Monday, October 8, 2018
OCTOBER 7 AND 8, 2018
NEWS AND VIEWS
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45774174
Brett Kavanaugh confirmation: Victory for Trump in Supreme Court battle
7 October 2018
PHOTOGRAPH -- Brett Kavanaugh, surrounded by his family, was administered the judicial oath by outgoing justice Anthony Kennedy
President Donald Trump's controversial nominee for the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh, has been sworn in following weeks of rancorous debate.
The Senate earlier backed his nomination by 50 votes to 48.
Mr Kavanaugh had been embroiled in a bitter battle to stave off claims of sexual assault, which he denies.
But after an 11th-hour investigation by the FBI into the allegations, enough wavering senators decided to support the nomination.
His confirmation hands Mr Trump a political victory ahead of key mid-term elections in November.
Before the vote, hundreds of people protested against Mr Kavanaugh's nomination at the US Capitol in Washington.
Media captionThe moment Vice President Mike Pence announces Brett Kavanaugh's win
During the vote, other protesters shouted "shame" from the public gallery and Vice-President Mike Pence had to call for order to be restored.
Why US top court is so much more political than UK's
What did the FBI inquiry into Kavanaugh result in?
Mr Kavanaugh's appointment is for life and he will strengthen conservative control of the nine-judge court, which has the final say on US law.
The 53-year-old was sworn in on Saturday evening in a private ceremony at the Supreme Court. Chief Justice John Roberts administered the constitutional oath, and retired justice Anthony Kennedy - whom Mr Kavanaugh is replacing - administered the judicial oath.
Protesters had gathered outside the court and at one point some ran up the steps and banged on its ornate doors. Other demonstrators climbed on the nearby statue of justice.
Image copyrightAFP
Image caption
Protesters sat on the statue of justice outside the Supreme Court
What has Mr Trump said?
He sent out a tweet of congratulations:
Image Copyright @realDonaldTrump@REALDONALDTRUMP
Report
Later he spoke to reporters aboard Air Force One, saying Mr Kavanaugh had withstood a "horrible attack by the Democrats" and that women were "outraged" at what had happened to the nominee.
Mr Trump also said he was "100% certain" that the woman who had accused Mr Kavanaugh of sexual assault, Christine Blasey Ford, had named the wrong person.
So what were the numbers in the Senate?
The upper house is split 51-49 in favour of the Republicans and the vote was largely along party lines. In the end, there was indeed a two-vote margin, the closest nomination vote since 1881.
The only party dissenters were Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who had intended to vote no, and Democrat Joe Manchin, who voted yes.
That should have meant a 51-49 tally, but the absence of Republican Steve Daines, a yes voter who was at his daughter's wedding, altered the final figures.
Media captionDonald Trump's nominee has been embroiled in a bitter battle over sexual assault allegations.
Ms Murkowski opted instead to simply mark herself as "present", leaving the final vote 50-48.
What was said in the Senate?
In their final summations, the two Senate party leaders reflected how bitter the divide had become.
Minority Democrat leader Chuck Schumer said Mr Kavanaugh did not belong on the bench as he had "obscured his views to the American people", "repeatedly misled the Senate" and delivered one of the "bitterest and most partisan testimonies ever presented by a nominee".
He also said Mr Trump had "stooped to new depths" in mocking the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford.
Image copyrightREUTERS
Image caption
The decision of Susan Collins to vote yes helped sway the final tally
Mr Schumer said that for all those who opposed the nomination, "there is one answer - vote" in the November mid-term elections.
Majority Republican leader Mitch McConnell said Mr Kavanaugh was a "serious scholar, a brilliant student of the law and a meticulous and dedicated public servant".
He said events had "strained our basic principles of fairness and justice" and that the vote showed the Senate was "an institution where evidence and facts matter".
He spoke of "intimidation by the mob" and said the Senate vote should be one "to turn away from darkness".
Ms Murkowski had earlier said that although Mr Kavanaugh was a "good man", he was "not the right person for the court at this time" and his "appearance of impropriety has become unavoidable".
Joe Manchin is facing a difficult re-election campaign in West Virginia, a traditionally Republican state that Mr Trump won by a landslide. He said he "found Judge Kavanaugh to be a qualified jurist".
There were shouts of "shame" from the public gallery as he voted yes.
Two Republican waverers, Susan Collins and Jeff Flake, finally decided to back the judge.
Analysis: Just the beginning
By Anthony Zurcher, BBC North America reporter
Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court has been decided. The political war, however, is just beginning.
Donald Trump's court pick generated a controversy that captured the nation's attention in a way that few political issues do. It generated daily headlines rivalled only by the US quadrennial presidential elections.
Now that the bombs have been thrown, it's time to assess the fallout.
Read more from Anthony
Why is the court so important?
Basically, it's the final arbiter of US law.
It has the ultimate say on such contentious issues as abortion and gun control.
The Democrats are still smarting from the previous Supreme Court appointment. Republicans last year successfully stalled the process, meaning it fell to Mr Trump, not Barack Obama, to nominate the new justice. Mr Trump's choice of Neil Gorsuch strengthened the conservative leaning.
All eyes will now be on November's mid-term elections. Mr Trump will be able to campaign on the back of an important victory, but commentators will be watching closely how the Kavanaugh affair affects women voters.
A really simple guide to the US mid-terms
THIS SINGLE FACT IS WHAT WORRIES ME MOST ABOUT THE TRUMPITES AND THE RACIAL SEGREGATIONIST FACTOR – WHOSE NAME HAD DIED DOWN IN THE LAST 20 OR 30 YEARS, ONLY TO SPRING UP AGAIN WITH NEW VIGOR, AND THAT PSYCHOLOGICAL STRAIN IS CLEARLY PARANOID. THAT IS THE MOST DANGEROUS TYPE OF MENTAL IMBALANCE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
PEOPLE CAN BE SCHIZOPHRENIC OR BIPOLAR WITHOUT BEING VIOLENT AT ALL, BUT PARANOID INDIVIDUALS POTENTIALLY ARE. SOMETIMES IT TAKES THE FORM OF FANTASIES OF A SEXUAL NATURE, SUCH AS INFIDELITY; BUT MOST OF US ARE CAPABLE OF FEELING FEAR WHILE WALKING DOWN A DARK AND DESERTED STREET. MY SOLUTION TO THAT IN WASHINGTON DC WAS TO SCOPE OUT WHICH STREETS WERE MORE DANGEROUS AND AVOID THEM; LISTEN AS WELL AS LOOK; STOP IF SOMEONE AHEAD SEEMS TO BE WAITING IN AMBUSH, ETC.
AN OLD VIETNAM VETERAN MOWS DOWN A CROWD CROSSING A STREET WITH HIS PICKUP TRUCK; ANOTHER MAN OF ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME TYPE TAKES SIX OR EIGHT REPEATING RIFLES APART, PUTS THEM INTO LUGGAGE, CARRIES THEM UP TO AN UPPER STORY IN A HOTEL, AND REASSEMBLES THEM THERE. THEN HE STATIONS HIMSELF AT THE WINDOW AND SHOOTS A SHOCKING NUMBER OF HAPPY COUNTRY MUSIC FANS AT AN OUTDOOR CONCERT. THEY ARE ALMOST NEVER LEFT-LEANING PEOPLE, BUT RIGHTISTS INSTEAD. ANY KIND OF FANATICAL THINKING IS DANGEROUS, OF COURSE.
IN ONE CASE AND ONE ONLY THAT I SAW WAS THAT RULE BROKEN. THAT WAS THE SHOOTING INCIDENT ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO WHEN A GROUP OF REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS WERE SHARING A NICE GAME OF SOFTBALL, WHEN A BERNIE SANDERS FAN DID SHOOT AT LEAST ONE OF THEM, AND IT MAY HAVE BEEN FATAL. BERNIE SANDERS IS MILES AWAY FROM BEING VIOLENT IN PERSONALITY OR PHILOSOPHY, BUT SEVERAL RIGHTIST VOICES BLAMED HIM FOR IT.
THERE IS ALSO AN ANTIFEMINIST THREAD THERE, WHICH POISONS THE CHARACTER OF ANY PHILOSOPHY OR POLITICAL GROUP. THAT IS PART OF WHAT DISTURBED ME SO DEEPLY ABOUT KAVANAUGH’S DESCRIBED ATTACK ON CHRISTINE FORD. IT WAS CONCERNED WITH SHAMING AND FRIGHTENING RATHER THAN RAPING HER. I THINK HE WANTED TO DO EXACTLY WHAT HE DID. THAT IS A HATE-FILLED ACTION RATHER THAN FRUSTRATED SEXUAL HUNGER. HIS GOAL WAS ASSAULT.
HIS WIFE SEEMS TO BE HAPPY AROUND HIM, BUT IS SHE REALLY? SHE IS RATHER STIFF IN HER BODY LANGUAGE WHICH IS LIKELY TO BE A MASK FOR FEAR. SHE SMILES A BIT, BUT SHE DOESN’T LOOK “HAPPY” TO ME. IT’S A FIXED AND OVERLY CAREFUL SMILE. I SEE THE SAME THING IN MELANIA TRUMP. ONE OF THE WORST THINGS ABOUT THE CATHOLIC TRADITION IN MY VIEW IS THAT THEIR DOCTRINES ARE TOTALLY AGAINST DIVORCE. HATE-FILLED OR VIOLENT MARRIAGES SHOULD SEPARATE. PEOPLE SAY “WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN,” BUT TO ME THE PROBLEM WITH CHILDREN HAVING TO GROW UP IN A HOUSEHOLD OF CRUELTY AND/OR EXTREME RANCOR IS FAR WORSE THAN A SEPARATION. I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THE TEMPER WHICH KAVANAUGH SHOWED BEFORE THE SENATE ON THURSDAY IS ALWAYS THERE, AND THE FAMILY HAS TO PUT UP WITH IT.
TAKE THE KIDS TO PSYCHOTHERAPY TO HELP THEM WORK THROUGH THEIR ANXIETIES OVER THE PARENTAL SITUATION; GIVE THEM VISITATION WITH THE MISSING PARENT IF AT ALL POSSIBLE; DON’T “SPOIL” THEM, BUT DO GIVE THEM EXTRA LOVE AND HELP THEM THINK THROUGH THEIR SITUATION. IF THE HUSBAND AND WIFE DO ACTUALLY WANT TO HOLD THE FAMILY TOGETHER, GO TO MARRIAGE COUNSELING AND FAMILY THERAPY. THAT’S SOMETHING PEOPLE OFTEN ARE UNAWARE OF, BUT FAMILY THERAPY HELPS FIND OTHER ISSUES – BULLYING FOR INSTANCE. SO MANY PARENTS JUST WANT “OBEDIENCE” FROM THEIR CHILDREN AND SEEM NOT TO SEE DEEP SADNESS IN THEIR CHILD, WHICH CAN LITERALLY KILL A YOUNG PERSON’S SPIRIT.
IN EUROPE, THE USA, AND BRITAIN IN THE 1940S AND ‘50S THE MOST FRIGHTENING FRINGE GROUPS WERE COMMUNIST, APPARENTLY, OR AT LEAST OUR POLITICIANS WANTED TO PAINT IT THAT WAY. THEY ARE NOW PEOPLE WHO ARE ATTRACTED TO NATIONALISTIC AND TRIBALISTIC VIEWS. TO SOME DEGREE THAT IS AUTOMATICALLY ONE ASPECT OF POLITICAL DIVISIVENESS, BUT THIS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS BROUGHT THE RUSSIAN SOCIETAL DISRUPTION MACHINE RIGHT INTO OUR MIDST. WE ARE UNDER THEIR THRALL AGAIN; THE PROBLEM ISN’T OVER BY ANY MEANS.
