Skip to content

Month: June 2018

Poor Nikki Haley, all alone in the world

Poor Nikki Haley, all alone in the world

by digby


Via Daily Kos:

One of Trump’s loyal subjects and the U.S. Ambassador, Nikki Haley, took a virtual beating at the United Nations meeting. The Twitter video below via Now This shows Haley begging other ambassadors to sign her Trump/U.S. Gaza Resolution. At one point in the video, with hand over her heart, Haley appears to be asking one ambassador, “Oh, please.” But her desperate attempts were to no avail leaving her in a very awkward situation. She then, in Trump style, tries to bully and threaten the entire U.N..

One ambassador said that he never, in the history of the U.N., had seen a resolution shot down the way Haley’s was. Here is the Now This video. With some videos, it’s easier to just read the transcript. I would recommend watching this one. It’s too good not to.

I think the world is coming around to simply saying, “who care what the US thinks about anything?”

Maybe that’s a good thing in theory. But we do have a monopoly on military power and nuclear weapons and a cretinous madman at the helm. So it’s probably not great for anyone.

Have Don and Rudy looked in the mirror lately?

Have Don and Rudy looked in the mirror lately?

by digby

Rudy says Melania doesn’t believe Trump had sex with Stormy Daniels. But Stormy is a whore anyway so…

“I respect women — beautiful women and women with value — but a woman who sells her body for sexual exploitation I don’t respect.Tell me what damage she suffered. Someone who sells his or her body for money has no good name.”

And just as Trump demeaned the looks of the women who claimed the creepy jerk mauled and groped them against their will he apparently doesn’t find Stormy Daniels attractive enough for him or Trump. It’s enough to make you wretch.

You can see this misogynist pig make these gross comments over at CNN:

Giuliani: Melania believes Trump over Daniels – CNN Video

Rudy Giuliani told an audience in Israel that he does not think first lady Melania Trump believes that President Donald Trump had an affair with Stormy Daniels. CNN’s MJ Lee reports.

Trump should be careful. Rudy’s making a good run at being the most despicable misogynist pig in the country, threatening to steal the crown from his client.

.

Bolton the wrecking ball

Bolton the wrecking ball

by digby

That sounds right. Trump didn’t know what the “Libya model” was so he didn’t realize what Bolton was doing. In fact he made it worse and ended up cancelling the summit with that puerile break up note, obviously dictated personally. Pompeo clearly got to him at some point and told him that Bolton was trying to ruin his Big Beautiful Pageant so he sidelined Bolton on this issue.

This should go over well:

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Wednesday boasted that Donald Trump’s tough line had forced the North Korean leader to beg to re-schedule a high-profile summit after the president abruptly called off the meeting.

After the cancellation, “Kim Jong Un got back on his hands and knees and begged for it, which is exactly the position you want to put him in,” Giuliani told a business conference in the Israeli city of Tel Aviv.

In an interview later with The Associated Press, Giuliani rejected suggestions that such comments might sour the atmosphere ahead of next week’s summit, saying that the North Korean leader must understand that the United States is in a position of strength.

“It is pointing out that the president is the stronger figure,” Giuliani told the AP. “And you’re not going to have useful negotiations unless he accepts that.”

Giuliani said Trump had no choice but to call off the meeting after the North Koreans insulted Vice President Mike Pence, National Security Adviser John Bolton and threatened “nuclear annihilation” of the U.S.

“President Trump didn’t take that. What he did was he called off the summit,” he said.

Giuliani said Kim quickly changed his position, expressed willingness to discuss denuclearization and asked to have the meeting again.

“That’s what I mean by begging for it,” Giuliani said.

Bolton did it on purpose. Giuliani probably didn’t.

But it amounts to the same thing.

.

Oh, Ivanka. #youtoo?

