief of mission in Iraq during the first Gulf War, told HuffPost, “If you’re an overseas businessman or politician who wants to curry favor with the Trump family, it doesn’t hurt to provide these little niceties to them. Things such as having a conference at the Trump hotel in Washington or entertaining at the Trump hotel, that you already see.”

Foreign countries have indeed taken advantage of the continued business ownership of Trump and his children/advisers.

China approved five new trademarks for Ivanka Trump’s business on the same day she met with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Ivanka’s business already had 16 registered trademarks in the country and has 30 more pending. The new trademarks covered the brand-name rights for jewelry, spa services and purses. The vast majority of Ivanka Trump’s product line is made in China and imported to the U.S.

Kushner’s company was seeking an investment from a politically connected Chinese bank into the largest property he owns. Those negotiations ended after members of Congress and others questioned whether it would create a conflict of interest with his work as a go-between for the White House and Chinese leadership. (Kushner sold his stake in the building to a private trust controlled by his family members.)

Foreign governments, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Azerbaijan and Turkey, have held or plan to hold events at Trump’s D.C. hotel, which both the president and his daughter have a stake in. It is not known how many diplomats and foreign dignitaries have decided to book rooms at Trump hotels or properties since the president took office.

“I think the Chinese have already completely figured it out,” Feierstein said. “I would say the Arabs have figured it out. Because, again, from their perspective, this isn’t an unusual thing. One way of ensuring favorable treatment is you take care of the business interests.”

SABAH ARAR VIA GETTY IMAGES
Supporters of Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr demonstrate in Baghdad on Feb. 8 to demand reforms from Iraq’s leading parties, which they accuse of corruption and nepotism.

Not all former diplomats see Trump’s nepotistic governing arrangement through the lens of foreign nations.

“Actually I would compare it to what I’ve seen in Washington,” Ambassador John Herbst, who headed the embassy in Uzbekistan from 2000 to 2003 and in Ukraine from 2003 to 2006, told HuffPost.

Herbst is right: The U.S. has its own long tradition of political nepotism. President George Washington was opposed to nepotism, but his successor, John Adams, appointed his son John Quincy Adams as minister to Prussia. Unlike Kushner and Ivanka Trump, John Quincy Adams had already, perhaps against his wishes, worked as minister to the Netherlands during Washington’s administration. “I rather wish it had not been made at all,” Adams lamented about the Netherlands posting. Later, President John F. Kennedy appointed his brother Robert as attorney general.

When PresOident Bill Clinton tapped his wife, Hillary Clinton, to lead an effort to reform health care in 1993, conservative and medical industry groups charged that her appointment violated either a 1967 anti-nepotism law or a federal advisory committee law requiring public meetings. But two appeals court judges ruled that Hillary Clinton’s White House role was not a violation of the anti-nepotism law. The decision stated that the nepotism law probably did not apply to White House adviser positions, particularly if they were unpaid.

“The anti-nepotism statute, moreover, may well bar appointment only to paid positions in government,” D.C. Circuit Court Judges Laurence Silberman and Stephen Williams wrote in their 1993 decision. “Thus, even if it would prevent the President from putting his spouse on the federal payroll, it does not preclude his spouse from aiding the President in the performance of his duties.”

The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel made the same argument in a 14-page memo rationalizing Trump’s appointment of his son-in-law as a White House adviser. The legal counsel also argued that a subsequent law providing the president with unilateral hiring authority in the White House superseded the possibility of the nepotism law restricting the employment of children or in-laws.

Or, as Eric Trump, the co-head of the president’s multibillion-dollar international business, puts it, “Nepotism is kind of a factor of life.”

One Hundred Days of Incompetence:

There is frustration all around. During his first hundred days in office, Trump has not done away with populist rhetoric, but he has acted almost entirely as a plutocrat. His Cabinet and his cast of advisers are stocked with multimillionaires and billionaires. His positions on health care, tax reform, and financial regulation are of greatest appeal to the super-wealthy. How he intends to improve the situation of the middle class remains obscure. A report in Politico described thirty staffers holed up in a conference room in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, attempting a “rebranding” of this first chapter of the Trump Administration. The aides furiously assembled “lists of early successes” on whiteboards.

