Thursday, October 01, 2020
Mary Trump: Donald Trump’s Debate Attack on Biden Children Was ‘Horrifying’ | The Last Word | MSNBC
ADL CEO: Proud Boys Don't Belong in the Political Conversation | The 11th Hour | MSNBC
Opinion: Trump Calls on Extremists to ‘Stand By’
President Trump didn’t hurt Joe Biden in Tuesday’s debate, but he badly damaged our country.
Trump harmed the United States in three ways, reminding us that the biggest threat to America comes not from desperate migrants, not from “socialists” seeking universal health care and not from “anarchists” in the streets — but from the White House itself.
The first way in which Trump damaged the country was in his salute to violent extremists.
“Are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists?” Chris Wallace, the Fox News anchor who moderated the debate, asked Trump. Trump initially dodged the question but finally asked petulantly, “Who do you want me to condemn?”
Biden suggested the Proud Boys, a militant group that is fervently pro-Trump.
“Proud Boys, stand back and stand by,” Trump declared.
Stand by?
The Proud Boys, founded in 2016, are part of what the Southern Poverty Law Center calls “a fascistic right-wing political bloc.” The Anti-Defamation League compares it to a gang. The Proud Boys’ founder once said, “I cannot recommend violence enough,” and its members have brandished guns, committed criminal assaults and engaged in rioting. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram have banned Proud Boys. » | Nicholas Kristof. Opinion Columnist | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
The Trump-Biden Debate Revealed the Dangers of Britain's 'Special Relationship'
THE GUARDIAN: If the US no longer stands as an inspirational model for the world, where does that leave those who defer to it?
Ever since the pioneeringKennedy-Nixon encounter in 1960, the questions that political journalists pose after US presidential debates have been the same. Who performed best? Who had the better of this or that part of the argument? Who exceeded expectations or fell short? Who had the best lines and delivered the best zinger? And has any of it changed the election odds?
They are still being asked after the first televised match-up between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. With five weeks to go before the US votes, the questions still matter. But after Tuesday’s verbal roughhouse they also feel crowded out by other uncertainties that seem more epochal, more dystopian and more pressing, not least when seen from this side of the Atlantic.
It can seem overblown, but it now makes sense to ask if America is on the edge of becoming ungovernable, or if the rule of impartial law enforcement still commands respect. It is also possible, in ways that were not true in the past, to consider whether the US can be relied on internationally, and whether it is realistic to continue to regard it as an ally. But if it is not an ally, what follows from that? The answers are increasingly uncomfortable.
Perhaps most potently, it has to be asked whether America, with all its fabulous energy, wealth, liberty and ambition, still offers the inspirational model to the world that it did to so many, for so long. Or instead is today’s America, defined increasingly by its inequalities, violence, fundamentalism and racism, becoming a model to be rejected, to be guarded against and even, in some cases, to be resisted? » | Martin Kettle | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Ever since the pioneeringKennedy-Nixon encounter in 1960, the questions that political journalists pose after US presidential debates have been the same. Who performed best? Who had the better of this or that part of the argument? Who exceeded expectations or fell short? Who had the best lines and delivered the best zinger? And has any of it changed the election odds?
They are still being asked after the first televised match-up between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. With five weeks to go before the US votes, the questions still matter. But after Tuesday’s verbal roughhouse they also feel crowded out by other uncertainties that seem more epochal, more dystopian and more pressing, not least when seen from this side of the Atlantic.
It can seem overblown, but it now makes sense to ask if America is on the edge of becoming ungovernable, or if the rule of impartial law enforcement still commands respect. It is also possible, in ways that were not true in the past, to consider whether the US can be relied on internationally, and whether it is realistic to continue to regard it as an ally. But if it is not an ally, what follows from that? The answers are increasingly uncomfortable.
Perhaps most potently, it has to be asked whether America, with all its fabulous energy, wealth, liberty and ambition, still offers the inspirational model to the world that it did to so many, for so long. Or instead is today’s America, defined increasingly by its inequalities, violence, fundamentalism and racism, becoming a model to be rejected, to be guarded against and even, in some cases, to be resisted? » | Martin Kettle | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Germans Embrace Fresh Air to Ward Off Coronavirus
THE GUARDIAN: Angela Merkel says ventilation may be one of cheapest and most effective ways of containing virus
Ventilating rooms has been added to the German government’s formula for tackling coronavirus, in refreshing news for the country’s air hygiene experts who have been calling for it to become official for months.
The custom is something of a national obsession, with many Germans habitually opening windows twice a day, even in winter. Often the requirement is included as a legally binding clause in rental agreements, mainly to protect against mould and bad smells.
But while some people may dismiss the method as primitive, “it may be one of the cheapest and most effective ways” of containing the spread of the virus, Angela Merkel insisted on Tuesday.
The German chancellor explained that the government’s guidelines to tackle the virus, encapsulated in the acronym AHA, which stands for distancing, hygiene and face coverings, will be extended to become AHACL. The “C” stands for the government’s coronavirus warning app, and “L” for Lüften or airing a room.
“Regular impact ventilation in all private and public rooms can considerably reduce the danger of infection,” the government’s recommendation explains. » | Kate Connolly in Berlin | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Ventilating rooms has been added to the German government’s formula for tackling coronavirus, in refreshing news for the country’s air hygiene experts who have been calling for it to become official for months.
The custom is something of a national obsession, with many Germans habitually opening windows twice a day, even in winter. Often the requirement is included as a legally binding clause in rental agreements, mainly to protect against mould and bad smells.
But while some people may dismiss the method as primitive, “it may be one of the cheapest and most effective ways” of containing the spread of the virus, Angela Merkel insisted on Tuesday.