Oh, Ivanka. #youtoo?

by digby

Oh look, Ivanka  referred another Russian to Michael Cohen who wanted to bring Putin and Donald Trump together during the campaign:

Amid intense scrutiny of contacts between Donald Trump’s inner circle and representatives of Vladimir Putin, Ivanka Trump’s name has barely come up. But during the campaign, she connected her father’s personal lawyer with a Russian athlete who offered to introduce Donald Trump to Putin to facilitate a 100-story Trump tower in Moscow, according to emails reviewed by BuzzFeed News and four sources with knowledge of the matter.

There is no evidence that Ivanka Trump’s contact with the athlete — the former Olympic weightlifter Dmitry Klokov — was illegal or that it had anything to do with the election. Nor is it clear that Klokov could even have introduced Trump to the Russian president. But congressional investigators have reviewed emails and questioned witnesses about the interaction, according to two of the sources, and so has special counsel Robert Mueller’s team, according to the other two.

The contacts reveal that even as her father was campaigning to become president of the United States, Ivanka Trump connected Michael Cohen with a Russian who offered to arrange a meeting with one of America’s adversaries — in order to help close a business deal that could have made the Trump family millions.

Her people said this was all just a superficial contact and she really had nothing to do with it. But Buzzfeed has emails that show they are lying. Surprise.

Rudy Giuliani has said that investigating Ivanka would be a “red line” and I’m guessing Mueller believes this too. Trump’s excessively close relationship with his daughter and his explosive temperament probably precludes anyone questioning her despite the fact that she was a top executive in the Trump Organization and now works officially as a senior White House adviser to the president. Mueller probably feels it isn’t worth it.

But I can’t help but recall Ken Starr and all the other prosecutors during the Clinton years going after Hillary Clinton with everything they had from billing records of her time years before as a lawyer and those cattle futures trades from a decade before.

Unlike the situation with Ivanka, there were no national security implications but nonetheless, they hounded her. Recall this:

Hillary Clinton Is Subpoenaed To Testify Before a Grand Jury
By Alison Mitchell|Jan. 22nd, 1996

Hillary Rodham Clinton has been subpoenaed to appear before a Federal grand jury that is investigating whether anyone at the White House obstructed justice in the handling of records from the First Lady’s former law firm.

Mark Fabiani, a White House lawyer, said Mrs. Clinton would appear on Friday before a Washington grand jury to answer questions from Kenneth W. Starr, the independent counsel investigating the Whitewater real estate deal. Mr. Fabiani said that officials had received no indication that the First Lady was a target of the investigation.

Mrs. Clinton has already answered questions from Mr. Starr under oath three times about other areas of the inquiry. But this is the first time that she will appear before a grand jury. Indeed, White House officials said they believed it was the first time that any First Lady had been called before a grand jury.

The subpoena was delivered on Friday after a White House aide testified that the legal records, which had been sought by prosecutors for two years, turned up in a White House room to which only the aide, the Clintons, their house guests and servants had access. In addition to Mrs. Clinton, the counsel also subpoenaed members of the White House staff and lawyers representing the Clintons.

It came just as President Clinton was in the midst of planning Tuesday’s State of the Union Message, in which he plans to set out the broad themes of his re-election campaign and vision for a second term. One aide said the White House had not planned to disclose the subpoena before Mr. Clinton’s appearance but did so because they believed it had already disclosed to the press.

Publicly the White House sought to put the best appearance on the grand jury summons. “As the First Lady has always said, she is as eager as anyone to resolve questions regarding the billing records and she will continue to provide whatever help she can finally to resolve these issues,” Mr. Fabiani said.

But the grand jury appearance promises to keep Mrs. Clinton in an uncomfortable spotlight just weeks before the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary begin setting the shape of the Presidential political field and focusing the nation’s attention on the campaign.

One White House official conceded that the eve of a particularly sensitive State of the Union Message was “not the ideal timing” for announcing Mrs. Clinton’s grand jury appearance. The official added that Mrs. Clinton would have been willing to answer questions without receiving a subpoena from the special counsel.

Earlier in the day, Mrs. Clinton had offered to give written answers to questions from the Senate Whitewater committee, which is also investigating the appearance of the copies of the documents two years after the documents were first sought by prosecutors.