One success they can name is the appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, although Democrats rightly judge that his seat was stolen from Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. The first hundred days are marked most indelibly by Trump’s attempted ban of travellers from six Muslim countries, which failed in the courts, and the effort to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act, which imploded in the House of Representatives. The list of domestic initiatives is largely confined to reversals of achievements of the Obama era. Trump has proposed an expansion of the prison at Guantánamo and ordered the easing of Dodd-Frank financial regulations. He has reversed plans to save wetlands and protect waterways from coal waste; he has reversed executive orders that banned gun sales to the mentally ill and that protected L.G.B.T. federal employees from discrimination; his Vice-President voted in a Senate tiebreaker to allow states to defund Planned Parenthood clinics. Trump, because of the lavish travel habits of his family, is shaping up to be the most expensive executive in history to guard. At the same time, his budget proposals would, if passed in Congress, cut the funding of after-school programs, rental-assistance programs, the Community Development Block Grant program, legal assistance for the poor, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Scorekeepers will credit these as promises kept. Guardians of democratic values and the environment, champions of economic opportunity and the national well-being will view them as an ever-growing damage report.

“There’s a slight madness to thinking you should be the leader of the free world,” Obama admitted before he went ahead and ran for President. But even after Richard Nixon’s anti-Semitic rants and Ronald Reagan’s astrology-influenced daily schedule, we are at a new level of strangeness with Donald Trump—something that his biography had always suggested.

Trump emerged from neither a log cabin nor the contemporary meritocracy. He inherited his father’s outer-borough real-estate empire—a considerable enterprise distinguished by racist federal-housing violations—and brought it to Manhattan. He entered a world of contractors, casino operators, Roy Cohn, professional-wrestling stars, Rupert Murdoch, multiple bankruptcies, tabloid divorces, Mar-a-Lago golf tournaments, and reality television. He had no real civic presence in New York. A wealthy man, he gave almost nothing to charity. He cultivated a kind of louche glamour. At Studio 54, he said, “I would watch supermodels getting screwed . . . on a bench in the middle of the room.” He had no close friends. Mainly, he preferred to work, play golf, and spend long hours at home watching TV. His misogyny and his low character were always manifest. Displeased with a harmless Palm Beach society journalist named Shannon Donnelly, he told her in a letter that if she adhered to his standards of discretion, “I will promise not to show you as the crude, fat and obnoxious slob which everyone knows you are.” Insofar as he had political opinions, they were inconsistent and mainly another form of performance art, part of his talk-show patter. His contributions to political campaigns were unrelated to conviction; he gave solely to curry favor with those who could do his business some good. He believed in nothing.

By the mid-nineties, Trump’s investment prospects had foundered. Banks cut him off. He turned to increasingly dubious sources of credit and branding opportunities at home and abroad. A typical deal, involving a hotel in Baku, Azerbaijan (described at length in these pages by Adam Davidson), included as partners an Azerbaijani family distinguished for its outsized corruption and for its connections to some Iranian brothers who worked as a profit front for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. There is little mystery as to why Trump has broken with custom and refuses to release his tax returns. A record of his colossal tax breaks, associations, deals, and net worth resides in those forms. It may turn out that deals like the one in Baku will haunt his Presidency no less than his grotesque conflicts of interest or any of the possible connections to Russia now being investigated by the F.B.I. and congressional committees will.

As Trump struggled in business, he made a deal with NBC to star in “The Apprentice,” which, for fourteen seasons, featured him in a role of corporate dominance. It was there that he honed his peculiar showmanship and connected to a mass audience well beyond New York City, perfecting the persona that became the core of his Presidential campaign: the billionaire populist. That role is not unknown in American history: in the eighteen-seventies, wealthy leaders of the Redeemer movement, a southern faction of the Bourbon Democrats linked to the Ku Klux Klan and other white paramilitary groups, set out to defund public schools, shrink government, lower taxes for land owners, and undercut the rise of a generation of black politicians.

It Takes A Village – VNV Monday: We the People – 4/24/17

Grass Roots Activism- Our salvation



 

 

Glad to see that President Obama will be making a speech soon. Sent encouragement to the French Presidential Candidate Melacon.

Popular vote winner Hillary Clinton blasted the Vagina’s Grabber In Chief recent anti-LGBTQ attacks, urging Americans to “remember 2018, the midterm elections” and “resist, insist, persist and enlist and make sure our voices and our votes count.” Hillary said:

“We have to face the fact that we may not ever be able to count on this administration to lead on LGBT issues,” the former Democratic nominee said during a speech at a fundraising event for The Center, a community LGBT organization in New York City.

Clinton singled out the Trump administration’s February directive revoking Obama-era protections for transgender students, with the Justice and Education Departments telling schools to disregard memos instructing them that preventing students from using bathrooms that aligned with their sexual identity would violate federal law.