The German chancellor explained that the government’s guidelines to tackle the virus, encapsulated in the acronym AHA, which stands for distancing, hygiene and face coverings, will be extended to become AHACL. The “C” stands for the government’s coronavirus warning app, and “L” for Lüften or airing a room.
“Regular impact ventilation in all private and public rooms can considerably reduce the danger of infection,” the government’s recommendation explains. » | Kate Connolly in Berlin | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Religious Group Scrubs All References to Amy Coney Barrett from Its Website
A tiny religious organization tied to Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump’s supreme court nominee, sought to erase all mentions and photos of her from its website before she meets with lawmakers and faces questions at her Senate confirmation hearings.
Barrett, a federal appeals judge, has declined to publicly discuss her decades-long affiliation with People of Praise, a Christian group that opposes abortion and holds that men are divinely ordained as the “head” of the family and faith.
Former members have said the group’s leaders teach that wives must submit to the will of their husbands.
A spokesman for the organization has declined to say whether the judge and her husband, Jesse Barrett, are members.
But an analysis by the Associated Press shows that People of Praise erased numerous records from its website during the summer of 2017 that referred to Barrett and included photos of her and her family. » | Associated Press | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Coronavirus: Reviving Italy's Wine Windows
The Guardian View on the US Presidential Debate: A Bad Night for the World
THE GUARDIAN: The dismal spectacle reminded viewers what is at stake in November for the US – and the rest of us
One unmistakable winner emerged from Tuesday’s presidential debate: Xi Jinping. The loser was the American public – and anyone else unfortunate enough to have sat through the grim 90-minute spectacle.
Variously described by commentators as a trainwreck, dumpster fire, shitshow and the worst debate in presidential history, it reflected the state of the race and the nation after four years of Donald Trump. This is America in 2020: wracked by a pandemic that has killed 200,000 people and highlighted its deep structural failings on healthcare and inequality, as well as the parlous state of its politics – a realm of bitter divisions in which facts appear to be optional.
Mr Trump lied, he blustered, he harangued and, above all, he interrupted. Most frighteningly, when invited to condemn white supremacists, he instead told the far-right Proud Boys to “stand back – and stand by”. He did this both by instinct and because Joe Biden remains ahead in the polls, with a lead that may well have been cemented by their performances. His base may have seen him as dominant, but to non-believers he was merely domineering. » | Editorial | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
One unmistakable winner emerged from Tuesday’s presidential debate: Xi Jinping. The loser was the American public – and anyone else unfortunate enough to have sat through the grim 90-minute spectacle.
Variously described by commentators as a trainwreck, dumpster fire, shitshow and the worst debate in presidential history, it reflected the state of the race and the nation after four years of Donald Trump. This is America in 2020: wracked by a pandemic that has killed 200,000 people and highlighted its deep structural failings on healthcare and inequality, as well as the parlous state of its politics – a realm of bitter divisions in which facts appear to be optional.
Mr Trump lied, he blustered, he harangued and, above all, he interrupted. Most frighteningly, when invited to condemn white supremacists, he instead told the far-right Proud Boys to “stand back – and stand by”. He did this both by instinct and because Joe Biden remains ahead in the polls, with a lead that may well have been cemented by their performances. His base may have seen him as dominant, but to non-believers he was merely domineering. » | Editorial | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Half of Conservative Party Members Believe Islam Is Threat, Poll Finds
THE GUARDIAN: Survey finds six in 10 card-carrying Tories have negative attitude towards Muslims
Almost half of Conservative party members believe Islam “a threat to the British way of life,” according to a poll which has reignited concerns over Islamophobia within Britain’s ruling party.
It found that more than one-third of card-carrying Tories believed that Islamist terror attacks reflected a widespread hostility to Britain among the Muslim community, and nearly six in 10 thought “there are no-go areas in Britain where sharia law dominates and non-Muslims cannot enter.”
Attitudes hardened among those who had backed Boris Johnson in the 2019 leadership election, 44% of whom believed that Islamist terror reflected widespread hostility of British Muslims, and two-thirds of whom believed there were “no-go areas”.
Conservative members were far more likely to have negative attitudes towards Muslims than members of the public in general, 30% of whom said they thought Islam was a threat, according to the poll, which was commissioned by the antiracism organization Hope Not Hate. » | Damien Gayle | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Almost half of Conservative party members believe Islam “a threat to the British way of life,” according to a poll which has reignited concerns over Islamophobia within Britain’s ruling party.
It found that more than one-third of card-carrying Tories believed that Islamist terror attacks reflected a widespread hostility to Britain among the Muslim community, and nearly six in 10 thought “there are no-go areas in Britain where sharia law dominates and non-Muslims cannot enter.”
Attitudes hardened among those who had backed Boris Johnson in the 2019 leadership election, 44% of whom believed that Islamist terror reflected widespread hostility of British Muslims, and two-thirds of whom believed there were “no-go areas”.
Conservative members were far more likely to have negative attitudes towards Muslims than members of the public in general, 30% of whom said they thought Islam was a threat, according to the poll, which was commissioned by the antiracism organization Hope Not Hate. » | Damien Gayle | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Trump gegen Biden - wenn sich zwei alte Männer beschimpfen
BERLINER ZEITUNG: Das Fernsehduell wirft die bange Frage auf, wie es in den USA nach der Wahl am 3. November weitergeht. Der erste Bürgerkrieg der USA ist 155 Jahre her. Ein zweiter ist nicht mehr ausgeschlossen, kommentiert Holger Schmale.