The White House press secretary, Michael D. McCurry, said he did not believe that the matter would ultimately hurt the President. Most Americans, he said, “want to know if there’s any ‘there’ there and when they’re told there is not and told that she will answer the questions and cooperate, they want to get onto subjects more germane to their lives.”

The summons for Mrs. Clinton capped several extraordinary weeks when a tour intended to promote her new book on children has instead become her opportunity to put forth her case and blame politics for the scrutiny of her role in Whitewater and a separate controversy over 1993 dismissals in the White House travel office.

On the very eve of the book tour the White House announced that it had found copies of the long-missing billing records from her Arkansas law firm. And it also made public a memorandum that raised questions about how involved she had been in seeking the dismissal of the travel office staff.

On Thursday, Carolyn Huber, a White House aide testified before Congress that she had found the copies of the long-missing billing records from the Rose law firm in early August on a table in the book room on the third floor of the White House residence.

She said the only ones who had access to the room are the Clintons, their guests and White House servants. Earlier in the week, Mrs. Huber had appeared before the Whitewater grand jury sitting in Little Rock, Ark.

She said she had placed the records in a box, brought them to her office and then examined them for the first time on Jan. 4. Both the President and Mrs. Clinton have said in interviews that they did not put the documents in the room, and White House aides have said they do not known how they got there.

Mr. Fabiani said that the subpoena for Mrs. Clinton was received a day after Mrs. Huber appeared before the Senate Whitewater committee. A number of White House aides who had access to the room and lawyers who handled the papers after their discovery have also been ordered to appear before the grand jury.

The records had been sought by Congress, the Resolution Trust Corporation and the independent counsel for the light they might shed on Mrs. Clinton’s legal work for the troubled savings association at the heart of Whitewater.

But the list of those summoned indicates that the Whitewater counsel is now trying to figure out who left the billing records in the book room, why it took so long for them to be produced and whether there had been any obstruction of justice.

The documents contain the handwritten notations of Vincent W. Foster Jr., the deputy White House counsel who committed suicide in 1993. Senate Republicans have charged the papers may have been improperly removed from Mr. Foster’s office after his death and intentionally withheld from investigators.

Other White House officials called to testify are Capricia Marshall, the clothing and makeup assistant to the First Lady; Gary Walter, the head White House usher, and Jane Sherburne, the special counsel who has been handling Whitewater matters and has been involved with trying to comply with subpoenas. David E. Kendall, the Clintons’ personal lawyer, and his assistant, Nicole Seligman have also been called. But Mr. Clinton, was not subpoenaed, Mr. Fabiani said.

Mr. Fabiani said that Mr. Kendall and White House lawyers met with representatives on Sunday and again today to arrange the details of Mrs. Clinton’s appearance before the grand jury.

There have been two independent counsels in the Whitewater. First was Robert B. Fiske, who was replaced in 1994 by Mr. Starr, a conservative Republican who served as Solicitor General in the Reagan and Bush Administrations. Previously the Clintons had been allowed to give sworn statements in depositions taken in the White House with their lawyers present.

On Capitol Hill, meanwhile, Republicans on the Senate Whitewater committee today asked the Senate to give them more time and money to continue their hearings. The request was denounced by Democrats, who said the committee’s proceedings had become an important part of the Republican strategy to win back the White House.

In a report filed with the Senate, the Republicans asked for an open-ended extension of the life of the Whitewater committee beyond Feb. 29, when it is supposed to shut down, and for $600,000 beyond the $950,000 in financing that was approved by the Senate last May.

The report said the committee would be unable to complete its work by the deadline because the White House had been slow in responding to requests for information, and because the committee was forced to suspend important aspects of its investigation in deference to the independent counsel, who has said the Congressional inquiries could interfere with his examination.

Democratic leaders in the Senate promptly criticized the Republican request, saying it was possible for the committee to complete its work by Feb. 29, before the Presidential campaign is in high gear. But the Senate minority leader, Tom Daschle, said it was unlikely that the Democrats would try to kill the proposal by a filibuster.

