Andy Borowitz | Giuliani Kidnapped by Ukrainian Circus

10 December 19 All Who Do Not Donate This is a special appeal to all those RSN readers who appreciate what we do, but do not donate. Your help would make a big difference. The donation process is painless, just hit the link below. Thanks for your attention. Marc Ash Founder, Reader Supported News Sure, I'll make a donation! Update My Monthly Donation If you would prefer to send a check: Reader Supported News PO Box 2043 Citrus Hts, CA 95611

10 December 19

It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT TO CONTINUE OUR WORK: Simply put, this is an organization that lives and dies with the support of its readership. We are asking for your support to continue our work. Thank you sincerely. / Marc Ash, Founder Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

---

Andy Borowitz | Giuliani Kidnapped by Ukrainian Circus

Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker
Borowitz writes: "While on a mission to Ukraine to acquire information about the business dealings of Hunter Biden, Rudy Giuliani was kidnapped by a traveling Ukrainian circus, Giuliani confirmed on Tuesday."
READ MORE

Democratic Council Daniel Goldman. (photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)

Lawyer for Democrats Calls Trump 'a Clear and Present Danger' as He Argues Case for Removal
John Wagner, Colby Itkowitz and Michael Brice-Saddler, The Washington Post
Excerpt: "A lawyer for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee called President Trump 'a clear and present danger' as he summarized the party's case for impeaching him for having abused his power and obstructed a congressional investigation into his conduct in Ukraine."
READ MORE

U.S. Army 1st Lt. Robert Wolfe, security force platoon leader for Provincial Reconstruction. (photo: Lt. j.g. Matthew Stroup/U.S. Navy)

Michael T. Klare | The US Military on a Planet From Hell
Michael T. Klare, TomDispatch
Klare writes: "It was Monday, March 1, 2032, and the top uniformed officers of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps were poised, as they are every year around this time, to deliver their annual 'posture statement' on military readiness before the Senate Armed Services Committee."
READ MORE

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Charlie Neibergall/AP)

Coalition of More Than 50 Progressive Groups to Endorse Sanders
Rebecca Klar, The Hill
Klar writes: "The Center for Popular Democracy Action, a coalition of more than 50 progressive groups, on Tuesday announced it was endorsing Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the Democratic presidential primary race."
READ MORE

McKinsey & Company, the global management consulting firm. (photo: AP)

NYC Paid Company Millions to Stem Jail Violence. Instead, Violence Soared.
Ian MacDougall, ProPublica
Excerpt: "The corporate consulting firm reported bogus numbers and flailed in a project at Rikers Island. Today, assaults and other attacks there are up almost 50%."

READ MORE

Myanmar's civilian leader Aung San Suu Kyi during a televised speech in Naypyidaw, the capital, on Sept. 19, 2017. (photo: Aung Shine Oo/AP)

Suu Kyi's Defense of Genocide Charges May Shock the West. But It Bolsters Her Status at Home.
Shibani Mahtani and Michael Birnbaum, The Washington Post
Excerpt: "This week in The Hague, Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel laureate and former democracy campaigner will defend some of the same generals and her country against allegations of genocide."
READ MORE

Environmental activists rally outside of New York Supreme Court in October in Manhattan, the first day of the trial accusing ExxonMobil of misleading shareholders about its climate change accounting. (photo: Drew Angerer/Getty)

Exxon Wins New York Climate Change Case
Laurel Wamsley, NPR
Wamsley writes: "A judge has handed ExxonMobil a victory in only the second climate change lawsuit to reach trial in the United States. The decision was a blow for the New York Attorney General's Office, which brought the case."

Justice Barry Ostrager of the New York State Supreme Court said that the attorney general failed to prove that the oil giant broke the law. 

"Nothing in this opinion is intended to absolve ExxonMobil from responsibility for contributing to climate change through the emission of greenhouse gasses in the production of its fossil fuel products," Ostranger wrote. But, he added, "this is a securities fraud case, not a climate change case."