IT MAKES ME SAD TO TALK ABOUT THIS. I WISH I DIDN’T AGREE WITH KRUGMAN THAT THE AUTHORITARIANS ARE JUST WAITING FOR THE CHANCE THEY NEED TO ACHIEVE TIGHTER CONTROL. I HADN’T HEARD ABOUT “PAID PROTESTORS” FOR YEARS, BUT HERE IT IS AGAIN. IT’S ONE OF THE STOCK LIES OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS THAT I LIKE SANDERS SO MUCH IS THAT HE SEEMS PSYCHOLOGICALLY NORMAL TO ME, INDIVIDUALISTIC AND BENIGN.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/opinion/gop-trump-kavanaugh-conspiracies-partisan.html
Opinion
The Paranoid Style in G.O.P. Politics
Republicans are an authoritarian regime in waiting
Paul Krugman
By Paul Krugman
Opinion Columnist
Oct. 8, 2018
PHOTOGRAPH -- CreditCreditDamon Winter/The New York Times
Many people are worried, rightly, about what the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh means for America in the long term. He’s a naked partisan who clearly lied under oath about many aspects of his personal history; that’s as important as, and related to, the question of what he did to Christine Blasey Ford, a question that remains unresolved because the supposed investigation was such a transparent sham. Putting such a man on the Supreme Court has, at a stroke, destroyed the court’s moral authority for the foreseeable future.
But such long-term worries should be a secondary concern right now. The more immediate threat comes from what we saw on the Republican side during and after the hearing: not just contempt for the truth, but also a rush to demonize any and all criticism. In particular, the readiness with which senior Republicans embraced crazy conspiracy theories about the opposition to Kavanaugh is a deeply scary warning about what might happen to America, not in the long run, but just a few weeks from now.
About that conspiracy theorizing: It began in the first moments of Kavanaugh’s testimony, when he attributed his problems to “a calculated and orchestrated political hit” motivated by people seeking “revenge on behalf of the Clintons.” This was a completely false, hysterical accusation, and making it should in itself have disqualified Kavanaugh for the court.
But Donald Trump quickly made it much worse, attributing protests against Kavanaugh to George Soros and declaring, falsely (and with no evidence), that the protesters were being paid.
And here’s the thing: Major figures in the G.O.P. quickly backed Trump up. Charles Grassley, chairman of the Senate committee that heard Blasey and Kavanaugh, insisted that the protesters were indeed employed by Soros. Senator John Cornyn declared, “We will not be bullied by the screams of paid protesters.” No, the protesters aren’t being paid to protest, let alone by George Soros. But to be a good Republican, you now have to pretend they are.
What’s going on here? At one level, this isn’t new. Conspiracy theorizing has been a part of American politics from the beginning. Richard Hofstadter published his famous essay “The Paranoid Style in American Politics” back in 1964 and cited examples running back to the 18th century. Segregationists fighting civil rights routinely blamed “outside agitators” — especially northern Jews — for African-American protests.
But the significance of conspiracy theorizing depends on who does it.
When people on the political fringe blame shadowy forces — often, as it happens, sinister Jewish financiers — for their frustrations, you can write it off as delusional. When people who hold most of the levers of power do the same thing, their fantasizing isn’t a delusion, it’s a tool: a way to delegitimize opposition, to create excuses not just for disregarding but for punishing anyone who dares to criticize their actions.
That’s why conspiracy theories have been central to the ideology of so many authoritarian regimes, from Mussolini’s Italy to Erdogan’s Turkey. It’s why the governments of Hungary and Poland, former democracies that have become de facto one-party states, love to accuse outsiders in general and Soros in particular of stirring up opposition to their rule. Because, of course, there can’t be legitimate complaints about their actions and policies.
And now senior figures in the Republican Party, which controls all three branches of the federal government — if you had any questions about whether the Supreme Court was a partisan institution, they should be gone now — are sounding just like the white nationalists in Hungary and Poland. What does this mean?
The answer, I submit, is that the G.O.P. is an authoritarian regime in waiting.
Trump himself clearly has the same instincts as the foreign dictators he so openly admires. He demands that public officials be loyal to him personally, not to the American people. He threatens political opponents with retribution — two years after the last election, he’s still leading chants of “Lock her up.” He attacks the news media as enemies of the people.
Add in the investigations closing in on Trump’s many scandals, from tax cheating to self-dealing in office to possible collusion with Russia, all of which give him every incentive to shut down freedom of the press and independence of law enforcement. Does anyone doubt that Trump would like to go full authoritarian, given the chance?
And who’s going to stop him? The senators parroting conspiracy theories about Soros-paid protesters? The newly rigged Supreme Court? What we’ve learned in the past few weeks is that there is no gap between Trump and his party, nobody who will say stop in the name of American values.
But as I said, the G.O.P. is an authoritarian regime in waiting, not yet one in practice. What’s it waiting for?
Well, think of what Trump and his party might do if they retain both houses of Congress in the coming election. If you aren’t terrified of where we might be in the very near future, you aren’t paying attention.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
Paul Krugman has been an Opinion columnist since 2000 and is also a Distinguished Professor at the City University of New York Graduate Center. He won the 2008 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on international trade and economic geography. @PaulKrugman
I DON’T KNOW IF IT INDICATES ANYTHING IMPORTANT, BUT THE READERSHIP STATISTICS ON THIS BLOG IS CURRENTLY CONCENTRATED IN TURKEY, ABOVE THE USA. WHEN THAT SHIFT AWAY FROM THE USA HAPPENS IT USUALLY IS RELATED TO A SITUATION OF STRESS. ONCE IT WAS WHEN THE PASSENGER PLANE WITH SOME HUNDRED RIDERS WAS SHOT DOWN OVER UKRAINE BY A RUSSIAN SOLDIER; THE HITS FROM UKRAINE WERE VERY HIGH. I WONDER IF IT IS REALLY TRUE THAT SOME NATIONS REALLY DO THROTTLE THE FLOW OF NEWS TO THEIR CITIZENS. I HAVE SEEN THREE OR FOUR CASES, USUALLY ON MSNBC'S MADDOW BLOG, THAT I GET A STATEMENT THAT THE STORY IS NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE. SO WHEN THAT HAPPENS, THEY GO TO A BLOG WHICH IS 80% NEWS AND 20% COMMENTARY.
THIS SITUATION IN TURKEY IS FAR WORSE THAN MOST. MURDER ISN’T ORDINARY POLITICAL TUSSLING. I DO HOPE THAT THE WRITER WILL BE FOUND SAFE AND SOUND SOMEWHERE. MURDER IN AN EMBASSY DOESN’T USUALLY MAKE THE NEWS, THOUGH IT MAY BE FAR MORE COMMON THAN WE USUALLY KNOW ABOUT. MAYBE IT’S BECAUSE I’VE READ AND WATCHED TOO MANY SPY STORIES, BUT I TEND TO BELIEVE THIS ONE. IT ALSO COMES ON THE HEELS OF THE TWO (AT LEAST) POISONINGS IN THE UK AT THE HANDS, PERHAPS, OF THE RUSSIANS.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45775819
Jamal Khashoggi: Turkey says journalist was murdered in Saudi consulate
OCTOBER 7, 2018 1 hour ago
PHOTOGRAPH -- Jamal Khashoggi has not been seen since lunchtime on Tuesday
Fears are growing over the missing Saudi writer Jamal Khashoggi, after Turkish officials said they believed he had been murdered.
Mr Khashoggi, a Saudi national, was last seen visiting the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on Tuesday.
A Turkish official told the BBC that initial investigations indicated he was murdered there.
Saudi Arabia has denied the accusations, saying it is "working to search for him".
Mr Khashoggi has contributed articles to the Washington Post's opinion section. The Post said it would be a "monstrous and unfathomable act" if he had been killed.
An official of Turkey's ruling AK Party told broadcaster CNN Turk there was concrete evidence in the case, although none has yet been presented.
When was he last seen?
Jamal Khashoggi went to the consulate on Tuesday to obtain a document certifying he had divorced his ex-wife, so that he could marry his Turkish fiancée, Hatice Cengiz.
LINKS
Saudi woman activist 'faces death penalty'
Saudi Arabia to punish online satire
Arrested for having breakfast with a woman
Ms Cengiz said she waited outside for 11 hours, but he did not come out.
Image copyrightEPA
Image caption
Jamal Khashoggi's fiancée Hatice waited outside the Saudi consulate on Wednesday
She said Mr Khashoggi was required to surrender his mobile phone, which is standard practice in some diplomatic missions. He told her to call an adviser to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan if he did not return.
"Jamal is not dead. I cannot believe that he has been killed...!" Ms Cengiz wrote in a Twitter post that included a photo of Mr Khashoggi. She added that she was waiting for official confirmation as the allegations circulated.
Image Copyright @mercan_resifi@MERCAN_RESIFI
Report
What has Turkey said?
Turkish officials said Mr Khashoggi was killed on the premises and his body was then removed.
Investigators said a 15-person team arrived at the consulate on Tuesday, returning to Riyadh the same day.
The head of the Turkish-Arab Media Association, Turan Kislakci, told the New York Times that Turkish police officers providing security for the consulate had checked their security cameras and did not see the journalist leave on foot.
But he added that diplomatic cars had been seen moving in and out.
Mr Erdogan was more circumspect, saying on Sunday he remained "positive" and would await the results of an investigation as Turkish authorities continue to look at camera footage and airport arrivals and departures.
What have the Saudis said?
Saudi Arabia said the allegations were baseless. It has allowed reporters into the consulate to show Mr Khashoggi is not there.
On Wednesday, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told Bloomberg News that Turkish authorities were welcome to search the building because "we have nothing to hide".
The prince said the Saudis were "very keen to know what happened to him", saying his understanding was that Mr Khashoggi left "after a few minutes or one hour".
Image copyrightAFP
Image caption
The Saudi consulate said Khashoggi left after completing paperwork
Who is Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed?
When asked if Mr Khashoggi faced charges in Saudi Arabia, the crown prince said his country would need to know where he was first.
----------------------------------------------
An already-strained relationship
Analysis by the BBC's Mark Lowen, Istanbul
This is a bombshell allegation by Turkey. And while the authorities here are so far not providing evidence to back it up, it's inconceivable that such a claim would have been made without firm grounds. Ankara's relationship with Riyadh is too important to jeopardise on the basis of unsubstantiated rumour.
That relationship is already strained over several issues, including Turkey's support for Qatar in the blockade by Saudi Arabia; its closeness to the Muslim Brotherhood - blacklisted by Riyadh as a terrorist organisation; and its rapprochement with Saudi Arabia's arch-rival Iran. But if proven, the murder of Jamal Khashoggi would be the most serious diplomatic crisis between the two in living memory.
Turkey would hope for backing from its Nato ally, the US. But Saudi Arabia has arguably become Donald Trump's closest ally in the Middle East - and Washington may be reluctant to weigh in against Riyadh at this stage.
-----------------------------------------------
Who is Jamal Khashoggi?
He is a high-profile critic of the crown prince. Mr Khashoggi, 59, has more than 1.6 million Twitter followers and has written for the Washington Post opinion section.
The crown prince has unveiled reforms praised by the West while carrying out an apparent crackdown on dissent. Human and women's rights activists, intellectuals and clerics have been arrested - meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is waging a war in Yemen that has triggered a humanitarian crisis.
