DECEMBER 12, 2018


NEWS AND VIEWS


VIDEO INTERVIEW ONLY -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT3MC-xtuCY
#SpecialReport #FoxNews
Bernie Sanders on push for anti-Saudi Arabia legislation
Fox News
Published on Dec 12, 2018
Sen. Bernie Sanders on the push for bipartisan measures over Saudi-led war in Yemen. #SpecialReport #FoxNews


“CHOMSKY REMINDS US THAT INTELLECT AND DISSENT GO TOGETHER, AND THAT THE VITAL CHALLENGE OF OUR TIMES IS TO MAINTAIN “AN INDEPENDENT MIND.’”
JOHN NICHOLS

TO SEE HOW FAR CHOMSKY HAS GONE TOWARD FREEDOM OF THOUGHT AND EXPRESSION, LOOK THROUGH THIS WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE ON A SCHOLARLY CONTROVERSY OVER A GENUINE THREAT TO DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS, WHICH IS CALLED “THE FAURISSON AFFAIR.” IT CONCERNS THE WORK OF A HOLOCAUST DENIER, THE LOWEST LEVEL OF HUMAN IN MY VIEW – PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE INTELLECT TO CONSTRUCT AN ARGUMENT, BUT LACK THE MORALITY AND EMPATHY TO MAKE IT FAIR TO ALL. PEOPLE LIKE THAT ARE EMPLOYED IN UNIVERSITIES, HIGH SCHOOLS, CORPORATIONS, EVEN CHURCHES, NOT TO MENTION POLICE FORCES. WHEN WE STIFLE THE ABILITY TO PROTECT HUMAN LIFE WITH OUR LAWS, WE ARE BECOMING THE CENTER OF THE DARKNESS THAT IN THESE TIMES IS AGAIN ON THE MARCH.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faurisson_affair. I WANT TO BELIEVE IN TOTALLY FREE SPEECH, BUT I CAN’T, BECAUSE MOST FALSEHOODS, PROPAGANDA AND HATE SPEECH ARE PROTECTED UNDER SUCH A DOCTRINE. IF PEOPLE WERE EQUALLY SAVVY MENTALLY AND HONORABLE EMOTIONALLY, I WOULD AGREE TO TOTAL FREEDOM, BUT THE PROVEN DAMAGE DONE BY MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL POISON TO INDIVIDUALS, GROUPS, GOVERNMENTS AND SOCIETIES IS TOO SEVERE TO ALLOW.

THAT IS MY PERSONAL OPINION, BUT I DEFEND IT, NOT ONLY BECAUSE I HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY IT, BUT BECAUSE I THINK IT IS INDISPUTABLE TO AN HONEST PERSON. THE LAW RECOGNIZES AN INTERESTING TERM, “PUFFERY,” WHICH MEANS MAKING EXAGGERATED CLAIMS IN ORDER TO SELL MORE OF A PRODUCT. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THAT AND FRAUD ISN’T CLEAR TO ME. IF ALL PEOPLE WERE INTELLECTUALLY CAPABLE OF DISCERNING PHILOSOPHICAL TRASH, I WOULDN’T WORRY ABOUT IT. AS IT IS, THE BIZARRE PIECES OF “INFORMATION” WHICH ARE RAMPANT ON THE INTERNET NOW SHOULD SHOW THE NEED FOR A NEW CLASS OF CRIME – THE FALSIFICATION OF KNOWLEDGE.

I WOULD CALL IT “INTELLECTUAL POISON,” THE DISTRIBUTION OF WHICH DESTROYS OUR BEST EFFORTS AT CIVILIZATION. I, OF COURSE, DO NOT THINK OF CIVILIZATION AS MERELY BEING LIFE IN CITIES RATHER THAN LIVING ON ISOLATED FARMSTEADS, BUT THE LIFE OF THE MIND. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT LIVING ON A FARM ON A MOUNTAINTOP IN APPALACHIA DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE ONE A “RUSTIC” OR WORSE “A HICK.” SO, TO ME, CIVILIZATION HAS TO INCLUDE THE LIBERAL ARTS, LEGAL FAIRNESS AND BASIC DECENCY. WE TEND TO THINK THAT THE WEALTHY AND SOCIALLY PROMINENT ARE THE ULTIMATE IN SUCCESS, BUT IF THEY ARE NOT ALSO LEGALLY FAIR AND EMOTIONALLY DECENT, THEY ARE FAILURES.

THIS UNWILLINGNESS TO PUT FORTH A PERSONAL EFFORT TO UNDERSTAND AND THINK ABOUT THE ISSUES WE FACE AS A NATION AND WORLD DISTURBS ME MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THE USA. I HAVE NEVER BELIEVED THAT SO MANY AMERICANS DO NOT HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO TACKLE QUESTIONS THAT AS CITIZENS WE FACE, AND AS CITIZENS, MUST VOTE ON. THEREFORE, IT IS MY FEELING THAT OUR WILLINGNESS TO BE LED BY THE NOSE BY AN AUTOCRATIC PSEUDOPOPULIST WITH A VENEER OF PATRIOTIC FERVOR AND A CLEAR UNDERLYING DISLIKE AND LACK OF RESPECT FOR PEOPLE OF BROWN OR DARKER SKIN COLORS, PLUS THAT CLOSED MIND TO ANYTHING THAT QUESTIONS TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, IS DISCOURAGING TO ME. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE MUST ACTUALLY APPROVE OF SUCH THINGS, GIVEN OUR POLITICAL SITUATION THESE DAYS. A PASSIVE AND GULLIBLE SOCIETY, AND THEREFORE ONE THAT IS EASY TO CONTROL, IS DEFINITELY THE GOAL OF “CONSERVATIVE” POLITICIANS AND OF THE OVERLY WEALTHY 1%-ERS, BUT IN MY VIEW THAT IS THE PATH TO EVIL RATHER THAN PEACE.

THE SUCCESS OF OUR DEAR SENATOR BERNARD SANDERS AND SEVERAL OTHERS SHOWS THAT THERE ARE THOSE WHO, LIKE ME, CARE ABOUT HOW WE THINK AS A CULTURE AND SEE IT AS AN ESSENTIAL PART OF BEING EVEN A “GOOD” NATION, MUCH LESS A “GREAT” NATION. IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT IS ALSO ESSENTIAL TO SURVIVAL. I'VE NEVER BEEN ONE TO BELIEVE THAT AS LONG AS A RULING MINORITY SURVIVE, THAT IS ALL WE NEED. I AM HORRIFIED BY THE IDEA THAT LIFE ITSELF (ABOVE THE LEVEL OF MICROORGANISMS) COULD BECOME HIGHLY DEGRADED OR SIMPLY DIE OUT DUE TO THE DOMINANCE OF BUSINESS OVER PEOPLE AND LITERALLY LIFE.

