[Content Note: Privilege. Conversation shared with Kate's permission.]
Liss: I think one of the (many) problems with a bunch of cishet white dudes being the loudest voices on the left is that purity politics is INCREDIBLY easy when you've never had to navigate internalized bigotry against yourself. I mean, I'm a lot less inclined to throw, say, Cory Booker in the garbage because he fucked up once on a women's issue (that's hypothetical; I don't even know if he has) when I've had to pull some ugly internalized misogyny out of my own female body and stare at it.
Eastsidekate: Well, and there's the quote from McKnight-Chavers about maybe wanting to see black people on Wall Street. White guys don't generally face criticism for having the audacity to feed themselves.
Liss: Exactly.
Eastsidekate: We have a system that benefits these guys from cradle-to-grave whether they ask it to or not, but as soon as a marginalized person wants to benefit, they're impure. It's the whole "I'm not privileged because I didn't choose to benefit from my position" argument.
Liss: OMG such a good point, Kate. So well said. They pat themselves on the back for "rejecting" the avenues they believe are impure, and then wonder why we're not impressed. Well, maybe because we don't even have those opportunities. And then they're like, "You shouldn't even want them." WELL, MAYBE I DON'T WANT TO WALK THAT PATH, BUT I'D AT LEAST LIKE THE GATE OPENED SO I HAVE A CHOICE. That's the thing they always miss — that what we're fighting for is often just the choice to make the same decisions they get to.
Eastsidekate: 
Eastsidekate and Liss Talk About Stuff
"Sanders Democrats" Don't Own the Left
[Content Note: Racism; misogyny; rape culture.]
It is not yet 9 months since the last presidential election, and already people are talking about the next one. While I understand the desire to think about the end of Donald Trump's presidency, at this point we don't need to be talking about candidates for 2020 before we've ensured that we'll still have free and fair elections. Who's running doesn't matter if the election itself is corrupted by foreign influence, voter suppression, and voting machine hacking.
Nonetheless, people are talking about who they want to run against Trump — and one of the people frequently mentioned is California Senator Kamala Harris. Who used to routinely make the lists of "Women We'd Vote for Who Aren't Hillary Clinton, to Prove We're Not Misogynists," but now is suddenly also insufficiently progressive.
Astounding how quickly the Bernie Sanders crew has mobilized against Kamala Harris. pic.twitter.com/ERUuhfFSvw
— Yashar Ali (@yashar) August 3, 2017
At the Week, Ryan Cooper decided to 'splain why it is that "leftists" are going after Democrats like Kamala Harris, and he wants us to know that it definitely isn't sexism or racism, even though he "would bet quite a lot of money the centrist Democratic establishment will" claim otherwise.
The optics here are not good — especially given the attacks on Hillary Clinton, Kirsten Gillibrand, and even Elizabeth Warren just for endorsing Clinton during the last cycle.
Cooper assures us that racism and misogyny play no role, and that to assert they do is just a cynical attempt by centrists "to win dirty." But if racism and misogyny play no role, then why is it only men of color and women who come up for this sort of scrutiny?
Yes, we're just scrutinizing records. Kicking tires. Digging into backgrounds. Demanding answers.
— Tom Watson (@tomwatson) August 3, 2017
Of every black Democrat.#badlook
That's one problem with this piece of apologia. The other is this: "Leftists" is defined to exclude anyone who doesn't support Bernie Sanders.
Writes Cooper: "At any rate, if I had to guess, I'd say we're in for a rather bitter fight for supremacy over the Democratic Party between big money elites on one side and Sanders Democrats on the other."
So, you're either a supporter of "big money elites," or you're a "Sanders Democrat" and thus a leftist.
That is a garbage construction, which elides that many of the disagreements between "Sanders Democrats" and Democrats are really about process, not policy.
It further elides how important the Democratic Party is, even when it's more conservative than "Sanders Democrats" would like, to lots of marginalized people in places across the country where Democrats are often the only ones standing between Republican state majorities and the complete annihilation of marginalized people's basic rights.
This is something about which I wrote during the primary in March of last year, by which point the word "revolution" had become a prominent fixture. There were voters talking about revolution, candidates talking about revolution, media talking about voters and candidates who were talking about revolution. But there was rarely any attempt made to clearly define what revolution meant, exactly. To some people, it meant (and means still) breaking up the banks. To others, it meant "making America great again." To still others, it meant electing a history-making candidate.
On the Democratic side of the aisle, there was particular disagreement about "revolution" — how it's defined and how it's best enacted — that came to be framed as those who want revolution (Sanders supporters) and those who don't (Clinton supporters).
But that was a false dichotomy, one that unnecessarily segments progressive voters in ways detrimental to our common interests; a misleading division born of and facilitated by a profound misunderstanding of why some Democratic voters, eager for change, may quite reasonably embrace a more measured and incrementalist approach.
Part of the reason that Black voters and non-Black voters, especially white voters from marginalized communities, joined to deliver crucial victories to Hillary Clinton across the Southern U.S. during the primary is because Sanders' message of revolution, which centered on upending rather than refining the system, failed to resonate. And contrary to pervasive narratives, it was not because voters in those states are too conservative or were too uninformed to appreciate Sanders' big ideas.
The truth is that the prospect of revolution, and the notions of monumental, sudden, chaotic change it conjures, can be utterly unappealing to people desperately longing for comfort and stability.
This is an idea with roots in Black anti-poverty activism, whose activists have detailed that, for many people living on the precipice, the idea of revolution can be nothing short of terrifying. People struggling to find money to keep themselves fed may be justifiably wary of the consequences of economic tumult for those already in financially precarious circumstances. People whose communities are under constant assault from police, corporations, and gentrifiers may be justifiably anxious about the prospect of further civil turmoil.
Like Black communities, other marginalized communities may have members who regard the specter of revolution with fear and suspicion. And with good reason: Revolution is not always kind to the vulnerable people.
At least not the kind of tumultuous, upending revolution that was and is proposed by people who don't view the incrementalist, within-the-system approach favored by Democrats like Clinton, Harris, Booker, Patrick, Gillibrand, and others as deserving of being called a revolution at all.
But how we view revolution often has a lot of do with from where we come.