In a three-week trial, New York state prosecutors argued that the oil company had downplayed the financial risks it faces from possible climate regulation. Attorney General Letitia James said this made Exxon's assets appear more secure than they really were, which in turn affected its share price and defrauded investors. 

Ostrager concluded that James' office "failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that ExxonMobil made any material misrepresentations that 'would have been viewed by a reasonable investor as having significantly altered the 'total mix' of information made available.'"

James released a statement following the verdict, saying that the case had compelled Exxon "to answer publicly for their internal decisions that misled investors."

"Throughout this case, we laid out how Exxon made materially false, misleading, and confusing representations to the American people about the company's response to climate change regulations," James said. 

"Exxon's inability to tell the truth, further underscores the lies that have been sold to the American public for decades," she said. "Despite this decision, we will continue to fight to ensure companies are held responsible for actions that undermine and jeopardize the financial health and safety of Americans across our country, and we will continue to fight to end climate change."

Exxon said the ruling "affirms the position ExxonMobil has held throughout the New York Attorney General's baseless investigation. We provided our investors with accurate information on the risks of climate change. The court agreed that the Attorney General failed to make a case, even with the extremely low threshold of the Martin Act in its favor."

"Lawsuits that waste millions of dollars of taxpayer money do nothing to advance meaningful actions that reduce the risks of climate change," the company said.

There were signs of weakness in the state's case. On the last day of the trial, the attorney general's office withdrew two counts of fraud from its lawsuit. Exxon asked the judge to rule on those counts anyway, saying the state had tarnished the company's reputation in making its case on them. 

The state went forward with two counts based on the Martin Act, a New York statute that grants the state's attorney general the authority to pursue investigations and actions against those it suspects of securities fraud. 

The Martin Act has a lower burden of proof: prosecutors must show that a company made misrepresentations to investors, and that there were consequences.

Ostrager minced no words in describing how he thought the trial had gone: "The testimony of the expert witnesses called by the Office of the Attorney General was eviscerated on cross-examination and by ExxonMobil's expert witnesses."

Ostrager said his ruling found Exxon not liable on any of the counts.

The highest profile witness in the landmark case was former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Exxon's CEO from 2006 to 2017.

Exxon used two different ways to estimate the impact of potential climate-change regulations on its future business. Tillerson testified that one assessment was used to estimate the effect of future climate change regulation — such as a carbon tax -- on the global energy system. But for specific projects, such as the Alberta oil sands, the company would use a different way of calculating a "greenhouse gas cost." 

Tillerson insisted this was appropriate, and that Exxon had no incentive to underestimate carbon costs internally, since "we'd be misinforming ourselves." 

Exxon battled for years to prevent this case and others from reaching trial, but there are now numerous pending lawsuits against Exxon and other oil companies, including a similar case that was recently brought in Massachusetts. 

In Massachusetts, Attorney General Maura Healey accuses Exxon Mobil of systematically misleading investors about climate change's impact on the economy and its own business, and of deceiving consumers about fossil fuel's environmental impact. 

Elsewhere, many city and state governments are using "public nuisance" arguments to try and hold energy companies accountable for their role in climate change. The idea is to force them to help pay for the mounting climate impacts communities now struggle to address. 

Fossil fuel companies often attempt to get the cases moved to federal courts, which they believe will be more sympathetic to their side.

READ MORE

---

Contribute to RSN

Update My Monthly Donation

Congressman Claims Evidence Links Lyme Disease to US Military Bioweapons Research

U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class William J. Camp Jr., left, noncommissioned officer in charge, uses a chemical agent detection pen to determine the substance at a simulated crime scene. (New Jersey National Guard photo/Mark C. Olsen)

12 Aug 2019

Task & Purpose | By Jeff Schogol

This article by Jeff Schogol originally appeared on Task & Purpose, a digital news and culture publication dedicated to military and veterans issues.

A lawmaker who wants the Pentagon to investigate whether military biological weapons experiments with ticks cause Lyme disease insists he is not spreading conspiracy theories.