Media captionJamal Khashoggi: Saudi Arabia needs reform, but one-man rule is "bad" for the kingdom
A former editor of the al-Watan newspaper and a short-lived Saudi TV news channel, Mr Khashoggi was for years seen as close to the Saudi royal family. He served as an adviser to senior Saudi officials.
After several of his friends were arrested, his column was cancelled by the al-Hayat newspaper and he was allegedly warned to stop tweeting, Mr Khashoggi left Saudi Arabia for the US, from where he wrote opinion pieces for the Washington Post and continued to appear on Arab and Western TV channels.
"I have left my home, my family and my job, and I am raising my voice," he wrote in September 2017. "To do otherwise would betray those who languish in prison. I can speak when so many cannot."
The Washington Post on Friday blanked out his column in support.
GO TO THE BBC WEBSITE. THIS IS A BEAUTIFULLY MOVING GESTURE OF SADNESS. IT'S LIKE THE RIDERLESS BLACK HORSE IN CEREMONIAL FUNERAL PARADES. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHERE I SAW THAT -- IT WAS EITHER THE FUNERAL OF PRINCESS DIANA OR JOHN F KENNEDY, I BELIEVE. IT CAUSES A CLUTCH AT MY HEART WHEN I THINK ABOUT IT.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45758096
Jamal Khashoggi: Washington Post blanks out missing Saudi writer's column
5 October 2018
IMAGE -- The Washington Post has printed a blank column in support of its missing Saudi contributor Jamal Khashoggi.
Mr Khashoggi - a critic of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman - has not been seen since visiting the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on Tuesday.
Saudi Arabia says he left the building but Turkey says he may still be inside.
The newspaper said it was "worried" and called on Mr bin Salman to "welcome constructive criticism from patriots such as Mr Khashoggi".
In an editorial, it asked that the crown prince do "everything in his power" to let the journalist work.
Saudi woman activist 'faces death penalty'
Saudi Arabia to punish online satire
Arrested for having breakfast with a woman
Previously an adviser to senior Saudi officials, Mr Khashoggi moved abroad after his Saudi newspaper column was cancelled and he was allegedly warned to stop tweeting his criticisms of the crown prince's policies.
The 59-year-old commentator has been living in self-imposed exile in the US and working as a contributor to the Washington Post.
What happened on Tuesday?
Mr Khashoggi went to the Istanbul consulate to obtain official divorce documents so that he could marry his Turkish fiancée, Hatice.
He left his phone with Hatice outside the consulate and asked her to call an adviser to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan if he did not return.
VIDEO -- Media captionJamal Khashoggi: Saudi Arabia needs reform, but one-man rule is "bad" for the kingdom
Hatice said she waited for Mr Khashoggi outside the consulate from about 13:00 (10:00 GMT) until after midnight and did not see him leave. She returned when the consulate reopened on Wednesday morning.
What do Saudi Arabia and Turkey say?
Turkey has said it believes he remains inside the building, while a Saudi official said Mr Khashoggi filled out his paperwork and then "exited shortly thereafter".
On Thursday the official Saudi Press Agency cited the consulate as saying it was working with Turkish authorities to probe Mr Khashoggi's disappearance "after he left the consulate building".
The US state department has also requested information about Khashoggi's whereabouts and expressed concern about his safety.
The BBC's Mark Lowen says the mystery threatens to deepen the strains in the relationship between Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Turkey has taken the side of Qatar over its blockade by Saudi Arabia and other neighbours, and Turkey's rapprochement with Iran has riled the government in Riyadh, our correspondent adds.
Why might Saudi Arabia want Khashoggi?
He is one of the most prominent critics of the crown prince, who has unveiled reforms praised by the West while carrying out an apparent crackdown on dissent, which has seen human and women's rights activists, intellectuals and clerics arrested, and waging a war in Yemen that has triggered a humanitarian crisis.
A former editor of the al-Watan newspaper and a short-lived Saudi TV news channel, Mr Khashoggi was for years seen as close to the Saudi royal family and advised senior Saudi officials.
After several of his friends were arrested, his column was cancelled by the Al-Hayat newspaper and he was allegedly warned to stop tweeting, Mr Khashoggi left Saudi Arabia for the US, from where he wrote opinion pieces for the Washington Post and continued to appear on Arab and Western TV channels.
"I have left my home, my family and my job, and I am raising my voice," he wrote in September 2017. "To do otherwise would betray those who languish in prison. I can speak when so many cannot."
I DO WISH WE HAD A HIGHLY EDUCATED, ETHICAL, FORWARD-LOOKING CITIZENRY IN THE USA AND AROUND THE WORLD AS WELL, WHO WOULD BOTHER TO PRESSURIZE OUR CONGRESS AND SENATE TO PUT A CAP ON THE AMOUNT OF CARBON EMISSIONS THAT MANUFACTURERS ARE ALLOWED TO USE. JUST A LIMIT ON IT OVER TIME WOULD DO SOME GOOD. THERE IS A “TIPPING POINT,” HOWEVER, WHICH I FEAR WE HAVE ALREADY PASSED, AT WHICH THE DIRECTION OF GLOBAL WARMING WILL NOT BE REVERSIBLE. AT LEAST THAT’S WHAT A SCIENTIFIC NEWS ARTICLE SOME TEN YEARS AGO SAID. THE WORST POSSIBILITY IS THAT IT’S ALREADY TOO LATE. THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT'S MUCH HARDER TO REMOVE CO2 OR METHANE FROM THE ATMOSPHERE THAN TO LEAK IT OUT INTO THE EVIRONMENT SO THAT IS RISES TO THE SKY.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/global-warming-heat-earth-ecosystems-intergovernmental-panel-climate-change-report-released-today-2018-10-07/
AP October 7, 2018, 10:11 PM
U.N. report about global warming warns of "life-or-death situation"
WASHINGTON -- Preventing an extra single degree of heat could make a life-or-death difference in the next few decades for multitudes of people and ecosystems on this fast-warming planet, an international panel of scientists reported Sunday. But they provide little hope the world will rise to the challenge.
The Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued its gloomy report at a meeting in Incheon, South Korea.
In the 728-page document, the U.N. organization detailed how Earth's weather, health and ecosystems would be in better shape if the world's leaders could somehow limit future human-caused warming to just 0.9 degrees Fahrenheit (a half degree Celsius) from now, instead of the globally agreed-upon goal of 1.8 degrees F (1 degree C). Among other things:
RELATED --
Half as many people would suffer from lack of water.
There would be fewer deaths and illnesses from heat, smog and infectious diseases.
Seas would rise nearly 4 inches (0.1 meters) less.
Half as many animals with back bones and plants would lose the majority of their habitats.
There would be substantially fewer heat waves, downpours and droughts.
The West Antarctic ice sheet might not kick into irreversible melting.
And it just may be enough to save most of the world's coral reefs from dying.
Stunning photos of climate change
"For some people this is a life-or-death situation without a doubt," said Cornell University climate scientist Natalie Mahowald, a lead author on the report.
Limiting warming to 0.9 degrees from now means the world can keep "a semblance" of the ecosystems we have. Adding another 0.9 degrees on top of that - the looser global goal - essentially means a different and more challenging Earth for people and species, said another of the report's lead authors, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, director of the Global Change Institute at the University of Queensland, Australia.
But meeting the more ambitious goal of slightly less warming would require immediate, draconian cuts in emissions of heat-trapping gases and dramatic changes in the energy field. While the U.N. panel says technically that's possible, it saw little chance of the needed adjustments happening.
In 2010, international negotiators adopted a goal of limiting warming to 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F) since pre-industrial times. It's called the 2-degree goal. In 2015, when the nations of the world agreed to the historic Paris climate agreement, they set dual goals: 2 degrees C and a more demanding target of 1.5 degrees C from pre-industrial times. The 1.5 was at the urging of vulnerable countries that called 2 degrees a death sentence.
Pace of new climate change legislation has "slowed significantly," study says
The world has already warmed 1 degree C since pre-industrial times, so the talk is really about the difference of another half-degree C or 0.9 degrees F from now.
"There is no definitive way to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 above pre-industrial levels," the U.N.-requested report said. More than 90 scientists wrote the report, which is based on more than 6,000 peer reviews.
"Global warming is likely to reach 1.5 degrees C between 2030 and 2052 if it continues to increase at the current rate," the report states.
Deep in the report, scientists say less than 2 percent of 529 of their calculated possible future scenarios kept warming below the 1.5 goal without the temperature going above that and somehow coming back down in the future.
The pledges nations made in the Paris agreement in 2015 are "clearly insufficient to limit warming to 1.5 in any way," one of the study's lead authors, Joerj Roeglj of the Imperial College in London, said.
"I just don't see the possibility of doing the one and a half" and even 2 degrees looks unlikely, said Appalachian State University environmental scientist Gregg Marland, who isn't part of the U.N. panel but has tracked global emissions for decades for the U.S. Energy Department. He likened the report to an academic exercise wondering what would happen if a frog had wings.
Yet report authors said they remain optimistic.
Limiting warming to the lower goal is "not impossible but will require unprecedented changes," U.N. panel chief Hoesung Lee said in a news conference in which scientists repeatedly declined to spell out just how feasible that goal is. They said it is up to governments to decide whether those unprecedented changes are acted upon.
"We have a monumental task in front of us, but it is not impossible," Mahowald said earlier. "This is our chance to decide what the world is going to look like."
To limit warming to the lower temperature goal, the world needs "rapid and far-reaching" changes in energy systems, land use, city and industrial design, transportation and building use, the report said. Annual carbon dioxide pollution levels that are still rising now would have to drop by about half by 2030 and then be near zero by 2050. Emissions of other greenhouse gases, such as methane, also will have to drop. Switching away rapidly from fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas to do this could be three to four times more expensive than the less ambitious goal, but it would clean the air of other pollutants. And that would have the side benefit of avoiding more than 100 million premature deaths through this century, the report said.
"Climate-related risks to health, livelihoods, food security, water supply, human security and economic growth are projected to increase with global warming" the report said, adding that the world's poor are more likely to get hit hardest.
Princeton University climate scientist Michael Oppenheimer said extreme weather, especially heat waves, will be deadlier if the lower goal is passed.
Meeting the tougher-to-reach goal "could result in around 420 million fewer people being frequently exposed to extreme heat waves, and about 65 million fewer people being exposed to exceptional heat waves," the report said. The deadly heat waves that hit India and Pakistan in 2015 will become practically yearly events if the world reaches the hotter of the two goals, the report said.
Coral and other ecosystems are also at risk. The report said warmer water coral reefs "will largely disappear."
The outcome will determine whether "my grandchildren would get to see beautiful coral reefs," Princeton's Oppenheimer said.
For scientists there is a bit of "wishful thinking" that the report will spur governments and people to act quickly and strongly, one of the panel's leaders, German biologist Hans-Otto Portner said. "If action is not taken it will take the planet into an unprecedented climate future."
© 2018 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
GO TO THIS WEBSITE FOR THE PHOTO OF A VERY YOUNG LION CUB. I WONDER IF SOMEONE STOLE IT FROM A ZOO, DECIDED THAT THEY COULD GET INTO SERIOUS TROUBLE OVER IT, AND PUT IT OUT INTO A CITY PARK LIKE ANY FOUNDLING IS LEFT AT A CHURCH OR FIRE STATION. THIS BABY KITTY, THOUGH, LOOKS AS IF HIS LIP IS CURLED UP EXPOSING TINY BABY FANGS. STAY AWAY FROM ME, YOU BIG BULLY!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45777842
Lion cub found by jogger in Netherlands
OCTOBER 8, 2018 5 hours ago
PHOTOGRAPH – LION CUB -- Police said they had received a "very peculiar" report
A jogger running through a field in the central Netherlands got a surprise on Sunday when an abandoned lion appeared on the route.
