The Commentariat -- Sept. 23, 2016
Afternoon Update:
Richard Fausset & Yamiche Alcindor of the New York Times: "A cellphone camera video made by the wife of Keith Lamont Scott as he was fatally shot by the police here shows the moments before and after the incident, including the wife's pleas to her husband to get out of his truck and her pleas to the officers not to shoot him. But the video, which was given to The New York Times by lawyers for the family Friday, does not include a view of the shooting itself. Nor does it answer the crucial question of whether Mr. Scott had a gun, as the police have maintained.... At a news conference on Friday, Charlotte officials repeatedly said that the police videos should not be released without a full report.... [Police] Chief [Kerr] Putney said officers had arrested Rayquan Borum and charged him in the death of Justin Carr, who was fatally shot near the Omni Hotel as demonstrators marched through the streets." Includes video. -- CW
Michael Shear & Matthew Rosenberg of the New York Times: "Hackers on Thursday posted hundreds of emails from a young Democratic operative that contained documents detailing the minute-by-minute schedules and precise movements of the vice president, the first lady and Hillary Clinton during recent campaign fund-raisers and official political events. The emails included names and cellphone numbers of numerous Secret Service agents, spreadsheets with the names and Social Security numbers of campaign donors, and PowerPoint presentations showing step-by-step directions for where officials like Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. should walk when they arrived at events.... The emails were stolen from the personal Gmail account of the Democratic operative, Ian Mellul. They reveal how widely White House officials, Clinton campaign operatives and Secret Service agents have exchanged detailed and sensitive information with people using personal email accounts." -- CW
Eric Levitz of New York: "Clinton Reveals Plan to Reduce the Trump Children's Inheritance.... Taken together..., [Clinton's] proposals would generate $260 billion over the next decade, which Clinton would use to finance some tax cuts on small businesses and an expansion of the child tax credit. (The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan entity that urges fiscal restraint, says that her math checks out). Donald Trump, by contrast, has proposed repealing the estate tax entirely -- a policy that would ostensibly provide Trump's kids with an extra $4 billion in inheritance (assuming he is worth what he claims to be)." -- CW
Cincinnati Enquirer Editors: "The Enquirer has supported Republicans for president for almost a century -- a tradition this editorial board doesn't take lightly. But this is not a traditional race, and these are not traditional times. Our country needs calm, thoughtful leadership to deal with the challenges we face at home and abroad. We need a leader who will bring out the best in all Americans, not the worst. That's why there is only one choice when we elect a president in November: Hillary Clinton." -- CW
Jonathan Chait: Two surveys, taken together, show "that Donald Trump has not been 'normalized.' Most Americans see him as a racist would-be authoritarian who is highly likely to start a nuclear war. The trouble is, some voters apparently like that in a president." -- CW ...
... Dana Milbank: "In the days since I wrote that Hillary Clinton wasn't necessarily wrong to say that half of Trump's supporters are racists and other 'deplorables,' the response has been, well, deplorable. Milbank provides "a sampling of the thousands of emails and social media replies.... I reprint this small sample of the nastygrams not to ruin your next meal but because the half of Trump supporters who aren't motivated by prejudice, and the few voters who remain genuinely undecided, should be aware of the bigotry that Trump has brought into the open -- and that those who vote for Trump are condoning." -- CW
Ed Kilgore: Ted Cruz is reportedly mulling an endorsement of Donald Trump, because he thinks it would be good for the country Ted Cruz. -- CW
Ben Guarino of the Washington Post: "The plan was simple: Order a pizza, rob whoever showed up to deliver the pie. But the caper did not go as the four men expected. That was because Napoleon Harris III, arrived with the pizza in hand.... The narrative ... unfolded like the recap of a superhero comic." Read on." -- CW
*****
Nicole Perlroth of the New York Times: "Yahoo announced on Thursday that the account information of at least 500 million users was stolen by hackers two years ago, in the biggest known intrusion of one company's computer network. In a statement, Yahoo said user information -- including names, email addresses, telephone numbers, birth dates, encrypted passwords and, in some cases, security questions -- was compromised in 2014 by what it believed was a 'state-sponsored actor.'... Changing Yahoo passwords will be just the start for many users. They'll also have to comb through other services to make sure passwords used on those sites aren't too similar to what they were using on Yahoo." -- CW
Presidential Race
Greg Miller of the Washington Post: "Two senior Democratic lawmakers with access to classified intelligence on Thursday accused Russia of 'making a serious and concerted effort to influence the U.S. election,' a charge that appeared aimed at putting pressure on the Obama administration to confront Moscow. The jointly issued statement from Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Adam B. Schiff -- Californians who are the ranking Democrats on the Senate and House intelligence committees, respectively -- described recent cyber penetrations of the Democratic National Committee and other U.S. political entities as intrusions that were likely directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin." -- CW
