Muckraker Farm

Keeping Track (of some things), Staying Outraged (it is possible), and Resisting (it’s essential)

Passages in bold in the body of the texts below are my emphasis. This is an ongoing project, and I update the site frequently. Because I try to stay focused on what has actually happened, I usually let the news ‘settle’ a day or so before posting. I hope readers will peruse the articles in full for a better understanding of the issues and their context; our democracy and our future depend on citizens who can distinguish between facts and falsehoods and who are engaged in the political process.

Friday, 3 November 2017, Day 288:

‘Very Frustrated’ Trump Becomes Top Critic of Law Enforcement and Says Justice Department and F.B.I. Must ‘Do What Is Right’ and Investigate Democrats, The New York Times, Peter Baker, Friday, 3 November 2017: “One of President Trump’s biggest disappointments in office, by his own account, was discovering that he is not supposed to personally direct law enforcement decisions by the Justice Department and the F.B.I. So, instead, he has made himself into perhaps the most vocal critic of America’s system of justice ever to occupy the Oval Office. Just this week, he denounced the criminal justice system as ‘a joke’ and ‘a laughingstock.’ He demanded that the suspect in the New York terrorist attack be executed. He spent Friday berating the Justice Department and F.B.I. for not investigating his political opponents. He then turned to the military justice system and called a court-martial decision ‘a complete and total disgrace.’ The repeated assaults on law enforcement cross lines that presidents have largely observed since the Watergate era, raising questions about the separation of politics and the law. But as extraordinary as Mr. Trump’s broadsides are, perhaps more striking is that investigators and prosecutors are so far ignoring the head of the executive branch in which they serve while military judges and juries are for the most part disregarding the opinions of their commander in chief. ‘You know, the saddest thing is that because I’m the president of the United States, I am not supposed to be involved with the Justice Department,’ Mr. Trump said in a radio interview on Thursday on the ‘Larry O’Connor Show.’ ‘I am not supposed to be involved with the F.B.I. I’m not supposed to be doing the kind of things that I would love to be doing. And I’m very frustrated by it.’ That frustration has been fueled particularly by Mr. Trump’s inability to control the special counsel investigation into whether his campaign coordinated with Russia during last year’s election, an investigation that unveiled its first criminal charges this week against Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman and two other advisers. Mr. Trump has made clear that he sees the attorney general and the F.B.I. director as his personal agents rather than independent figures, lashing out at both for not protecting him from the Russia investigation.” See also, Trump pressures Justice Department to investigate ‘Crooked Hillary,’ The Washington Post, Philip Rucker, Friday, 3 November 2017: “President Trump on Friday pressured the Department of Justice — and specifically the FBI — to investigate Hillary Clinton, ticking through a slew of issues involving the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee and her party, and urging law enforcement to ‘do what is right and proper.’ Trump’s advocacy for criminal probe of his political opponent marked a significant breach of the traditional boundaries within the executive branch designed to prevent investigations from being politicized.”

Commercial Real Estate, Which Fueled Trump’s Fortune, Fares Well in Tax Plan, The New York Times, Alan Rappeport, Friday, 3 November 2017: “An industry familiar to President Trump appears to have emerged from the Republican tax rewrite relatively unscathed: commercial real estate. For months, commercial real estate developers had been concerned that the tax plan in the works would make it more difficult or expensive for them to take out huge bank loans or would damage demand in the property market. But if the plan unveiled this week by House Republicans comes to pass, developers like Mr. Trump, who made much of his fortune building skyscrapers, hotels and resorts, will have little to worry about. ‘The industry was left whole,’ said Thomas J. Bisacquino, president of NAIOP, a commercial real estate development trade group. ‘The provisions we feel are working will still work.'”