Berlin – Zwei alte weiße Männer stehen in einem Fernsehstudio und beschimpfen einander anderthalb Stunden lang pausenlos. Das soll ein Höhepunkt eines Wahlkampfes sein, in dem es um die Zukunft einer der ältesten Demokratien, des wirtschaftlich und militärisch mächtigsten Landes der Welt mit 330 Millionen Bürgerinnen und Bürgern geht? Tatsächlich ist es ein neuer Tiefpunkt dessen, was man einmal politische Kultur genannt hat. Nicht Trump, nicht Biden ist der Verlierer dieses Spektakels. Es sind die Amerikaner.
Es ist aber noch mehr. Es kann einem wirklich angst und bange werden, was aus diesem Land nach der Wahl am 3. November werden wird. Man kann aus dem brachialen Auftreten Donald Trumps nur den Schluss ziehen, dass er die Wahl bereits verloren gegeben hat. Dafür sprechen alle Umfragen. Er hätte die Fernsehdebatte als Chance nutzen können, noch unentschlossene Wähler der Mitte mit Argumenten für sich zu gewinnen. Das wäre nötig gewesen, um die Umfragen zu beeinflussen. Er hat darauf verzichtet und allein seine hundertprozentigen Anhänger bedient. » | Holger Schmale | Mittwoch, 30. September 2020
Berlin – Zwei alte weiße Männer stehen in einem Fernsehstudio und beschimpfen einander anderthalb Stunden lang pausenlos. Das soll ein Höhepunkt eines Wahlkampfes sein, in dem es um die Zukunft einer der ältesten Demokratien, des wirtschaftlich und militärisch mächtigsten Landes der Welt mit 330 Millionen Bürgerinnen und Bürgern geht? Tatsächlich ist es ein neuer Tiefpunkt dessen, was man einmal politische Kultur genannt hat. Nicht Trump, nicht Biden ist der Verlierer dieses Spektakels. Es sind die Amerikaner.
Es ist aber noch mehr. Es kann einem wirklich angst und bange werden, was aus diesem Land nach der Wahl am 3. November werden wird. Man kann aus dem brachialen Auftreten Donald Trumps nur den Schluss ziehen, dass er die Wahl bereits verloren gegeben hat. Dafür sprechen alle Umfragen. Er hätte die Fernsehdebatte als Chance nutzen können, noch unentschlossene Wähler der Mitte mit Argumenten für sich zu gewinnen. Das wäre nötig gewesen, um die Umfragen zu beeinflussen. Er hat darauf verzichtet und allein seine hundertprozentigen Anhänger bedient. » | Holger Schmale | Mittwoch, 30. September 2020
Face-à-face Trump-Biden : un débat inquiétant pour la démocratie américaine
LE MONDE : Editorial. De l’affrontement brouillon entre Donald Trump et Joe Biden, mardi soir, on retiendra surtout la menace que le président persiste à laisser planer sur la validité du scrutin du 3 novembre. Un danger pour la démocratie.
Editorial du « Monde ». A cinq semaines de l’élection présidentielle américaine, le premier débat télévisé opposant le président républicain Donald Trump et l’ex-vice-président démocrate Joe Biden a confirmé, mardi 29 septembre, toutes les inquiétudes apparues depuis quatre ans sur la démocratie aux Etats-Unis.
Les moments les plus marquants de cet affrontement chaotique et brutal des deux candidats septuagénaires n’auront pas été les exclamations exaspérées de Joe Biden à l’égard d’un président qui ne cessait de l’interrompre et qu’il a traité de « clown », ni les attaques personnelles de ce dernier sur les affaires faites à l’étranger par l’un des fils de son adversaire. Ce que l’on retiendra surtout de ce débat, c’est l’avertissement lancé à la fin par Donald Trump sur le scrutin du 3 novembre : « Cela ne va pas bien se terminer. » » | ÉDITORIAL | mercredi 30 septembre 2020
Editorial du « Monde ». A cinq semaines de l’élection présidentielle américaine, le premier débat télévisé opposant le président républicain Donald Trump et l’ex-vice-président démocrate Joe Biden a confirmé, mardi 29 septembre, toutes les inquiétudes apparues depuis quatre ans sur la démocratie aux Etats-Unis.
Les moments les plus marquants de cet affrontement chaotique et brutal des deux candidats septuagénaires n’auront pas été les exclamations exaspérées de Joe Biden à l’égard d’un président qui ne cessait de l’interrompre et qu’il a traité de « clown », ni les attaques personnelles de ce dernier sur les affaires faites à l’étranger par l’un des fils de son adversaire. Ce que l’on retiendra surtout de ce débat, c’est l’avertissement lancé à la fin par Donald Trump sur le scrutin du 3 novembre : « Cela ne va pas bien se terminer. » » | ÉDITORIAL | mercredi 30 septembre 2020
Geneva to Raise Minimum Wage to £3,500 a Month
THE GUARDIAN: Voters back increase amid reports of growing poverty linked to Covid-19 pandemic
Geneva is to raise its minimum wage to almost £3,500 a month, reported to be the highest in the world, after locals approved the measure in a surprise vote result sparked by reports of growing coronavirus-linked poverty in the Swiss city.
The canton’s 500,000 voters passed the increase proposed by local unions and leftwing parties, after twice rejecting it in 2011 and 2014.
The minimum hourly wage will rise to just under £19.50 an hour, more than twice the rate in neighbouring France, with a guaranteed minimum monthly salary of 4,086 Swiss francs (£3,457) based on a 41-hour working week, or 49,000 Swiss francs (£41,430) a year, in one of the world’s most expensive cities to live. » | Kim Willsher in Paris | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Geneva is to raise its minimum wage to almost £3,500 a month, reported to be the highest in the world, after locals approved the measure in a surprise vote result sparked by reports of growing coronavirus-linked poverty in the Swiss city.