The cub - which is believed to be four months old - was found in a small cage outside of Utrecht.
It was taken to the Lion Foundation in the northern Netherlands after being examined by a vet, according to public broadcaster NOS.
Local police have made a public appeal for information on its owner.
It was certainly not business as usual for a force on patrol in Tienhoven, a village about 10km (6 miles) to Utrecht's north.
On Twitter, they wrote: "This morning, colleagues received a very peculiar report in Tienhoven. Seen or heard anything?"
PHOTOGRAPH – CUB IN A CAGE OUTDOORS --
PolitieStichtseVecht
@PolitieStiVe
Vet Peter Klaver told RTL Nieuws that he was shocked when he arrived at the scene.
"I have travelled all over the world to stun animals, even lions and tigers, but I've never experienced anything like this," he said.
He found the cage was not very sturdy and said the cub could have escaped.
"But in the end it was possible to put the lion, the cage and everything into the car, so it wasn't necessary to stun it."
Police said they wanted to hear from "anybody who had recently bought a lion" or anyone who could help with information about this particular cub.
LINKS -- You might also like:
Monkey takes the wheel of Indian bus
Watch: Runaway race horse runs into a bar
Elephant rudely interrupts BBC reporter mid-flow
THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST STORIES IN MONTHS, IT SEEMS TO ME. NOT SERIOUS OR EVEN IMPORTANT, BUT FUN.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-45772168
Video shows monkey 'driving' bus in Karnataka, India
6 October 2018
PHOTOGRAPH -- This is not the face of a man who is concerned by events -- YOUTUBE
An Indian bus driver has been suspended - for letting a monkey "drive" his bus.
This is despite not one of the 30-or-so passengers on board the vehicle in southern Karnataka state complaining about their furry chauffeur.
However, when a video of the relaxed - and apparently competent - langur monkey taking the wheel went viral, the human driver's employers took action.
The safety of passengers cannot be put at risk by "allowing a monkey on the steering" wheel, a spokesman said.
Somewhat unsurprisingly, this has not been an entirely popular decision with internet users delighted by the short clip.
"So sweet. Why suspend. He should have been warned not to repeat this," Parag Heda tweeted.
Watch: Runaway race horse runs into a bar
Why a national park is holding a 'Fat Bear Week' contest
Elephant rudely interrupts BBC reporter mid-flow
The incident took place on Monday, according to the government's road transport corporation - which only learned of the unusual driver's actions after the video went viral.
According to witnesses, the monkey boarded the vehicle with another passenger but refused to sit anywhere but up front as the bus travelled around Davanagere.
The driver, named as M Prakash, seemed to be unconcerned by this turn of events, allowing his new friend to sit on the steering wheel as they continued their journey.
In fairness to Mr Prakash, he does appear to have one hand on the wheel at all times. And in fairness to the monkey, he does seem to be paying attention to the road ahead - although whether he had mastered the mirrors is unclear.
According to reports, the monkey eventually reached his destination and left the driver to carry on with his day.
THINGS I REALLY LIKE ABOUT BERNIE – HE CAN BE CROCHETY, BUT HE’S HUMBLE, CONSIDERING HIS POSITION AND IMPORTANCE; HE CARES; HE WILL TAKE THE TIME TO LEND A HAND; HE IS THE LEAST MONEY AND CLASS MOTIVATED PERSON IN POLITICS THAT I CAN BRING TO MIND; BASED ON ALL THE EVIDENCE, I CAN FEEL SURE THAT HE DIDN’T SET THIS SITUATION UP AS A GREAT PHOTO-OP. PEOPLE SAY THAT HE’S TOO OLD TO BE PRESIDENT, BUT HE SHOWS ABSOLUTELY NO SIGN OF SENILITY OR PHYSICAL DISABILITY. HE IS, AS MY FATHER USED TO SAY, “AS SHARP AS A TACK!” BERNIE 20/20!
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/bernie-sanders-saved-a-woman-s-life-and-didn-t-tell-anybody-1.6533556
Bernie Sanders Saved a Woman’s Life and Didn’t Tell Anybody
Sanders did not mention the incident on either of his two verified Twitter accounts
JTA and Sam Sokol Oct 07, 2018 3:49 PM
FILE PHOTO: Senator Bernie Sanders, an Independent from Vermont, smiles during a keynote session at the South By Southwest (SXSW) conference in Austin, March 9, 2018.David Paul Morris/Bloomberg
RELATED -- Bernie Sanders: Netanyahu only passed nation-state law because he knew Trump had his back
RELATED -- Michael Moore warns Trump could use Hitler-like terror attack to grab power
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is not publicity shy by any stretch of the imagination. Known for his thick Brooklyn accent and progressive politics, the former presidential candidate has become an iconic figure on the American left.
Apparently, however, Sanders can also exhibit modesty.
On Thursday, a woman named Amy Currotto posted on Facebook that Sanders had saved her life, writing that he “stopped me from getting hit by a car on my way to my guitar lesson so we took a selfie together. (He is also much taller than me so awkward picture.)” Currotto did not say where the incident occurred.
skip - 3
Jeff Stein
✔
@JStein_WaPo
Apparently Sen. Sanders went for a walk by himself during a break on Wednesday, stopped a woman from getting hit by a car, and then came back to the office and didn't tell anybody about it. His team found out about it on Facebook
jordan
✔
@JordanUhl
Bernie just saved this woman from being hit by a car
View image on TwitterView image on Twitter
10:34 AM - Oct 4, 2018
9,485
1,951 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Washington Post reporter Jeff Stein shared the post, writing that Sanders did not tell anybody about the incident and his staffers only found out by happenstance.
“Apparently Sen. Sanders went for a walk by himself during a break on Wednesday, stopped a woman from getting hit by a car, and then came back to the office and didn’t tell anybody about it,” Stein tweeted. “His team found out about it on Facebook.”
Stein’s tweet was shared 525 times and received 2,611 likes.
Sanders did not mention the incident on either of his two verified Twitter accounts.
JTA
News Agencies and Affiliates
350,000 SHOUTS OF JOY. REMEMBER THAT RUBBER TREE PLANT OF THE 1960S? THAT’S WHY I REMAIN HOPEFUL AND PROUD TO BE A BERNIECRAT. BY THE WAY, DO LOOK AT THE VIDEO. BERNIE IS TRYING HARD TO HOLD A STRAIGHT FACE HERE, BUT HE CAN’T QUITE DO IT. WHETHER HE WINS THE PRESIDENCY IN 2020 OR NOT, HE IS THE BEST! BERNIE, IT’LL BE OKAY IF YOU LAUGH OUT LOUD.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/10/02/what-it-looks-and-sounds-when-thousands-amazon-workers-learn-they-just-won-15-hour
Published on
Tuesday, October 02, 2018
byCommon Dreams
This Is What It Looks and Sounds Like When Thousands of Amazon Workers Learn They Just Won $15 an Hour
"This is what the political revolution is all about."
byJake Johnson, staff writer
PHOTOGRAPH -- "Let me thank the many hundreds of Amazon workers who contacted my office and the Fight for $15 movement which has been leading this effort for years," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement on Tuesday. (Photo: Amazon/Screengrab)
What does it look and sound like when thousands of Amazon workers learn that CEO and world's richest man Jeff Bezos has finally relented to widespread grassroots pressure and raised the company's minimum wage to $15 an hour?
In a video posted to Twitter on Tuesday, Dave Clark—Amazon's senior vice president for worldwide operations and customer service—captured the moment he announced to California warehouse workers early Tuesday that Amazon has decided, in the face of intensifying political scrutiny, to raise its entry-level wage to $15 an hour for all of its 350,000 U.S. workers.
VIDEO – A LARGE CROWD OF AMAZON WORKERS CHEER AS THEY FIND THAT THEY HAVE WON THE $15/HOUR VICTORY.
"This is what the political revolution is all about," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who has been leading the public pressure and shaming campaign against Amazon over the past several months—wrote on Twitter in response to the video.
Watch: WATCH HIS VIDEO. HE’S VERY HAPPY.
Bernie Sanders
✔
@SenSanders
What happened at Amazon is a big step forward for workers across the nation. I want to thank the many hundreds of workers at Amazon fulfillment centers all across this country who contacted us and spoke up.
3:35 PM - Oct 2, 2018
11.2K
3,417 people are talking about this
This is what the political revolution is all about: today 350,000 Amazon workers found out they are getting a raise to at least $15 an hour. pic.twitter.com/RbEojpc9X0
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) October 2, 2018
While Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) were applauded for their major role in calling attention to Amazon's poverty wages and awful warehouse working conditions with legislation and public town halls, the Vermont senator said during a press conference on Tuesday that the Fight for $15 movement and workers nationwide are the real "heroes" who deserve all the credit for the wage boost.
"Let me thank the many hundreds of Amazon workers who contacted my office and the Fight for $15 movement which has been leading this effort for years," Sanders said. "What Mr. Bezos has done today is not only enormously important for Amazon's hundreds of thousands of employees, it could well be a shot heard around the world. Mr. Bezos and Amazon are helping to lead the way, but there is no reason why other profitable corporations in the fast food industry, the airlines and retail should not be following suit."
What happened at Amazon is a big step forward for workers across the nation. I want to thank the many hundreds of workers at Amazon fulfillment centers all across this country who contacted us and spoke up. pic.twitter.com/5UebVD5gnM
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) October 2, 2018
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
WHEN WITHIN A FEW DAYS OF TAKING OFFICE TRUMP ISSUED AN ORDER CAUSING ISLAMIC VISITORS TO THE COUNTRY TO BE STOPPED, I THOUGHT HE WAS DOING JUST THAT – GRABBING POWER. I WAS GLAD TO SEE THE IMMEDIATE OUTCRY FROM ACROSS THE WHOLE COUNTRY, THOUGH. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME FIVE OR SIX OTHER CASES OF OVERSTEPPING THE BOUNDS OF LAW ALSO, AND IN ALL THE CASES THE PUBLIC HAS REACTED WITH OUTRAGE.
THERE IS ONE THING THAT I THINK IS OUT OF THE NEWS SOONER THAN IT SHOULD BE, AND THAT IS THE MEXICAN BORDER INCIDENTS IN WHICH CHILDREN HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THEIR PARENTS’ SIDE. THAT IS TERRIBLY INHUMANE. I WONDER IF ALL THOSE CHILDREN HAVE BEEN RETURNED TO THEIR PARENTS YET? THAT’S THE MOST HITLERIAN MOVE THAT I HAVE SEEN, AND THERE ARE A LARGE NUMBER OF CONTAINMENT CENTERS FOR UNREGISTERED IMMIGRANTS. LOOKS UNCOMFORTABLY LIKE CONCENTRATION CAMPS, NO? I WONDER WHAT THE CURRENT STATUS OF THAT ISSUE IS – STILL HAPPENING? REVERSED ALREADY? I HAVEN’T SEEN A SINGLE STORY ON IT IN THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS.
