13 November 19
Far behind now on November donations. Fewer than 50 people have donated in the past 3 days, and most of those have been very small.
Serious problems now.
With urgency.
Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News
Founder, Reader Supported News
If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
13 November 19
Charles Pierce | The Anonymous White House Book-Writer Can Anonymously Bite Me
Charles Pierce, Esquire
Pierce writes: "Not to put too fine a point on it, but Anonymous can bite me."
Charles Pierce, Esquire
Pierce writes: "Not to put too fine a point on it, but Anonymous can bite me."
EXCERPT:
This was all stuff that we knew before he got elected. This is all stuff we knew before he was nominated. Yet Anonymous took a job in Bedlam anyway, and, as nearly as we can tell, still works there. I’m not buying for a minute that A and the "Steady State” did so to keep the president* from acting upon his own paranoia and bigotry. He never was going to change, and we knew that all along, too. They took the jobs because they were White House jobs. (And Anonymous’s attempt to recast John Kelly, the architect of the detention policies at the border, as some kind of moderating force is laughable.) And even if you believe that the author is in it to keep the president* on the rails, the author certainly has to know by now that it’s not possible to do so.
So, no, thanks. I’ll stick with the witnesses who appear in public and who explain under oath the breadth and depth of the corruption afflicting our politics, and I’ll leave the guessing game to the easily distracted, upon whom this president* depends.
And, anyway, I still think it’s Tiffany.
Chairman Adam Schiff after a House Intelligence Committee hearing last week in Washington. (photo: Anna Moneymaker/NYT)
Michael H. Fuchs, Guardian UK
Fuchs writes: "President Donald Trump withheld US military assistance to Ukraine until it agreed to help Trump's re-election campaign. That is an abuse of power of the highest order - a corruption of American democracy that undermines national security - and requires that Trump be removed from office."
As Congress begins public hearings to determine whether Trump’s actions merit impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate, it’s vital that the process focuses on these simple facts of Trump’s corruption. Over recent weeks the House has conducted depositions of current and former officials, all of which have corroborated Trump’s abuse of power. But since the deposition transcripts from those officials are thousands of pages long, the details can get lost in the endless spin by politicians and the media. Don’t expect much new information from the public hearings because the facts are already clear and conclusive. Rather, this is an opportunity for the public to hear directly from participants in this saga and for the American people to understand just how dangerous Trump’s actions are.
So, what should the American people watch for in the hearings and the process that could lead to impeachment?
First, focus on the facts. As the 2020 campaign began, Trump tried to force Ukraine to manufacture a scandal about Trump’s domestic political opponent – the former vice-president, Joe Biden – despite zero evidence of wrongdoing. Trump also wanted Ukraine to fabricate evidence of a false conspiracy theory that somehow connects Ukraine to the 2016 campaign. Trump withheld military assistance from Ukraine and a White House meeting with the new Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, until Ukraine agreed to smear Trump’s opponents. And Trump got numerous US government officials – including the vice-president, Mike Pence, and US ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland – as well as his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to take part in the extortion scheme.
The bottom line is clear, and confirmed by the transcript of the 25 July phone call between Trump and Zelensky released by the White House: Trump abused his power and admitted to it.
Second, the impeachment process must show Americans why Trump’s actions were so bad. Trump abused his official power to get a foreign country to help his re-election campaign. Trump potentially disobeyed the law by withholding aid that Congress had already ordered be given to Ukraine. And Trump subjected a key US foreign policy goal – supporting Ukraine’s sovereignty in the face of Russia’s invasion – to his personal goals. These are devastating consequences that strike at the heart of American national security and democracy.
Some of Trump’s supporters have argued this is how foreign policy works. When asked whether the extortion scheme was a quid pro quo, White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said, “we do that all the time in foreign policy.” As the impeachment process continues, we are likely to hear Trump supporters attempt to gaslight Americans into believing that this behavior is normal.
But it’s not normal. Many of those deposed – and whom the public will hear from in the coming weeks – are life-long, highly trained national security officials who told Congress that Trump’s attempt to extort Ukraine for personal gain was wrong and that many of them tried to stop it and reported the wrongdoing. Trump even ousted the US ambassador to Ukraine for trying to stop this extortion.