The canton’s 500,000 voters passed the increase proposed by local unions and leftwing parties, after twice rejecting it in 2011 and 2014.
The minimum hourly wage will rise to just under £19.50 an hour, more than twice the rate in neighbouring France, with a guaranteed minimum monthly salary of 4,086 Swiss francs (£3,457) based on a 41-hour working week, or 49,000 Swiss francs (£41,430) a year, in one of the world’s most expensive cities to live. » | Kim Willsher in Paris | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
America Is in Pain. The Presidential Debate Offered No Help
With more than 200,000 Americans dead from Covid-19, the economy in tatters, the west on fire, schools shuttered, police brutality against Black people still rampant, and millions of Americans grieving, scared and unable to recognize their lives, the first of three presidential debates on Tuesday night came at a time of pain, desperation, and anxiety for the American people. The debate itself reflected absolutely none of this anxiety. It was a display of vulgarity and egotism that insulted the Americans it was purportedly meant to persuade.
For more than 90 minutes, instead of substantive discussion of the multiple ongoing national emergencies that have warped their lives, viewers were shown three old white men – Donald Trump, Joe Biden and Fox News’ Chris Wallace, nominally the moderator – interrupting, shouting at and insulting one another. The coarseness, dishonesty, and grandstanding on display was a mockery of the dignity of the electoral process and a slap in the face to the Americans whose lives will be shaped by the actions of the next president. » | Moira Donegan | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Meacham: Trump Declared War on Decency, Democracy Last Night | Morning Joe | MSNBC
Why the US Presidential Debate Saw No Winner | DW News
US President Donald Trump and his Democratic challenger Joe Biden have faced off in what's being being called the worst presidential debate ever. The chaotic, 95-minute, televised clash touched on on issues including the coronavirus, race relations and the economy. But the discussion descended into a series of interruptions and personal mud-slinging.
The first presidential debate capped an unedifying spectacle in which Trump papered over his policy blindspots, and Biden his age. In this era of polarization the debate managed to yield a consensus: there were no winners.
The first presidential debate capped an unedifying spectacle in which Trump papered over his policy blindspots, and Biden his age. In this era of polarization the debate managed to yield a consensus: there were no winners.
Is This the End of Democracy? (w/ Prof. Jason Stanley)
How close is the United States to fascism? How far away from democracy has Trump taken us? Professor Jason Stanley joins Thom Hartmann for the devastating answer!
There are ten elements of fascism. Where is the US on the scale today? The Republican party has become less willing to defending democracy, following the cult of the leader. This could lead to a stolen election in 2020.
Professor Jason Stanley joined Thom to discuss ow the US is heading towards becoming a fascist society and is walking into it with eyes closed.
Jason Stanley is the author of “How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them” and the Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy at Yale University.
There are ten elements of fascism. Where is the US on the scale today? The Republican party has become less willing to defending democracy, following the cult of the leader. This could lead to a stolen election in 2020.
Professor Jason Stanley joined Thom to discuss ow the US is heading towards becoming a fascist society and is walking into it with eyes closed.
Jason Stanley is the author of “How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them” and the Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy at Yale University.
'Trump Is a Clear and Present Danger' to US National Security: Clinton | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC
Trump Refuses to Denounce White Supremacy | US Presidential Debate Analysis
With just weeks to go until the November 3 election, Donald Trump and Joe Biden went head-to-head in a debate that sought to energize supporters and win over undecided voters. Interruptions, tense exchanges and insults dominated the debate, with moderator Chris Wallace struggling to get a word in. This first debate mainly focused on US domestic issues, with the COVID-19 pandemic, a Supreme Court vacancy, the economy, and racial justice topping the agenda.
Trump also refused to condemn far-right militia groups, including a group known as Proud Boys mentioned by the moderator. "Proud Boys, stand back, stand by, but I'll tell you what, somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem. This is a left-wing problem."
Trump also refused to condemn far-right militia groups, including a group known as Proud Boys mentioned by the moderator. "Proud Boys, stand back, stand by, but I'll tell you what, somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem. This is a left-wing problem."
With Cross Talk, Lies and Mockery, Trump Tramples Decorum in Debate With Biden
THE NEW YORK TIMES: Interrupting Joe Biden nearly every time he spoke, President Trump made little attempt to reassure swing voters about his leadership. Mr. Biden hit back: “This is so unpresidential.”
WASHINGTON — The first presidential debate between President Trump and Joseph R. Biden Jr. unraveled into an ugly melee Tuesday, as Mr. Trump hectored and interrupted Mr. Biden nearly every time he spoke and the former vice president denounced the president as a “clown” and told him to “shut up.”
In a chaotic, 90-minute back-and-forth, the two major party nominees expressed a level of acrid contempt for each other unheard-of in modern American politics.
Mr. Trump, trailing in the polls and urgently hoping to revive his campaign, was plainly attempting to be the aggressor. But he interjected so insistently that Mr. Biden could scarcely answer the questions posed to him, forcing the moderator, Chris Wallace of Fox News, to repeatedly urge the president to let his opponent speak.
“Will you shut up, man?” Mr. Biden demanded of Mr. Trump at one point in obvious exasperation. “This is so unpresidential.” » | Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns | Tuesday, September 29, 2020; Updated: Wednesday, September 30, 2020
WASHINGTON — The first presidential debate between President Trump and Joseph R. Biden Jr. unraveled into an ugly melee Tuesday, as Mr. Trump hectored and interrupted Mr. Biden nearly every time he spoke and the former vice president denounced the president as a “clown” and told him to “shut up.”