Republicans predicted that they would have the votes to extend the committee’s existence deep into the election year.

Think about that as you listen to the Republicans insist that Mueller has to wind up the investigation before the election.

By the way, James Comey was the Senate Whitwater Committee’s staff attorney working under Al D’Amato.

.

Very stable geniuses of the Trump administration #schmahtaswhips

Very stable geniuses of the Trump administration

by digby

You cannot make this stuff up:

President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had a testy phone call on May 25 over new tariffs imposed by the Trump administration targeting steel and aluminum imports coming from Canada, including one moment during the conversation in which Trump made an erroneous historical reference, sources familiar with the discussion told CNN.

According to the sources, Trudeau pressed Trump on how he could justify the tariffs as a “national security” issue. In response, Trump quipped to Trudeau, “Didn’t you guys burn down the White House?” referring to the War of 1812.

The problem with Trump’s comments to Trudeau is that British troops burned down the White House during the War of 1812.


Get a load of this one:

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert on Tuesday cited the D-Day invasion during an answer about the current state of US-German relations.

“We have a very strong relationship with the government of Germany,” Nauert said. “Looking back in the history books, today is the 71st anniversary of the speech that announced the Marshall Plan. Tomorrow is the anniversary of the D-Day invasion. We obviously have a very long history with the government of Germany, and we have a strong relationship with the government of Germany.”

Yeah, D-Day was a great moment in our strong relationship with Germany.

I don’t know what to say except that this G7 meeting should be really fun.

I hate to say it, but I hope that our erstwhile allies band together and teach Trump a lesson. He’s out of control.

.

They’re going after the families, just not the way we thought

They’re going after the families, just not the way we thought


by digby

I wrote about this atrocity at the border for Salon this morning:

When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families! They care about their lives, don’t kid yourselves. They say they don’t care about their lives. But you have to take out their families.–Donald Trump

Donald Trump delivered many disturbing, un-American declarations during the 2016 campaign but that had to be one of the most chilling, immoral comments any American politician has ever made. He hasn’t changed his attitude since he became president. The Washington Post reported this just last April:

The president…was reportedly shown a recording of a previous drone strike and asked “Why did you wait?” after the video showed the strike was delayed until the target’s family home was out of range… 

Later, when the agency’s head of drone operations explained that the CIA had developed special munitions to limit civilian casualties, the president seemed unimpressed.

He stated repeatedly on the trail that the families were “in on it” that “the wives know” etc and expressed the opinion that they had to be dealt with harshly in order to persuade the bad guys to stop their terrorist ways. He never explicitly said that we should remove children from their families but apparently he thinks that’s a good idea too. He’s actually put that form of “going after the families” into practice at the Mexican border.

The issue of children from Mexico and Central America turning up at the border unaccompanied and asking for asylum has been a thorny issue for some time. Those kids’ parents sent them away to escape violence in their home countries and the US government has never dealt with it very successfully.

Under Obama they were housed in unpleasant conditions and the government apparently “lost track” of some of them, although immigrant advocates say that particular story is overblown because most of those kids simply ended up with relatives and fell off the grid. Nonetheless, at least the Obama administration understood they were dealing with a humanitarian crisis and made some effort to mitigate the problem, however ineffectually.

Something much more insidious is taking place today. On May 7th Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the administration’s new hard line immigration policy:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced Monday that the Justice Department will begin prosecuting every person who illegally crosses into the United States along the Southwest border, a hard-line policy shift focusing in particular on migrants traveling with children…Federal prosecutors will “take on as many of those cases as humanly possible until we get to 100 percent,” he said.

“If you cross the border unlawfully . . . then we will prosecute you,” Sessions said. “If you smuggle an illegal alien across the border, then we’ll prosecute you. . . . If you’re smuggling a child, then we’re going to prosecute you, and that child will be separated from you, probably, as required by law. If you don’t want your child separated, then don’t bring them across the border illegally. It’s not our fault that somebody does that.”