And while so much of the recent public debate has swirled around the question of a quid pro quo, the American people must not let this debate distract them. Even if there had been no explicit quid pro quo – and there was – Trump still grossly abused his power. Any conversation with the president carries tremendous official power, and Zelensky knew exactly what Trump was asking and felt the pressure of the world’s most powerful country pushing him to advance the personal interests of its president. Furthermore, it is illegal to ask for campaign help from a foreign entity.
While Trump and his supporters claim that Trump was attempting to root out corruption in Ukraine, in reality Trump was pressuring Ukraine into committing corrupt acts – acts the Ukrainians knew were wrong, and repeatedly tried to resist despite desperately needing US military aid. In a telling moment from the testimony of deputy assistant secretary of state George Kent, we learned that when former US special envoy for Ukraine Kurt Volker objected to Ukrainian officials investigating the previous Ukrainian president, Ukrainian officials responded by pointing out American hypocrisy: “You mean the type of investigations you’re pushing for us to do on Biden and Clinton?” The sad fact is that Trump was turning the US government into a corrupt enterprise in the service of his own personal interests, making America look like just another kleptocratic dictatorship.
As the impeachment process heats up, Trump and his allies will do whatever it takes to try to muddy the waters. They will throw around the words “Clinton,” “Biden,” and “corruption” to distract. And when all else fails they will admit that Trump’s actions were wrong, but not impeachable, as some have already begun to do.
But this is a slam dunk case. The question is not whether Trump did it – it’s whether the members of the House and Senate will live up to their oaths of office and vote to impeach and convict. Allowing Trump to get away with this would be to condone wrongdoing at the highest levels, and to make a mockery of the constitution. And if Trump is not removed from office, it will give him the green light to further abuse his power – and it would make clear that future presidents can too.
Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney listens during a Cabinet meeting Oct. 21. (photo: Leah Millis/Reuters)
Aides Are Counseling Trump Not to Fire Mulvaney, as Acting Chief of Staff Changes Course Again
Carol D. Leonnig, Tom Hamburger, Josh Dawsey and John Hudson, The Washington Post
Excerpt: "President Trump has been threatening for weeks to fire acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, but senior advisers have counseled him to hold off on such a drastic step amid a high-stakes impeachment probe, according to three people familiar with the discussions."
Carol D. Leonnig, Tom Hamburger, Josh Dawsey and John Hudson, The Washington Post
Excerpt: "President Trump has been threatening for weeks to fire acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, but senior advisers have counseled him to hold off on such a drastic step amid a high-stakes impeachment probe, according to three people familiar with the discussions."
Trump has expressed particular anger over Mulvaney’s performance in an Oct. 17 news conference in which Mulvaney stunned White House aides by saying military aid to Ukraine was withheld to pressure its government to launch investigations that could politically benefit Trump, two of the people said. Later, Mulvaney issued a statement saying the media had misconstrued his televised comments and that “there was absolutely no quid pro quo.”
Senior advisers have cautioned Trump that removing Mulvaney at such a sensitive time could be perilous, the people said — both because Mulvaney played an integral role in the decision to freeze the aid, and because of the disruption that would be caused by replacing one of Trump’s most senior aides.
“I don’t think you’ll see him going anywhere until after December,” said one Trump adviser, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations. “But the president was very unhappy with that press conference. That was a very bad day for the president.”
White House officials declined to comment Tuesday.
Mulvaney had direct talks with Trump about the president’s desire to withhold nearly $400 million in security aid to Ukraine, The Washington Post has reported. At the same time, Trump and other allies were pressuring Ukraine to open an investigation of Democratic rival Joe Biden and of theories about the country’s role in the 2016 election, according to congressional testimony in the impeachment inquiry.
Trump’s advisers have cited as a cautionary tale the example of national security adviser John Bolton, who was dismissed in September. Bolton is now a sought-after witness for Democrats, and despite White House instructions to defy a congressional subpoena has expressed a willingness to testify if cleared by a judge.