In a chaotic, 90-minute back-and-forth, the two major party nominees expressed a level of acrid contempt for each other unheard-of in modern American politics.
Mr. Trump, trailing in the polls and urgently hoping to revive his campaign, was plainly attempting to be the aggressor. But he interjected so insistently that Mr. Biden could scarcely answer the questions posed to him, forcing the moderator, Chris Wallace of Fox News, to repeatedly urge the president to let his opponent speak.
“Will you shut up, man?” Mr. Biden demanded of Mr. Trump at one point in obvious exasperation. “This is so unpresidential.” » | Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns | Tuesday, September 29, 2020; Updated: Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Proud Boys Celebrate Trump’s Mention of Them at the Debate
Asked whether he condemned white supremacists and military groups, Mr. Trump demurred and then said, “Proud Boys — stand back and stand by.”
Within minutes, members of the group were posting in private social media channels, calling the president’s comments “historic.” In one channel dedicated to the Proud Boys on Telegram, a private messaging app, group members called the president’s comment a tacit endorsement of their violent tactics.
In another message, a member commented that the group was already seeing a spike in “new recruits.”
Mr. Trump’s rival, Joseph R. Biden Jr., noted that the group was celebrating Mr. Trump’s remark, pointing in a retweet to some of the comments being made. When asked what Mr. Trump meant by “stand by,” Jason Miller, a senior adviser to the president’s campaign, said it was “very clear he wants them to knock it off.” The Proud Boys describe themselves as “a pro-Western fraternal organization for men.” The group has openly endorsed violence, and has recently been tied to several violent incidents at recent protests. » | Sheera Frenkel and Annie Karni | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Donald Trump Refuses to Condemn White Supremacists at Presidential Debate
THE GUARDIAN: President tells Proud Boys, a far-right group often associated with violent protests, to ‘stand back and stand by’
Donald Trump declined to condemn white supremacists and violent rightwing groups during a contentious first presidential debate, instead urging a far-right group known for street brawling to “stand by” and arguing that “somebody’s got to do something” about the left.
The president was asked repeatedly by the moderator, Chris Wallace, to condemn violence by white supremacists and rightwing groups, such as armed militias, as well as criticizing leftwing protesters.
Instead, Trump addressed the Proud Boys, a far-right group whose members have been sentenced to prison for attacking leftwing protesters in political street fights, and said: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by! But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left.”
The Proud Boys, whose uniform is a black polo shirt, immediately celebrated the president’s comment in posts on social media platform Telegram. One Proud Boys group added the phrase “Stand Back, Stand By” to their logo. Another post was a message to Trump: “Standing down and standing by sir.”
Experts who study extremist groups said Trump’s message was dangerous, and could encourage additional violence.
“A green light like ‘stand back and standby’ is catastrophic,” Kathleen Belew, a historian of American white power movements, wrote on Twitter. » | David Smith, Lois Beckett, Maanvi Singh, Julia Carrie Wong | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Donald Trump declined to condemn white supremacists and violent rightwing groups during a contentious first presidential debate, instead urging a far-right group known for street brawling to “stand by” and arguing that “somebody’s got to do something” about the left.
The president was asked repeatedly by the moderator, Chris Wallace, to condemn violence by white supremacists and rightwing groups, such as armed militias, as well as criticizing leftwing protesters.
Instead, Trump addressed the Proud Boys, a far-right group whose members have been sentenced to prison for attacking leftwing protesters in political street fights, and said: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by! But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left.”
The Proud Boys, whose uniform is a black polo shirt, immediately celebrated the president’s comment in posts on social media platform Telegram. One Proud Boys group added the phrase “Stand Back, Stand By” to their logo. Another post was a message to Trump: “Standing down and standing by sir.”
Experts who study extremist groups said Trump’s message was dangerous, and could encourage additional violence.
“A green light like ‘stand back and standby’ is catastrophic,” Kathleen Belew, a historian of American white power movements, wrote on Twitter. » | David Smith, Lois Beckett, Maanvi Singh, Julia Carrie Wong | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Trump Ensures First Presidential Debate Is National Humiliation
THE GUARDIAN: Analysis: Only one man looked remotely presidential on the debate stage in Cleveland, Ohio, and it was not the incumbent
Cry, the beloved country. Donald Trump ensured Tuesday’s first US presidential debate was the worst in American history, a national humiliation. The rest of the world – and future historians – will presumably look at it and weep.
More likely than not, according to opinion polls, his opponent Joe Biden will win the November election and bring the republic back from the brink. If Trump is re-elected, however, this dark, horrifying, unwatchable fever dream will surely be the first line of America’s obituary.
Only one man looked remotely presidential on the debate stage in Cleveland, Ohio, and it was not the incumbent. He interrupted, ranted, raged, spewed lies and interrupted some more. Oh, and he passed on an opportunity to condemn white supremacists, instead telling them to “stand back and stand by”.
The debate moderator, Chris Wallace of Fox News, did not cover himself in glory either. He was a like a school supply teacher, hopelessly out of his depth as unruly children run riot. He did not enforce the rules or cut the president’s mic.
Facing this asymmetric bullying, Biden showed self-control and stood his ground. He spoke for tens of millions of Americans when he demanded: “Will you shut up, man?” – the Biden campaign rushed out this slogan on a T-shirt before the debate was even over.
Five weeks before the election, the debate pitted an ageing white male against an ageing orange male sweating like Richard Nixon in 1960. Anyone hoping for elegant verbal jousting or rapier-like wit was in for a disappointment. » | David Smith in Washington | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Cry, the beloved country. Donald Trump ensured Tuesday’s first US presidential debate was the worst in American history, a national humiliation. The rest of the world – and future historians – will presumably look at it and weep.