Los Angeles Times Editors endorse Hillary Clinton: "American voters have a clear choice on Nov. 8. We can elect an experienced, thoughtful and deeply knowledgeable public servant or a thin-skinned demagogue who is unqualified and unsuited to be president.... Electing Trump could be catastrophic for the nation. By contrast, Hillary Clinton is one of the best prepared candidates to seek the presidency in many years." -- CW
Peter Stevenson of the Washington Post: "Professor Allan Lichtman, who has correctly predicted every presidential election since 1984," based on a series of "key factors" he weighs, predicts that Donald Trump will win the election. -- CW
Ed Kilgore of New York: "When we think of external events that might affect the presidential election, it&'s generally something national: good or bad economic news, or maybe a terror incident that instantly becomes national news. But sometimes local events can have a disproportionately national impact. And sure enough, there is a growing sentiment that the anti-police protests in Charlotte could shake up elections in the very close battleground state of North Carolina. This being a state with a long history of backlash politics, the natural suspicion is that images of violent protests will help reinforce Donald Trump's law-and-order message in the Tar Heel State." --safari... (See also Nolan McCaskill's report, linked below, on Trump's reaction to the Charlotte protests.)
David Kay Johnston in the Daily Beast: "This means that, relative to wealth, the Clintons have given at a rate a thousand times Trump's verifiable charitable giving. Even accepting Trump's claim that his giving is much larger than the public record shows, the Clintons gave at more than 37 times Trump's rate." -- CW
Paul Krugman: "I am not calling on the news media to take a side; I'm just calling on it to report what is actually happening, without regard for party. In fact, any reporting that doesn't accurately reflect the huge honesty gap between the candidates amounts to misleading readers, giving them a distorted picture that favors the biggest liar. Yet there are, of course, intense pressures on the news media to engage in that distortion. Point out a Trump lie and you will get some pretty amazing mail -- and if we set aside the attacks on your race or ethnic group, accusations that you are a traitor, etc., most of it will declare that you are being a bad journalist because you don't criticize both candidates equally." -- CW ...
... Drew Harwell & Mary Jordan of the Washington Post: Teevee exposure has made a star of Donald Trump & his long experience as a TV showman will give him an advantage in debates with Hillary Clinton. Trump is also a big TV watcher. "Many people, though, find it frightening that the man who wants to be commander in chief spends more time watching TV than reading." -- CW
Aaron Blake of the Washington Post: "'Why aren't I 50 points ahead?' Hillary Clinton asked rhetorically on Wednesday, echoing a question she surely gets all the time -- and perhaps legitimately wonders herself.... A few reasons:... If you're a major-party presidential nominee in this day and age in American politics, you've frankly got to work pretty hard to get less than 40 or even 45 percent of the vote. Because we're just that partisan.... There's the matter of turnout.... And when it comes to doing that, it helps to have enthusiasm. Right now, Trump may have more of it.... The big reason this election isn't a blowout right now may be Hillary Clinton herself. Trump's image numbers are bad enough that a candidate with even middling numbers of his or her own would probably be leading him by a substantial margin. But Clinton's numbers are also bad, and it makes the race close." -- CW
Spencer Ackerman of the Guardian: "A key priority of Hillary Clinton's proposed intelligence surge will be to kill or capture Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, her campaign has told the Guardian. During the past year, Clinton, the former secretary of state and Democratic presidential nominee, has placed bolstering the vast US intelligence apparatus at the center of her national security agenda. Days before the first presidential debate -- and after the New York area escaped without mass casualties from multiple bombings -- her campaign has for the first time expanded on how her policies would work." -- CW
Arlette Saenz of ABC News: President Obama offers Hillary Clinton debate advice: "Be yourself & explain what motivates you." With video. -- CW
Jonathan Chait: "The news media's obsession with the emails has, without necessarily intending to do so, conveyed the impression that Clinton committed not just run-of-the-mill political scandals but extraordinary offenses of a historic scale.... The funny thing about the scandal surrounding Clinton's private email account is that there was a similar scandal in the Bush administration.... They ... deleted some 22 million emails, thus systematically flouting the same public-records principle that Clinton evaded. If you forgot about this episode, it is because it was merely a secondary scandal within a larger one, involving a Bush administration scheme to politicize the Department of Justice.... If you don't remember that scandal, it's because it was subsumed beneath a torrent of other scandals." The list goes on. --safari
CW: If you're worried about the right-wing meme, now oozing onto the Hill, that Hillary Clinton has serious brain damage that has caused "sleepy-eye" or something & she is about to go nuts or die or both, you might want to read Steve M. on that, although, as he points out, 'I'm not an ophthalmologist or neurologist" -- and neither are the wingers who are making the claim.