My former colleague Ginger McKnight-Chavers, a Generation X Black woman, a Texas transplant to New York City, explains:
A discomfort with revolution is not necessarily passivity. With respect to African-American people, we're not monolithic by any stretch. But there is a sense of pragmatism in the way many of us approach politics that arises from needing real solutions to problems.There is a particular sort of privilege, easily and widely taken for granted, in being able to turn on the faucet and drink the water. To know that, despite other problems in a broken system, you reliably have access to clean water. To know that your basic physical safety and essential rights are not social and political footballs.
We don't necessarily want to overthrow the system — we want the system to work for us.
We want to turn on the faucet and be able to drink the water. We want our communities to be safe and clean. We want affordable healthcare. We want jobs. We want the criminal justice system to work for us instead of against us. We don't necessarily disagree with elements of the anti-Wall Street push. We don't see it as a zero sum game; we're just more concerned about our own streets.
And to be frank, many of us want the opportunity to be part of a fair capitalist system. We want to see people like us on Wall Street and in the capital markets, so that perhaps some of that capital will make its way into our communities.
Marginalized people, especially those who live in states with legislatures governed by a Republican majority, are thrown into constant chaos by abortion restrictions, "religious liberty" bills, "trans bathroom" bills, housing and employment discrimination, voter disenfranchisement, and all the other political tug-of-war we are obliged to navigate, in addition to social oppression and a ceaseless onslaught of microaggressions that can leave us reeling.
Those same things also make us urgent for change, but it disposes many of us toward an incrementalist approach, as opposed to the lurching upheaval of revolution.
It is a privilege, in many ways, to be able to "think big." To have the space and safety where one can imagine seismic shifts that don't come with the risk of falling off the edge. We don't all have that luxury.
Which is not to suggest that marginalized people don't desperately long for change. The greater the cavernous divide between reliable drinking water from the kitchen tap and having to bathe your child in bottled water, the more fervent that desire for change is.
In blue states and spaces where the Democratic Party is not as progressive as many of its constituents, the Party can seem almost quaint to its most privileged voters. It's easier to be contemptuous of the Democrats when one lives in a state, or municipality, where they have a comfortable governing majority.
People who live in red states, however, may rightly view the Democrats as the only thing standing between them (with varying degrees of passion and efficacy) and the obliteration of their rights by Republican-majority state legislatures.
The Democratic Party, for all its perceived and actual flaws, means a lot to people in red states. Like in Indiana and Wisconsin and Texas, where Democratic state legislatures left the states and went into hiding to try to stop Republicans from running roughshod over voters' rights and needs.
Many marginalized people in red states depend on the Democratic Party in ways that privileged people in true blue states don't need to. We don't have the luxury of being contemptuous of the Democratic Party for not being as progressive as we might like them to be, because our basic rights are constantly under assault.
There are certainly a number of people who voted for Clinton who appreciate and value Sanders' critiques of corporate corruption, yet bristle at his disdain for establishment politics, because we depend on them. In many red states, the near-total lack of progressive infrastructure means that the Democratic Party — the establishment — is the only well-funded institution prepared to hold the line against conservative oppression.
A revolution that includes the decimation of establishment politics risks leaving many Democratic voters in red states without any functional defense at all.
That's why when we see Bernie Sanders declare "the establishment wing of the Democratic Party" an enemy, or see "Sanders Democrats" launch attacks on Democrats like Kamala Harris, it can feel like an attack on the only institution that has had our backs while our rights are under assault.
And it's no fucking surprise that people who believe choice is negotiable don't understand why "establishment Democrats" who have stood the line for us, even if imperfectly, are important to us.
We all want meaningful change, but we have fundamental disagreements about how best to achieve it. Incrementalism is not a rejection of revolution, and it is certainly not indicative of indifference. It would be a mistake to misinterpret as indifference what is in reality a calculated caution.
And it is a mistake — and an incredible fucking insult — to assert that people who approach politics with calculated caution cannot be "leftists."
"Sanders Democrats" don't own the left.
For thirteen years, I've been occupying this space, advocating for progressive policy and social justice. I support universal healthcare and a basic guaranteed income. I am pro-choice, anti-death penalty, a prison abolitionist, and advocate for vast criminal justice reform. I strongly reject privatization schemes and strongly support free public education. I am an intersectional feminist; an anti-racist; a fierce defender of LGBTQ rights; an advocate for dismantling the rape culture; a disabled survivor; a fat activist; a Democratic critic and a Democratic supporter.
Those are not conservative positions. They are not even centrist positions.
They are leftist positions.
And I have spent the last thirteen years of my life being mercilessly inundated with gross harassment for taking those positions. [CN: Descriptions of abuse.]
Death threats. Rape threats. Threats to kill my family, my pets. Detailed emails describing what it would be like to commit various acts of violence against me. Emails imagining what sex is like between my husband and me, and how he must hate it because I am disgusting. Hopes that someone else will hurt me. Admonishments to kill myself.
Pictures of weapons that people want to use on me. Photoshopped images of me being jizzed on, raped, sliced, diced, murdered. Pictures of dead fetuses.
Pictures of my house. Emails and comments the entire text of which is just my address. Threats. Insults. Slurs. Oh my god, so many slurs.
Harassing phone calls. Voicemails with threats of violence. My home address and phone numbers published. A publicly posted campaign offering a reward to anyone for proof of my rape and/or murder.
Private images stolen and published. Photoshopped images of me as various historical tyrants. Hate sites. My image used in fake Twitter accounts, online dating profiles, blogs. My life scrutinized, my privacy invaded, lies told about me, my appearance mocked, my reported experiences audited.
People have pounded on my front door. Dumped garbage on my lawn. Smashed a phone just beneath my office window, as if to say this is how close I can get.
I have seen my face broadcast on cable news beneath a graphic of a sniper's crosshairs. I have listened to a conservative man say on national television that he wants to personally bankrupt me. (After, by the way, he got me fired from my job.)
All of this, and then some, because I have dedicated my life to leftist activism. It isn't because I'm a fucking centrist that I've had conservatives spit narratives at me about how they are the "Real Americans." That I've had to listen to Republicans call me a traitor for supporting Democrats, for protesting war, for marrying an immigrant. That I've fielded brazen death threats from self-identified Republicans with government email addresses because I am a progressive writer.