13 Federal Agencies Unveiled an Exhaustive Scientific Report That Says Humans Are the Dominant Cause of Climate Change, Contradicting Top Officials in the Trump Administration, The New York Times, Lisa Friedman and Glenn Thrush, Friday, 3 November 2017: “Directly contradicting much of the Trump administration’s position on climate change, 13 federal agencies unveiled an exhaustive scientific report on Friday that says humans are the dominant cause of the global temperature rise that has created the warmest period in the history of civilization. Over the past 115 years global average temperatures have increased 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, leading to record-breaking weather events and temperature extremes, the report says. The global, long-term warming trend is ‘unambiguous,’ it says, and there is ‘no convincing alternative explanation’ that anything other than humans — the cars we drive, the power plants we operate, the forests we destroy — are to blame. The report was approved for release by the White House, but the findings come as the Trump administration is defending its climate change policies. The United Nations convenes its annual climate change conference next week in Bonn, Germany, and the American delegation is expected to face harsh criticism over President Trump’s decision to walk away from the 195-nation Paris climate accord and top administration officials’ stated doubts about the causes and impacts of a warming planet. ‘This report has some very powerful, hard-hitting statements that are totally at odds with senior administration folks and at odds with their policies,’ said Philip B. Duffy, president of the Woods Hole Research Center. ‘It begs the question, where are members of the administration getting their information from? They’re obviously not getting it from their own scientists.’ While there were pockets of resistance to the report in the Trump administration, according to climate scientists involved in drafting the report, there was little appetite for a knockdown fight over climate change among Mr. Trump’s top advisers, who are intensely focused on passing a tax reform bill — an effort they think could determine the fate of his presidency.” See also, What the Climate Report Says About the Impact of Global Warming, The New York Times, Henry Fountain and Bard Plumer, Friday, 3 November 2017: “The same, only worse. Global warming is affecting the United States more than ever, and the impacts — on communities, regions, infrastructure and sectors of the economy — are expected to increase. That’s the gist of Volume II of the National Climate Assessment, a draft report made public on Friday that focuses on the current and future impacts of climate change. The draft will eventually accompany a report on the science of climate change that was unveiled by 13 federal agencies in its final form on the same day. In addition to comments by members of the public, Volume II is being reviewed by an expert committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. After revisions by the agencies involved it is expected to be published in December 2018. Like the scientific report, the draft of Volume II contains many of the same findings cited in the previous National Climate Assessment, published in 2014. But reflecting some of the impacts that have been felt across the country in the past three years, some of the emphasis has changed.” See also, Trump administration releases scientific report finding ‘no convincing alternative explanation’ for climate change, The Washington Post, Chris Mooney, Juliet Eilperin, and Brady Dennis, Friday, 3 November 2017.

Continue reading Week 42, Friday, 3 November – Thursday, 9 November 2017 (Days 288-294)

Keeping Track (of some things), Staying Outraged (it is possible), and Resisting (it’s essential)

Passages in bold in the body of the texts below are my emphasis. This is an ongoing project, and I update the site frequently. Because I try to stay focused on what has actually happened, I usually let the news ‘settle’ a day or so before posting. I hope readers will peruse the articles in full for a better understanding of the issues and their context; our democracy and our future depend on citizens who can distinguish between facts and falsehoods and who are engaged in the political process.

Friday, 20 October 2017, Day 274:

After Video Refutes John Kelly’s Charges Against Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, She Raises the Issue of Race, The New York Times, Yamiche Alcindor and Michael D. Shear, Friday, 20 October 2017: “Video of a 2015 speech delivered by Representative Frederica S. Wilson revealed Friday that John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, misrepresented her remarks when he accused her of bragging about securing $20 million for a South Florida F.B.I. building and twisting President Barack Obama’s arm. Mr. Kelly, escalating a feud between Mr. Trump and Ms. Wilson, had cast the congresswoman on Thursday as a publicity-seeking opportunist. However, the video, released by The Sun Sentinel, a newspaper in South Florida, showed that during her nine-minute speech, Ms. Wilson never took credit for getting the money for the building, only for helping pass legislation naming the building after two fallen federal agents. She never mentioned pleading with Mr. Obama, and she acknowledged the help of several Republicans, including John A. Boehner, then the House speaker; Representatives Mario Diaz-Balart and Carlos Curbelo; and Senator Marco Rubio. Ms. Wilson, in an interview on Friday, called Mr. Kelly a liar and hinted strongly that the altercation, prompted by a call from President Trump to the widow of a fallen black soldier, was racially charged. ‘The White House itself is full of white supremacists,’ she said. ‘I feel very sorry for him because he feels such a need to lie on me and I’m not even his enemy,’ Ms. Wilson said of Mr. Kelly. ‘I just can’t even imagine why he would fabricate something like that. That is absolutely insane. I’m just flabbergasted because it’s very easy to trace.’ While she stopped short of accusing Mr. Kelly, a retired Marine general, of racial animus, she did say that others in the White House are racially biased. ‘They are making themselves look like fools. They have no credibility,’ she said. ‘They are trying to assassinate my character, and they are assassinating their own because everything they say is coming out and shown to be a lie.’… [White House Press Secritary Sarah Huckabee] Sanders … told a reporter who questioned Mr. Kelly’s veracity that ‘if you want to get into a debate with a four-star Marine general, I think that that’s something highly inappropriate.'” See also, Video shows John Kelly, Trump’s chief of staff, made false claims about congresswoman Frederica Wilson in feud over Trump’s condolence call, The Washington Post, David Nakamura, Friday, 20 October 2017. See also, John Kelly, Trump’s chief of staff, owes congresswoman Frederica Wilson an apology, The Washington Post, Editorial Board, Friday, 20 October 2017: “White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly owes Rep. Frederica S. Wilson (D-Fla.) an apology. That is the only conclusion that can be drawn after watching a video of the representative’s remarks at the dedication of an FBI building in Miramar, Fla., in 2015. Mr. Kelly took to the lectern in the White House briefing room Thursday to defend President Trump’s handling of a condolence call to a widow of one of the soldiers killed in Niger and to attack Ms. Wilson as selfish and politically motivated for her criticism. To bolster that characterization, he offered up his remembrance of the dedication of the FBI building in memory of two FBI agents who had been killed in the line of duty. He claimed Ms. Wilson used the occasion to take unseemly credit for securing federal funding for the building. ‘We were stunned,’ he said, ‘stunned that she had done it. Even for someone that is that empty a barrel, we were stunned.’ But, as a video by the Florida Sun Sentinel of Ms. Wilson’s remarks that day shows, Mr. Kelly got it all wrong. She did not say she got money for the building. She was generous and graceful in sharing credit for how legislation naming the building was fast-tracked. And she spent most of her nine-minute speech praising the FBI agents killed in a gunfight with drug dealers: ‘Today it is our patriotic duty to lift up Special Agent Benjamin Grogan and Special Agent Jerry Dove from the streets of South Florida and place their names and pictures high, where the world will know that we are proud of their sacrifice, sacrifice for our nation.'” See also, Let’s Compare John Kelly’s Lie About Congresswoman Frederica Wilson With Reality, The Intercept, Robert Mackey, Friday, 20 October 2017: “White House Chief of Staff John Kelly lied on Thursday when he falsely claimed that Rep. Frederica Wilson, D-Fla., had loudly boasted about obtaining money for an FBI building in Miami during a dedication ceremony he attended in 2015. We know this for a fact because, on Friday, the South Florida Sun Sentinel published video of Wilson’s complete remarks at the event…. It is jarring to listen to Kelly’s description of Wilson’s behavior and then hear the entirely respectful and generous remarks she actually delivered. But the contrast gives us a chance to trace the exact contours of how much a seething resentment at modern American society has distorted the White House chief of staff’s perception of reality, like that of his boss. As my colleague Shaun King writes, that Kelly said he was enraged by Wilson’s remarks as she made them is perhaps even more disturbing, because it means that this is not just about his faulty memory. (And his memory is faulty: in his remarks on Thursday, Kelly misremembered not just what Wilson said that day, but the name of one of the agents the building was dedicated to, and said, incorrectly, that the agents had been killed by ‘drug traffickers,’ instead of bank robbers.) So the distorted lens through which the man now running the Oval Office views the world does not only warp his recollection of events, but his understanding of them as they unfold in front of his eyes.” See also, Here are the four-star generals Donald Trump has publicly bashed, The Washington Post, Herman Wong, Friday, 20 October 2017. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said it is “highly inappropriate” to question a four-star general. This article identifies three four-star generals Trump has bashed.

John Kelly and the Language of the Military Coup, The New Yorker, Masha Gessen, Friday, 20 October 2017: “Consider this nightmare scenario: a military coup. You don’t have to strain your imagination—all you have to do is watch Thursday’s White House press briefing, in which the chief of staff, John Kelly, defended President Trump’s phone call to a military widow, Myeshia Johnson. The press briefing could serve as a preview of what a military coup in this country would look like, for it was in the logic of such a coup that Kelly advanced his four arguments. Argument 1. Those who criticize the President don’t know what they’re talking about because they haven’t served in the military…. 2. The President did the right thing because he did exactly what his general told him to do…. 3. Communication between the President and a military widow is no one’s business but theirs…. 4. Citizens are ranked based on their proximity to dying for their country. Kelly’s last argument was his most striking. At the end of the briefing, he said that he would take questions only from those members of the press who had a personal connection to a fallen soldier, followed by those who knew a Gold Star family. Considering that, a few minutes earlier, Kelly had said most Americans didn’t even know anyone who knew anyone who belonged to the “one per cent,” he was now explicitly denying a majority of Americans—or the journalists representing them—the right to ask questions. This was a new twist on the Trump Administration’s technique of shunning and shaming unfriendly members of the news media, except this time, it was framed explicitly in terms of national loyalty.”