"Why wouldn't we want to know?" Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) told Task & Purpose. "Let the IG [inspector general's office] decide that -- and put this to bed forever -- if indeed it's a fable, if it's untrue."

Smith authored an amendment to the House version of the Fiscal 2020 National Defense Authorization Act that would require the Pentagon to investigate if the military released infected ticks onto an unsuspecting American public "by accident or experiment design."

But experts say they are skeptical of any link between U.S. military bioweapons research and the outbreak of Lyme disease.

Related: Army Biowarfare Lab that Tests Ebola and the Plague Failed Safety Inspection

"Ticks and Lyme Disease would be a very strange choice as a deliberate bioweapon because ticks are difficult to work with, don't have wings, and Lyme would hardly be a force reducer," said Robert Peterson, an entomology professor at Montana State University.

Pentagon spokeswoman Heather Babb declined to discuss Smith's amendment because the Defense Department does not comment on proposed legislation.

"DOD takes extreme care in all of our research programs to ensure the protection of our personnel and the community," Babb said.

When Smith announced his amendment, he cited the book "Bitten: The Secret History of Lyme Disease and Biological Weapons," which looks at U.S. military experiments with ticks.

"There's just too much evidence for a reasonable man or woman to just turn the page and say: 'Put on your tinfoil fat. This is just a conspiracy theory,'" Smith said. "And yet, people with credentials will say that, which begs the question: Why would they even say that?"

Kris Newby, who wrote "Bitten," said she discovered circumstantial evidence linking the outbreak of Lyme disease in the 1960s to the U.S. military.

As proof, Newby cites an interview she had with Dr. Willy Burgdorfer, the American scientist who discovered what causes Lyme disease, who told her shortly before his death that he had been instructed to keep his research into a possible cause for Lyme disease a secret.

"My hypothesis is that was the biological weapon they were trying to cover up," said Newby, a science writer at the Stanford School of Medicine in California.

But Newby said she cannot definitively link Lyme disease to the U.S. military's bioweapons research efforts conducted at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

"I can't connect all those dots right now," said Newby, who survived Lyme disease. "My theory is that it was a genetically engineered Rickettsia [bacteria] but, as a journalist, I can't prove that."

Others find the idea the notion that the U.S. military infected ticks with Lyme disease more than a little far-fetched.

"I've heard a little bit about this story and speculation and whatnot -- it's a really intuitively weak accusation," said Jeffrey Lockwood, who teaches natural sciences and humanities at the University of Wyoming.

Lockwood wrote "Six-Legged Soldiers: Using Insects as Weapons of War," about the U.S. military's biological warfare experiments with ticks, flies, and fleas. It turns out the Army did conduct research into whether ticks could be used to spread tularemia, relapsing fever, and Colorado fever during the Cold War.

Despite these experiments, Lockwood said he is "profoundly dubious" that the U.S. military looked into using ticks to transmit Lyme disease.

Ticks are not the best vector to spread bioweapons because they do not go very far and Lyme disease is a slow-acting pathogen, Lockwood told Task & Purpose. Other tick-borne diseases are far worse to humans.

"Weaponizing Lyme disease with a tick vector just doesn't add up to make a whole lot of sense," Lockwood said. "On the other hand -- quite frankly -- U.S. military weapons development hasn't always made a whole lot of sense."

SEE ALSO:

You be the judge! Author sheds light on possible tick weaponization

Deaths prompt look at Lyme carditis

Why 2017 Is Going To Be A Really Bad Year For Lyme Disease—And How You Can Protect Yourself