I hope I don’t have to point out that it’s not a child’s fault either. But that doesn’t appear to concern Sessions or DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen anymore than killing family members to deter terrorists concerns their boss. Nielsen declared that Americans are separated every day from their children when they commit a crime so these people shouldn’t commit crimes and it won’t happen to them. Defining keeping your family together as “smuggling” is glib but it doesn’t mean it makes sense.

Repeating this does not make it true.

There is no law requiring children to be ripped away from their parents. https://t.co/heVvNjaRth

— ACLU (@ACLU) June 5, 2018

These aren’t members of MS-13, the violent street gang that Trump calls “animals” and loves to talk about in creepy lurid detail. In fact,  some of them are appearing at the border seeking asylum from MS-13 in their home countries. ( Many gang members are hardened into violent criminals in the American prison system and are then deported back to their home countries where they rule the streets.) Trump and Sessions don’t have any compassion for those women and children for reasons that aren’t hard to figure out. They hail from “sh–hole” countries and so in their minds aren’t any better than “animals” themselves.

It is not a crime to appear at the US border and seek asylum. And yet they are essentially treating those people the same as those who have crossed the border from Mexico simply seeking work. Neither of these categories should be prosecuted as criminals but the former are especially vulnerable people, often women with their kids, desperately escaping violence and trying to keep their families out of the line of fire. They are allowed by law to have a fair hearing of their application and they are not getting it.

According to NBC News, they are so backlogged and overwhelmed that hundreds of kids under the age of 12 are stuck in various overcrowded detention centers and it’s getting worse every day. Salon’s Matthew Rosza wrote about about Senator Jeff Merkley’s attempt to visit one of the children’s detention centers last week-end only to be turned away. It’s clear they’re hiding something.

This podcast interview between MSNBC’s Chris Hayes and the ACLU’s chief immigration lawyer Lee Gelernt is extremely informative about the surreal nightmare of this byzantine system which is, of course, a feature not a bug. According to Gelernt, the government’s Kafkaesque policy is to immediately separate mothers from their kids, some as young as a few months old, then rush the applicant through a phony hearing so they can deny their application and then prosecute them for committing the crime of illegal entry — even though they openly presented themselves to the government to seek asylum. And even if they win their case, they don’t necessarily get their kids back.

The whole point of this is to make examples of these mothers and children to deter asylum seekers from sh–hole countries from even attempting to come to the US. And this is in spite of both domestic and international laws governing the rights of refugees. Apparently, those laws are no longer operative in the United States.

Trump always said, “I will be very tough on families” but I think everyone assumed he just meant it to apply to families of suspected terrorists, not that that makes it any less grotesque and immoral. It appears that he meant it as a broad based deterrent to be used against all people he sees as enemies of the state. And he has administrators, prosecutors and an armed force eager to carry it out.

America’s borders are officially a dystopian hellscape for foreigners. And Republicans couldn’t be happier.

No House lockouts by @BloggersRUs

No House lockouts
by Tom Sullivan

Democrats this morning seem to have survived the state’s top-two primary without a single lockout in the seven Republican-held districts they hope to flip in November. That is, in none of the contested districts will there be two Republicans on the fall ballot. Except in two statewide races, The Los Angeles Times characterized the primaries looked like traditional primaries:

The candidates who succeeded were largely staunch defenders of either liberal or conservative principles — moderation was not the big winner in California on election night.

And yet backers of the top-two primary, who in 2010 took a wrecking ball to the idea that spots on the November ballot should be reserved by political party, seemed to envision consensus-building candidates who could bridge the partisan divide.

Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom will be the Democrats’ gubernatorial candidate in the fall. The former San Francisco mayor will face Republican John Cox, a Trump-backed candidate who moved to California after half a dozen failed bids for office in Illinois.

California ballots will still be coming in for days. After a printing error bumped nearly 120,000 voters off the voter rolls in Los Angeles County, they’ll be counting provisional ballots for days. The county registrar estimated 1,530 precincts of the 4,357 in Los Angeles County were affected.