Senate to take up the AUMF (authorization for use of military force) debate as Trump defends his reaction to Niger attack, The Washington Post, Karoun Demirjian, Friday, 20 October 2017: “The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is taking up a long-awaited debate about authorizing military force against the Islamic State as President Trump comes under unprecedented public scrutiny for his treatment of dead soldiers’ families, following an ambush on troops helping to fight Islamic terrorists [in Niger]. Senators will grill Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis in an open hearing on Oct. 30 about whether the administration thinks it is necessary for Congress to pass a new authorization for use of military force, or AUMF, to replace existing AUMFs that date back to the early years of the George W. Bush administration. The hearing is seen as a precursor to a more congressionally driven legislative effort to write an AUMF that can draw enough Republican and Democratic support to pass. Lawmakers have wrangled for years over whether or how to replace the existing 2001 AUMF, which authorized operations against al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and affiliated groups in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, and the 2002 AUMF, which allowed for operations in Iraq, with a new AUMF more focused on present-day and future threats — particularly the Islamic State. Many members of Congress have charged that the existing AUMFs do not provide a firm legal basis for current operations, a view that both the Obama and Trump administrations have argued against. But the timing of this hearing has put an increased urgency behind the AUMF debate, as Congress and the nation demand answers about what led to the deaths of four U.S. Special Forces in Niger on a support mission to fight Islamic terrorists like the Islamic State.”

Continue reading Week 40, Friday, 20 October – Thursday, 26 October 2017:

Continue reading...

Keeping Track (of some things), Staying Outraged (it is possible), and Resisting (it’s essential)

Passages in bold in the body of the texts below are my emphasis. This is an ongoing project, and I update the site frequently. Because I try to stay focused on what has actually happened, I usually let the news ‘settle’ a day or so before posting. I hope readers will peruse the articles in full for a better understanding of the issues and their context; our democracy and our future depend on citizens who can distinguish between facts and falsehoods and who are engaged in the political process.

Friday, 13 October 2017, Day 267:

Trump sets new conditions for the U.S. to stay in the Iran nuclear deal, tossing the issue to Congress, The Washington Post, Anne Gearan and Abby Phillip, Friday, 13 October 2017: “President Trump on Friday officially disavowed the international nuclear deal with Iran, undermining but not terminating an agreement he called weak and poorly constructed. The administration asked Congress to attach new caveats that could either alter the pact or lead to its rupture. Sounding frustrated and angry, Trump also threatened to unilaterally withdraw from the seven-nation accord if his concerns are not met…. His decision to withdraw presidential ‘certification’ of the deal throws its future into doubt by tying continued U.S. participation to new requirements for Iran. But the approach also falls well short of Trump’s repeated campaign vow to scrap the deal altogether, marking the latest collision between his ‘America first’ worldview and the realities of global diplomacy and dealmaking. The move was immediately met with opposition Friday from U.S. allies that are part of the pact and with skepticism from many U.S. lawmakers, including some Republicans. Iran, meanwhile, responded with a threat of its own, vowing in a statement to walk away if Iranian ‘rights and interests in the deal are not respected.'” See also, Trump Disavows Nuclear Deal, but He Doesn’t Scrap It, The New York Times, Mark Landler and David E. Sanger, Friday, 13 October 2017. See also, Fact-checking Trump’s speech on the Iran deal, The Washington Post, Glenn Kessler, published on Saturday, 14 October 2017. See also, Assessing Trump’s Criticisms of Iran and the Nuclear Deal. Trump Offered Misleading or Incomplete Claims About Iran and the Nuclear Deal in His Rebuke. The New York Times, Linda Qiu, Friday, 13 October 2017: “President Trump declared his intention not to recertify the Iran nuclear deal in a forceful speech on Friday. But the rationale he provided includes several misleading or incomplete statements about the terms of the deal, what he considers a violation of the agreement and Iran itself.”