Other advisers have counseled the president that its unwise to replace his chief of staff and create turmoil while Trump is dealing with the multiple brush fires of a congressional impeachment probe.
“Trump is back asking everyone what they think about Mulvaney,” said one senior U.S. official. “He clearly is upset with him. He’s being advised that the last thing he needs is another major personnel move.”
Mulvaney’s relationship with Trump garnered new scrutiny Tuesday when he called off plans to file a lawsuit asking the courts to rule on whether he should comply with a House subpoena to testify in the impeachment inquiry. Instead he announced he would follow the president’s broad directive barring aides from participating in the inquiry.
Some current and former aides have nonetheless chosen to comply with subpoenas from Congress. Others, such as Bolton, have indicated they would look to the courts for guidance on competing demands from two branches of government.
Tuesday’s court filing by Mulvaney came amid growing rancor inside the White House over how to respond to the impeachment investigation. Mulvaney has clashed with White House counsel Pat Cipollone over how to navigate the inquiry, in which public hearings are set to begin Wednesday.
The about-face was also the latest in a series of high-profile course changes by Mulvaney as he comes under fire from Capitol Hill and from present and former colleagues in the White House.
On Monday, Mulvaney’s legal team had notified the court that he planned to file his own lawsuit against the House seeking court guidance on how to respond to a subpoena for his testimony. The lawsuit, his attorney said, would be related to one filed earlier by Bolton’s top deputy, Charles Kupperman.
Mulvaney’s lawyers noted in a court filing Tuesday that “after further consideration,” Mulvaney had decided not to go to court at all. “Rather he will rely on the direction of the President, as supported by an opinion of the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice, in not appearing” before the House, Mulvaney’s lawyers said.
Mulvaney’s initial effort to join the Kupperman lawsuit rankled Bolton and Kupperman because they had cited Mulvaney as a critical player in the effort to press the Ukrainian government to pursue investigations helpful to Trump’s domestic political agenda, a move they viewed as improper.
Outside legal experts saw Mulvaney’s move to join the case as an effort to secure some legal cover given he had potential exposure because of his private actions seeking to withhold aid to Ukraine and his conflicting public statements about the motives for that blockade.
The abrupt change in legal strategy confounded national legal experts, as well as senior advisers to the president.
“None of it made any sense to me. What we’re seeing right now is not only disarray but almost jaw-dropping incompetence,” Chris Whipple, who has written a biography on White House chiefs of staff and has interviewed most living ones, said of Mulvaney’s moves.
MartÃn Batalla Vidal speaks during a protest and press conference in New York before a hearing challenging the Trump administration's termination of DACA in 2017. (photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
The Supreme Court Will Hear My Case Today. Trump Will Not Win on DACA.
MartÃn Batalla Vidal, Vox
Vidal writes: "Two years ago, when President Donald Trump moved to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, I said, 'I'll see you in court, Mr. President.' Now, the case that bears my name, McAleenan v. Vidal, is one of three consolidated cases that has reached the highest court in the land. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on which my future hangs."
MartÃn Batalla Vidal, Vox
Vidal writes: "Two years ago, when President Donald Trump moved to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, I said, 'I'll see you in court, Mr. President.' Now, the case that bears my name, McAleenan v. Vidal, is one of three consolidated cases that has reached the highest court in the land. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on which my future hangs."
Fight it we have, with immigrant youth, immigrant rights organizations, and many states challenging the administration’s reckless decision to end DACA. Thousands of us have taken to the streets and proudly come out as undocumented across the country. We have marched, protested, taken over congressional offices, and even put our bodies on the line to demand dignity and respect for all of our communities. And, because of this persistence, we have won in the courts. The program remains in place for now.
But today the Supreme Court is considering President Trump’s unlawful termination of the DACA program. Courts across the country have repeatedly agreed that the Trump’s administration termination of DACA was arbitrary and capricious, and now the question lies with the highest court.
If the Court sides with Trump, the consequences would be devastating for me, my family, and communities across the country. For the past seven years, over 700,000 young undocumented immigrants, who came to the United States as children, have been able to work at the jobs of their choosing, graduate from schools around the country, contribute billions of dollars to the economy, and support their families and communities — all because of DACA.