The 2016 Democratic nominee added that if LGBT advocates wanted to see progress from the federal government, they needed to focus their efforts on the next round of congressional elections.

Protests during the presidency Just a reminder

Protest in Chicago on January 20

  • January 20 – Fifty women from El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juárez, demonstrated against the proposed wall and the Trump Administration immigration policies by standing on the US/Mexico border, linked by hands and braiding scarves or hair together between 7am and 9am.[290][291] The women were part of an organization called Boundless Across Borders.[291]
  • January 20, inauguration – Multiple protests took place in connection with the inauguration of Donald Trump as the President of the United States of America.[292]

Women’s March in Washington D.C.

  • January 21, Women’s Marches – A series of political rallies known as Women’s Marches took place in locations around the world.[293][294] Estimates suggest between 3.3 and 4.6 million people took part, making it the largest protest in United States history.[295]
  • January 25 – Seven Greenpeace members climbed a construction crane belonging to Clark Construction and displayed a large banner saying “Resist”, blocking traffic and interrupting work on a new office building a half mile from The White House.[296]
File:Trump Immigration Order Sparks Protests at NY Airport.webmhd.webm

‘Trump Immigration Order Sparks Protests at NY Airport’ report from Voice of America

February 2017[edit]

Protests in St. Louis

LGBT Solidarity Rally on February 4

Day Without Immigrants 2017 – Protesters in Washington, D.C.

File:Not My President's Day Protest VOA.webm

‘Not My President’s Day Protest’ video from Voice of America

  • February 20Not My Presidents Day, thousands of protesters in cities around the country demonstrated against Trump.[347]
  • February 21 – Protesters participated in a “Resist Trump Tuesday” protest in Chicago where 8 clergy members of different faiths were arrested.[348]
  • February 22 – After the Trump administration rescinded the protections for transgender students to use school restrooms that correspond to their gender identity, protests took place. [349] There were around 200 people demonstrating in front of the White House in support of transgender students’ rights.[350] The city council of Richmond, California passed a resolution which supported an investigation of Trump in relation to the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.[351]
  • February 24 – The United Talent Agency (UTA), which had already cancelled its Oscars party, hosted a rally against Trump, called “United Voices.”[352] The event helped raise $320,000 for the ACLU and the International Rescue Committee.[352] At the rally were Jodie Foster, Michael J. Fox, Keegan-Michael Key and other celebrities.[353] There were nearly 2,000 attendees.[352]
  • February 27 – A peaceful protest that stopped some traffic occurred in Minneapolis in the evening. The protest drew between 150 and 200 demonstrators who protested Trump and were in support of $15 minimum wage.[354]
  • February 28 – Protesters in Vancouver demonstrated anti-Trump sentiment during the grand opening of the Trump hotel in Vancouver.[355] Outside the White House, despite pouring rain, Rosie O’Donnell led a few hundred protesters against Trump.[356]

March 2017[edit]

  • March 1 – Protests against Trump using the hashtag, #CampusResistance, occurred on college campuses across the United States.[357]
  • March 2 – Employees of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) protested proposed budget cuts for their department. There were a “few dozen” protesters at the Federal Plaza in Chicago.[358]
  • March 3 – Around 1,000 protesters in Chicago demonstrated for transgender rights and against the Trump administration.[359] In Palm Beach, around 100 protesters demonstrated against Trump, and one protester was arrested and given a traffic ticket and then released.[360]
  • March 4 – Counter-protesters at Pro-Trump rallies (Spirit of America) occurred on March 4, with one protest, at Berkeley, becoming a violent clash between pro and anti-Trump groups.[361] Ten people were arrested in connection with the violence and the protest briefly shut down the BART station at Berkeley.[362] In Minneapolis, anti-Trump and pro-Trump supporters also clashed and six people were arrested for setting off firecrackers.[363]
  • March 6 – A rally held outside of the White House against the new travel ban. Tom Perez was one of the speakers.[364]
  • March 8A Day Without a Woman, a call for women not to work on International Women’s Day.[365]
  • March 10 – Thousands of protesters marched from the US Army Corps of Engineers headquarters to the White House to protest the Dakota Pipeline decision by Trump.[366]
  • March 12 – In Baltimore, several groups protested the revised travel ban.[367] On Sunday morning, an anonymous environmental group carved the message “NO MORE TIGERS. NO MORE WOODS.” into the greens of the Trump National Golf Club in Rancho Palos Verdes.[368] On the same day, in Brentwood, Los Angeles, roughly 50-60 people protested outside the offices of Breitbart News aiming to “hold the Trump Administration accountable for its unprecedented assault on the free press.”[369]
  • March 14 – Tech industry workers protested Trump’s policies on Pi Day.[370] There were a few hundred protesters in Palo Alto.[371]
  • March 15 – Hundreds of protesters demonstrated outside of a Trump rally in Nashville.[372] A physician, Carol Paris, interrupted the rally with a sign reading “Improved Medicare for All” and when she was met with boos from the crowd, Trump stopped speaking and she was asked to leave.[373] In Detroit, about 300 protesters demonstrated at the Willow Run Airport and denounced Trump’s environmental policies.[374]
  • March 17 – A small protest against Trump took in took place in Aspen.[375] In New York, the “Irish Stand” event took place. It was led by Aodhán Ó Riordáin in Riverside Church and opposed Trump’s stance on immigration.[376]
  • March 18 – Protests in London, Cardiff and Glasgow against Brexit and Trump’s “anti-migrant hysteria.”[377]
  • March 20 – Hundreds of protesters on Monday waved signs and gave fiery speeches at the gates to Freedom Hall ahead President Donald Trump’s visit to tout his plan to replace Obamacare, booing as Air Force One passed overhead for landing. [378][379]
  • March 21 – In opposition to “Trump Care,” around 300 protesters held a “die-in” outside of the office of Representative Darrell Issa in Vista, California.[380]
  • March 25 – Trump supporters clashed with Protesters after the Trump supporters path were blocked by the protesters.
  • March 28 – Anti-Trump Protesters Gather Outside Senator Cornyn’s Houston Office and voice their opinion.