That said: Not a small part of this harassment has come from other leftists who accuse me of not being left enough, owing to my insufficient fealty to Bernie Sanders. And every time that "leftist" is defined in a way that writes me out of the left, it puts a target on my back for more of that shit.
Don't fucking tell me that I'm not a leftist when I have risked a lot and been obliged to navigate a colossal amount of abuse because of my politics and advocacy.
I have fucking earned my place on the left.
So have millions of other activists and voters and politicians who are currently being cast out as U.S. progressivism is redefined around a single man.
We are the left, too. And we're not going away.
A Glimpse into One of Our Possible Dystopian Futures
[Content Note: Eugenics; privilege.]
It's appropriate this particular scientific advancement would happen during the Trump administration. https://t.co/ZFDDfc7ILi
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
Because I suspect, once perfected, its primary use will be enabling wealthy people to uphold white supremacy, ableism, and the patriarchy.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
I am also feeling squirmy as Donald Trump is a big eugenics aficionado, because of course he is. Last year, the Huffington Post compiled some of his grossest hits on the subject.
Text onscreen: "This may be the most dangerous part of Donald Trump's campaign."So, you know, I'm not actually super pumped about this guy overseeing policies made regarding the ethics of genetically modifying human embryos.
Footage of Trump saying during a speech: "All men are created equal. Well, it's not true. Because some are smart; some aren't."
Interview with Trump biographer Michael D'Antonio, who says: "The family subscribes to a racehorse theory of human development."
Footage of Trump saying during an interview: "When you connect two racehorses, you usually end up with a fast horse." Footage of Trump saying during a campaign rally: "Secretariat doesn't produce slow horses."
D'Antonio: "They believe that there are superior people, and that if you put together the genes of a superior woman and a superior man, you get a superior offspring."
Footage of Trump saying during an interview: "You have to have the right — the right genes." Another interview: "I have a certain gene. I'm — I'm a gene believer." A stump speech: "Do we believe in the gene thing? I mean, I do." Another stump speech: "I have great genes and all that stuff, which I'm a believer in."
Interview: "Well, I believe I was born with a drive for success." Interview: "I was born with a certain intellect." Interview: "The fact is, you have to be born and blessed with [points to head] something up here." Interview: "God helped me [points to head] by giving me a certain brain."
Interview: "It's this. [points to head] It's not my salesmanship." The interviewer asks: "It's what?" Trump replies: "THIS. [points to head] You know what that is? It's the brainpower."
Stump speech: "I have Ivy League education; smart guy." Stump speech: "I have, like, a very, very high aptitude." Interview: "I'm pretty good at English. I always did very nicely in English." Stump speech: "I mean, like, I'm a smart person." Interview: "You're born a fighter. And I've seen a lot of people — they wanna fight, but they can't." Speech: "Some people cannot genetically handle pressure."
Interview: "I always said winning is somewhat, maybe, innate. Maybe it's just something you have, you know — you have the winning gene."
Interview: "Frankly, it'd be wonderful if you could develop it, but I'm not so sure you can." Interview: "You know I'm proud to have that German blood. There's no question about it. Great stuff."
I'm pretty certain the people who have been caterwauling about stem cell research will have no problem with this, though, as soon as Trump slaps a #MAGA tag of approval on it.
Cuz, you know — principles.
Question of the Day
Suggested by Shaker Sue Kerr: "Do you visit a Farmer's Market or use a CSA in your town? Tell us about it."
The Wednesday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by thunderstorms.
Recommended Reading:
Flavia Dzodan: [Content Note: Bigotry; hatred] From Gut Feeling to Policy: The Lifecycle of Hate (This is a follow-up to Flavia's piece linked in a previous blogaround.)
Sue Kerr: [CN: Transmisogynistic hatred; death] Tee Tee Dangerfield Is the 16th Trans Woman Murdered in 2017
Rachel Becker: Cracks Are Still Spreading Where That Massive Antarctic Iceberg Broke Free
Andrea J. Ritchie: [CN: Police violence; misogyny; racism] On Why We Need a World Without Police
Evonnia Woods: Reproaction Works to #ExposeFakeClinics in Columbia, MO
Andy Towle: Trump Lied About Phone Calls Praising Him from Boy Scouts Chief and Mexican President
Vivian Kane: [CN: Slavery; anti-Black appropriation] Amazon Announces Black America, the Alt-History Series That's Everything HBO's Confederate Isn't
Ryan Knutson: Millennials Unearth an Amazing Hack to Get Free TV: The Antenna
Leave your links and recommendations in comments. Self-promotion welcome and encouraged!
This Immigration "Reform" Is Even Worse Than You Might Think
And I'm assuming that you are already thinking that it's awful. Still, it's even worse.
But first let's back up for a moment.
Earlier today, Donald Trump made some garbage remarks as he "endorsed a new bill in the Senate aimed at slashing legal immigration levels over a decade."
Then he sent out poisonous slice of white toast Stephen Miller to talk about how cool the new policy is, during which CNN's Jim Acosta asked if the bill isn't a violation of the principle to "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses," per the Emma Lazarus verse etched into the Statue of Liberty. It's just one slice of an overwhelmingly reprehensible press conference, but it's a very revealing and representative slice.
Here is Stephen Miller actuallying the Emma Lazarus poem on the Statue of Liberty: pic.twitter.com/CWqMoDOmi1
— Tom Namako (@TomNamako) August 2, 2017
Acosta: The Statue of Liberty says, "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free." It doesn't say anything about speaking English or being able to be a computer programmer. Aren't you trying to change what it means to be an immigrant coming into this country, if you're telling them "you have to speak English"? Can't people learn how to speak English when they get here?Oh. Well, Donald Trump isn't part of the original White House, so let's disregard him then, too.
Miller: Well, first of all, right now, it's a requirement that, to be naturalized, you had to speak English, so the notion that speaking English wouldn't be a part of our immigration systems would be very ahistorical. Secondly, I don't want to get off into a whole thing about history here, but the Statue of Liberty is a symbol of liberty enlightening the world. It's a symbol of American liberty lighting the world. The poem that you're referring to was added later. It's not actually part of the original Statue of Liberty.