IF WE HAVE BEEN CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF “TENDING THE GARDEN OF EDEN,” AND THE BIBLE DOES SAY THAT, WE ARE CERTAINLY FAILING AT THAT AND INDEED SHOWING LITTLE INTEREST IN THE HOLINESS OF LIFE. WE HAVE FAILED TO EDUCATE OUR PEOPLE IN A WAY THAT GIVES THEM THE INFORMATION AND THE EMOTIONAL WILLINGNESS TO BE “A PART OF THE SOLUTION,” RATHER THAN BEING “PART OF THE PROBLEM.” WE NEED TO BE WILLING AND ABLE AS INDIVIDUALS TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT GOAL.

https://madison.com/ct/opinion/column/john_nichols/john-nichols-noam-chomsky-at-still-challenging-manufactured-consent/article_4d3ed02b-7375-5bfb-88a4-bbd760d61db5.html
John Nichols: Noam Chomsky, at 90, still challenging manufactured consent
By John Nichols Dec 11, 2018

photograph -- Noam Chomsky answered a recent question about the approach of the Republican Party of Donald Trump and Paul Ryan to climate change with a question: “Has there ever been an organization in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organized human life on Earth?” His answer: “Not that I’m aware of.” PHOTO BY ASSOCIATED PRESS

Noam Chomsky was aptly described in a New York Times book review published almost four decades ago as “arguably the most important intellectual alive today.” He was 50 then. Now he is 90, and on the occasion of his Dec. 7 birthday, the German international broadcasting service Deutsche Welle observed, again aptly, that Chomsky is “arguably the foremost political dissident of the last half a century.”

Chomsky reminds us that intellect and dissent go together, and that the vital challenge of our times is to maintain “an independent mind.” That’s not easy in an age of manufactured consent, but it is possible, as Chomsky so well reminds us — by continuing to speak, as consistently and as agilely as ever, about the lies of our times.

When I visited him the other day, he was as gracious, witty and blunt as ever. He pulled no punches, decrying the flaws of capitalism and politics, sparing few politicians and no parties. The academic and activist, whose outspoken opposition to American imperialism earned him a place on former President Richard Nixon’s “enemies list,” answered a recent question (from Amy Goodman of "Democracy Now!") about the approach of the Republican Party of Donald Trump and Paul Ryan to climate change with a question: “Has there ever been an organization in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organized human life on Earth?” His answer: “Not that I’m aware of.”

Much will be said about Chomsky’s contributions to our intellectual and political life in the days and weeks to come. And new contributions will be added by the man whose statements continue to stir debates and consciences. I’ll offer just a few more words to the celebration, from an extended conservation we had several years ago about the challenges facing independent thinkers in perilous times.

Chomsky recalled a preface that George Orwell wrote for "Animal Farm," which was not included in the original editions of the book.

“It was discovered about 30 years later in his unpublished papers. Today, if you get a new edition of 'Animal Farm,' you might find it there,” he recalled. “The introduction is kind of interesting — he basically says what you all know: that the book is a critical, satiric analysis of the totalitarian enemy. But then he addresses himself to the people of free England; he says: You shouldn’t feel too self-righteous. He said in England, a free country, I’m virtually quoting: Unpopular ideas can be suppressed without the use of force. And he goes on to give some examples, and, really, just a couple of common-sense explanations, which are to the point. One reason, he says, is: The press is owned by wealthy men who have every reason not to want certain ideas to be expressed. And the other, he says, essentially, is: It’s a ‘good’ education.”

Chomsky explained: “If you have a ‘good’ education, you’ve gone to the best schools, you have internalized the understanding that there’s certain things it just wouldn’t do to say — and I think we can add to that, it wouldn’t do to think. And that’s a powerful mechanism. So, there are things you just don’t think, and you don’t say. That’s the result of effective education, effective indoctrination. If people — many people — don’t succumb to it, what happens to them? Well, I’ll tell you a story: I was in Sweden a couple years ago, and I noticed that taxi drivers were being very friendly, much more than I expected. And finally I asked one of them, ‘Why’s everyone being so nice?’ He pulled out a T-shirt he said every taxi driver has, and the T-shirt had a picture of me and a quote in Swedish of something I’d said once when I was asked, ‘What happens to people of independent mind?’ And I said, ‘They become taxi drivers.’”

Or Noam Chomsky.

John Nichols is associate editor of The Capital Times. jnichols@madison.com and @NicholsUprising.

Associate Editor John Nichols has been with The Capital Times since 1993 and has become one of Wisconsin's best-known progressive voices. He is the author of seven books on politics and the media and he also writes about electoral politics and public policy for The Nation magazine.


CLIMATE CHANGE MEETING IN POLAND

https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/10/whats-happening-poland-right-now-fix-climate-change-why-you-should-be-paying-attention/
Energy and Environment
What to know about the big climate change meeting in Katowice, Poland
Countries are setting the rules for the Paris agreement and struggling over how to do more to stop warming in its tracks.
By Chris Mooney December 11 at 12:48 PM

Delegates from nearly 200 countries have assembled this month in Katowice, Poland — the heart of coal country — to try to move the ball forward on battling climate change.

It’s now the 24th annual meeting, or “COP” — conference of the parties — under the landmark U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, which the United States signed under then-President George H.W. Bush in 1992. More significantly, it’s the third such meeting since nations adopted the Paris climate agreement in 2015, widely seen at the time as a landmark moment in which, at last, developed and developing countries would share a path toward cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

But the surge of optimism that came with Paris has faded lately. The United States, the second largest greenhouse gas emitter, said it would withdraw from the agreement, though it has not formally done so yet. Many other countries are off target when it comes to meeting their initial round of Paris promises — promises that are widely acknowledged to be too weak to begin with. And emissions have begun to rise after a brief hiatus that had lent some hope of progress.

The latest science, meanwhile, is pointing toward increasingly dire outcomes. The amount of global warming that the world already has seen — 1 degree Celsius, 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit — has upended [sic] the Arctic, is killing coral reefs and may have begun to destabilize a massive part of Antarctica. A new report from the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), requested by the countries that assembled in Paris to be timed for this year’s meeting, finds a variety of increasingly severe effects as soon as a rise of 1.5 degrees Celsius arrives — an outcome that can’t be avoided without emissions cuts so steep that they would require societal transformations without any known historical parallel, the panel found.