We are business owners, artists, school teachers, lawyers, mothers, fathers, and nurses like me. Even though the program’s structure has meant that I have been living my life in two-year increments (recipients must reapply every two years), DACA provides me with critical immigration relief, allowing me to work and remain in the United States with my family.
With DACA, I have been able to grow up with my siblings. Together, we have been able to celebrate our birthdays and christenings. I have been able to help them with their homework, see them graduate from middle school and high school, and even help them get over their first heartbreak.
DACA has allowed me to find myself and build a future. I am now back in college and have a chance to pursue a career as an occupational therapist. Plus, I have been able to become an economic support for my mother and my younger brothers. My mother has worked immensely hard to always provide a home where we can sleep peacefully and fill our bellies with her delicious cooking. As the Supreme Court arguments grow near, my mother constantly wonders what is going to happen to me. My eyes fill up with tears as I try to stay strong. I hold my mother and tell her: “Ma, don’t worry, we will win.” My fight is as much for her as it is for me.
Just as importantly, the security of having DACA helped me to be able to proudly come out as gay and unafraid. I no longer live in fear. I will fight until the very end to not be ripped away from my mother, my community, and the place I have called home for over 20 years.
That’s why I have also joined immigrant youth from all over the country in a historic march that started in New York City and ended in Washington, DC this weekend. Over a hundred DACA recipients, community leaders, and allies with Make the Road New York, NAKASEC, and the Home Is Here campaign marched 230 miles to the steps of the US Supreme Court. Our message is clear: The termination of DACA was unlawful and we will continue to show our resilience as we fight for our futures. We aren’t going back into hiding. We’re standing up as a community, stronger than ever — ready to fight.
Since the day the Trump administration unlawfully terminated DACA, we have repeatedly been used as pawns, like our lives are pieces that could be easily moved to negotiate whatever policy seems most convenient at the moment. But my life, and the lives of immigrant youth, are not bargaining chips in any political game. We demand that this country recognize our full humanity, period.
The law and the overwhelming majority of the country are on our side. Now it’s time for the US Supreme Court to uphold the rule of law, affirm the lower court injunctions, and leave DACA in place.
Immigrant youth will win, Mr. President. And, like it or not, we and our families are here to stay.
White House operative Stephen Miller. (photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)
Stephen Miller's Affinity for White Nationalism Revealed in Leaked Emails
Michael Edison Hayden, Southern Poverty Law Center
Hayden writes: "In the run-up to the 2016 election, White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller promoted white nationalist literature, pushed racist immigration stories and obsessed over the loss of Confederate symbols after Dylann Roof's murderous rampage."
READ MORE
Michael Edison Hayden, Southern Poverty Law Center
Hayden writes: "In the run-up to the 2016 election, White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller promoted white nationalist literature, pushed racist immigration stories and obsessed over the loss of Confederate symbols after Dylann Roof's murderous rampage."
READ MORE
Trace Banda is one of just 52 female field rangers in Malawi. (photo: Rabson Kondowe/Al Jazeera)
Female Rangers in Malawi: 'Only the Strongest Survive'
Rabson Kondowe, Al Jazeera
Kondowe writes: "Trace Banda stands outside the rangers' camp carrying an M-16 assault rifle as she prepares for an anti-poaching training exercise inside the park."
Rabson Kondowe, Al Jazeera
Kondowe writes: "Trace Banda stands outside the rangers' camp carrying an M-16 assault rifle as she prepares for an anti-poaching training exercise inside the park."
EXCERPT:
Banda, 35, is a ranger and risks her life to save wildlife at Kasungu National Park.
Situated in the district of Kasungu, home to about 55,000 people, it is the second-biggest national park in the country at 2,316sq km.
It is known for its population of elephants but over the years, they have been threatened by poachers. The population dropped from more than 1,000 in the 1990s to about 50 in 2015. Currently, there are about 120 grey giants.
Banda never thought she would become a field ranger.