In all seriousness, this entire "immigrants have to speak English" premise is abject trash, for a whole bunch of reasons, but let's just start with the fundamental problem of how English-speaking gets assessed and by whom.
And who determines who speaks English, b/c my Scottish immigrant husband who's been here 15 yrs just was told to "speak English" last week. https://t.co/JvmkoUgxeL
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
Imagining that heavily accented English won't be a disqualifier is probably very foolish.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
NB: There are people already working for the U.S. government who don't have any idea in what countries English is the primary language.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
See why it might be a bad idea tasking those people w/ determining whether someone "speaks English" well enough to qualify?
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
...determining whether he "spoke English," would he have ever gotten his citizenship? What about someone w/o his white privilege?
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
Anyone who thinks this is acceptable, or even workable, is fucking bananas. This is indecent and impractical -- and it's DESIGNED THAT WAY.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
This is white supremacist, nativist, isolationist, nationalist horseshit, which will not stop even at this alarming, despicable point.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
Be wary of people who advise shutting down the borders to keep people out — b/c soon enough they'll be explaining why they're keeping us in.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
To be abundantly clear: I'm not using Iain as an example because I'm unaware of his immense privilege, but because I am keenly aware of it. And having gone through the official immigration process, and been a witness to some of the mistreatment he's gotten as a highly privileged person with accented English, I am incredibly concerned about how this will play out — and I am certain that it will play out even worse than many people expect, because they haven't yet stopped to consider just how shambolic and unreasonable a process this would be.
Time to start making calls again. Urge your Senators to oppose the RAISE Act.
It's Delightful, It's Delicious, It's De-Lovely...
...it's De-lurk Day! We haven't had one of these in quite some time, and Shaker IrishUp requested one, so all you Shaker lurkers who rarely or never pipe up, don't be shy; say hi!
And, as always, no one should feel obliged to stop lurking. These threads are a meant as a safe and easy space for people who do lurk to pop in if they want to, and some people have used them as a springboard to regular commenting, but that doesn't have to be the case at all.
Lurking is one of many ways to be part of this community, and if lurking feels best to you—lurk away! lurk away! :)
Daily Dose of Cute
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
We Resist: Day 195
One of the difficulties in resisting the Trump administration, the Republican Congressional majority, and Republican state legislatures is keeping on top of the sheer number of horrors, indignities, and normalization of the aggressively abnormal that they unleash every single day.
So here is a daily thread for all of us to share all the things that are going on, thus crowdsourcing a daily compendium of the onslaught of conservative erosion of our rights and our very democracy.
Stay engaged. Stay vigilant. Resist.
* * *
Here are some things in the news today:
Earlier today by me: I Write Letters and Today in White Supremacy White House and Trump Signs Russia Sanctions Bill, with "Concerns".
Today's top issue is immigration, as Donald Trump has unveiled an immigration plan that would severely curtail legal immigration.
VIDEO: President Trump unveils legislation that would place new limits on legal immigration. https://t.co/cJ17AuCTYD
— The Associated Press (@AP) August 2, 2017
Today Trump blessed a bill to cut legal immigration in half. Here's what he said in an interview two months ago: pic.twitter.com/JssK3OqhP0
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) August 2, 2017
I've been saying for months that the Trump administration would come after legal immigrants next, and here we are. https://t.co/aqNl0pLt6w
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
And here's me last month noting many of the legal immigration talking points Trump used today are hot garbage. https://t.co/Qs01jxSzXQ
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
When I warned Trump would come after legal immigrants next, I was called a dum-dum hysteric alarmist, but here we are.
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
But I'll say again: Pay attention to the people who get this shit right, & not the people who keep. being. wrong. that we're "overreacting."
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
This, too, is another proposal to fundamentally alter the character of the United States and our place in the world. It's devastating.
And, let me be blunt, for anyone who doesn't understand what a "merit-based" immigration policy that favors English-speaking immigrants actually is: It's a white supremacist shitshow. That's what it is.
And even if we were willing, for shits and grins, to pretend that it was really just about centering skilled workers, the fucking chutzpah of a man married to an immigrant who entered the country as a model advocating a "merit-based" immigration policy!
Which is not a knock on modeling or an implication that it's an unskilled job. But in terms of integral work, we need agricultural laborers to process food significantly more than we need models. (Someone might observe we need them more than political writers, too, and they would be absolutely correct.)
This policy is perhaps the ultimate example of closing the door behind you once you've exploited the opportunities offered to you. What a cruel, selfish shitbird Donald Trump is.
In other immigration news...
[Content Note: Nativism; video may autoplay at link] Elise Foley at the Huffington Post: ICE's 'Targeted Enforcement Operation' Mostly Arrests Immigrants It Wasn't Targeting. "An Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation to arrest people who entered the country without authorization as kids or as families ended up mostly sweeping up other people who officers encountered along the way. ...The purpose of 'Operation Border Guardian/Border Resolve' was to pick up people who came to the U.S. as unaccompanied minors or family units. But such people made up only about 30 percent of the total arrests: 120 people who entered the country as unaccompanied minors and 73 as part of families, versus 457 who were 'encountered during this operation,' as ICE put it in a statement. An ICE spokeswoman confirmed that those 457 people were not the targets of the operation."
[CN: Nativism; harassment] Kira Lerner at ThinkProgress: As United States Cracks Down on Refugee Resettlement, the 'Ellis Island of the South' Keeps Open Arms. "[Clarkstown, Georgia, is] often referred to as the 'Ellis Island of the South.' In recent decades, the Clarkston area has accepted roughly 1,500 refugees each year, making the town the most diverse 1.4 square miles in the United States. Clarkston is now home to people from more than 40 countries speaking more than 60 languages. ...The world right now is experiencing the largest forced migration crisis in recorded history, with more than 21.3 million refugees worldwide. And opportunities, especially in the United States, are quickly disappearing. [Donald] Trump campaigned for the presidency with a staunchly anti-immigrant, anti-refugee message, and in his five months in office, his administration has followed through with actions that have terrified the residents here."