It’s in this context that countries are meeting in Poland, with expectations and stakes high.

So what’s on the agenda in Poland?

The answer starts with the Paris agreement, which was negotiated three years ago, has been signed by 197 countries and is a mere 27 pages long. It covers a lot, laying out a huge new regime not only for the world as a whole to cut its greenhouse gas emissions, but for each individual country to regularly make new emissions-cutting pledges, strengthen them over time, report emissions to the rest of the world and much more. It also addresses financial obligations that developed countries have to developing countries and how technologies will be transferred to help that.

But those 27 pages leave open to interpretation many fine points for how it will all work. So in Poland, countries are performing a detailed annotation of the Paris agreement, drafting a “rule book” that will span hundreds of pages.

That may sound bureaucratic, but it’s key to addressing many of the flash points. For instance, it will be hard for countries to trust that their fellow nations are cutting emissions without clear standards for reporting and vetting. Not everybody is ready to accept a process like the one followed in the United States, which not only publishes its emissions totals but also has an independent review of the findings.

“A number of the developing countries are resisting that kind of model for themselves. They see it as an intrusion on their sovereignty,” said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists and one of the many participants in Poland this week. “That’s going to be a pretty tough issue at the end of the day.”

It’s hardly the only one. Also unclear is what countries will do after the time frames on their current emissions-cutting promises are up, which for many is 2025 or 2030. Will all countries then start reporting newer and more ambitious promises every five years? Every 10 years?

That really matters when five years of greenhouse gas emissions — currently about 40 billion tons of carbon dioxide annually — are capable of directly affecting the planet’s temperature.

What can we expect each day?

The conference is in its second week, when higher-level players — basically, the equivalent of cabinet-level leaders in the United States — are in Katowice to advance the negotiations.

As this happens, several big events are on the agenda. On Tuesday and Wednesday is the “Talanoa Dialogue,” which will bring together world leaders in a series of group meetings to discuss these key questions: “Where are we? Where do we want to go? How do we get there?”

Friday is the last day of the conference, but pros know these events tend to run long. On Friday — or after — we will be waiting for an overall statement or decision from the meeting which may signal how much has been achieved.

What is the “Talanoa Dialogue”?

“Talanoa” is a word used in Fiji and in many other Pacific islands to refer to “the sharing of ideas, skills and experience through storytelling.” This is the process that organizers settled on to fulfill a plan formed in Paris in 2015.

That year, along with signing the Paris agreement, nations released a decision that in 2018 there should be a “facilitative dialogue" among the countries “to take stock” of where their efforts stood to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This was important because going into that Paris meeting, it was already clear that countries' promises were not strong enough to hold global warming below a rise of 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial temperatures.

This dialogue, in the Talanoa process, was meant to prompt reflection and maybe even soul searching about what more would have to be done. Throughout the year, “inputs” to the Talanoa dialogue — most prominently, the recent report by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on the meaning and consequences of 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming —have been compiled and synthesized. Now, over two days in Poland, countries' ministers will assemble to share stories in small groups about what is working and what is not and to assess where the world as a whole is on achieving the required greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

What remains to be seen is whether this process will culminate in any kind of product or statement that calls clearly for immediate, strong ramping up of climate change promises across the world.

With the clock ticking, will countries do anything to increase their ambition at this meeting?

If negotiating the Paris rule book sounds disappointingly technical, well, you’re not the only one feeling that way. Pressure is mounting for countries to accomplish something more than that in Poland — to at minimum give a strong signal that they understand that the science is looking worse and worse, and the world’s progress isn’t matching that outlook.

“The bigger issue is how we’re going to get to an outcome on greater ambition,” said Lou Leonard, senior vice president for climate and energy at the World Wildlife Fund, who is in Poland observing the talks. “And I think the first week was not kind on moving that part of the agenda forward.”

Most countries are not likely to make new emissions-cutting promises this week. But there are two ways that the meeting could give a strong statement that countries should — or will — come up with new promises at least by 2020. That’s when extremely dramatic emissions cuts would have to start, according to the recent report on 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming.

The first is the aforementioned “Talanoa dialogue” (see above). It’s possible that the outcome of the dialogue could be a statement acknowledging that the world isn’t nearly far enough along and calling for much stronger steps.

There will also be a decision text released for the meeting as a whole, which could potentially send a signal. Leonard said he hopes that would include details for the next steps that will put the world on a better course.

“We have to create milestones, and the politics around it that will pressure countries to do something that quite frankly they don’t want to do,” he said. “It’s not going to be easy. That’s why we need a process that will help make it happen. And make the most of the IPCC report that was designed to come out right now so it could do this for us. That’s why we have it, and it needs to serve that role.”

The United States says it will withdraw from the agreement, so what role is it playing in Poland?

Despite President Trump’s pledge to withdraw, the United States remains in the Paris agreement (for now) and has sent a delegation of 44 people to Poland, largely from the State Department but also from the Environmental Protection Agency, Energy Department and even the White House. Many of these career government officials remain deeply engaged in hashing out details of the agreement.

Still, the country as a whole is being cast in an antagonistic role in the talks.

The United States promoted a session Monday focused on fossil fuels and nuclear energy, the second year in a row that it hosted a meeting on the topic. Last year, protesters disrupted the event in the middle by busting into song. This time, yet again, the session was disrupted by protesters chanting, “Keep it in the ground!”

At the session, the U.S.'s assistant secretary for fossil energy at the Energy Department, Steven Winberg, made a pitch for adapting coal fired power with new technologies such as carbon capture and storage. “Fossil fuel use is not declining, it’s continuing on a steady pace,” he said. “So the question is, do we continue using coal technologies that we developed in the 1970s, or do we move forward with transformational coal technologies that will be near zero emitting?”

But such technologies are not currently in widespread use, and with a very short time window to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it is not clear how they could become prevalent in the short term.

The United States also teamed up with Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait on Saturday in an effort that seemed aimed at minimizing the import of the dire IPCC report on 1.5 degrees Celsius. Debating in a technical working group whose efforts flow into the overall Poland outcome, these countries merely wanted the meeting to “note” the existence of the report, rather than “welcoming” it, as many other nations preferred.

This now sets the stage for a bigger battle as the meeting shifts, in its second phase, from one guided by government negotiators to one in which ministerial leaders arrive and push forward. And it seems likely that the tension over the IPCC report will now be revisited at a higher level.

“The technocrats have tried,” said Yamide Dagnet, a project director at the World Resources Institute who is in Poland for the talks. “The negotiators have tried, using the process. And that was not concluded. But now the ministers have an opportunity to still get us on track to endorse the IPCC report.”