FOR HIM TO CREATE A MOCK EMERGENCY AS MOORE IS SUGGESTING HERE WOULD PROBABLY NOT GO UNNOTICED, I HOPE.
https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/michael-moore-warns-trump-will-use-a-terror-attack-like-hitler-to-grab-power-1.6494283
https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/michael-moore-warns-trump-will-use-a-terror-attack-like-hitler-to-grab-power-1.6494283
WATCH Michael Moore Warns Trump Could Use Hitler-like Terror Attack to Grab Power
Moore's new film, 'Fahrenheit 11/9,' is rife with Trump-Hitler comparisons
The Associated Press and Haaretz Sep 24, 2018 1:21 PM
PHOTOGRAPH -- US filmmaker Michael Moore and former Trump aide Omarosa Manigault Newman at the premiere of "Fahrenheit 11/9" at the Samuel Goldwyn theatre in Beverly Hills, on September 19, 2018Photo by VALERIE MACON / AFP
“I hope he never does one on me,” Donald Trump once said of Michael Moore.
It was in 1998, on Roseanne Barr’s syndicated talk show. Trump complimented Moore’s “Roger & Me,” a takedown of General Motors and its then-CEO, Roger Smith. “It’s terrific,” he said, then added he hoped never to be a similar target. Everybody laughed.
Well, 20 years later, Moore has done that Trump film, and he includes that strange little scene. Only Moore isn’t laughing much now, and the current president probably isn’t either — especially if he’s heard about the Adolf Hitler comparisons.
While promoting the film on MSNBC this week, Moore doubled down on those same Hitler comparisons.
"The Nazis won an election and then there was a terrorist incident -- the Reichstag fire -- and Hitler said we've got to clamp down, we've got to ban these parties and he consolidated power in a time when people were afraid. That's what I'm worried about," Moore said of a post-Reichstag world.
Moore warned when Trump takes away "our democratic rights" because he has to "protect us" we must be "very, very cautious" when that point happens.
"Whatever happens under Trump. Whatever national emergency -- a real emergency may happen -- that will not allow him to take away our democratic rights because he has to "protect us." That's what we have to be very, very cautious of when that point happens," Moore said.
RELATED: Michael Moore On Midterms: Time To End This Madness, Vote | Hardball | MSNBC
His new film, “Fahrenheit 11/9” — its title a sly reference to both the day after the election and Moore’s hugely successful “Fahrenheit 9/11” — is about a lot more than just Trump though. In fact, little time is devoted to Trump’s performance or policies; presumably, Moore knows he’s preaching to the choir. What he seeks to examine are the root conditions — social, cultural, political — that got us here.
Or, to use Moore’s own words, minus one we can’t print: “How the f--- did this happen?”
He spends two full hours trying to answer that question. Is it effective? That depends on whether you accept the implicit argument that you can’t truly illustrate our messy, chaotic, disjointed times without, well, a messy, chaotic, disjointed movie. He sort of has a point.
And whether Moore’s frenetic but absorbing work here — the cinematic equivalent of a Jackson Pollock painting, where you throw everything and some of it sticks — pleases or frustrates you, one thing is clear. Moore’s at his best when hitting a subject dear to his heart. That’s why “Fahrenheit 11/9” is best when Moore turns his camera on his hometown of Flint, Michigan, and its devastating water crisis. You may not cry when Moore unleashes a “Jaws”-like score as Trump takes the presidential oath. But you may cry when listening to the grieving, angry citizens of Flint.
Moore begins with a whiplash-fast sequence that, to Democrats, will indeed play like a horror film, and a too-familiar one: the near-universal assumption that Hillary Clinton would win, giving way to election night shock.
Then it’s on to the big question. HOW? Yes, it was the Russians, Moore says, and James Comey, but really, it was Gwen Stefani. When Trump realized NBC was paying her more on “The Voice” than he was getting on “The Apprentice,” Moore posits, he announced a “fake” presidential run to raise his profile with the network. Only later, he says, adoring rally crowds convinced Trump that maybe this president thing was an OK idea.
Moore excoriates the media. The candidate was their cash cow, he says, showing none other than Les Moonves — the recently deposed CBS chief — saying, “It may not be good for America, but it’s darned good for CBS.”
So how do we get to Flint? Well, Moore tells us that Trump loves dictators — North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, for one — and that brings him to Rick Snyder, the Michigan governor, to whom Moore attributes dictatorial tendencies.
He blames Snyder for the crisis in which lead-tainted water was pumped from the Flint River into homes and businesses, leading to elevated lead levels in children’s blood. Using his familiar ambush technique, Moore tries to make “a citizen’s arrest” at Snyder’s office, then tries to get an aide to drink a glass of Flint water. He fails at both.
More surprising is Moore’s criticism of a prominent visitor to Flint: then-President Barack Obama. He shows perplexed Flint citizens reacting to a moment when Obama, whose visit was eagerly anticipated, appears tone-deaf to the depth of their concerns.
It’s part of a broader criticism Moore is making of the Democratic establishment, which he says has been too willing to compromise, shifting the party to the right in defiance of popular will. Congressional leaders like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer come in for harsh treatment. Moore also argues that support for Bernie Sanders was suppressed.
So, who is going to help save the nation? Moore argues that it’s first-time candidates, many of them women, like New York’s Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or striking teachers in West Virginia, unifying to win key concessions.
And it’s student activists in Parkland, Florida. Moore’s focus on gun violence in schools recalls, of course, his searing 2002 film “Bowling for Columbine.” He joins a student meeting to show how they are rejecting politics as usual, confronting state lawmakers, organizing marches, even forcing out a Maine candidate who called student Emma Gonzalez a “skinhead lesbian.”
Finally, Moore makes his most attention-getting argument. He juxtaposes audio from a Trump rally with video of Hitler speaking. Moore has said he’s not arguing equivalency here, just that one must consider history as a lesson in how some leaders manipulate public fear.
He also interviews 99-year-old Benjamin Ferencz, the last surviving Nuremberg prosecutor, who is reduced to tears when speaking of the separation of children from parents at the U.S. border.
“It’s the world in which we live,” Ferencz says, echoing Moore. “We’ve got to change it or perish.”
“Fahrenheit 11/9,” a Briarcliff Entertainment release, is rated R by the Motion Picture Association of America “for language and some disturbing material/images.” Running time: 125 minutes. Two and a half stars out of four.
The Associated Press
WATCH OUT FOR “FRIENDLY FASCISM” AND THE “DUMBING DOWN OF THE DEMOCRACY.”
https://www.msnbc.com/hardball/watch/michael-moore-on-midterms-time-to-end-this-madness-vote-1323682883793?v=raila&
Michael Moore’s latest film examines the factors that led to the rise of the Trump presidency and the impact it has had in the two years since the 2016 election.
Sep.18.2018
THIS INTERVIEW TELLS OF VARIOUS SHORTCUTS THAT THE FBI USED, UNDER PRESSURE, OR EVEN A COVERUP, PERHAPS?
https://www.msnbc.com/katy-tur/watch/is-the-kavanaugh-fbi-investigation-close-to-wrapping-already-1336008771583
NBC’s Julia Ainsley, former FBI agent Michael German and former federal prosecutor Cynthia Alksne join Katy Tur to discuss the progress of the FBI’s background investigation into Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
Oct.03.2018
VIDEO
https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari-melber/watch/kavanaugh-classmate-pulls-support-citing-partisanship-temperament-1336206403945
A classmate of Trump Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, who publicly endorsed him joins Ari Melber to discuss why he is officially pulling his support for Kavanaugh. The Yale Law School classmate, Mark Osler, tells “The Beat” that Kavanaugh’s failure to maintain “civility” during the hearings regarding his alleged assault of Dr. Ford, in particular his exchange with Sen. Amy Klobuchar was the turning point in his changing view.
Oct.03.2018
THIS ARTICLE IS MEANT FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES. I THINK A RUN-DOWN OF WHO IS WHO WOULD HELP ME, SO MAYBE IT WILL HELP OTHERS ALSO.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33103973
Magazine
The US Supreme Court: Who are the justices?
By Taylor Kate Brown
BBC News Magazine
OCTOBER 8, 2018 3 hours ago
PHOTOGRAPH -- The old formation of the Supreme Court without its new member, Brett Kavanaugh
Brett Kavanaugh has been confirmed as the new member of the US Supreme Court, following a contentious political battle.
Kavanaugh, who replaces Justice Anthony Kennedy, is President Donald Trump's second pick, after Neil Gorsuch in 2017.
Here is a look at the nine justices who have had a big influence on American life. Meet the Supremes.
Elena Kagan
On the court since: 7 August 2010
How she got to the court: Kagan grew up in New York City. At the age of 12, she convinced her rabbi to hold the synagogue's first formal bat mitzvah, the rite of passage for young women. After law school at Harvard, she clerked for Justice Thurgood Marshall. After a successful stint as the first female dean of Harvard Law School, she was briefly US solicitor general - the federal government's top representative at the US Supreme Court, before being nominated by President Barack Obama for the high court.
Who is she as a justice? Kagan is the first justice in decades not to previously serve as a judge. She is part of the court's left-leaning wing, but has been the author of many of recent unanimous or near unanimous decisions. Her writing is often easy for a layperson to understand without sacrificing legal analysis, and she is an aggressive questioner during oral arguments. Kagan first took her seat at the bench at the age of 50 and could potentially be a force on the court for decades.
Dahlia Lithwick, Slate's legal correspondent, says Kagan is "much more inscrutable" on issues than other recent additions to the court. "She's very close to the vest," she says.
Media captionListen to Elena Kagan at arguments
Justice's Opinion: Kagan wrote an impassioned dissent in the Town of Greece v Galloway, in which the court heard a challenge to Greece's practice of opening town meetings with a Christian prayer.
"When a person goes to court, a polling place, or an immigration proceeding, I could go on: to a zoning agency, a parole board hearing, or the DMV - government officials do not engage in sectarian worship, nor do they ask her to do likewise. They all participate in the business of government not as Christians, Jews, Muslims (and more), but only as Americans - none of them different from any other for that civic purpose. Why not, then, at a town meeting?"
Sonia Sotomayor
On the court since: 8 August 2009
How she got to the court: Sotomayor was born to Puerto Rican parents in the Bronx. As a student at Princeton University, she fought for hiring more Latino professors and admitting more Latino students. After Yale Law school, she became a prosecutor in New York and was later named to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The federal appeals courts are often the final step before the Supreme Court for cases. In the second circuit, Sotomayor authored more than 150 majority opinions - including a few that were ultimately overruled by the higher court.
Who is she as a justice? Sotomayor is the first Hispanic justice. She's also been one of the most public facing - her memoir appeared on the New York Times' best-selling list, she appeared twice on Sesame Street, once to adjudicate a dispute between Goldilocks and Baby Bear, and she helped drop the ball in Times Square on New Year's Eve 2013. "She's trying really hard to demystify the court, showing 'You can be a justice too'," Lithwick says.
Her former experience as a prosecutor and trial judge often leads her to challenge lawyers on the facts of a case, says Marcia Coyle, the chief Washington correspondent for the National Law Journal. "She knows how criminal trials operate," Coyle says.
Media captionListen to Sonia Sotomayor at arguments
Justice's Opinion: In a dissent to the court's 5-3 ruling in Schuette v. BAMN, a case involving a ban on affirmative action policies, Sotomayor argued directly against the conservative justices in how the court should treat challenges to race-based laws.
"Race matters. Race matters in part because of the long history of racial minorities' being denied access to the political process… And race matters for reasons that really are only skin deep, that cannot be discussed any other way, and that cannot be wished away. Race matters to a young man's view of society when he spends his teenage years watching others tense up as he passes, no matter the neighbourhood where he grew up. Race matters to a young woman's sense of self when she states her hometown, and then is pressed, 'No, where are you really from?', regardless of how many generations her family has been in the country…. Race matters because of the slights, the snickers, the silent judgments that reinforce that most crippling of thoughts: 'I do not belong here.'"