[CN: Nativism; human trafficking] Nina Mast at Media Matters: Pro-Trump Trolls Silent After "Alt-Right" Ship Detained in Mediterranean for Apparent Human Trafficking. "Defend Europe, an anti-immigrant group that attempts to disrupt humanitarian search and rescue missions in the Mediterranean Sea, recently chartered a boat that was stopped in a Cyprus port, where several members were arrested for forging documents and engaging in potential human trafficking. Since then, pro-Trump media trolls associated with the campaign have been conspicuously silent." I'll bet they have.
* * *
Jeffrey Toobin at the New Yorker: Trump's Real Personnel Victory: More Conservative Judges. "So while the public watches Trump churn through White House staff members, his Administration is humming along nicely in filling federal judgeships, with the enthusiastic assistance of the Republican majority in the Senate. The first and most important victory for the President came with the confirmation of Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, in a seat that Mitch McConnell, of Kentucky, the Republican leader in the Senate, kept vacant for nearly the full final year of Barack Obama's Presidency. But McConnell didn't just protect a Supreme Court seat for the next President; he basically shut down the entire confirmation process for all of Obama's federal-judgeship nominees for more than a year. It's the vacancies that accumulated during this time — more than a hundred of them — that Trump's team is now working efficiently to fill." *screams*
Chris Riotta at Newsweek/Yahoo News: Trump Can't Be Left Alone, So His Generals Created Plan to Keep Tabs on Him. "Donald Trump can't be left alone to make decisions regarding matters of national security — at least, that is reportedly the view of his new chief of staff, John Kelly, and of his defense secretary, James Mattis. The two military men, who Trump affectionately refers to as 'my generals,' hatched a plan during the initial months of his presidency to ensure he wasn't left alone while in the U.S., the Associated Press reported Tuesday. Kelly and Mattis agreed to schedule their travel arrangements so at least one of them could be physically accessible to the new president at all times, an official with knowledge of the pact said."
Instead of "hatching a plan" to make sure someone is always with him, these two abetting clowns should have been hatching a plan to convince every Republican Congressman that Donald Trump is unfit to be president because he cannot be trusted. Goddammit.
Ian Millhiser at ThinkProgress: Trump Is About to Make America Much Crueler to Unionized Workers. "Since Election Day, unions have lived on borrowed time. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which has exclusive authority over many key questions of labor law, is still controlled by Democrats — thus shielding workers and their unions from attacks that became far likelier the moment Donald Trump was declared the winner of the 2016 election. But this period of interregnum is about to end. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) began the process of confirming the first of Trump's two nominees to the NLRB on Monday. When both nominees sit on the Board, a swift rollback of union rights is likely."
[CN: War; death] Micah Zenko at Foreign Policy: Donald Trump Is Pushing America's Special Forces Past the Breaking Point.
With little policy guidance or public attention, the Donald Trump administration has further expanded former President Barack Obama's use of lethal counterterrorism operations in nonbattlefield countries — namely Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. During the final 193 days of Obama's presidency, there were 21 such operations. Over a comparable number of days under [Donald] Trump, there have been five times as many operations: at least 92 in Yemen, four in Pakistan, and six in Somalia.The whole piece is an important read to understand our current military policy, and what's wrong with it.
The workhorse for these expanded missions is the military's Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) — a sub-unified command of U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM). We know that JSOC, and not the CIA, is the lead executive authority for these operations because they are overt, rather than covert. Military officials have publicly explained the missions, and the Defense Department has even issued press releases about them...
There is no reason to doubt that Trump will turn more and more to JSOC, just as his predecessors did, in pursuit of counterterrorism objectives. But this over-reliance on lethal force is not just exhausting America's special operators; it is wholly insufficient to comprehensively confront the underlying causes of militancy and terrorism — a mantra Pentagon officials repeat when they all but beg Congress to adequately fund the State Department.
[CN: Video may autoplay at link] Billy House at Bloomberg: House Judiciary Chairman's Priority: Investigating Hillary Clinton. "Between Russian meddling in last year's election, Donald Trump's decision to fire FBI Director James Comey, and the president's public drubbing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the House Judiciary Committee has a lot it could be looking into. But its Republican chairman, Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, has a different priority: investigating Hillary Clinton." PRIORITIES! The Republican Party definitely has them! And they. are. terrible.
Trump says the White House is "a real dump." His Yelp review will def mention the scandalous lack of gold toilets. https://t.co/ODO6eSeY7N
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
* * *
In good resistance news, or at least not terrible news...
Alice Ollstein at TPM: Federal Court Gives States a Say in Trump's Battle over Obamacare Subsidies. "As [Donald] Trump mulls sabotaging Obamacare's exchanges by cutting off billions in cost sharing reduction payments to insurers — payments that are the subject of an ongoing federal lawsuit that began when the Republican-controlled House of Representatives sued the Obama administration in 2014 — a new court action this week makes it harder for him to unilaterally ending the subsidies. On Tuesday night, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted a motion filed by 16 states — led by New York and California — who want to be intervening parties in the lawsuit around the legality of the payments. This means that even if Trump decides to drop the government's defense of the insurer subsidies, the states can take up the mantle."
Imani Gandy at Rewire: Lawsuit Revived Against Ferguson Police. "A federal appeals court on Tuesday breathed new life into a multimillion dollar lawsuit alleging that police in Ferguson, Missouri, used excessive force on protesters during the civil unrest following the death of Michael Brown in 2014. A unanimous three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that one of the nine plaintiffs, DeWayne Matthews, could move forward with his claims that Ferguson police used excessive force when they arrested him on August 13, 2014. The ruling reverses part of the lower court's decision last October to dispense with the entire lawsuit."
Mark Hand at ThinkProgress: 16 Attorneys General Sue Scott Pruitt for Blocking Implementation of EPA Smog Rule. "The states contend that Administrator Scott Pruitt's proposed one-year delay in compliance deadlines for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards violate the requirements of the Clean Air Act. The Obama-era regulation lowered the allowable concentration of ozone to 70 parts per billion, from the previous 75. 'By illegally blocking these vital clean air protections, Administrator Pruitt is endangering the health and safety of millions — but attorneys general have made clear: We won't hesitate to fight back to protect our residents and our states,' New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who is leading the lawsuit, said in a statement."
What have you been reading that we need to resist today?
Trump Signs Russia Sanctions Bill, with "Concerns"
So, as you may recall, the House and Senate both passed (with veto-proof majorities) legislation to impose sanctions on Russia, with a stipulation that Donald Trump could not ease those sanctions without Congressional authority.