By Driftglass.Natasha Geiling of ThinkProgress: "On Thursday, Donald Trump spoke before an audience full of natural gas and energy industry leaders -- and the message was exactly the same as his economic policy proposal from last week: fewer environmental regulations and more land available to fossil fuel companies.' We need an America-First energy plan,' Trump said. 'This means opening federal lands for oil and gas production; opening offshore areas; and revoking policies that are imposing unnecessary restrictions on innovative new exploration technologies.'... If elected president, Trump has pledged to revoke both the Clean Power Plan and President Obama's Climate Action Plan, the cornerstones of Obama's domestic climate agenda." --safari ...
... It's All Obama's Fault! Nolan McCaskill of Politico: "Donald Trump on Thursday pinned the blame for the turmoil in Charlotte, North Carolina, on President Barack Obama, suggesting that the violent protests there show a 'wounded country' that 'looks bad to the world.' Pausing for roughly 10 minutes during an energy speech in Pittsburgh at the Shale Insight Conference to address the Charlotte unrest, Trump also presented himself as the man to heal America's racial divides. Akhilleus: I can see it now, President KKK will be the guy to fix all those racial problems caused by that divisive creep Obama. Whadda guy. Will "Stop and Frisk" be a big part of the fix? (Also linked yesterday.)
** Isaac Arnsdorf & Kenneth Vogel ofPolitico: "Donald Trump's presidential campaign has paid his family's businesses more than $8.2 million, according to a Politico analysis of campaign finance filings, which reveals an integrated business and political operation without precedent in national politics.... In all, the Trump campaign's payments to Trump-owned businesses account for about 7 percent of its $119 million spending total, the analysis found. That's an unprecedented amount of self-dealing in federal politics." --safari ...
... ** Isaac Arnsdorf & Kenneth Vogel: "Donald Trump's campaign isn't alone in patronizing his own businesses: taxpayers are indirectly doing so, too. Federal Election Commission records show that the U.S. Secret Service has paid the Trump campaign about $1.6 million to cover the cost of flying its agents with the candidate on a plane owned and operated by one of his companies.... It's standard practice for the agency to reimburse presidential campaigns for the cost of traveling with the candidates. In fact, the Secret Service has reimbursed the Clinton campaign, too: $2.6 million so far this cycle. The difference with Trump is that one of his companies, TAG Air, Inc., owns the plane, so the government is effectively paying him." --safari
"Trump's English-Only Campaign." Shane Goldmacher of Politico: "With 46 days until the November elections, and as early voting begins in a handful of states, Trump is on the precipice of becoming the only major-party presidential candidate this century not to reach out to millions of American voters whose dominant, first or just preferred language is Spanish. Trump has not only failed to buy any Spanish-language television or radio ads, he so far has avoided even offering a translation of his website into Spanish, breaking with two decades of bipartisan tradition." -- CW
Will Work for Racists. Paul Lewis & Tom Silverstone of the Guardian: "Donald Trump's campaign has replaced an Ohio official who was forced to resign over a racism controversy with a woman who has previously said she was 'offended as an African American' by the Republican candidate and confessed she had 'bashed the crap out' of him in the past. Tracey Winbush is also on record stating Trump had 'denigrated the Republican party'. The Trump campaign announced it had appointed Winbush as its new chair in Mahoning, a crucial Ohio county, on Thursday, shortly after the previous chair resigned over comments she made about racism in a Guardian interview." --safari ...
** Andrew Rosenthal of the New York Times: "The more Donald Trump presses his supposed effort to appeal to black voters, the more bizarre it gets.... Trump isn't actually speaking to minority voters. He is offering excuses for white Americans who might otherwise hesitate to support a racist candidate.... He declared that his 'movement' already embraces 'everybody.' And one of his county campaign chairs announced that there was no racism before Obama was elected. Not convinced that this is going to make black Americans vote for Trump? On Earth, people know that racism has poisoned America since it was founded. All that changed when Obama was elected in 2008 was that some bigots began to speak more openly.... Trump[' 'outreach to black Americans'] has given [racists] permission to shout their hatred from the rooftops. That's the truth behind his campaign, and no phony town-hall meeting staged by Fox News is going to change it." -- CW ...