Watch for David Dayen to post comments on Herbert Lee, a losing candidate running as a Democrat in Orange County’s CA-39. Dayen teased it in a tweet storm night.

In New Mexico, Democrat Deb Haaland won her 1st Congressional District primary putting her on track to be the first Native American woman to hold a seat in Congress. Thanking her volunteers and donors, Haaland called the election “”victory for working people, a victory for women, a victory for Indian country, and a victory for everyone who has been sidelined by the billionaire class.” Two other Native Americans serve in the U.S. House, both men from Oklahoma, reports Huffington Post.

In New Jersey, U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez won his primary less handily than he should have. Menendez was “severely admonished” in April by the Senate Ethics Committee for accepting gifts from a donor. His trial last year on criminal corruption charges ended in a hung jury and charges being dropped. First-time candidate. Lisa McCormick, an unknown publisher of community newspaper with no money and no endorsements, won nearly 40 percent of the vote last night:

“I thought maybe she’d get 25 percent of the vote as a protest vote against Menendez,” said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. “That’s not unusual. Forty percent is what you’d expect to see in a contested primary.”

Slate observes Menendez did only slightly worse in his last general election in 2012.

Dave Weigel notes that a couple of the GOP winners in New Jersey House districts at the moment are not exactly poised to run hard:

In Alabama, incumbent Republican Rep. Martha Roby faces a July runoff against former Rep. Bobby Bright, a former Democrat. Analysts credit Roby’s anti-Trump comments in 2016 for weakening her support among party regulars:

“Martha Roby committed political suicide the day she said Donald Trump wasn’t qualified for political office,” said David Ferguson, a Republican strategist.

But Bright has his own baggage: a vote for Pelosi as speaker of the House from 2009, at the beginning of Bright’s one and only term in Congress as a Democrat. Roby attacked Bright over the vote when she beat him in a general election eight years ago, and the charge can only be more potent in a Republican primary.

Once again, it was a good night for women, except maybe in Mississippi:

Democrats Abby Finkenauer and Cindy Axne could become Iowa’s first female House members in IA-1 and IA-3. Cook’s ranks IA-1 a GOP toss-up and IA-3 “lean Republican.”

Republican Rep. Kristi Noem won her gubernatorial primary in South Dakota, positioning her to be the state’s first female governor.

* * * * * * * *

For The Win 2018 is ready for download. Request a copy of my county-level election mechanics primer at tom.bluecentury at gmail.

Even rich libertarians don’t live forever

Even rich libertarians don’t live forever

by digby

I don’t know who will take their places but someone surely will. There’s always more greedy rich guys and probably more than ever these days. (Peter Thiel?)

Billionaire conservative icon David Koch is stepping down from the Koch brothers’ network of business and political activities.

The 78-year-old New York resident is suffering from deteriorating health, according to a letter that older brother Charles Koch sent to company officials Tuesday morning.

Charles Koch wrote that he is “deeply saddened” by his brother’s retirement. “David has always been a fighter and is dealing with this challenge in the same way,” he wrote.

David Koch is leaving his roles as executive vice president and board member for Koch Industries and a subsidiary, Koch Chemical Technology group, where he served as chairman and chief executive officer. Koch is also stepping down as chairman of the board for the Americans For Prosperity Foundation, the charity related to Koch brothers’ primary political organization.

Charles Koch had assumed a more visible leadership role in the brothers’ affairs in recent years. He will continue to serve as the CEO of Koch Industries and the unofficial face of the network’s political efforts.

Charles Koch is 82, so he won’t be around forever either.

I’m not one to celebrate the misfortune of others even if they are political adversaries. The world will be a better place when the Kochs shuffle off their mortal coils as we all will do someday.

(I would make an exception for Trump. I’m sorry, but I will celebrate quietly if he dies in his sleep. I know that’s terrible but I’ve hated anyone so thoroughly in my life as I hate him.)

.