In response to that legislation, Russian President Vladimir Putin threatened retaliation on the United States, and, as the bill passed out of Congress and onto the president's desk for signature, Russia seized two U.S. properties in Moscow and ordered the U.S. embassy to reduce its staff by September.
After some dithering, Trump finally signed the bill today, but added a signing statement noting his "concerns."
Trump has signed the Russia sanctions bill Congress forced on him, and is adding a statement saying the administration will carry out the law but with reservations about its impact and the constitutionality of some provisions.So, three things:
The so-called signing statement, obtained by Bloomberg, lays out Trump's concerns about the legislation, including that it encroaches on presidential authority and may hurt U.S. ability to work with allies.
Trump's statement doesn't signal any intent to bypass or circumvent aspects of the law. Instead, the president indicates he intends for his administration to carry out the law in a way consistent with his constitutional authority, language that leaves open some room for interpretation of how the law is executed.
1. In another nod to his campaign to rewrite the U.S. presidency as an authoritarian dictatorship, Trump is grousing about Congress encroaching "on presidential authority," as though Congress doesn't have the right and the obligation to provide checks and balances on presidential authority.
2. The objection that this bill "may hurt U.S. ability to work with allies" is really something, given that Trump's fealty to Putin (among other alienating policies) has definitely hurt the nation's relationship with key allies, but Trump hasn't seemed too concerned about that.
3. It's not even clear how Trump will simultaneously comply with the law as written and "carry out the law in a way consistent with his constitutional authority," which he clearly views as mutually exclusive ways of interpreting the law.
So who knows where we really are at the moment. Except for this: Congress is on break, and Putin has probably already given orders to escalate the retaliatory measures.
It is unlikely that Putin will have viewed Trump's signing statement detailing his reservations sufficient action from his stooge, who was supposed to intercede to prevent the sanctions altogether.
And the Trump administration is certainly aware of that. Also today, in an indication of how large Russia looms over White House policy, it was reported that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson "is resisting the pleas of State Department officials to spend nearly $80 million allocated by Congress for fighting terrorist propaganda and Russian disinformation," despite the fact that $60 million of it "will expire on Sept. 30 if not transferred to State by then."
There are reportedly multiple reasons for Tillerson's intransigence, but among them, is fear of provoking Russia: "One Tillerson aide, R.C. Hammond, suggested the money is unwelcome because any extra funding for programs to counter Russian media influence would anger Moscow, according to a former senior State Department official."
A couple of perfect and terrifying examples of why it's a bad idea to ratify election results even when the election is known to have been compromised by the government of a foreign adversary, who will expect the "winner" to serve as its puppet.
Today in White Supremacy White House
Under the New York Times' innocuous headline "Justice Dept. to Take on Affirmative Action in College Admissions," Charlie Savage reports: "The Trump administration is preparing to redirect resources of the Justice Department's civil rights division toward investigating and suing universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants, according to a document obtained by The New York Times."
Emphasis mine.
"The project," Savage continues, "is another sign that the civil rights division is taking on a conservative tilt under [Donald] Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions."
Yes, that's a very polite way of putting it. A less polite, and frankly more honest, way of putting it is that the project is another sign that Donald Trump, a long-time public racist, is overseeing a white supremacist presidency and, with the help of of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a long-time public racist, is re-codifying white supremacy into federal law in places where any trace of racial justice measures have been enacted.
Another day of the Trump presidency; another erosion of the progress we've made.
To anyone who ever said any variation on the words "Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are the same," fuck you forever.
I Write Letters
Trump is "acting sharper in meetings and even rattling off stats" now that Kelly is chief of staff https://t.co/1W4qnIVz3a
— Blake Hounshell (@blakehounshell) August 2, 2017
Omg you guys, here comes the pivot!!!
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 2, 2017
😒 https://t.co/6SHGPByOlk
Dear Political Press:
Stop. Just stop. For two years now, you have been writing and publishing articles about and taken up countless hours of television and radio airtime discussing how Donald Trump is just about to turn the corner and become a Serious Person.
This is never going to happen.
It did not happen when Corey Lewandowski was running his campaign. It did not happen when Paul Manafort was running his campaign. It did not happen when Kellyanne Conway was running his campaign. It did not happen when he made his son-in-law Jared Kushner a senior advisor in his White House. It did not happen when his daughter Ivanka was given a prominent role in his White House. It did not happen when he made Reince Priebus his Chief of Staff. And it will not happen now that John Kelly is his Chief of Staff.
Because Trump is always Trump. Being Trump is the only thing he knows how to do.
And he's never going to stop doing it.
He will be Maximum Trump every day of his Trump life — and if he were ever going to stop being the abusive, arrogant, vainglorious, controlling, manipulative, self-aggrandizing, corrupt bully that he has been his whole deplorable life, if he were even capable of change, giving him more power, more influence, more visibility, more attention, and less accountability was the surest way to nip that already infinitesimally small possibility right in its impossibly unlikely bud.
Trump gonna Trump. That should be excruciatingly evident at this point, if it somehow wasn't from go.
Every article that portends or promises a pivot is a fucking embarrassment. I honestly don't know how any human being with a modicum of dignity could put their name to such execrable dreck.
But even worse than that: It's dangerous, this narrative. It's a lie. And it's a lie that serves to suggest that the heinous assault Trump is making on our democratic systems, norms, ethics, and rule of law is just a passing phase, and we'll definitely get back to normal in short order.
No, we won't. If we manage to fully recover at all from the ruination Trump has already wrought, it will take a very long time. And it will require more than giving Trump a cookie for paying attention in a meeting.
Shame on you for delivering false reassurances to the public that it could ever be as simple as your narrative suggests, that all we need is for Trump to finally pivot to presidential at long last, especially when it's never going to happen anyway.
Please. I beg you. Stop.
STOP.
Most Urgently,
Liss
Question of the Day
Suggested by Shaker KitSileya: "What is your favorite view? Do you have a picture?"
"Instead, there’s just a Hillary-shaped hole where Hillary is supposed to be."
I've got a new piece up at Medium: "Just a Sea of White Dudes."
It's a piece I published here back in June, but I've updated it to reflect some recent developments. And because it still just feels relevant, every damn day.