More likely than not, according to opinion polls, his opponent Joe Biden will win the November election and bring the republic back from the brink. If Trump is re-elected, however, this dark, horrifying, unwatchable fever dream will surely be the first line of America’s obituary.
Only one man looked remotely presidential on the debate stage in Cleveland, Ohio, and it was not the incumbent. He interrupted, ranted, raged, spewed lies and interrupted some more. Oh, and he passed on an opportunity to condemn white supremacists, instead telling them to “stand back and stand by”.
The debate moderator, Chris Wallace of Fox News, did not cover himself in glory either. He was a like a school supply teacher, hopelessly out of his depth as unruly children run riot. He did not enforce the rules or cut the president’s mic.
Facing this asymmetric bullying, Biden showed self-control and stood his ground. He spoke for tens of millions of Americans when he demanded: “Will you shut up, man?” – the Biden campaign rushed out this slogan on a T-shirt before the debate was even over.
Five weeks before the election, the debate pitted an ageing white male against an ageing orange male sweating like Richard Nixon in 1960. Anyone hoping for elegant verbal jousting or rapier-like wit was in for a disappointment. » | David Smith in Washington | Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Tuesday, September 29, 2020
Kuwait’s Emir Sheikh Sabah Dies at Age 91
GOP Takeover of the Supreme Court: What You Need to Know
Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich explains what's at stake in the SCOTUS nomination fight to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Led by Mitch McConnell, Republicans are gearing up to reverse the precedent they themselves set in 2016, when they blocked President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee for 293 days because, they said, “this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.” They know if they let the people decide who should appoint the next Supreme Court justice, their last chance to implement minority rule could be lost.
Remember: Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million people. And he was impeached. If confirmed, his nominee would be approved by Senate Republicans representing 11 million fewer Americans than their Senate Democratic counterparts. That justice would join a Supreme Court alongside four conservative justices who were nominated by Republican presidents who also lost the popular vote. And these 5 would have the power to negate laws supported by a majority of Americans.
In other words, a president elected by a minority will appoint a justice who will be confirmed by senators representing a minority. That justice will have the power to subvert the will of the majority and possibly hand the election to a president who’s already been impeached.
The majority of Americans will not go down without a fight. First, we must defeat Trump and his Republican enablers in the upcoming election. Next, when Democrats have control of the Senate, the House, and the presidency, the top priority must be to restructure the Supreme Court so it better reflects the will of the people.
We must see the GOP’s exercise of raw power for what it is and meet it with even greater force.
Led by Mitch McConnell, Republicans are gearing up to reverse the precedent they themselves set in 2016, when they blocked President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee for 293 days because, they said, “this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.” They know if they let the people decide who should appoint the next Supreme Court justice, their last chance to implement minority rule could be lost.
Remember: Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million people. And he was impeached. If confirmed, his nominee would be approved by Senate Republicans representing 11 million fewer Americans than their Senate Democratic counterparts. That justice would join a Supreme Court alongside four conservative justices who were nominated by Republican presidents who also lost the popular vote. And these 5 would have the power to negate laws supported by a majority of Americans.
In other words, a president elected by a minority will appoint a justice who will be confirmed by senators representing a minority. That justice will have the power to subvert the will of the majority and possibly hand the election to a president who’s already been impeached.
The majority of Americans will not go down without a fight. First, we must defeat Trump and his Republican enablers in the upcoming election. Next, when Democrats have control of the Senate, the House, and the presidency, the top priority must be to restructure the Supreme Court so it better reflects the will of the people.
We must see the GOP’s exercise of raw power for what it is and meet it with even greater force.
David Cay Johnston: Trump Deserves to Be Jailed, But System Is Set Up to Let Rich Avoid Paying Taxes
The Story of Trump as Tycoon Is 'a Fiction', But Will It Matter to Voters? | Morning Joe | MSNBC
NYT Report Shows 'The Apprentice' Helped Boost Trump's Finances | Morning Joe | MSNBC
Do Trump's Personal Debts Pose a Risk to the US' National Security? | DW News
US Democrats went on the attack on Monday after a report by The New York Times (NYT) revealed that President Donald Trump paid little to no income tax in recent years and held large amounts of debt. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Donald Trump's debts were a "national security" issue. If it involved different countries, she said, they could hold leverage over the president. "To me this is a national security question," she said. "It's so strange that in 2017, the president paid $750 in federal taxes, and he paid over $300,000 in taxes to other countries."
Trump dismissed the NYT report as "fake news" and tweeted that he had paid "many millions of dollars in taxes" but was entitled to depreciation and tax credits and was "extremely under-leveraged" in terms of his debt and assets.
Trump dismissed the NYT report as "fake news" and tweeted that he had paid "many millions of dollars in taxes" but was entitled to depreciation and tax credits and was "extremely under-leveraged" in terms of his debt and assets.
NYT Tax Story Puts Trump in a Bind: Admit Being a Business Failure or Admit Lying on Taxes | MSNBC
NYT Details Damning Trump Business Woes Just Before First Debate | The 11th Hour | MSNBC
Trump Tax Returns: 10 Things You Need to Know
Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich breaks down 10 things you need to know about Trump's serial tax dodging.
He paid $0 in income taxes in 10 of the past 15 years and claimed a $70,000 tax deduction for hairstyling. He faces federal and state prosecution for bank fraud, tax fraud, wire fraud, and mail fraud, as does his entire family.
In many ways, Trump's tax returns show once again that he represents the worst side of America -- a cheat, conman, someone who doesn't give a fig about the United States, who puts himself first every chance he gets, and a hypocrite.