Free Lyme testing coming this spring

The Lyme Tick Yuk and How to Protect Yourself

Lyme Disease patients push back against Baker

Among those closely following the weekend legislative maneuverings are residents who suffer from Lyme disease, Elaine Thompson of the Telegram reports. Measures that would require insurers to cover long-term care for the ailment has already been vetoed twice by Gov. Baker, who has sent lawmakers a new compromise proposal. The original bill’s co-sponsors, Sen. Anne Gobi of Spencer and Rep. David Linksy of Natick, spent yesterday whipping votes, Thompson reports. “I’m hopeful,” Linsky said. “It will require a concerted effort on behalf of my colleagues to do this along with a number of other pressing issues before Sunday at midnight.”  But the Massachusetts Medical Society yesterday declared its support for Baker's alternative proposal for the treatment of patients with Lyme disease. "The Massachusetts Medical Society is firmly in support of the governor's initiative to provide insurance coverage for the treatment of patients with Lyme disease," said James Gessner, president of the society, said in a statement, reports State House News Service (pay wall). "Public health officials have determined that Lyme disease is endemic throughout the commonwealth, so much so that the state has the fourth highest incidence of Lyme disease in the nation. It is imperative that we provide comprehensive care for those affected, and the governor is attempting to do just that." After the House convened on Saturday morning, Baker's bill (H 4560) relative to the treatment of Lyme Disease was referred to the Committee on Financial Services. Seconds later, the chair considered no action taken on the matter. The Telegram U of U Researchers May Have Discovered a Breakthrough for Treating Lyme Disease

Robert Reich | How Corporate Welfare Hurts You

18 July 19 What the Hell Has Happened to Our Donors? What has brought anyone to believe that this organization can do what it does on a daily basis without the basic funding we have always relied on? We can’t. When the donations stop, we have to get busy fixing that. We do that so RSN will be here for readers like you. Time to get moving. Marc Ash Founder, Reader Supported News Sure, I'll make a donation! Update My Monthly Donation If you would prefer to send a check: Reader Supported News PO Box 2043 Citrus Hts CA 95611

18 July 19

It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

YOU PICKED AN ORGANIZATION THAT CHALLENGES INJUSTICE - It’s what we do all day, every day. When you come here to “Reader Supported News” and ignore the organization’s funding, that is unfair and it is unjust. We will absolutely challenge that too. We - must - have your help to do this. Right now, you are not providing it. Unfair, unjust. / Marc Ash, Founder Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

---

Robert Reich | How Corporate Welfare Hurts You 

Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
Reich writes: "You often hear Trump and Republicans in Congress railing against so-called 'welfare programs' - by which they mean programs that provide health care or safety nets to ordinary Americans."
READ MORE

The Camp Fire burning in 2018. State investigators found that PG&E equipment sparked the deadly fire. State legislators are now voting on an overhaul of the way California deals with wildfires sparked by utilities. (photo: San Francisco Chronicle)

California's "Progressive" Governor Prepares Huge Bailout for Reckless, Bankrupt Utility
Editorial Board, San Francisco Chronicle
Excerpt: "One of this year's most critical pieces of state legislation is AB1054, a major overhaul of the way California deals with wildfires created by the major utilities, including Pacific Gas and Electric Co."
READ MORE

People cheer as Donald Trump speaks at a rally. (photo: AFP)

Trump Rally Crowd Chants 'Send Her Back' After President Attacks Ilhan Omar
Tom McCarthy, Guardian UK
Tom McCarthy writes: "Goaded on by the president, a crowd at a Donald Trump rally on Wednesday night chanted 'send her back! send her back!' in reference to Ilhan Omar, a US congresswoman who arrived almost 30 years ago as a child refugee in the United States."
READ MORE

Sadie Roberts-Joseph, Founder of African American History Museum, Found Dead in Trunk of Car. (photo: AP)

Activist Who Spotlighted African American History Found Dead in Trunk of Car, Police Say
Alex Horton and Hannah Knowles, The Washington Post
Excerpt: "News of Roberts-Joseph's death has brought an outpouring of grief and disbelief from friends, family and local officials familiar with her passionate advocacy for the preservation of African American history."
READ MORE

Central American asylum seekers wait as U.S. Border Patrol agents take them into custody on June 12, 2018, near McAllen, Texas. (photo: Getty)