Besides the U.S., which other countries are seen as roadblocks to progress?

Saudi Arabia is also drawing the ire of climate activists after it played a central role – with the support of the U.S., Russia, and Kuwait – in blocking the idea of “welcoming” the IPCC report.

“Saudi Arabia was the most vocal of the proponents in the room but they weren’t the only ones," said Meyer. “The U.S. made a statement, Russia made a short statement. It was primarily Saudi Arabia driving that.”

It’s not hard to see how a document that calls for the world to slash greenhouse gas emissions dramatically and rapidly could be looked on somewhat unfavorably by the world’s largest oil producing countries. And for Saudi Arabia, it doesn’t just sell a lot of oil on world markets -- internally, the country also has fast-rising rates of oil consumption.

But this group would be empowered greatly in the talks if the U.S. continues to take its side.

Is there any outcome that would make this meeting a success?

That’s a matter of interpretation. Clearly, though, with a litany of bad news about climate change arriving just before the meeting, the world will be watching to see how leaders assembled in Poland can respond to it.

The real question is whether the technical process playing out right now — complicated by the dynamics of developed and developing countries and by the existence of several countries, like the United States, that are resisting sharp emissions cuts — is capable of delivering something more than just a rule book.

Chris Mooney
Chris Mooney covers climate change, energy, and the environment. He has reported from the 2015 Paris climate negotiations, the Northwest Passage, and the Greenland ice sheet, among other locations, and has written four books about science, politics and climate change. Follow


I AM SO GLAD TO SEE THAT OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE STANDING UP TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. THAT’S WHAT CHECKS AND BALANCES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE FOR, AFTER ALL.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/12/13/donald-trump-senate-votes-end-u-s-support-yemen-war-jamal-khashoggi/2296155002/
In rebuke to Trump, Senate votes to halt US support for Saudi-led war in Yemen, names crown prince as responsible for Khashoggi death
Deirdre Shesgreen, USA TODAY Published 3:23 p.m. ET Dec. 13, 2018 | Updated 6:49 p.m. ET Dec. 13, 2018


WASHINGTON – In a historic bipartisan rebuke of the president and a marked shift in the long-standing U.S. alliance with Saudi Arabia, the Senate voted Thursday to try to force the Trump administration to end its military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen.

Although the measure will stall in the House for now, the Senate's 56-41 vote carried extraordinary significance – marking the first time the Senate has invoked Congress' war powers to challenge U.S. military involvement abroad. The step was both a condemnation of Saudi Arabia's execution of the Yemen war – which has killed thousands of civilians and created a humanitarian catastrophe – and of the kingdom's role in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

“Today, we tell the despotic regime in Saudi Arabia that we will not be a part of their military adventurism,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who championed U.S. withdrawal from the Yemen conflict along with Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Mike Lee, R-Utah. "The United States Congress ... is sick and tired of abdicating its constitutional responsibility on matters of war," Sanders said.

Senators unanimously approved a separate, nonbinding resolution naming Saudi Arabia's crown prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, as responsible for Khashoggi's death. The Washington Post columnist was killed inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul on Oct. 2 by a team of Saudi operatives, many of whom have been tied to the crown prince.

A leading international aid group said Wednesday that an estimated 85,000 Yemeni children under the age of 5 may have died of hunger and disease since the outbreak of the country's civil war in 2015. (Nov. 21) AP

The resolution, introduced Thursday by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., calls on the Saudi government “to ensure appropriate accountability for all those responsible for Jamal Khashoggi’s murder” and urges the kingdom to “moderate its increasingly erratic foreign policy,” among other steps.

"The United States Senate has said the Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman is responsible for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi," Corker said. "That is a strong statement. ... I think it speaks to the values that we hold dear."

The two Senate votes were a direct challenge to President Donald Trump, who downplayed evidence that Saudi Arabia's crown prince was involved in Khashoggi's murder and said the incident should not damage U.S.-Saudi relations. His administration, through his son and adviser Jared Kushner, has cultivated close ties to the kingdom.

"Today is a watershed moment for Congress," Murphy said. "We are reasserting our responsibility to be a co-equal branch with the executive (branch) in foreign policymaking."

It was also a watershed moment for Sanders, Murphy and Lee – an odd-bedfellows trio who have tried for three years to curb American support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen. Their first effort, on a measure that would have blocked arms sales to the Saudis in 2016, garnered only 27 "yes" votes.

Thursday, seven Republican senators joined all the chamber's Democrats and its two independents in passing the Yemen resolution, which would require the United States to stop providing intelligence, targeting assistance in bombing and other military support to the Saudi government and its allies in the Yemen conflict.

Before the Senate vote, House GOP leaders blocked a similar measure from coming up for a vote in that chamber. Proponents vowed to revive the issue when Democrats take power in January.

“We won’t ignore these issues in the next Congress,” said Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., who will become the new chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee in January. “It’s a betrayal of the men and women who have served this country in uniform.”

Proponents of the Yemen resolution said America’s involvement in the war was unauthorized, unconstitutional and immoral. They argued that Congress has abdicated its responsibility for decades, fearing the responsibility that comes with sending American troops into harm's way.

"There is no decision that is more fraught with moral peril," Lee said at a news conference after the vote. "When we’re putting American treasure and, even more importantly, American blood on the line, it is wrong to entrust that to one person."

Sanders and others said they hoped the Senate’s action would bolster negotiations, led by a United Nations special envoy, to end the horrific conflict. Since hostilities began in 2015, the Yemen war has left thousands of civilians dead and created the world’s worst humanitarian disaster – putting millions on the verge of starvation.

Opponents of the resolution said U.S. support for the Saudi-led coalition did not amount to warfare, and they argued that U.S. involvement was vital to helping Saudi Arabia contain Iran's influence in the Middle East.

The war is a proxy battle between Saudi Arabia and Iran, two regimes vying for expanded influence in the region. The United States stopped refueling Saudi jets, but it still provides munitions and intelligence to the Saudi government.

"There is a threat in the Middle East posed by Iran and their ambitions which must be confronted," Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said during Thursday's Senate debate. Rubio suggested that the U.S.-Saudi alliance would be "shattered" if the United States ended its military role in Yemen, and the war would spiral further out of control.

Though lawmakers focused mostly on Yemen, they were spurred to act by Khashoggi’s murder. Proponents of the war resolution said his brutal killing, and the crown prince's alleged involvement, strengthened their case for withdrawing.