So, in case you missed it the first time around, or want to read it again, here 'tis!
If The President Is A Russian Propaganda Agent Maybe We Should Care
Today NPR's David Folkenflick published a story about a lawsuit by former FOX commentator Rod Wheeler. it alleges that Fox News conspired with the White House and wealthy Trump supporter Ed Butwowsky knowingly manufactured fake quotes in order to promote a news story. The story, allegedly pushed in order to take attention away from the Russia investigation, promoted a conspiracy theory alleging that DNC staffer Seth Rich was murdered by the DNC and/or Hillary Clinton in revenge for providing material to Wikileaks. The NPR piece is well worth reading in full, as is Philip Bump's timeline at the Washington post.
The NPR story includes the following:
On the evening of May 14, Butowsky leaves a voicemail for Wheeler raising the stakes by invoking the White House and saying, "Let's close this deal."
A bit later that night, at 9:10 p.m., Butowsky texts Wheeler, according to Wheeler's suit: "Not to add any more pressure but the president just read the article. He wants the article out immediately. It's now all up to you. But don't feel the pressure."
This is the president of the United States, reading and approving of an outright lie, and asking for it to be published immediately. But more than that, it's disinformation with Russian DNA.
As Snopes noted nearly a year ago, the story surfaced first on conspiracy outlet WhatDoesItMean, and was promptly promoted by Wikileaks itself, which offered a $20,000 reward for information connecting the DNC/Clinton to the murder. As it is becoming clearer and clearer that Wikileaks was doing the Kremlin's bidding in 2016, it's obvious that this is a lie the Kremlin likes very well.
It's one that the most extreme Bernie Sanders supporters jumped on; it's one that Sanders-endorsed Tim Canova, who ran to unseat Debbie Wasserman Schultz in 2016, has embraced. (Sanders is not endorsing him for 2018.) Jeff Guo at Vox has more on the origins and growth of the conspiracy theory, as well as the Fox story and the Rich family's attempts to prevent the further exploitation of their son's death for political gain.
Maybe it's just me, but the clear evidence that Trump is taking an active role in promoting Russian-approved disinformation, via an American media outlet, should be kind of a big deal. This is routine in the regime of brutal dictators like Putin, but it has no place in a democratic republic.
This is the vilest propaganda, grown out of ancient GOP slurs against Bill and Hillary Clinton, nurtured by the hatred of both far left and far right, actively propagated by the Kremlin, and wielded as a weapon to discredit an entire political party, its primary process and its presidential candidate. And it relies an incredibly cruel, indecent, and cynical exploitation of a tragic death.
It goes without saying that if it were a generic Democrat in the White House doing anything like this, the GOP would be screaming for impeachment. How long will they continue to enable a man who should be ineligible for the most basic security clearance? How long will they be content to let him do the bidding of his puppeteers?
Sadly, my guess is very long indeed.
Fat Fashion
This is your semi-regular thread in which fat women can share pix, make recommendations for clothes they love, ask questions of other fat women about where to locate certain plus-size items, share info about sales, talk about what jeans cut at what retailer best fits their body shapes, discuss how to accessorize neutral colored suits, share stories of going bare-armed for the first time, brag about a cool fashion moment, whatever.
* * *
I got that tee at Torrid, where it unfortunately sold out really quickly. But they've got another one featuring the Golden Girls on sale now, if you're interested!
Anyway! As always, all subjects related to fat fashion are on topic, but if you want a topic for discussion: What's currently your favorite tee?
Have at it in comments! Please remember to make fat women of all sizes, especially women who find themselves regularly sizing out of standard plus-size lines, welcome in this conversation, and pass no judgment on fat women who want to and/or feel obliged, for any reason, to conform to beauty standards. And please make sure if you're soliciting advice, you make it clear you're seeking suggestions—and please be considerate not to offer unsolicited advice. Sometimes people just need to complain and want solidarity, not solutions.
Daily Dose of Cute
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
We Resist: Day 194
One of the difficulties in resisting the Trump administration, the Republican Congressional majority, and Republican state legislatures is keeping on top of the sheer number of horrors, indignities, and normalization of the aggressively abnormal that they unleash every single day.
So here is a daily thread for all of us to share all the things that are going on, thus crowdsourcing a daily compendium of the onslaught of conservative erosion of our rights and our very democracy.
Stay engaged. Stay vigilant. Resist.
* * *
Here are some things in the news today:
Earlier today by me: Here Is Another Report That Trump Lied About Russia.
🚨🚨🚨 HOLY SHIT. Sorry to get all Drudge on you with the alarms, but this is a big one, friends. Josh Rogin at the Washington Post: State Department Considers Scrubbing Democracy Promotion from Its Mission. Just reading that headline took my breath away. Emphases mine:
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has ordered his department to redefine its mission and issue a new statement of purpose to the world. The draft statements under review right now are similar to the old mission statement, except for one thing — any mention of promoting democracy is being eliminated.The Trump administration and Republican Party are keen to kill democracy at home, and this is the opening salvo in delineating official indifference to, or active subversion of, democracy around the world.
According to an internal email that went out Friday, which I obtained, the State Department's Executive Steering Committee convened a meeting of leaders to draft new statements on the department's purpose, mission and ambition, as part of the overall reorganization of the State Department and USAID. (The draft statements were being circulated for comment Friday and could change before being finalized.)
• The State Department's draft statement on its purpose is: "We promote the security, prosperity, and interests of the American people globally."
• The State Department's draft statement on its mission is: "Lead America's foreign policy through global advocacy, action, and assistance to shape a safer, more prosperous world."
• The State Department's draft statement on its ambition is: "The American people thrive in a peaceful and interconnected world that is free, resilient, and prosperous."
Compare that to the State Department Mission Statement that is currently on the books, as laid out in the department's fiscal year 2016 financial report:
"The Department's mission is to shape and sustain a peaceful, prosperous, just, and democratic world and foster conditions for stability and progress for the benefit of the American people and people everywhere. This mission is shared with the USAID, ensuring we have a common path forward in partnership as we invest in the shared security and prosperity that will ultimately better prepare us for the challenges of tomorrow."Former senior State Department officials from both parties told me that eliminating "just" and "democratic" from the State Department's list of desired outcomes is neither accidental nor inconsequential.