Not surprisingly, Trump claims this bombshell is "totally fake news." But the easiest way to refute it would be to make his tax returns public, which he refuses to do. Now we know why.
He paid $0 in income taxes in 10 of the past 15 years and claimed a $70,000 tax deduction for hairstyling. He faces federal and state prosecution for bank fraud, tax fraud, wire fraud, and mail fraud, as does his entire family.
In many ways, Trump's tax returns show once again that he represents the worst side of America -- a cheat, conman, someone who doesn't give a fig about the United States, who puts himself first every chance he gets, and a hypocrite.
Not surprisingly, Trump claims this bombshell is "totally fake news." But the easiest way to refute it would be to make his tax returns public, which he refuses to do. Now we know why.
Monday, September 28, 2020
Fmr. Trump Campaign Manager Brad Parscale Hospitalized | Morning Joe | MSNBC
Brad Parscale, former Trump campaign manager, hospitalised after self-harm threats »
The Choice 2020: Valerie Biden Owens (Interview) | FRONTLINE
Valerie Biden Owens is Joe Biden’s sister and has managed his seven senatorial campaigns, as well as his two previous presidential campaigns.
The following interview was conducted by FRONTLINE’s Jim Gilmore on July 21, 2020 during our reporting for the “The Choice 2020: Trump vs. Biden” — FRONTLINE’s critically acclaimed election series featuring the interwoven, investigative biographies of both presidential candidates. It has been edited for clarity and length.
The following interview was conducted by FRONTLINE’s Jim Gilmore on July 21, 2020 during our reporting for the “The Choice 2020: Trump vs. Biden” — FRONTLINE’s critically acclaimed election series featuring the interwoven, investigative biographies of both presidential candidates. It has been edited for clarity and length.
Opinion: Trump’s Tax Avoidance Is a National Disgrace. Don't Let Him Blame 'The System'
Well, now we know why Donald Trump didn’t want the public to see his tax returns. A New York Times investigation looking at years of previously undisclosed documents found that Trump used countless maneuvers to avoid having to pay federal income tax. He ended up paying $750 total in 2016 despite hundreds of millions of dollars in income from The Apprentice and his various companies and licensing arrangements. Many years he paid nothing at all, and even received an income tax refund of $72.9m, which included millions in interest, straight from the federal treasury to Trump’s pocket.
The New York Times paints a picture of an elaborate shell game in which losses from some of his companies are used to wipe out tax liabilities elsewhere. It is not always clear how much of his “losses” are real losses rather than creative accounting, but the Times suggests that Trump may be both living large on hundreds of millions in annual income and overseeing distressed and unprofitable businesses. » | Nathan Robinson | Monday, September 28, 2020
Sunday, September 27, 2020
The President’s Taxes: Long-concealed Records Show Trump’s Chronic Losses and Years of Tax Avoidance
THE NEW YORK TIMES: The Times obtained Donald Trump’s tax information extending over more than two decades, revealing struggling properties, vast write-offs, an audit battle and hundreds of millions in debt coming due.
Donald J. Trump paid $750 in federal income taxes the year he won the presidency. In his first year in the White House, he paid another $750.
He had paid no income taxes at all in 10 of the previous 15 years — largely because he reported losing much more money than he made.
As the president wages a re-election campaign that polls say he is in danger of losing, his finances are under stress, beset by losses and hundreds of millions of dollars in debt coming due that he has personally guaranteed. Also hanging over him is a decade-long audit battle with the Internal Revenue Service over the legitimacy of a $72.9 million tax refund that he claimed, and received, after declaring huge losses. An adverse ruling could cost him more than $100 million. » | Russ Buettner, Susanne Craig and Mike McIntire | Sunday, September 27, 2020
Donald J. Trump paid $750 in federal income taxes the year he won the presidency. In his first year in the White House, he paid another $750.
He had paid no income taxes at all in 10 of the previous 15 years — largely because he reported losing much more money than he made.
As the president wages a re-election campaign that polls say he is in danger of losing, his finances are under stress, beset by losses and hundreds of millions of dollars in debt coming due that he has personally guaranteed. Also hanging over him is a decade-long audit battle with the Internal Revenue Service over the legitimacy of a $72.9 million tax refund that he claimed, and received, after declaring huge losses. An adverse ruling could cost him more than $100 million. » | Russ Buettner, Susanne Craig and Mike McIntire | Sunday, September 27, 2020
Opinion: Is Amy Coney Barrett Joining a Supreme Court Built for the Wealthy?
Much of the public anxiety about Amy Coney Barrett — judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Notre Dame law professor and Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court — has focused on the question of abortion, and whether as a believer in originalism and a practicing Catholic she would be likely to vote to reverse Roe v. Wade.
At least as consequential might be her position on the Social Security Administration: She has suggested that an originalist — whose view of the law is rooted in the idea that the duty of judges is to ascertain whether laws reflect the original meaning of the Constitution — might say that it is not clearly permissible given a strict reading of the Constitution. This isn’t to say that she thinks it should or even could be repealed. “Some decisions,” she wrote, “thought inconsistent with the Constitution’s original public meaning are so well baked into government that reversing them would wreak havoc.” But it does indicate that in the area of judicial philosophy, there are many ways to be extreme. » | Kim Phillips-Fein | Ms. Phillips-Fein is the author of “Invisible Hands: The Businessmen’s Crusade Against the New Deal.” | Sunday, September 27, 2020
America has turned into a joke! A sick one at that! – Mark
Yuval Noah Harari - Q&A on Being Gay
The Choice 2020: Mary Trump (Interview) | FRONTLINE
Mary Trump is the niece of Donald Trump and the author of Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World's Most Dangerous Man.