Trump Defies the World on Iran, The New Yorker, Robin Wright, Friday, 13 October 2017: “Defying most of the world, President Trump announced on Friday that the landmark 2015 Iran nuclear deal is no longer in the U.S. interest, and took the first step toward unravelling it. The accord—brokered jointly with Britain, China, France, Germany, and Russia, during two years of often tortuous diplomacy—is the most significant agreement stemming proliferation of the world’s deadliest weapon in more than a quarter century. It now faces a precarious future—with the United States, not Iran, shaping up as the first country to violate its terms…. The unveiling of the Trump Administration’s long-awaited Iran policy—after nine months of contentious internal debate—is somewhat of a compromise. The President did not formally pull out of the deal, despite his description of it, on Friday, as ‘one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into.’ But he is now refusing to certify—as required every ninety days by U.S. law—that Iran has fully complied, even though his own Administration acknowledges that Tehran has met all its obligations for two years. International inspectors with the International Atomic Energy Agency have also reported eight times, most recently in August, that Tehran is obeying the terms…. Trump’s decision to decertify Iran—after twice certifying its compliance this year—now punts action to Congress. It has sixty days to decide whether to re-impose punitive sanctions that were originally lifted as the incentive for Iran to surrender most of its nuclear program. If Congress re-imposes sanctions, the United States will be violating its obligations under the Iran deal…. Trump’s long-anticipated Iran policy has sweeping implications far beyond Iran. It creates tensions with allies, and China and Russia, as well, that could have a major impact on other global crises. It undermines diplomacy to resolve the escalating showdown with North Korea. It weakens U.S. credibility on arms control—and, for that matter, international agreements on any issue. It threatens U.S. efforts to defuse other flash points in the Middle East. And it risks escalating tensions with Iran—and the first tentative engagement on regional issues, after almost four decades of hostility. The world’s major powers quickly spurned Trump’s appeal to amend or renegotiate the Iran accord.” See also, European Leaders Criticize Trump’s Disavowal of Iran Deal, The New York Times, Stephen Castle and Thomas Erdbrink, Friday, 13 October 2017: “Iran, Russia and European leaders roundly condemned President Trump’s decision on Friday to disavow the Iran nuclear deal, saying that it reflected the growing isolation of the United States, threatened to destabilize the Middle East and could make it harder to resolve the growing tensions on the Korean Peninsula. The reaction was far from panicked, as Mr. Trump’s decision punts to Congress the critical decision of whether the United States will reimpose sanctions on Iran — a step that would effectively sink the deal. But Mr. Trump also warned that unless the nuclear agreement was altered and made permanent — to prohibit Iran from ever developing nuclear weapons — he would terminate the agreement, an ultimatum that threw the future of the accord into question.”

Trump taps climate change skeptic Kathleen Harnett White to lead the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The CEQ advises the president on environmental matters and ensures federal agencies comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. The Hill, Devin Henry, Friday, 13 October 2017: “President Trump has nominated a skeptic of climate change science to lead the White House’s environmental policy board. The White House late Thursday announced that Trump picked Kathleen Hartnett White to serve as a member, and eventually chairwoman, of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). White is a fellow for energy and environment issues at the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) and the former chairwoman of the state’s Commission on Environmental Quality. But her views on climate change do not align with the scientific consensus, which says greenhouse gas emissions produced by human activity is the driving factor behind a dangerous warming trend around the globe. At the TPPF — which has received funding from the fossil fuel industry — White led a project to ‘explain the forgotten moral case for fossil fuels,’ and she has written that carbon dioxide is the gas ‘that makes life possible on the earth and naturally fertilizes plant growth.’ ‘Whether emitted from the human use of fossil fuels or as a natural (and necessary) gas in the atmosphere surrounding the earth, carbon dioxide has none of the attributes of a pollutant,’ she wrote in a 2014 paper that argued ‘global warming alarmists are misleading the public about carbon dioxide emissions.’ She was also a critic of the Obama administration’s environmental initiatives, calling them a ‘deluded and illegitimate battle against climate change’ in an op-ed for The Hill last year and arguing against regulations like the Clean Power Plan rule for power plants.” See also, Trump Names Former Texas Regulator Kathleen Harnett White as White House Environmental Adviser. She has called renewable energy ‘unreliable and parasitic.’ The New York Times, Lisa Friedman, Friday, 13 October 2017: “The appointment is the latest in a series of disputed environmental nominations. This week, Mr. Trump nominated Barry Lee Myers, the chief executive of AccuWeather, a for-profit weather forecasting company, to lead the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Last week, the president nominated Andrew Wheeler, a coal lobbyist, to be deputy administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Environmentalists say Mr. Trump is stacking agencies with those who either reject the scientific consensus that human-made emissions cause climate change or lack the scientific qualifications for their jobs. ‘Now you have a full house for the fossil fuel industry,’ said Christy Goldfuss, who served as managing director of the White House environmental council under former President Obama. She called Mrs. White’s appointment particularly troubling, citing a piece she wrote entitled, ‘Fossil Fuels: The Moral Case.’ In it, Mrs. White argued that labeling carbon dioxide emissions as a pollutant is ‘absurd’ and asserted that it should be considered the ‘gas of life.’ Mrs. White also has called renewable energy ‘unreliable and parasitic,’ described global warming as ‘a creed, a faith, a dogma that has little to do with science,’ and asserted that science does not dictate policy in democracies.”

Continue reading Week 39, Friday, 13 October – Thursday, 19 October 2017:

Continue reading...