Samuel Alito
On the court since: 31 January 2006
How he got to the court: Alito grew up in New Jersey in an Italian immigrant family. While at Princeton University, he was involved in conservative and libertarian groups, as well as the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps. After Yale law school, he was a prosecutor in New Jersey and served in the Reagan administration in the justice department, including as assistant to the solicitor general, where he argued before the Supreme Court. President George HW Bush named him to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 1990, where he stayed until his nomination to The Supreme Court.
Who is he as a justice? Alito is a conservative justice, but one who does not hew as often to originalism as fellow conservatives Scalia and Thomas. He is not always talkative in oral arguments but his questions are sharp, aiming to pick apart an argument's logic. Alito has a low public profile despite being a large part of the court's rightward shift on business, campaign finance and racial issues over the past decade.
The former prosecutor has been "very pro-government" in criminal cases, Coyle says, and has shown less willingness than his conservative colleagues to protect free speech in cases where it is harmful or hateful.
Media captionListen to Samuel Alito at arguments
Justice's Opinion: Alito wrote for the majority in a labour case, Harris v Quinn, in which the court ruled labour groups could not collect fees from Illinois home health care workers who did not want to join the union despite being covered by collective bargaining.
"If we accepted Illinois' argument, we would approve an unprecedented violation of the bedrock principle that, except perhaps in the rarest of circumstances, no person in this country may be compelled to subsidise speech by a third party that he or she does not wish to support."
John Roberts
On the court since: 29 September 2005
How he got to the court: Born in New York and raised in Indiana, Roberts attended a boarding school as a teenager but also spent summers working in a steel mill. After considering becoming a historian at Harvard, he went to law school there instead, eventually clerking for then-Associate Justice Rehnquist. He spent many years as a lawyer in the Reagan administration then entered private practice, arguing before the high court and serving as one of several legal advisers to George W Bush in the Florida presidential recount case. Originally nominated to fill the spot left by retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, Roberts was re-nominated for the chief justice position after Chief Justice Rehnquist died between terms, and his nomination was fast-tracked.
Who is he as a justice: A conservative justice, Roberts is the third-youngest Chief Justice in the court's history, confirmed at 50 years old. Last year's term saw more than half its cases decided unanimously, something many court watchers cite as the outcome of Roberts' desire to foster agreement through narrower rulings. He also notably wrote the 5-4 opinion that shot down a major challenge to President Barack Obama's healthcare law.
"I think he cares deeply about how the 'Roberts court' looks," Lithwick says, and knows he can move the court slowly over decades.
"He doesn't want huge swings, except in areas he feels very strongly about," Coyle says, like government's role in racial issues, campaign finance's relation to free speech and the structure of constitution. Roberts also looks to keep decorum on the bench during oral arguments.
Media captionListen to John Roberts at arguments
Justice's Opinion: Roberts, writing for the majority in Shelby County v Holder, effectively knocked out a part of the Voting Rights Act which requires certain states to gain permission of the justice department before changing their voting laws.
"At the same time, voting discrimination still exists; no one doubts that. The question is whether the Act's extraordinary measures, including its disparate treatment of the States, continue to satisfy constitutional requirements. As we put it a short time ago, "the Act imposes current burdens and must be justified by current needs".
Stephen Breyer
On the court since: 3 August 1994
How he got to the court: Breyer grew up in San Francisco with a lawyer father and a politically-active mother, attending Stanford, then Harvard Law. After clerking for Justice Arthur Goldberg, he moved into government, working as counsel in various positions in Congress, including as an assistant special prosecutor in the Watergate investigation. He spent a lengthy period of time on the First Circuit Court of Appeals and was considered for a Supreme Court nomination in 1991. It went to Ruth Bader Ginsburg instead. President Clinton went back to Breyer when Justice Blackmun retired from the court in 1994.
Who is he as a justice? Breyer believes the court needs to consider the history of laws, the intent of Congress and the consequences of its decisions. "He believes deeply in government and government processes," Lithwick says.
Breyer, the king of the complicated hypothetical, has sought to "bridge gaps" in differences between the justices, Coyle says, by listening closely to find give-and-take between justices on an issue.
"Those hypothetical questions are really designed for his colleagues," Coyle says. He did this last year while writing a 9-0 opinion in a politically charged case over the president's power to appoint judges and other officials during Senate recesses. The ruling was narrowly decided against the president, and both the conservative and liberal wings were in agreement on the final judgement - but not all the details.
Media captionListen to Stephen Breyer at arguments
Justice's Opinion: From the aforementioned 9-0 ruling, National Labor Relations Board v Noel Canning.
"There is a great deal of history to consider here. Presidents have made recess appointments since the beginning of the Republic. Their frequency suggests that the Senate and President have recognised that recess appointments can be both necessary and appropriate in certain circumstances. We have not previously interpreted the Clause, and, when doing so for the first time in more than 200 years, we must hesitate to upset the compromises and working arrangements that the elected branches of Government themselves have reached."
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
On the court since: 10 August 1993
How she got to the court: Another New Yorker, Ginsburg stayed in the state to attend Cornell and eventually transferred to Columbia Law School after first enrolling at Harvard. She was rejected from a Supreme Court clerkship after graduating because of her gender, according to the New York Times. As she moved into a teaching and litigating career, Ginsburg focused on women's rights - starting the first law journal focused on the topic and arguing six cases before the Supreme Court. She was confirmed to the federal appeals court for the District of Columbia in 1980 and 13 years later, was nominated by President Bill Clinton for a seat at the top court.
Who is she as a justice? As the most senior justice on the court's left wing, Ginsburg is often in charge of assigning dissents in highly controversial cases. She has used this power to write a "a string of barnstormers", Lithwick says, including a case which expanded the religious exemptions to birth control insurance coverage, and another which made major changes to a law prohibiting racial discrimination in voting. The dissents, combined with her refusal to heed calls to step down during the first Obama term, has earned her a fan base and her own internet meme - Notorious RBG. "She's the last vestige of an old guard of liberalism" on the court, Lithwick says, and the last civil rights lawyer on the bench.
Media captionListen to Ruth Bader Ginsburg at arguments
Justice's Opinion: In a dissent in Burwell v Hobby Lobby, Ginsburg wrote the court's decision to expand religious exemptions to "closely held" corporations was in error.
"Indeed, until today, religious exemptions had never been extended to any entity operating in 'the commercial, profit-making world'. The reason why is hardly obscure. Religious organisations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. Workers who sustain the operations of those corporations commonly are not drawn from one religious community. Indeed, by law, no religion-based criterion can restrict the work force of for-profit corporations."
Clarence Thomas
On the court since: 23 October 1991
How he got to the court: Thomas was born in a small town in Georgia, and was one of the few African-Americans in attendance during a short stint in seminary and then at Holy Cross College. But unlike Justice Sotomayor, those experiences made him distrustful of affirmative action policies. After finishing Yale Law, he worked in Missouri government and in Washington DC before being named chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, an agency that responds to discrimination claims in the workplace. After a bruising confirmation hearing - in which a former employee accused him of sexual harassment - Thomas was narrowly confirmed to Supreme Court, at the relatively young age of 43.
Who is he as a justice? Thomas' originalism is exacting, including a disregard for stare decisis, respect for prior court rulings and precedence. Thomas has also not asked a question during oral arguments in nine years. He has previously said he doesn't care for the question-heavy arguments, sometimes already drafting opinions based on written briefs before any lawyer gets up to argue. Thomas often files entirely separate dissents rarely joined by others, but Coyle says he is influential in other ways, including during conferences only justices attend, and in "difficult decisions" in areas that don't get a lot of press - like intellectual property and tax law. Thomas replaced the first African-American justice on the court - Thurgood Marshall - and remains the only current black justice.
Media captionListen to Clarence Thomas at arguments (in 2006)
Justice's Opinion: In a dissent to a 2011 case, Brown v Entertainment Merchants Association, Thomas argues it is a mistake for the court to overturn a California law banning the sale of violent video games to minors.
"But I do not think the First Amendment stretches that far. The practices and beliefs of the founding generation establish that 'the freedom of speech', as originally understood, does not include a right to speak to minors (or a right of minors to access speech) without going through the minors' parents or guardians."
Image copyrightREUTERS
Neil Gorsuch
On the court since: 10 April, 2017
How he got to the court: At 49, Gorsuch was the youngest nominee in a quarter of a century when he was approved in 2017. The Colorado native, whose legal pedigree includes Harvard and Oxford, was first nominated to the 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals by former President George W Bush in 2006. He began his law career clerking for Supreme Court Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy, and worked in a private law practice in Washington for a decade and served as the principal deputy assistant associate attorney general at the Justice Department under the Bush administration. Judge Gorsuch graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where former President Barack Obama was a classmate, and earned a doctorate in legal philosophy at Oxford University.
Who is he as a justice? Gorsuch succeeded the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and was welcomed by conservatives who consider him to espouse a similarly strict interpretation of law. In his first year on the court he has cemented the 5-4 conservative advantage, and that's been seen in a series of rulings on contentious issues such as the Trump travel ban, trade union fees and gerrymandering.
Image copyrightAFP
Brett Kavanaugh
On the court since: 6 October, 2018
How he got to the court: Kavanaugh served on the influential Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit and was formerly a White House aide under George W Bush. He previously worked for Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel who investigated Democratic President Bill Clinton in the 1990s. His confirmation process was one of the most controversial in recent years amid allegations of sexual misconduct in the 1980s, which he denied. After a hearing in which one of his accusers gave a dramatic testimony of the alleged incident and Kavanaugh fiercely defended his record, he was approved by the Senate by 50-48. Born in Washington, DC in 1965, Kavanaugh studied at Georgetown Preparatory School an all-boys school in Bethesda, Maryland, and graduated from Yale College and Yale Law School.
Who is he as a justice? He succeeded Anthony Kennedy, who was the Supreme Court's swing vote, often casting the deciding opinion in 5-4 cases, consolidating a conservative majority at the top court. Some Democrats fiercely opposed to his name for his views on delicate issues such as abortion. His views on the environment and gun rights have also raised concerns among environmentalists and gun control activists.
VIDEOS:
https://www.msnbc.com/craig-melvin/watch/former-obama-deputy-national-security-adviser-weighs-in-on-kavanaugh-confirmation-midterms-1339278403746
Ben Rhodes, former Deputy National Security Adviser under President Obama, joins Craig Melvin to discuss Brett Kavanaugh and the midterms.
Oct.08.2018
https://www.msnbc.com/weekends-with-alex-witt/watch/how-judge-kavanaugh-differs-from-historic-supreme-court-nominations-1338828867632
Presidential Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, author of the new book, “Leadership in Turbulent Times,” compares Brett Kavanaugh’s supreme court nomination to those of the past and says she’s seen nothing like it in her lifetime.
Oct.07.2018
https://www.msnbc.com/andrea-mitchell-reports/watch/sen-blumenthal-fbi-report-on-judge-kavanaugh-is-woefully-incomplete-1336775747898?v=raila&
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is pushing ahead with a critical test vote on Judge Kavanaugh's nomination tomorrow - setting the stage for what could be confirmation as soon as this weekend. Connecticut Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal serves on the Judiciary Committee, he joins Andrea Mitchell to discuss.
Oct.04.2018
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/kavanaugh-takes-partisan-vendetta-to-high-court-with-lifetime-job-1338128963891
Senator Richard Blumenthal talks with Rachel Maddow about Brett Kavanaugh's partisan rant and threat that "what goes around comes around," a political vendetta Kavanaugh will take to the Supreme Court with a lifetime position.