"The only significant difference is the deletion of justice and democracy," said Elliott Abrams, who served as deputy national security adviser for global democracy strategy during the George W. Bush administration. "We used to want a just and democratic word, and now apparently we don't."
I fear this is one of those things that will fly under the radar, but it's big. Very big. It's a redefinition of the US' place in the world. https://t.co/PHuNR6cD0S
— Melissa McEwan (@Shakestweetz) August 1, 2017
This is America First as foreign policy. It is a total abdication of America's role as a global democratic leader. It is a giant shit on veterans and currently serving service members, who signed up to defend democracy here and abroad. It is a betrayal of this nation's citizens who believe in and defend our democratic institutions, and a fuck-you to our democratic allies.
I am absolutely sick. I am angry. And I am afraid.
* * *
Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart at Reuters: North Korea Can Hit Most of United States Say U.S. Officials. "North Korea's latest test of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) has shown that Pyongyang now may be able to reach most of the continental United States, two U.S. officials told Reuters on Monday. The assessment, which the officials discussed on condition of anonymity, underscored the growing threat posed by Pyongyang's nuclear and missile programs, and could add pressure on [Donald] Trump's administration to respond."
That sounds scary. I wonder if it's true, or whether it's a dangerous exaggeration (or straight-up lie) being used to justify military action from the Trump administration. We have no way of knowing, since most of the senior members of this administration have shown themselves to be demonstrable liars, and the "U.S. officials" disclosing this information are anonymous. Let's all pay attention to see if Donald Trump is publicly angry about this leak. Something tells me he won't be, and that will itself be very informative.
Meanwhile, in shit we definitely know we should care about, but too bad our president is Putin's puppet...
Michael R. Gordon and Eric Schmitt at the New York Times: Russia's Military Drills Near NATO Border Raise Fears of Aggression. "Russia is preparing to send as many as 100,000 troops to the eastern edge of NATO territory at the end of the summer, one of the biggest steps yet in the military buildup undertaken by President Vladimir V. Putin and an exercise in intimidation that recalls the most ominous days of the Cold War. The troops are conducting military maneuvers known as Zapad, Russian for 'west,' in Belarus, the Baltic Sea, western Russia and the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad. The drills will feature a reconstituted armored force named for a storied Soviet military unit, the First Guards Tank Army. Its establishment represents the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union that so much offensive power has been concentrated in a single command."
Fuck.
It's probably a good time for a reminder, in case you've forgotten (or never heard), that Sweden has been making "preparations for a possible military attack" by Russia since the end of last year.
* * *
Ashley Feinberg at Wired: Kushner on Middle East Peace: "What Do We Offer That's Unique? I Don't Know."
WIRED has obtained a recording of Kushner's talk, which lasted for just under an hour in total.Fucking hell.
The speech—which was peppered with self-deprecating jokes as reported by Foreign Policy—offered a rare insight into the man who [Donald] Trump has tasked with criminal justice reform, managing the opioid crisis, updating the government's technological systems, and creating peace in the Middle East, among other tasks. It's the latter, though, that's both the most deeply personal for Kushner (a staunch supporter of Israel) and that prompted him to embark on his longest, most rambling answer during yesterday's question-and-answer session.
While the recording doesn't catch the entirety of the question, it appears to center on how Kushner plans to negotiate peace between Israelis and Palestinians, as well as why he believes he'll be successful where every other administration has failed. He doesn't directly answer either question, but he does reveal that, from his extensive research, he's learned that "not a whole lot has been accomplished over the last 40 or 50 years." He also notes that he's spoken to "a lot of people," which has taught him that "this is a very emotionally charged situation."
Later in the clip, Kushner expresses frustration at others' attempts to teach him about the delicate situation he's been inserted into, saying, "Everyone finds an issue, that, 'You have to understand what they did then' and 'You have to understand that they did this.' But how does that help us get peace? Let's not focus on that. We don't want a history lesson. We've read enough books. Let's focus on how do you come up with a conclusion to the situation."
Nicole Lafond at TPM: Eric Trump: I Want Somebody to Start Fighting for My Father. Appearing on Fox's 'Hannity' show, the favorite media outlet of the Trump family, Eric Trump said his father is carrying the 'whole weight' of the Republican party on his shoulders. ...He said his father is 'the best fighter in the world' and no one can do a better job of fighting for Trump than Trump can. 'But how much weight does he have to carry by himself? How can a party that is doing so much better than the Democrats… Why wouldn't they embrace this? My father has the voice of this country. The people of this country love him. Why wouldn't they get in line?' he said, referencing defections by three Republican senators who voted against the Obamacare repeal vote early Friday morning." My god, this family.
[Content Note: Video may autoplay at link] Lydia Wheeler at the Hill: GOP House Member Calls on Mueller to Resign. "Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) is calling on Robert Mueller, special counsel for the Justice Department's Russia investigation, to resign. Franks, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, claims Mueller is violating a law governing the special counsel that prohibits him from serving if he has a 'conflict of interest'... 'Those who worked under them have attested he and Jim Comey possess a close friendship, and they have delivered on-the-record statements effusing praise of one another.'" Fuck. Off.
This is bad — very bad:
NEW: Attorney General Jeff Sessions announces General Mark S. Inch as new director of Federal Bureau of Prisons. pic.twitter.com/6HuToOlxas
— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) August 1, 2017
It doesn't seem normal that military officials are now the White House Chief of Staff & the head of the Bureau of Corrections. https://t.co/dxZSUPS2rj
— deray mckesson (@deray) August 1, 2017
Sam Thielman at TPM: Stinger Missiles and Shady Deals: Ex-Biz Partner to Trump Has a Tall Tale to Tell. "In December 2015, an Associated Press reporter asked Donald Trump why he had appointed Felix Sater, a man who'd been convicted for stock fraud, his senior advisor. 'Felix Sater, boy, I have to even think about it,' Trump told the AP. 'I'm not that familiar with him.' The feeling is not mutual. 'My last Moscow deal [for the Trump Organization] was in October of 2015,' Sater recalled. 'It didn't go through because obviously he became President.'" There is so, so much more at the link.
What have you been reading that we need to resist today?