A Border Patrol Agent Reveals What It's Really Like to Guard Migrant Children
Ginger Thompson, ProPublica
Thompson writes: "The Border Patrol agent, a veteran with 13 years on the job, had been assigned to the agency's detention center in McAllen, Texas, for close to a month when the team of court-appointed lawyers and doctors showed up one day at the end of June."
READ MORE

Protesters gather to demand the resignation of Puerto Rico's Governor. (photo: NBC)

Thousands Protest at Mass Rally in San Juan, Demanding Puerto Rico Governor's Resignation
Nicole Acevedo, NBC News
Acevedo writes: "With chants of 'Ricky, renuncia!' ('Ricky, resign!') tens of thousands of Puerto Ricans marched and rallied in Old San Juan on Wednesday in a massive protest calling for the resignation of Gov. Ricardo Rosselló."
READ MORE

The aircraft carrier John C. Stennis in the Strait of Hormuz in November. (photo: Kenneth Abbate/AP)

The US Military Has Spewed $21 Billion in Emissions Since 9/11
David R. Baker, Bloomberg
Baker writes: "The U.S. military is belching more global-warming pollutants than some industrialized nations, with about a third of its emissions occurring in major conflict zones such as Afghanistan and Iraq, according to a new study."
READ MORE

---

Contribute to RSN

Update My Monthly Donation

To Ramp Up Fear of Russia in Africa, NYT Downplays Massive US Military Presence on Continent view post on FAIR.org by Adam Johnson The New York Times (3/31/19) reports that Russia is “steadily expanding its military influence across Africa,” “expanding Moscow’s military sway on the continent” in hopes of “returning Russia to its former glory.” The New York Times (3/31/19) added to its series of reports depicting Official Enemies surpassing the US in the race for global dominance. It seems that having taken control of the Arctic (FAIR.org, 9/15/15), the nuclear domain (FAIR.org, 3/7/18) and a whole host of other spaces the US is “behind” in, Russia is now gobbling up Africa—a threat the US, presumably, must counter with an even greater military build-up. The report, “Russia’s Military Mission Creep Advances to a New Front: Africa,” by Eric Schmitt, asserting an uptick in Russian weapons contracts and military training exercises in Africa, is thin on context and hard numbers, but is artificially fortified with a series of anecdotes and frightening quotes. Since the obvious rejoinder to any discussion of increased Russian presence in Africa is, “OK, but what is the US’s current reach?” the Times hangs a lampshade on the inconvenience with this throwaway line: The United States military has a relatively light footprint across Africa. About 6,000 United States troops and 1,000 Defense Department civilians or contractors work on a variety of missions throughout Africa, mainly training and conducting exercises with local armies. According to documents obtained by the Intercept’s Nick Turse (12/1/18), the US currently has 34 military bases in Africa; Russia has zero. The Timesdoesn’t tell us how many “contractors’ and “troops” Russia has in Africa, so it’s not clear what the so-called “light footprint” is “relative” to. Is it 10? 100? 10,000? If it’s a lot less than 6,000, then the story is a bit of a dud. Alas, we’re simply left guessing at the “relative” size of Russia’s Africa presence. AFRICOM map of Africa, published by The Intercept(12/1/18). Note that in the Pentagon’s doubletalk, the US does not have “permanent bases” in Africa—it has “enduring locations.” Also worth noting: “Light footprint” is the same Orwellian phrase the Pentagon has been using for years to obscure the growth of AFRICOM, as in this AFRICOM press release (6/13/12) : AFRICOM Will Maintain Light Footprint in Africa — The United States has no plans to seek permanent bases in Africa, and, in the spirit of the new defense strategic guidance, will continue to maintain a “light footprint” on the continent, the top US Africa Command officer said. It’s always reassuring when the paper of record adopts the US government’s preferred press release language. (See also New York Times, 1/25/12 , 3/1/19.) Aside from quotes from US military brass, Schmitt’s report was primarily propped up with testimony from weapons contractor-funded think tanks, namely the Institute for the Study of War and the Center for International and Strategic Studies, which both provided urgent, stakes-raising narratives: Russia is seeking more strategic bases for its troops, including at Libyan ports on the Mediterranean Sea and at naval logistics centers in Eritrea and Sudan on the Red Sea, according to an analysis by the Institute for the Study of War, a