Oct.05.2018
BEFORE THE SENATE DECISION. THIS IS A REVIEW OF SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED, HOW THE REPS ENGINEERED THIS AND WHETHER THE FBI PURPOSELY HELPED THEM. THE KEY WORD THAT I KEEP HEARING IS “VOTE!” I’M GOING ON OCTOBER 22 WITH A FRIEND TO DO JUST THAT, AND I’LL CHECK AROUND FOR OTHERS IN MY BUILDING WHO WOULD LIKE A RIDE.
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/watch/sen-durbin-don-t-know-how-r-s-say-they-believe-ford-yet-confirm-kavanaugh-1337913923929
Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin joins Nicolle Wallace to discuss the last minute decisions for Sens. Collins, Murkowski, and Manchin on Brett Kavanaugh
Oct.05.2018
https://www.msnbc.com/andrea-mitchell-reports/watch/sen-leahy-kavanaugh-confirmation-battle-damaging-to-senate-and-supreme-court-1337655875543
Sen. Leahy: Kavanaugh confirmation battle damaging to Senate and Supreme Court
Oct.05.2018
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/watch/sen-durbin-don-t-know-how-r-s-say-they-believe-ford-yet-confirm-kavanaugh-1337913923929
Sen. Durbin: Don’t know how R’s say they believe Ford yet confirm Kavanaugh
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/kavanaugh-vote-will-drive-political-backlash-if-history-is-guide-1338131011681
Rachel Maddow looks back at the political fallout from the treatment of Anita Hill in the Clarence Thomas confirmation process when a wave of women candidates were inspired to improve their representation in the Senate.
Oct.05.2018
PERMANENT DAMAGE TO THE SUPREME COURT BY THIS SCANDALOUS QUICK AND DIRTY PUSH BY REPUBLICANS TO ENGINEER THE SUCCESS OF THEIR SOCIAL AND MONETARY ISSUES, IS I’M AFRAID LIKELY TO BE THE RESULT. READ THE JUSTICES’ COMMENTS BELOW.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/cloud-legitimacy-crisis-taint-legal-experts-kavanaugh-joining-court-n916731
SUPREME COURT
'Cloud.' 'Legitimacy crisis.' 'Taint.' Legal experts on Kavanaugh joining the court.
Misconduct allegations, temperament questions will follow Trump's pick as he takes his seat. They say it may never go away.
by Adam Edelman / Oct.07.2018 / 2:30 PM EDT
PHOTOGRAPH -- Judge Brett Kavanaugh is sworn in as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court by Chief Justice John Roberts as Kavanaugh's wife Ashley holds the family bible and his daughters Liza and Margaret look on at the Supreme Court building on Oct. 6, 2018.Fred Schilling / Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States via Reuters
Brett Kavanaugh joins the Supreme Court as damaged goods, dogged by questions about his integrity that he may never be able to outrun — casting a pall over the institution for a long time to come, high court experts said.
"I don't think he'll ever be able to disassociate himself from what just happened," said Benjamin Barton, a professor at the University of Tennessee College of Law. "For Kavanaugh, this is a first-paragraph-of-his-obituary type of situation. He's going to be known for this and stuck with this for his career."
Barton added, "Every single case that he is on, people will say, 'Hmm, I wonder what Kavanaugh decided for this?' When we have a whole string of 5-4 decisions with Kavanaugh on there, it will make it seem like a partisan body, which is terrible for the Supreme Court and bad for the country."
Ari Melber: Kavanaugh has publicly violated Judge rules
OCT.04.201807:51
NBC News spoke with eight court watchers, including academics, former clerks and ex-legislative aides to get this take on the court's newest member as he begins his work on the court this week.
All of the experts, regardless of political leaning or judicial philosophy, offered a stark prognosis for Kavanaugh and for the court: That his reputation as a jurist has suffered, perhaps irreversibly; that the perception he can rule fairly on several hot-button issues has been diminished; and that the public's view of the fairness of the court will drop, possibly precipitously. A few, however, said the only thing, if anything, that would ever have the chance of healing the judicial wound would be the simple passage of time.
The court watchers said they were shocked at the nominee's unsteady, fiery temperament during his testimony and his open partisanship and defiance of Democrats on the Judiciary Committee.
Barton, a former clerk for a U.S Court of Appeals judge and the author of well-known 2012 study that examined the personal pre-Supreme Court backgrounds of justices, noted that even if the "actual integrity" of the Supreme Court ends up being unharmed by Kavanaugh's presence, damage will be done.
"The perceived integrity of the court matters just as much," he said. "And for the perceived integrity of the court, this is a disaster."
'SIGNIFICANT CLOUD'
Wendy Weiser, who directs the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, a left-leaning law and public policy center that takes no position on nominees, went further, arguing that Kavanaugh would, in fact, "harm the actual credibility, legitimacy and authority of the U.S. Supreme Court."
"The process throughout this entire nomination creates a serious risk for the court's legitimacy,” she added. "And it's not going to go away."
For Weiser, it wasn't just about Kavanaugh's "injudicious comments" about drinking, his "visible lack of respect" for Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., or his "highly partisan" statements during the hearing — although she said those were all were to his detriment.
"Cases dealing with women's rights and gender issues are obviously going to be questioned," Weiser said. "But honestly my concern is what he does to the court writ large. If half the country believes one of the members of the Supreme Court committed sexual assault and lacks integrity, that is going to taint the perception of all the court's rulings."
A court with Kavanaugh on it has a "permanent taint," she concluded.
Image:Protesters sit and chant against Judge Brett Kavanaugh as Capitol Hill Police officers make arrests outside the office of Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, on Capitol Hill, on Sept. 24, 2018 in Washington.Alex Brandon / AP
Anil Kalhan, a professor at Drexel University's Kline School of Law and a former clerk to two federal judges, said for all the issues with the confirmation process, it was Kavanaugh's appearance before the committee that would "cast the most significant cloud."
"I think it just puts his partisanship front and center," Kalhan said, referring to Kavanaugh's claims that the "national disgrace" of a confirmation process was caused by opposition from "the left" and based on "revenge on behalf of the Clintons."
"He may have been entitled to anger and raw emotion, even indignance based on what happened to him," Kalhan added. "But the partisanship and then his hostility and manifest disrespect to senators? It doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence. This is as close as we have been to a potential legitimacy crisis as I can think of in my lifetime."
LIKELY TO WORSEN
Partisan tensions already surrounding the Supreme Court are almost certain to worsen, several experts said.
Image: Dr. Christine Blasey Ford And Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Testify To Senate Judiciary CommitteeSen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., points at the Democrats as he defends Judge Brett Kavanaugh during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on his nomination on Capitol Hill in Washington on Sept. 27, 2018Pool / Getty Images
Some Democrats have threatened — if they take back the House or the Senate in November — to launch further investigations into the allegations against Kavanaugh, with some even throwing around the possibility of impeachment proceedings.
Nightly News Full Broadcast (October 7th)
BEAT SPECIAL REPORT
Meet the Press - October 7, 2018
Kalhan and others offered one solution that they said could possibly lessen any damage done to the integrity of the court: Avoiding hot-button issues for a time.
"At the end of the day, this could turn on what the court is doing," Kalhan said. "If the court is engaging in topics that are not of major concern to large segments of the population, then maybe it can blow over. But if it's rendering controversial decisions about the right to have an abortion, or contraception or religious freedom issues, that's not likely."
Some said they doubted Kavanaugh would recuse himself from such cases, but believe it's an idea worth considering.
THE CASE OF CLARENCE THOMAS
On the other hand, some of the experts that NBC News spoke with said they believed public perception of the Supreme Court would recover after an extended period of time.
Michael Dorf, a professor at Cornell Law School and a law clerk to former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, predicted the saga would affect public regard for Kavanaugh "at least for some period of time, a couple of years," but he added, "Over time, memories will fade and other issues will gain greater prominence."
To make their point, Dorf and others said they believe that Clarence Thomas has largely outlived the controversy over his 1991 confirmation, when Anita Hill made sexual harassment allegations against him.
"Most voters don't know much about the court, and they will forget," Dorf said. "We now routinely talk about decisions rendered by Justice Thomas, or his dissents and his conservative jurisprudence. Not as much about Anita Hill."
Barton, of the University of Tennessee College of Law, agreed, but pointed out how, just because the Hill-Thomas hearing didn't permanently damage the justice's reputation doesn't mean it didn't have a large affect on his demeanor and style on the bench.
"He has kept a low profile, he hardly ever speaks during cases," Barton said — Thomas didn't ask a question from the Supreme Court bench for 10 years during oral arguments, ending his run of silence in 2016.
Kalhan, of Drexel's Kline School of Law, however, disagreed that the passage of nearly three decades had provided "any kind of roadmap back to acceptability" for Thomas.
"Things didn't blow over for Clarence Thomas, people still talk about Anita Hill," he said. "And the idea that Thomas' situation didn't have political consequences isn't true. It motivated women and Democrats in 1992. It was 'The Year of the Woman'" — when nearly 50 women were elected to the House and six to the Senate.
Image: Justices Thomas and Ginsburg leave the ceremony where Neil Gorsuch was administered the judicial oathU.S. Supreme Court Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Ruth Bader Ginsburg leave the Rose Garden following a ceremony where Neil Gorsuch was administered the judicial oath at the White House April 10, 2017 in Washington.Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images file
And Weiser, of the Brennan Center, said comparisons can't be drawn between Thomas and Kavanaugh because the latter "is happening during a very different time, during a time of national reckoning of sexual assault, in the midst of #MeToo, during a time when people thought and expected we had moved forward and will move forward."
llya Somin, a professor at Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, referred to another past high-profile instance where partisan politics intersected with the court — the Bush v. Gore ruling that decided the 2000 presidential election.
"There are a history of situations where people say, 'This will affect the permanent legitimacy of the court' — that happened after Bush v. Gore, and while people certainly talk about it, these did not end up have a long-term impact on the perception or the legitimacy of the court," said Somin.
But several experts agreed that things seem different this time, due to the seriousness of the the allegations, as well as Kavanaugh's handling of them.
"The allegation by Anita Hill against Clarence Thomas, while serious, did not involve conduct nearly as harmful as that alleged to have been committed by Kavanaugh," Dorf noted.
"So, in that sense, you could see it being a cloud over him," he said. "For a long time."
WHY ARE AMERICANS SO UNCARING ABOUT THE EARTH AND ITS’ WONDERS? WHY DO THEY THINK THAT THEIR PIECE OF TRASH ISN'T UNACCEPTABLE? THIS KIND OF THING DISGUSTS AND SHAMES ME. [THIS IS A VIDEO ONLY.]
https://www.cbsnews.com/live/video/20181006165313-garbage-found-after-yellowstone-geyser-erupts/?ftag=CNM15cf32c
Garbage found after Yellowstone geyser erupts...
PRINT ARTICLE:
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a23622495/yellowstone-garbage-ear-spring-geyery/
Heavily Littered Yellowstone Geyser Spews Tons of Trash Into Air During Eruption
When nature hurls your garbage right back at you.
image
By Sam Blum
Oct 5, 2018
VIDEO – RARE EAR SPRING ERUPTION 16:49:22
As long as geysers are treated like garbage cans there remains the possibility of a trash eruption.
Ear Spring geyser, located in Yellowstone National Park, had long been engorged by years of trash left inside of it by ill-mannered tourists. So naturally when the geyser erupted in September, unleashing its usual blast of searing-hot water and air, a nasty wave of dreck followed.