"The murder of Mr. Khashoggi caused us to think long and hard, with good reason, about the fact that we've got somewhat blindly into this war," Lee said in a floor speech Wednesday. "When we pulled back the curtains and we look into exactly who we're fighting for and why we're fighting, people understandably got a little freaked out."

Several lawmakers said Khashoggi's murder was part of a broader pattern of disturbing actions by the Saudi regime, led by the crown prince, who is Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler. They cited the kidnapping of the Lebanese prime minister and the detention of many in the prince's own family, among other incidents.

Several top lawmakers said Thursday's Senate vote marked the beginning, not the end, of the debate over Khashoggi's murder – and by extension, the debate over America's long-standing alliance with Saudi Arabia.

"I’m never going to let this go until things change in Saudi Arabia," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Wednesday. He is part of a bipartisan group of senators pressing for sanctions on any Saudis, including the crown prince, found responsible for Khashoggi's murder, and a suspension in U.S. arms sales to the kingdom.

"Do you really want to transfer your most advanced technology to somebody who thinks it’s OK to lure a journalist to a consulate in Turkey … and chop him up?" Graham said, referring to reports that Khashoggi was tortured and dismembered. "The crown prince is so toxic, so tainted, so flawed that I can’t ever see myself doing business with Saudi Arabia" unless there's a change in leadership.

Trump condemned Khashoggi's death but said the incident should not harm U.S.-Saudi relations. The administration relies heavily on Saudi Arabia in its effort to isolate Iran, and Trump championed U.S. arms sales to the regime as an economic boon.

Murphy and others said Trump's response to the Khashoggi killing has so infuriated lawmakers in both parties that it has spurred a fresh desire to debate and legislate on foreign policy. He said that sentiment will last well into the next Congress.

More: Saudi crown prince ‘complicit’ in Jamal Khashoggi’s murder, GOP senator says after CIA briefing

More: Hope emerges for end to war in Yemen in wake of Jamal Khashoggi’s killing

More: Who is Saudi Arabia’s crown prince? A reformer and ruthless ruler

More: ‘Maybe he did, and maybe he didn’t!’ Trump says US will stand by Saudis despite Khashoggi murder


I MAY BE WRONG, BUT LOGICALLY THE WORD OF A LARGE BUSINESS ON THE SCALE OF AMERICAN MEDIA, INC. ADMITTING TO WORKING “IN CONCERT WITH” DONALD TRUMP TO INFLUENCE THE ELECTION IS ANOTHER PIECE OF EVIDENCE INDEPENDENT FROM THE STORIES OF THE WOMEN THEMSELVES, AND INCREASING ITS’ WEIGHT. BRIBERY IS A PUNISHABLE CRIME AND SO IS TRYING TO INFLUENCE AN ELECTION ILLEGALLY; SO, BY MY WAY OF LOOKING AT THE SITUATION, AT ANY RATE, IT’S A CRIME AGAINST THE USA.

NATIONAL ENQUIRER CAME FORWARD “WITHIN HOURS” OF COHEN’S BEING CONVICTED ON THESE SAME LINES. I THINK THEY DECIDED THAT GOING TO PRISON WASN’T ACCEPTABLE. OF COURSE, I SEE BELOW THAT THE ACTUAL PHRASE WAS “IN CONCERT WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN.” THAT MAY LEGALLY BE DIFFERENT FROM WORKING WITH TRUMP HIMSELF, BUT HE SHOULDN’T GET AWAY WITH ASSERTING THAT HE HIMSELF KNEW NOTHING ABOUT IT, OR IS NOT THE PRIMARY RESPONSIBLE PARTY.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/prosecutors-media-company-admitted-it-paid-off-playboy-model-to-protect-trump-before-election/
By KATHRYN WATSON CBS NEWS December 12, 2018, 3:33 PM
National Enquirer owner admits to paying off Playboy model to protect Trump

Last Updated Dec 12, 2018 3:58 PM EST

The media company that owns the National Enquirer admitted to "working in concert" with the Trump campaign to pay off a woman who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump in order to squash her story, prosecutors in New York said Wednesday.

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York said it had agreed not to prosecute American Media, Inc. (AMI), the Enquirer's parent company, for its involvement in the scheme in exchange for the company's cooperation in the investigation into the payment to Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model.

AMI "admitted that its principal purpose in making the payment was to suppress the woman's story so as to prevent it from influencing the election," the office said.

The announcement came hours after former Trump attorney Michael Cohen was sentenced in Manhattan to three years in federal prison for violating campaign finance laws for his role in paying off McDougal and Stormy Daniels.

Prosecutors did not say when they reached the agreement not to prosecute AMI for the payment to McDougal, which came in the weeks before the 2016 election. The office said in a press release the company "admitted that it made the $150,000 payment ... in order to ensure that the woman did not publicize damaging allegations about the candidate."

"AMI further admitted that its principal purpose in making the payment was to suppress the woman's story so as to prevent it from influencing the election," the news release said.

In exchange for avoiding prosecution, AMI accepted responsibility, agreed to assist in the investigation, and improve its internal compliance related to campaign finance laws, the U.S. Attorney's Office said.

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Kathryn Watson
Kathryn Watson is a politics reporter for CBS News Digital.


I AM SO GLAD TO SEE THAT THESE PEOPLE EMERGED FROM THE MINE SAFELY. THE FOLLOWING USA TODAY STORY QUOTES THE SHERIFF AS SAYING THAT THE MISHAP IS THOUGHT TO HAVE BEGUN AS AN ATTEMPT TO LOCATE AND STEAL COPPER WIRES LEFT IN THE MINE. WHAT PEOPLE WILL DO FOR A LITTLE MONEY IS FRIGHTENING. MAYBE IT FRIGHTENED THEM ENOUGH FOR THEM TO START LOOKING AT HONEST MEANS OF MAKING A LIVING. OF COURSE, THIS USA TODAY STORY SAYS THAT THE COPPER WAS THE THEORY THAT THE POLICE ARE PURSUING. HOPEFULLY THERE WILL BE A FULLER STORY TOMORROW.

SEE ALSO: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/12/13/west-virginia-mine-rescue-3-found-days-after-missing-go-hospital/2298418002/.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/search-intensifies-for-3-missing-inside-abandoned-west-virginia-coal-mine/
By TONY DOKOUPIL CBS NEWS December 11, 2018, 6:37 PM
Search intensifies for 3 missing inside abandoned West Virginia coal mine

CBS VIDEO – COAL MINE RESCUE

Three people are missing deep inside an abandoned coal mine about 52 miles southeast of Charleston, West Virginia. A fourth person, 43-year-old Eddie Williams, emerged on Monday.