research organization in Washington…. “Moscow and its private military contractors are arming some of the region’s weakest governments and backing the continent’s autocratic rulers,” said Judd Devermont, director of the Africa Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studiesin Washington. “This engagement threatens to exacerbate current conflict zones.” Panic over a creeping Russia menace in Africa is timed, not coincidentally, with congressional debate over the Defense budget, submitted by Trump two weeks ago. In addition, some congressional Democrats and Republicans are working to erode what little caps exists for the military budget, with a planned vote next week in the House for lifting limits on discretionary Defense spending. Needless to say, the primary funders of the Center for Strategic and International Studies and Institute for Study of War—the think tanks whose juicy quotes and studies bolster the primary arguments of the articles’ premise—stand to make tens of billions in profit from both of these legislative efforts. Having the New York Times provide marketing collateral for these efforts is no doubt useful in convincing an increasingly war-weary public, and accordingly war-wary Congress , to rubberstamp yet another record-setting Pentagon budget. For hawkish arms industry-funded groups like CSIS, the answer is always to build more weapons systems and to paint enemy states in the most sinister light possible. One 2017 study by FAIR (5/8/17) found that while commenting on Korea, CSIS’s experts either explicitly backed its funder Lockheed Martin’s THAAD weapons system, or its central value proposition that it would ward off a hostile North Korea, 30 out of 30 times. There were zero examples of a CSIS rep downplaying a threat or arguing against more military spending. When asked in email to provide an example of CSIS saying any threat was exaggerated or advising against any kind of military spending increase, the CSIS spokesperson declined to comment. The primary purpose of organizations like CSIS and ISW is to push the weapons systems of the corporations that fund them. Any analysis of their reports, studies or media appearances will show that at least 99 percent of the time, they come down on the side of hyping threats and pushing for the shiny new publicly funded instruments that would counter those threats. CSIS was Exhibit A in the New York Times‘ exposé (8/7/16) of how think tanks serve as undisclosed lobbyists—but that hasn’t stopped the paper from using the think tank’s “experts” as national security sources. This glaring conflict of interest, as usual, isn’t disclosed by the New York Times. A particularly strange omission, since it was the Times itself in 2016 that, citing leaked emails, argued (8/7/16) that CSIS was acting as a thinly veiled lobbyist for its weapons-maker funder General Atomics, and was, according to its own report, “blurring the line between researchers and lobbyists.” “As a think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies did not file a lobbying report,”  Eric Lipton and Brooke Williams reported, “but the goals of the effort were clear.” They are clear indeed. Yet since that time, CSIS has continued to be the go-to source for analyzing global threats for the Times, without even a token disclosure. Also as usual, the article went to no skeptical voices for any comment; the onlysources sought were war makers and those funded by war makers. They all worked to paint a one-sided, cartoon picture of a Russian takeover of Africa, complete with the patented New York Times double standard of motives: Russia is said by Schmitt to be seeking “new economic markets and energy resources.” The United States? Simply there to provide “foreign aid” and “train and conduct exercises with local armies.” In the Times, the idea that the US would also be motivated by securing markets and resources would be tantamount to lizard people conspiracy theory talk. But for Russia, it’s simply taken for granted. In the Times, Official Enemy threats are unquestionably bad, and unquestionably sinister in nature. The only answer? Let the Pentagon gravy train run its course, year in and year out, because invariably there will always be, with the help of the New York Times, the specter of an enemy threat “advancing on a new front.” You can send a message to the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com(Twitter:@NYTimes). Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Featured image: New York Times depiction (3/31/19) of soldiers in Burkina Faso.

FAIR/Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201
New York NY 10001
USA