The contents of the garbage eruption were displayed by the National Park Service. In a Facebook post, the agency advises tourists to refrain from treating ecological wonders like dumpsters, writing:
"Foreign objects can damage hot springs and geysers. The next time Ear Spring erupts we hope it's nothing but natural rocks and water. You can help by never throwing anything into Yellowstone's thermal features!"
The garbage had clearly been building within the geyser for a while, as evidenced by the breadth of the objects retrieved. A pyrex funnel, a rather large cement block, three cigarette butts, a no.2 pencil, a plastic spoon, a Solo jazz cup, a baby pacifier and various other things were found after Ear Spring's 30-foot belch on September 15.
The garbage blast was also historic: Some of the objects are believed to date back to the 1930s and are primed to be "inventoried by curators and may end up in Yellowstone's archives," per the NPS.
Thermal activity has been surging recently in Yellowstone's Geyser Hill, and Ear Spring's September eruption was its biggest in over 60 years, according to Live Science. The uptick has resulted in the closure of a popular boardwalk that runs over a newly-formed "thermal feature" in the Upper Geyser Basin, due to safety concerns.
While a blast of this magnitude is nothing to worry about, it's probably worth presenting a different advisory: Don't litter because nature can and will regurgitate your garbage.
Source: NPS via Live Science
VIDEOS
https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/sen-hirono-on-kavanaugh-vote-and-clueless-grassley-1338062403514
Sen. Hirono on Kavanaugh vote and 'clueless' Grassley
The Hawaii Democrat weighs in on the GOP's push to confirm a judge accused of sexual harassment -- and their absurd claim that protesters are all paid.
Oct.05.2018
https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/trump-uses-ford-s-pain-for-political-punchline-1336540739615
During a rally in Mississippi, President Trump mocked sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. Trump has received push back from some Republicans for mocking Ford, and the panel discusses.
Oct.04.2018
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/susan-rice-raises-specter-of-challenging-susan-collins-in-2020-1338131011768
Why Murkowski opposes Kavanaugh 18:03
Lawrence looks at the markedly different standards Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins had for how they weighed their decisions on Brett Kavanaugh and why they ultimately decided the way they did. Maya Wiley, Jill Wine-Banks, and Lisa Graves discuss.
Oct.05.2018
https://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/watch/schmidt-on-trump-attacking-dr-blasey-ford-contemptible-vulgar-1335432771802
Political veteran & former Republican Steve Schmidt reacts to Trump's attacks on the testimony by Kavanaugh accuser Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
Schmidt on Trump attacking Dr. Blasey Ford: Contemptible & vulgar
Political veteran & former Republican Steve Schmidt reacts to Trump's attacks on the testimony by Kavanaugh accuser Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
Oct.02.2018 02:49 / 06:18
02:47 / 06:18
THE WHITE MALE UNDER ATTACK THEME
https://www.msnbc.com/hardball/watch/eugene-robinson-dems-need-to-get-mad-about-kavanaugh-1338010691862
Eugene Robinson: Dems need to get mad about Kavanaugh
Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson had a simple message for liberals today: "Get mad about Kavanaugh. Then get even."
Oct.05.2018 4:28
YES, THE VOTE IS OVER, BUT LISTEN TO THIS VIDEO. I DO NOT WANT THE DEMOCRATS TO DROP THIS AS IF IT WERE A RESULT IN A FOOTBALL GAME. IT IS A SERIOUS AMERICAN SOCIETAL MATTER IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE. I HOPE THIS WHOLE CHARADE WILL BE OPENED TO THE DAYLIGHT, WITH CRIMINAL CHARGES IN SOME CASES. VOTE, LADIES!! VOTE!!
https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari-melber/watch/sen-merkley-white-male-gop-crew-treat-women-like-a-problem-1337101379629
Despite the President's word on Monday that the FBI should have a free hand in conducting their background investigation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, there's mounting concern that the bureau didn't do a thorough enough job. 8:10.
Oct.04.2018
THIS STORY IS LONG, BUT IT OFFERS HOPE. READ IT FOR PLEASURE MORE THAN SPECIFIC INFORMATION.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45504065
Can chocolate sweeten a bitterly divided US?
By Rajini Vaidyanathan
BBC News
7 October 2018
PHOTOGRAPH -- The Super Decathlon brought people from rural and urban areas together to play games
The rancorous confirmation of the new US Supreme Court justice, Brett Kavanaugh, has revealed how deeply divided the country is. The distance between the left and right feels cavernous. Can Americans from different political backgrounds bond over sport and chocolate-tasting?
It's just gone 9am on a Saturday morning and a group of more than 30 people have gathered at a sports field in the centre of Waynesboro, Pennsylvania.
A two hour ride from Washington DC, it's a rural township where the urban sprawl of the nation's capital has been traded for green fields and woodland, set against mountain views and a powder-blue sky.
As the group assemble around picnic tables they make their introductions as they munch on bagels and drink coffee.
Half of the people here have travelled from Washington DC, while the other half are locals from Franklin County, where Waynesboro, a town with a predominantly white population of ten thousand people sits.
Image copyrightRAJINI VAIDYANATHAN
Image caption
Beau, Stuart, Christopher and Allison
They're here to take part in what organisers call the "Super Decathlon" a day-long event which brings together teams of four - two urban, two rural - to compete in a range of events.
"There are lots of divides in our country right now, one of which is the divide between people who live in urban and rural areas," says Joe Bubman, who has organised the day's activities.
Bubman points to data from the Pew research centre which suggests that the majority of rural dwellers (58%) believe those in urban America have different values to them, with a similar percentage of urban dwellers (53%) feeling the same about those in rural areas.
The same survey shows that 70% of those in rural areas and 65% in urban areas, feel people who live in a different type of community to them don't understand their concerns.
Image copyrightRAJINI VAIDYANATHAN
"Our hypothesis is that one of the reasons for these divisions is that there's not much interaction between rural and urban communities."
"We believe that people are more likely to engage in discussions on substantive issues if you are first able are interact with someone else as a fellow human, as a fellow American," adds Bubman who is in his second year of such an event.
Joe and his co-organiser David Michaels, hope that through 10 different activities - everything from kickball to dodgeball, rock paper scissors to trivia quiz, relay race, blindfold dessert tasting, and Sudoku - they can do their bit to break down some of the divisions in the country.
There's not much time to make small talk before teams are thrust into their first activity, a game of kickball.
Image copyrightCORIE WALSH
Image caption
The Super Decathlon aims to build lasting friendships across divides
On the pitch I meet Golzar Meamar from Washington DC, who was encouraged to attend by her housemate.
By her own admission, she wouldn't otherwise visit a place like Waynesboro but she's pleased to attend, not least to break down some of the misconceptions rural and urban Americans have about each other.
"Something I've heard a lot is this idea that those in urban communities live frivolously, live differently and are mean and unkind to neighbours," she tells me, "and that we don't care about community."
For Golzar this is the biggest myth she hopes to dispel through the day, "There's a community bonding experience that we all share, we all just want to love… regardless of where we live."
It's heartening to see how Golzar and her team, who are wearing pink, gel so quickly over their shared experiences on the sports field. Shortly after the game of kickball end, the teams line up facing each other to play a mammoth game of rock, paper, scissors.
Image copyrightRAJINI VAIDYANATHAN
Image caption
Rock, Paper, Scissors
A refrain of "rock, paper, scissors…shoot", ripples along the line as the teams engage in a slightly unconventional bonding experience.
As Golzar competes with a player from the red team, her allies in pink - John, Josh and Corie - watch on, throwing their hands in the air enthusiastically when she wins a round.
John and Josh, who are from Franklin county, tell me what they think are the biggest misconceptions people have about those who live in the countryside.
"I feel that everyone thinks that we're farmers. That we all work with cows and plant crops and harvest corn," says John, who works at an after-school club in the area.
"I don't even live near a farm," he adds incredulously.
John doesn't believe America is as divided as many would think it is. "I don't really feel that anything is really going to divide us like in the Civil War. I think it's more of the media twisting on both sides, about how it really is."
More than 70% of residents in Franklin County voted for Donald Trump, including Josh, who says he never has a problem talking about the issues of the day with friends across the political spectrum.
His rural teammate Josh, who leans "more negative" towards Mr Trump has a slightly different take.
"I think tensions are very high and opinions are very heated, so there aren't a whole lot of proper discussions being had about certain topics."
Image copyrightCORIE WALSH
Image caption
John, Golzar and Josh bonded through the day
And that's definitely the case during the Super Decathlon. Most teams are divided along political lines, but team talk is firmly focused on winning the day's events, rather than who won the 2016 election.
As I approach the orange team, who are preparing for their chocolate tasting round, I ask them if they've discussed politics in any way.
"I think it feels uncomfortable quite frankly talking about politics these days," Allison Shean, who works in international development in Washington DC tells me.
Allison was one of the 90% of DC residents who cast a ballot for Hillary Clinton. She might have voted for a different candidate to her team mate Stuart Ocker, who works in manufacturing in Greencastle, Pennsylvania, but on this matter they agree.
"I usually shy away from talking politics just because I don't follow it all that closely.
"It is just easier to stay on common ground to unite with somebody, than rip each other apart for no reason."
Both believe there are opportunities to come together in America, despite their political differences.
"We're on the same team today," they tell me in unison.
"When you have days like today, where you're coming together and playing dodgeball or kickball, you really recognise that we're all kind of just out here to have fun," adds Allison.
Image copyrightRAJINI VAIDYANATHAN
Image caption
Can chocolate tasting sweeten a divided nation?
As the day winds up, the teams are blindfolded to guess the flavour of different chocolates.
It is striking to see how a focus on whether the dark chocolate is honey roasted or sprinkled with cinnamon can unite people.
"What better way to bring America together than by tasting chocolate," quips Jay Lurie, a member of the red team who works in international development in Washington DC.
"I can definitely see people breaking down barriers and bonding. Today has pulled me out of my comfort zone so I forget the daily news feed for a moment and focus on connecting with people."
As the day wraps up, the humid summer heat is swapped for torrential rain as the winners are announced.
Image copyrightCORIE WALSH
Image caption
Joe Bubman came up with the idea as a way to develop human interaction across geographic divides
The group then poses for a photo before saying their goodbyes - and in some cases exchange contacts - as those from the city prepare for their drive back to Washington DC.
Organisers hope that the lasting legacy of this sort of event are new friendships.
"Even if it's things like becoming friends on Facebook that makes a difference because it may change what shows up in your news feed because you are then seeing perspectives of people who are living in different communities," says Bubman.
He plans to bring some of the participants together again in October to work together on a clean-up of the Appalachian nature trail in the area, one way Bubman says to come together on local projects, even if their national views are different.
Bubman hopes to expand his project more broadly but warns that the mid term elections provide a challenge.
"I think they are not putting the country over their political party.
"We need to channel activism to not just getting your preferred political candidate elected, but to collaborate across the partisan divide."
Follow Rajini on Twitter @BBCRajiniv
GREAT DOCUMENTARY VIDEO –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xgri8QZwUQI
Fact or Fiction II - Richard III
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is best to take part in a contest for among the best blogs on the web. I'll suggest this website! casino online
ReplyDeleteCome to homework help online assistance is proposed to give specialists' pay for online class help for students to lower their academic pressure. If you are feeling stressed about your due dates, best homework help online buy coursework help
ReplyDeleteDo You Want To Be The Best At business report writing? Business report writing seems a nerve-wracking affair, isn’t it so? Online assignment help from the best online business writers in Australia
ReplyDelete