In 2005, she enrolled for mechanical engineering in college but later dropped out because of financial constraints.
Unemployed, in 2008 she applied to be a field ranger even though she had little idea what lied ahead.
When she first arrived at the park, it dawned on her that she was the only female ranger.
"After I was shortlisted, I went for training, the training was to determine whether or not I was fit enough to become a ranger. It was very tough, I had to run every morning, sometimes with a backpack of 15kgs, but I survived."
To prepare for the role, rangers learn about animal behaviour.
But confrontations with animal poachers, where gunshots are often exchanged, can bring more danger.
"I went in the jungle with three other colleagues of mine, it was a night combat, I heard a gunshot and immediately woke my colleagues.
"We saw the poachers coming, and we began shooting and they were shooting back while escaping, but I know we managed to shoot one because we saw a trail of blood on the ground," said Banda.
The Tongass national forest in an undated handout photo issued by Aarhus University. (photo: John Schoen/Anchorage/PA)
'We Depend on the Tongass': Alaskans Fight to Save US's Largest National Forest
Nina Lakhani, Guardian UK
Lakhani writes: "Tribal leaders, fishermen and environmentalists from Alaska will testify before Congress on Wednesday in an effort to save America's biggest national forest - the latest battle against the Trump administration's assault on environmental protections."
Nina Lakhani, Guardian UK
Lakhani writes: "Tribal leaders, fishermen and environmentalists from Alaska will testify before Congress on Wednesday in an effort to save America's biggest national forest - the latest battle against the Trump administration's assault on environmental protections."
The Tongass national forest, one of the world’s last intact temperate rainforests which plays a crucial role in fighting the climate crisis, is under threat of logging as Alaska seeks exemption from the Roadless Rule, which protects millions of acres of pristine forests across the US. The Tongass is considered the “crown jewel” of the national forest system, sequestering huge amounts of carbon dioxide to keep the greenhouse gas out of the atmosphere.
The Roadless Rule prevents mass clearcutting of trees in undeveloped forested areas and is seen as one of the most broadly supported environmental protections in the US.
Donald Trump has reportedly intervened in the Alaska case, raising fears that other states with strong extractive industry lobbying machines will seek to fast-track similar exemptions without properly consulting communities on the impact that felling trees in wilderness areas will have.
“There are indications that many other states are watching to see what happens with Alaska, which has shown us how this administration is blindly following whatever industry, corporations and lobbyists want without thinking about future generations,” said Blaine Miller-McFeeley, senior legislative representative at the legal not-for-profit Earthjustice.
Wednesday’s hearing by the natural resources subcommittee on national parks, forests and public land (NPFPL) will hear evidence on the potentially devastating consequences for the Tongass and its people.
“We’ve been here for thousands of years. These are our lands and we depend on the Tongass for food security,” Joel Jackson, 63, president of the organized village of Kake, said.
“Tribes everywhere are worried and watching very closely at what they’re trying to do in Alaska,” added Jackson, who will testify.
“Tourism and commercial fishing run this region economically, not timber, which is a pathetically small sector,” said Lance Preston, 47, a fisherman and board member of the Seafood Producers Cooperative in Sitka. “The salmon already faces challenges from ocean acidification and warming … A very small minority stands to gain economically by being very irresponsible.”
Stretching 16m acres over 500 miles, the Tongass is unique in its size and biodiversity, with thousands of islands, waterways, glacial fjords and green valleys flanked by rugged mountains and sprawling forests of old-growth cedar, spruce and hemlock trees.
It is home to myriad species including wild Pacific salmon, brown bears, wolves, Sitka black-tailed deer and bald eagles, and attracts more than a million visitors annually.
The Roadless Rule was adopted during the Clinton administration after an extensive public consultation, in which 96% of the 1 million participants nationwide supported protection for unspoiled forests.
Since then Alaska has fought the regulation, but its efforts to roll back the protection have been repeatedly thwarted in Congress and the courts.
Then, the state’s petition for an exemption was granted by the Department of Agriculture in August 2018 without consulting any tribal nations.