Williams, said to be in good condition, is now helping authorities locate the others. Conditions for 21-year-old Cody Beverly, 25-year-old Kayla Williams and 31-year-old Erica Treadway are unknown.

Rescue workers have been pumping out water and fresh air into the coal mine, which has been inactive for two years. Authorities don't know how they ended up there, but they are hoping to rescue them to get an answer.

"I just didn't know what to think I couldn't believe she went in there. It's just mind boggling, you know. I just know how dangerous it is," said Tyler Treadway, Erica Treadway's brother.

Rescue workers have been working round the clock in teams of four. But the search has hampered by rough terrain, heavy snow and water blocking one of the mine's entrances.

Gov. Jim Justice traveled to meet with the families of the missing.

"Usually these things end up not very good, so we've still got some heavy lifting to get to some good outcome here, but we've got some good signs too," he said. "Let's just cling to that and hope and pray it works out."

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.


HOMELESSNESS IS A CHRONIC PROBLEM, AND THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE FIGURE FOR PEOPLE LIVING ROUGH IS ZERO. RISING RENTS ARE BLAMED HERE. WE OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST LEANING GROUP OFTEN SEE THE PROBLEM AS BEING ONLY ONE HALF ABOUT INCOME, WITH THE OTHER ISSUE BEING ABOUT PRICE CONTROLS. BUSINESSES JUST DON’T WANT TO SUBMIT TO THAT. THEY DON’T EVEN WANT TO SPEND MONEY ON KEEPING THE PROPERTIES IN DECENT LIVING CONDITIONS, AS THEY ARE MORALLY BOUND TO DO. RATS AND MOLD FREQUENTLY POP UP IN STORIES LIKE THIS.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/homelessness-on-the-rise-in-some-u-s-cities/
By MEGAN CERULLO MONEYWATCH December 11, 2018, 3:26 PM
Homelessness on the rise in some U.S. cities

Homelessness has declined across most of the U.S. over the last decade as the economy has crawled back from the housing crash. In some cities, however, the problem is getting worse, with researchers pointing to a one culprit in particular: rising rents.

A new analysis from Zillow found that the incidence of homelessness is growing faster in the least affordable rental housing markets, including Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco and Washington, D.C.

"It's undoubtedly good news that the overall level of homelessness has fallen nationwide, even as housing costs have increased. But that zoomed-out view obscures some very real, local tensions between housing affordability and homelessness, and ignores the reality that success in tackling homelessness in one community doesn't necessarily have the same effect in another," said Skylar Olsen, director of economic research and outreach at Zillow, a provider of real estate data, in a statement.

In cities with high housing costs, even a modest rent increase can significantly drive up homelessness, found Zillow*, which did the study in collaboration with researchers at the University of New Hampshire, Boston University School of Social Work and University of Pennsylvania.

In Los Angeles, where the rent burden — the share of income people spent on rent — is 49 percent, a 2 percentage point increase in that metric could result in an additional 4,000 people finding themselves on the street, according to the report.

"We particularly noticed it around 2014 when we were housing more people than ever... yet our streets looked terrible," said Molly Rysman, Housing and Homelessness Deputy, Los Angeles County District 3, referring to widely circulated pictures of people sleeping on the city's sidewalks.

Notably, the rate of homelessness jumps sharply when the rent burden exceeds 32 percent, such as in cities like Portland, Oregon, and Seattle, Washington. The rent burden already exceeds that threshold in 100 real estate markets across the country, according to the analysis.

How much should renters spend?
Homelessness in the U.S. has dropped about 13 percent since 2010, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Nationwide, some 661,000 people were homeless for some period of time last year, the researchers found.

Nationwide, a renter earning the median U.S. income — roughly $61,000 per household in 2017 — looking to rent a median-priced apartment should expect to spend 28 percent of their income on rent, according to the study.

"Before 30 percent, savings are possible, until you go past 32 percent the strength of relationship between rent burden and homelessness gets much stronger," Olsen said.

That's the pattern in cities like Los Angeles and New York, she said, while cautioning that the problem of homelessness in such cities is complex and that the remedies are unclear.

Many Americans find they have to spend above levels that would allow them to save — rent burdens are as high as 62.9 percent for median market homes in Monroe County, Florida.

The data provide an opportunity to tackle homelessness before it becomes a crisis, the researchers wrote. "These affordability thresholds — along with local poverty rates and the level of rent itself — act as signals for understanding how so many parts of the country can face a homeless crisis, even as the number of people in homelessness nationwide is falling."

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.


THIS IS ONE OF THOSE STORIES THAT I LOVE TO FIND. THE IDEA THAT THE SOIL COVERS MAGICAL GLIMPSES OF OUR PAST, HISTORICAL OR UNKNOWN, THRILLS ME.

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/discovery-of-lost-city-in-albania-thrills-archaeologists-06-18-2018
NEWS 18 JUN 18
Discovery of ‘Lost City’ in Albania Thrills Archaeologists
Archaeologists from Albania and Poland say a ‘huge’ city uncovered beneath a grassy hill near Shkodra could be the city of Bassania that the Roman historian Livy once described.
Anila Dushi BIRN Shkoder

PHOTOGRAPH -- Digging on the site near modern day Bushat village. Photo Courtesy: Kole Shaben

Local inhabitants thought it was just a small, grassy hill.

However, a joint team of Polish and Albanian archaeologists now think they may have discovered the lost city of Bassania, which the Roman writer Livy described as the site of a battle between the Romans and the last king of Illyria.

A clue to the importance of the discovery is that the team uncovered what looks like a surprisingly large town with defensive walls around three meters thick and built in a Hellenistic style.

These thick walls also surrounded a town covering about 20 hectares of land, implying a very large settlement.

According to Professor Piotr Dyczek, of the University of Warsaw, the discovered town or city is “huge”, as he told Science Poland.

Saimir Shpuza, an Albanian archaeologist and an Associated Professor, told Gazeta Shqiptare that the mission had been working in the area since 2016, aiming to map all the archaeological sites near the northern city of Shkodra.

He said the site looked uninteresting at first glance. Now, he added, the discovery was evidently large, and also very promising.

This is because abandoned underground cities often reveal much better preserved structures than those above ground, which have been rebuilt continuously over the centuries.

“The abandonment of the town during the Roman era gives us hope that it is very well preserved,” Shpuza said.

Along with its thick, fortified walls, the archaeologists have also uncovered ceramics and iron objects that could help to exactly date the settlement.