The following interview was conducted by FRONTLINE’s Gabrielle Schonder on July 30, 2020 during our reporting for the “The Choice 2020: Trump vs. Biden” — FRONTLINE’s critically acclaimed election series featuring the interwoven, investigative biographies of both presidential candidates. It has been edited for clarity and length.
The following interview was conducted by FRONTLINE’s Gabrielle Schonder on July 30, 2020 during our reporting for the “The Choice 2020: Trump vs. Biden” — FRONTLINE’s critically acclaimed election series featuring the interwoven, investigative biographies of both presidential candidates. It has been edited for clarity and length.
Iron Iran? Ft. Javad Zarif, Iranian Foreign Minister
Im Eiltempo zum Supreme Court
SÜDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG: Nur eine Woche nach dem Tod der liberalen Richter-Ikone Ruth Bader Ginsburg nominiert Donald Trump die konservative Abtreibungsgegnerin Amy Coney Barrett für das höchste US-Gericht. Statt Konsens sucht Trump Streit.
Es soll jetzt vor allem schnell gehen. US-Präsident Donald Trump steht am Samstag hinter seinem Pult im Rosengarten des Weißen Hauses, um Amy Coney Barrett für den vakanten Platz im obersten Gericht der USA zu nominieren. Nur eine Woche nach dem Tod der liberalen Richter-Ikone Ruth Bader Ginsburg, noch bevor sie in dieser Woche beerdigt werden wird.
Und noch vor der Präsidentschaftswahl am 3. November wird voraussichtlich der US-Senat mit seiner republikanischen Mehrheit Barretts Nominierung zustimmen. Keine 40 Tage sind es bis dahin. Im Schnitt haben Nominierungsverfahren bisher 67 Tage gedauert. Am 12. Oktober sollen die Anhörungen beginnen.
Nennenswerte Opposition aus den eigenen Reihen ist nicht zu erwarten. Zumindest keine, die die Mehrheit im Senat gefährden könnte. Trump sagte am Samstag, "dies sollte eine unkomplizierte und schnelle Bestätigung werden". Mit nichts anderem ist zu rechnen. » | Von Thorsten Denkler, New York | Sonntag, 27. September 2020
Es soll jetzt vor allem schnell gehen. US-Präsident Donald Trump steht am Samstag hinter seinem Pult im Rosengarten des Weißen Hauses, um Amy Coney Barrett für den vakanten Platz im obersten Gericht der USA zu nominieren. Nur eine Woche nach dem Tod der liberalen Richter-Ikone Ruth Bader Ginsburg, noch bevor sie in dieser Woche beerdigt werden wird.
Und noch vor der Präsidentschaftswahl am 3. November wird voraussichtlich der US-Senat mit seiner republikanischen Mehrheit Barretts Nominierung zustimmen. Keine 40 Tage sind es bis dahin. Im Schnitt haben Nominierungsverfahren bisher 67 Tage gedauert. Am 12. Oktober sollen die Anhörungen beginnen.
Nennenswerte Opposition aus den eigenen Reihen ist nicht zu erwarten. Zumindest keine, die die Mehrheit im Senat gefährden könnte. Trump sagte am Samstag, "dies sollte eine unkomplizierte und schnelle Bestätigung werden". Mit nichts anderem ist zu rechnen. » | Von Thorsten Denkler, New York | Sonntag, 27. September 2020
How Trump Laid Groundwork for Election Result Mayhem
Saturday, September 26, 2020
'She Lies about Lying': Brianna Keilar Fires Back at McEnany
Friday, September 25, 2020
The Role of Women in Islam | DW Documentary
Is there room for feminism in the Muslim world? The role of women in Islam is a frequent subject of controversy. Few other religions are so tainted with bias. But does Islam have any justification for its discrimination against women?
In this film, director Nadja Frenz introduces Muslim women who have set out to find their own path to emancipation. Together they investigate the role of women in Islam and study the Surah, the chapters of the Quran. Can the western concepts of gender equality be transferred directly to the Islamic world? Is wearing a headscarf a clear gesture of submission? Does the Quran really permit men to control women and beat them? Is the image of modern woman anti-Islamic? Must a woman choose between being a faithful Muslim or an independent feminist?
This documentary also consults women who are Islamic scholars. They say it is not Islam or the Quran that vilifies women, but rather certain interpretations of it and patriarchal traditions. They are campaigning for a more gender-neutral interpretation of the Quran and are trying to bring religion and feminism together. In contrast, women's rights advocates such as Zineb El Rhazoui, a former employee of the French satirical magazine "Charlie Hebdo", refuse to reconcile themselves with their religious roots, saying that Islam cannot be reformed.
In this film, director Nadja Frenz introduces Muslim women who have set out to find their own path to emancipation. Together they investigate the role of women in Islam and study the Surah, the chapters of the Quran. Can the western concepts of gender equality be transferred directly to the Islamic world? Is wearing a headscarf a clear gesture of submission? Does the Quran really permit men to control women and beat them? Is the image of modern woman anti-Islamic? Must a woman choose between being a faithful Muslim or an independent feminist?
This documentary also consults women who are Islamic scholars. They say it is not Islam or the Quran that vilifies women, but rather certain interpretations of it and patriarchal traditions. They are campaigning for a more gender-neutral interpretation of the Quran and are trying to bring religion and feminism together. In contrast, women's rights advocates such as Zineb El Rhazoui, a former employee of the French satirical magazine "Charlie Hebdo", refuse to reconcile themselves with their religious roots, saying that Islam cannot be reformed.
America’s Pandemic Election: What Could Go Wrong? | The Economist
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)