Tired of the circus

Tired of the circus

by digby



I understand this. But I think it’s also how Trump and fascism win:

Almost seven-in-ten Americans (68%) feel worn out by the amount of news there is these days, compared with only three-in-ten who say they like the amount of news they get. The portion expressing feelings of information overload is in line with how Americans felt during the 2016 presidential election, when a majority expressed feelings of exhaustion from election coverage.

While majorities of both Republicans and Democrats express news fatigue, Republicans are feeling it more. Roughly three-quarters (77%) of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents feel worn out over how much news there is, compared with about six-in-ten Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (61%). This elevated fatigue among Republicans tracks with them having less enthusiasm than Democrats for the 2018 elections.

Feeling overwhelmed by the news is more common among those who follow the news less closely than among those who are avid consumers. While a majority of those who follow the news most of the time (62%) are feeling worn out by the news, a substantially higher portion (78%) of those who less frequently get news say they are fatigued by the amount of it that they see. (Most Americans – 65% – say they follow the news most of time, whereas 34% say they follow only when something important is happening.)


Those less favorable toward the news media are also the most “worn out.” Eight-in-ten of those who think national news organizations do “not too” or “not at all well” in informing the public are feeling this exhaustion. This is somewhat higher than among those who say the news media do “fairly well” (69%), and much higher than for those who think news organizations do “very well” – of whom 48% say they are worn out by the news and 51% say they like the amount they see. This relationship between attitudes toward the news media and fatigue holds even after accounting for Americans’ political party affiliation.

 

(Overall, 17% of Americans say national news organizations are doing very well at keeping the public informed of the most important national stories of the day, while 24% say they do not too or not at all well; the largest portion, 58%, say the news media do fairly well.)

Some demographic groups – most notably white Americans – are more likely than others to feel exhausted by the news. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of white Americans express fatigue with the amount of news, much higher than among both Hispanic (55%) and black Americans (55%). Women are also somewhat more likely than men to feel worn out (71% vs. 64%, respectively). Those ages 65 and older are slightly less likely than those who are younger to express a sense of exhaustion with the news.

It is overwhelming. But white Republicans are the most “worn out” because they can’t stand to be reminded that their president is a cretinous moron and an embarrassment to decent people everywhere. The rest of us just can’t believe this is happening and want to avert our eyes.

The problem is that this cascade of news is likely to make people apathetic and cynical which benefits the wrecking crew. People have to pay attention or we won’t make it out of this.

.

SWATTing for murder by cop

SWATTing for murder by cop

by digby


This is nice:

The family of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School student David Hogg was “swatted” Tuesday morning, prompting deputies to respond to their Parkland home.

A call came into the Coral Springs Police Department claiming a hostage situation at the home.

When a Broward Sheriff’s Office SWAT team arrived at the scene, they found no hostage situation and determined the call was a prank.

Hogg was not home at the time of the incident and is currently in Washington with his mother to accept the RFK Human Rights award.

Sometimes people get shot in these situations which is, I’m sure, what the caller was hoping would happen. Remember this one?

A feud between two Call of Duty players led to the death of a 28-year-old Kansas man, who was shot and killed by police after a fraudulent 911 call sent a SWAT team to the man’s private home. The news was first reported by local newspaper The Wichita Eagle, which cites numerous now-deleted tweets in which Call of Duty players take responsibility for participating in or observing the intended prank, which came after an argument about an online wagered match reportedly worth just $1.50. One player allegedly provided a fake address to someone with a history of calling in fake threats. That person, later identified and arrested by the LAPD, proceeded to embroil the innocent stranger in the feud, according to independent cybersecurity journalist Brian Krebs.

The move, known as swatting, involves a disgruntled internet user calling in a fake threat of violence, typically a murder and hostage situation invented by the caller, and doing so anonymously by using software to mask their identity and location. That results in an excessive display of force from police, who have no other information to go on and typically respond to such calls with an extraordinary amount of aggression.. 

I don’t know that police have to shoot first and ask questions later. But everyone knows that in a lot of cases that’s exactly what they do. It’s entirely possible that’s what the caller was hoping would happen — murder by cop.

It’s a very, very dangerous situation. All it takes is one wrong move.

.