April 2017

Tax March demonstrators outside the United States Capitol

  • April 1 – Hundreds of protesters showed up for a “dance party” protest outside of Ivanka Trump’s Washington, D.C. home.[383]
  • April 2 – Around 300 people, both pro and anti Trump came to a rally at Esther Short Park.[384]
  • April 3 – Protesters displayed a banner with the words “Impeach Trump” at the opening day game at Nationals Park.[385]
  • April 4 – Movie theaters across the United States and in five other countries screened 1984 in a protest against Donald Trump.[386][387]
  • April 9 – More than 3,000 people came to the Dallas MegaMarch demonstration to protest Trump’s immigration policies.[388][389] Protests against Trump’s strike on Syria occurred in Milwaukee.[390]
  • April 10 – Children and young adults from the group, We Belong Together, start their spring break trip to Washington D.C. to protest Trump. They first protested on Monday outside of Mayor Carlos Gimenez’s office because the mayor of Miami-Dade County has agreed to work with Trump.[391]
  • April 11 – Protests against both Trump and Representative Marsha Blackburn took place in Clarksville, Tennessee.[392]
  • April 12 – The “first protest in space” was carried out by the Autonomous Space Agency Network (ASAN) by printing a tweet against Trump and flown into the near-space atmosphere.[393]
  • April 13 – Around 25 protesters from the group, “Rise and Resist” were arrested while protesting immigration policies at Trump Tower.[394] Around 200 young people and other activists from We Belong Together protested in front of the White House.[395]
  • April 15 – The Tax March demanded that Donald Trump release his tax returns. Thousands attended rallies and marches held throughout the U.S.[396][397] At least 21 people were arrested as Trump supporters and opponents clashed Saturday at the Civic Center Park in Berkeley, California, police said. Another eleven people were also injured.[398]
  • April 18 – Protesters came to Snap-on Inc. in Kenosha, Wisconsin to urge Trump to release his tax returns. President Trump was there to sign an executive order.[399]
  • April 19 – Anti-Trump protesters showed up at Auburn University after “word got out that white nationalist Richard Spencer would be speaking at an event.”[400]

Planned protests

 Resistance Continues:

Jon Ossoff was 3200-3700 short of a clear win, but will win in June. Dems need to keep strong during the Budget negotiations, shut the Gov down if necessary, I will be directly affected.

Rev. Barber Silence is not an option https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics/videos/1529379923760159/

It Takes A Village – VNV Monday: We the People – 4/17/17

Grass Roots Activism- Our salvation


 

 

This week post will be short due to illness and PC Issues:

The continue dismantling of regulations and rules enacted to protect the most vernable continues with the resolution  to let states not fund planned parenthood.

We drop the Mother of all bombs on a another Nation of Color, shades of Doctor Strange Love.

Vagina Grabber In Chief wants to ride in a Carriage when he visits Britain.

7 executions in a role, what have we become as a nation.

 

 Resistance Continues:

Thousands March for The Vagina Grabber In Chief ‘s Tax return