The state was given $2m in federal funds by the Forest Service (FS) to help facilitate dialogue about six potential outcomes ranging from no change to full exemption.
At least 10% of this money was given to the Alaska Forest Association – a timber industry group – to aid their participation in the process, according to documents obtained by KTOO.
The Angoon Cooperative Association, Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes, Hoonah Indian Association, Hydaburg Cooperative Association, organized village of Kake and organized village of Kasaan – which all have roots in the Tongass dating back thousands of years – were belatedly offered a seat at the table as “cooperating agencies” alongside the state in the review process.
The tribes say they were not given any financial support leaving them scrambling to make sense of complex long document. Their requests for extensions were repeatedly denied.
In June, Trump held a private meeting with Alaska’s governor, Mike Dunleavy, on Air Force One. Shortly after, Trump instructed the agriculture secretary, Sonny Perdue, to grant a full exemption, according to the Washington Post.
Last month, a full exemption, opening the door for the logging industry to bulldoze roads and clearcut trees over 9m acres, was recommended in the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
In response, tribal leaders wrote to Perdue condemning the federal government’s rushed and unfair handling of the proposed exemption, which they said “represents the most controversial and potentially destructive assault on our way of life to date”.
In the Tongass, the tribes mostly live on isolated islands, relying on salmon fishing, deer, moose, grouse and berries. This traditional diet remains extremely important amid rising food prices and cuts to ferry services.
“All communities deserve to have access to the resources they rely on for subsistence, but this administration has gone out of its way to change the rules for their friends who seek to profit off those resources,” said the New Mexico congresswoman Deb Haaland, chair of the NPFPL.
In May, fellow committee member and Arizona congressman Ruben Gallego, and the Washington senator Maria Cantwell, senior member of the Senate energy and natural resources committee, introduced legislation to codify the Roadless Rule in order to permanently protect millions of acres of pristine national forests.
The 2019 Roadless Area Conservation Act would prevent state exemptions to the rule, which nationwide protects habitats for 1,600 threatened or endangered species, reduces wildfire risk and supplies clean drinking water to 60 million Americans and 350 communities across the US.
“The administration continues to try to solve 21st-century problems with 19th-century thinking, trying to extract a relatively small amount from our few remaining pristine natural areas,” said Cantwell.
Nationally, public support for the Roadless Rule remains strong: a Pew poll in March of this year found three-quarters of respondents want protections to remain in place.
Locally, the vast majority of south-east Alaska’s 32 native and white communities also support the current roadless protection.
But the Alaska congressman Don Young, the Republican leader of the NPFPL, believes the Roadless Rule has been a “disaster” for his home state. He has been working closely with Trump, senior White House staff and the rest of the Alaska delegation to secure an exemption.
“Congressman Young believes an exemption is needed to not only boost the economy of south-east Alaska, but to bolster the long-term health of the Tongass national forest by promoting active resource management,” a spokesperson said.
The rule already allows for individual exemptions: in Alaska, every single request for the Tongass to date – more than 50 – for projects such as mines and dams has been approved.
Dunleavy’s office did not respond to requests for comment, but has previously blamed the rule for destroying logging and thousands of jobs.
The timber industry contributes less than 1% to the south-east Alaska economy, compared with 25% by the fishing and tourism industries combined.
Tongass waterways produce 80% of the commercial salmon annually harvested from south-east Alaska, valued at $60m. The FS has lost almost $600m on Tongass timber sales over the last 20 years, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.
The FS is legally obliged to take into account public opinion before making its final decision, which is expected in mid-2020.
If it is fully repealed as Alaskan Republicans want, 5m acres of the Chugach national forest, which is second only to the Tongass in roadless acreage, could also be threatened, according to the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council.
In both forests, vital food sources and Native cultural and sacred sites are at risk.
“If we didn’t have wild food to eat, we would be starving right now. We are living in virtual poverty because of the systems of government,” said Wanda Culp, a Tlingit advocate for the Tongass in Hoonah. “The Roadless Rule is just the latest example of how we jump through hoops but get nowhere – there is no due process for indigenous communities. We are nuisance communities standing in the way of industry profits.”
No comments:
Post a Comment