"It is too early to state for sure, but the town seems to have flourished from about the 4th to the 2nd century BC, and been abandoned gradually after the fall of the Illyrian kingdom,” Shpuza said.

Kole Shabeni, a local who accompanied the archaeologists during the dig, says local people knew the place only as the 'Stone Serpent', due to a serpent-shaped path that meandered up the hill.

None of them imagined that an ancient town or city lay hidden under the ground.

Some digs had been carried at the site back in the 1980s, when ancient tombs were discovered, but the search went no further.

Archeologists think the lost city may be the same one that classical sources referred to as Bassania, Bexena, or Pexena.

Bassania appears in Livy’s History of Rome during the chapters on the Roman-Illyrian wars.

According to Livy, the Illyrian King Gentius assembled an army of 15,000 men at Lyssus and marched on Bassania, which was “five miles from Lyssus” and was in alliance with the Romans.

The Roman General Appius Claudius then marched into Illyria “where his principal object was raising the siege of Bassania”, Livy said.

The Illyrian Wars ended in 168 BC with the victory of the Romans. It is believed that Bassania was later destroyed by a Roman army under Octavian Augustus in the 1st Century AD.

Working on Livy’s description, Albanian archaeologists hunting for Bassania originally searched for the lost town within a small radius of Lezha, the modern Albanian name for Lyssus.

The current discovery is somewhat further way, about 30 kilometres north of Lezha.

L.E.K.A, an Albanian magazine that was published back in the 1930s, recalled a local legend of a princess named Peksene, or Pexena, who build a canal to connect the town with the Buna river, now about 10 km away.

Whether or not the lost city is indeed the city of Bassania, the nearby Vau Dejes municipality has said it will put guards at the place to discourage illegal digging, and as well as making use of the discovery in future for tourism.


FOR THE UNIVERSITY MOVEMENT, A LEFTIST STUDENT MOVEMENT IS DEMONSTRATING TO STOP THE COLLEGE TUITION RATES FROM BEING RAISED. ALSO INVOLVED IS A BELIEF THAT THE SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT FAVORS THE WEALTHY. IF IT’S LIKE THE USA, THE WEALTHY CAN BUY INFLUENCE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO.

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/albanian-protests-channel-wider-anger-with-rama-govt-12-10-2018
11 DEC 18 FEATURE Albanian Protests Channel Wider Anger With Rama Govt

Behind the protests in Albania over rises in tuition fees, a deeper disappointment with a Socialist government that many say favours the rich seems to be emerging.

Gjergj Erebara BIRN Tirana

Albania’s Prime Minister, Edi Rama, repeatedly called for “dialogue” with rebellious students protesting against tuition fees on Sunday and Monday but was rebuffed – as the number of those present at the gates of the Ministry of Education in Tirana began to fall.

Albania had a long weekend this week in honour of 8 December, the day when student protesters in 1991 began to topple the country’s now hated communist regime.

However, Rama was not on holiday but at his office on Sunday and Monday, vainly calling for dialogue.

Photograph -- Students protesting in Tirana in this photo of 9 December 2018. The placard reads: We pay high prices to end up working as waiters.

“This is a golden moment to build a government in collaboration with the students,” Rama said in a video-message on Facebook on Sunday.

“The government cannot let this encouraging moment for change slip,” he added.

The For the University Movement, a leftwing student group, refused the invitation, however. “You are part of the problem, not the solution,” they said.

Rama also left open the possibility of compromise, saying he was ready to discuss higher tax transfers from state budget – and lower tuition fees. “Our joint aims cannot be reached through ultimatums,” he declared, hopefully.

The For the University Movement has been protesting against Rama’s reforms to higher education for the last five years, claiming that a new law, approved in 2014, erodes university autonomy.

Students protesting in Tirana on 8 December 2018. The placards reads: "The Education that We Do not Want" and "We do want books not Google-translated". Photo: Ivana Dervishi/BIRN

It has denounced moves to increase fees as a way to make universities more economically sustainable.

However, the University Movement appears to be losing control over the protests.

On Monday, a smaller crowd appeared at the gates of the Ministry of Education, while media close to the opposition centre-right Democratic Party attacked the Movement, calling them communists.

The latest protests started last Tuesday, when students at the Faculty of Architecture in Tirana received a notice to pay their annual fees in advance before 15 December because the faculty had incurred high expenses while trying to renovate the premises.

Angered by the notice, the students boycotted lessons and marched toward the Ministry of Education.

A student protesting in Tirana on 9 December 2018. The placard reads: "We end up incompetent medics". Photo: Ivana Dervishi/BIRN

Students from other departments soon joined in and, two days later, students from universities across the country burst onto the streets.

In several other universities, in Korca, Shkodra and Gjirokastra, fees are not a particular concern and life is less expensive for students. However, they still joined the protests out of solidarity.

The rallies seemed also to attract the sympathy of some college professors and a wide section of the population.

When marching students temporarily blocked Tirana’s main boulevard on Saturday, TV footage showed that not all the drivers were annoyed. Some drivers even got out of their cars and hailed the protesters.

Tuition fees are not particularly high in Albania and the student protest appears to be channeling a wider anger against Prime Minister Rama, now in his fifth year in post.

Protest. Photo: BIRN

But some of the students with whom BIRN spoke during the protest told stories of poverty and real struggle.

Edison Lika, 20, a student of Political Sciences in Tirana, said he had paid for his tuition fees by working during the summer as a welder in Kacanik, in Kosovo, where the US-based contractor Bechtel is building a highway from the Kosovo capital, Pristina, to the Macedonian border.

“We had to work up to 6pm in the evening and I had one day off in two weeks,” Lika told BIRN on the sidelines of a student protest held in Tirana city centre.

“During the weekends I work as salesman in a shop,” he added.

Edison used the money he earned in Kosovo to cover his tuition fee of 40,000 leks [320 euros] a year and other expenditures related to his education.

Next year, when he expects to start his master degree studies, his fee will rise to 80,000 leks.

His family is in no position to help him. His father lost his job as miner in the chromium industry back in 1997, one year before Edison was born.

His father’s pension of 120 euros a month, paid by the government to jobless miners, is the only income that the family currently receives.

One of his friends also protesting on the streets said he had paid for his tuition fee by working during the summer months in tourism.

“I can earn as much as 80,000 leks in a two-month season, but life here in Tirana is expensive,” he noted.

He refused to be quoted by name because his father, the breadwinner of the family, works in the public administration and might face repercussions if his son was seen protesting against the government.

“I have worked as waiter since I was 13,” he said with a degree of pride.

Liri Kuci, a leftwing activist, blamed Rama’s own economic management for the difficulties, criticizing also the latest wave of the so-called “concessionary agreements”, a much-debated government program that has awarded several billion euros in contracts to a few companies in exchange for public works that some doubt will bring any benefits.

“They have become rich at the expense of our parents who survive on salaries of 20,000 leks a month,” she said last Friday to an exalted [sic] crowd of protesters.

“They want to rob us with concessions, tariffs, taxes and are inventing all kinds of stuff, to steal more,” she added.

Read more:
Albania Students to Rally Against Education Bill
Albanian Students Protest Over Education Law
Albanian Students Rally Against University Reforms


THE FOX NEWS ECHO EFFECT
PREPARE YOUR MIND BY WATCHING THIS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOA_YdZoTcw.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2018/12/13/trump-echoes-fox-news-talking-point-fox-news/?noredirect=on
Opinions
Trump echoes Fox News talking point on Fox News
By Erik Wemple
Media critic
December 13 at 4:32 PM

President Trump needed to mount a forceful response to a federal court filing from last week alleging that his longtime lawyer, Michael Cohen, violated campaign finance laws at his direction. So he sat down with Fox News.

In an interview with host Harris Faulkner that aired on Thursday afternoon, Trump held himself blameless. “Nobody except for me would be looked at like this. Nobody,” he told Faulkner. His complaint was that the hush payments that Cohen had arranged for two women, with the involvement of the National Enquirer, didn’t violate campaign finance laws, and he cited a piece by the Heritage Foundation’s Hans A. von Spakovsky, as well as an opinion piece in the National Review headlined “Michael Cohen Pled Guilty to Something That Is Not a Crime.”

“What about Congress, where they have a slush fund? And millions and millions of dollars is paid out each year. They have a slush fund. Millions -- they don’t talk about campaign finance anything. Have you ever heard of campaign finance laws? Have they listed that on their campaign finance sheets? No,” said Trump.

Here, the president was referring to a congressional kitty used to pay out settlements, including those stemming from sexual harassment complaints. That’s a nifty little argument. Wonder where a guy like Trump came up with it?

One possibility is Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who on Monday night laid out essentially the same argument that Trump articulated on Fox News on Thursday afternoon:

Now, by this reasoning, any money a political candidate spends to maintain or protect his image while running for office now qualifies as a regulated campaign donation, and has to be disclosed. That would include, by the way, in addition to an infinite number of other things, buying toothpaste and getting a haircut.

It would definitely include the taxpayer-financed slush fund that Congress has set aside to pay off its own sexual harassment claims. Yes, those now qualify as campaign contributions. They must be publicly disclosed, except, of course, they’re not publicly disclosed, and they never will be. Why is that?

Bolding added to highlight Fox News-Trump echo effect.

It is possible, of course, that Trump dug up this talking point somewhere else. In his Wednesday piece on the matter, for example, von Spakovsky wrote that Capitol Hill lawmakers might be in trouble under the legal premise of the Cohen campaign-finance proceedings. “Last year, it was reported that Congress has secretly paid out over $17 million to settle close to 300 cases by staffers claiming sexual and other forms of harassment and discrimination.”

Then again, Trump could have sourced the argument from his lawyers. Whatever the provenance, Fox News viewers get a one-two punch of polemical reinforcement: They hear it from a leading network host and also from the president himself. He’s gotta be the victim of a double standard.

Read more:

Erik Wemple: Trump is a crime victim
Bradley Smith: Those payments to women were unseemly. That doesn’t mean they were illegal.
Erik Wemple: Surprise: Fox News colluded with Trump’s then-EPA boss
Paul Waldman: Welcome to the Fox News presidency
Erik Wemple: Fox News’s Sean Hannity: Proud to be a Trump operative

Erik Wemple
Erik Wemple, The Washington Post's media critic, focuses on the cable-news industry. Before joining The Post, he ran a short-lived and much publicized local online news operation, and for eight years served as editor of Washington City Paper. Follow


MADDOW NEWS

THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 12/12/18
Davis: W.H. alerted to false Cohen testimony; did not forbid it
Lanny Davis, adviser and former attorney for Michael Cohen, tells Rachel Maddow that the White House was aware of the false nature of Cohen's testimony ahead of time but did not discourage him from delivering it. Duration: 6:18


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 12/12/18
Case against Trump progeny clearer after Cohen, AMI deals
Rachel Maddow shows the legal exposure of Don Jr, Eric, and Ivanka Trump as the only Trump Organization executives with check-writing authority who aren't protected by an immunity deal as federal prosecutors appear to be focusing on the trail of the hush money Donald Trump paid to allegedly keep infidelity accusations from hurting his campaign. Duration: 7:34


HELP THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 12/12/18
Cohen beseeches court for mercy, receives 3-year prison sentence
Rachel Maddow reads from the transcript of former Donald Trump attorney Michael Cohen's sentencing hearing in which Cohen offers effusive apologies, the judge hands down a prison sentence, and prosecutors move the Trump-Russia case on to a significant next step. Duration: 24:33


http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/episodes
THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 12/12/18
Flynn wasn't the only one who lied about sanctions discussions
As Mike Flynn's sentencing approaches, Rachel Maddow looks at the other members of the Trump administration who lied about discussion Russian sanctions, or who lied about knowing about the lies, and wonders about the biggest remaining unanswered question: Why did Flynn lie? Duration: 21:08


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 12/11/18
Flynn asks for no jail time, cites FBI not warning him not to lie
Rachel Maddow takes a first, very fresh look at Mike Flynn's defense sentencing memorandum in which he asks for no jail time and makes the novel argument that the FBI did not properly caution him against lying to them. Duration: 16:33


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 12/12/18
New details about FBI interview revealed in Flynn sentencing memo
Joyce Vance, former U.S. attorney, helps Rachel Maddow understand Mike Flynn's defense sentencing memo in which his lawyers not only ask for no jail time but cast blame on the FBI for Flynn's lies. Duration: 6:26


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 12/11/18
A question still outstanding: Why did Mike Flynn lie?
Shane Harris, national security reporter for the Washington Post, talks with Rachel Maddow about questions that still linger about the Mike Flynn case (from the public perspective), including the role of his deputy, K.T. McFarland, and the question at the root of it all, why did Flynn lie? Duration: 6:02


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 12/10/18
Comey slams Americans helping Russia attack U.S. as aiding enemy
Rachel Maddow shares excerpts from the transcript of former FBI Director James Comey's testimony before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees in which he emphasizes the gravity of the possibility that Americans helped Russia attack the U.S. democratic process. Duration: 2:50