... Meet Your Trump Supporters, Ctd. It's All Obama's Fault. Philip Bump of the Washington Post, in a not so surprising interview with a Trump campaign chair in an Ohio county, Kathy Miller, "... she doesn't think 'there was any racism until [Barack] Obama got elected' and that black Americans 'have an advantage' over whites because they 'got into schools without the same grades as white kids.' If black Americans haven't been successful in the last 50 years, she said, 'it's [their] own fault.'" Akhilleus: Well, whadaya know? I never realized that there was NO racism until Obama came along. Damn that Kenyan guy! He ruined it for all of us....so what does the boss say? (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
... Meet Your Trump Supporters, Ctd. Gideon Resnick & Ben Collins of the Daily Beast: "A Silicon Valley titan is putting money behind an unofficial Donald Trump group dedicated to 'shitposting' and circulating internet memes maligning Hillary Clinton. Oculus founder Palmer Luckey financially backed a pro-Trump political organization called Nimble America, a self-described 'social welfare 501(c)4 non-profit' in support of the Republican nominee.... According to Paul Ryan ... of the The Campaign Legal Center, Nimble America can still exist as a 501(c)(4) so long as it does other things besides supporting Trump.... 'The group knows that it can do some candidate election work, but that such work can't be its primary activity -- i.e., it has to spend more than half of its budget on non-candidate-election work,' Ryan told The Daily Beast...." -- CW
Other News & Views
A Tale of Two Cities
Samantha Vicent & Corey Jones of the Tulsa World: "The Tulsa County District Attorney's Office filed a first-degree manslaughter charge Thursday against Officer Betty Shelby in the fatal shooting of Terence Crutcher six days earlier. District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler said during a brief news conference that a warrant has been issued for the arrest of Shelby, 42, who is expected to turn herself in to authorities." -- CW ...
... The New York Times story, by Manny Fernandez, is here. ...
... CW: For those of us old enough to remember the "good old days" (that is, the not-so-distant past that Republicans revere, though they want to drag us much further back in time), this is a remarkable story. First, Betty Shelby would not have been a police officer at all; there was no such thing as a policewoman. Second, there were no such things as bodycams & dashcams, & not necessarily for want of technology; rather, law enforcement had the unique prerogative -- and presumption of truthfulness -- to describe any police action on their own terms. That the Tulsa police department installed the means to review its officers' actions is surprising. Third, Tulsa has a long history as a deeply racist city; anyone even suggesting that an on-duty police officer should be charged in the killing of a black citizen would have been ridiculed. The arc of the moral universe has indeed bent toward justice in, of all places, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Jordyn Phelps of ABC News: "In his first public reaction to the violent protests in Charlotte, North Carolina, during an exclusive interview with ABC News' 'Good Morning America,' President Obama called for protesters to seek out peaceful means to address concerns of racial inequalities in the American policing system. 'The way we change the system requires to be able to reach out and engage the broader American community and that requires being peaceful, that requires being thoughtful about what are the specific reforms you're looking for,' Obama told 'GMA' co-anchor Robin Roberts in an interview Thursday] at the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture." With video. -- CW ...
... Cleve Wootson, et al., of the Washington Post: "Protesters chanting 'What curfew?' marched Friday in defiance of orders by Charlotte's mayor to clear the streets after midnight, as anger spilled onto the streets for a third night following a deadly police shooting that has become the latest showdown over questions on law enforcement and race.Despite the mayor’s curfew decree, Charlotte Police Capt. Mike Campagna said protests could continue as long they remained peaceful. The split appeared to underscore the careful calculations by authorities in a city now under a state of emergency and patrolled by National Guard troops." -- CW ...
... Gavin Off, et al., of the Charlotte Observer: "After two nights of furious street violence, demonstrators took to the streets of uptown Charlotte again Thursday night and early Friday with passionate but mostly peaceful protests. Only one notable confrontation with police occurred after hundreds of marchers briefly blocked the John Belk Freeway." -- CW ...
... Alex Johnson of NBC News: "A man shot during Wednesday night's protests over the fatal police shooting of Keith Lamont Scott died Thursday in a Charlotte, N.C., hospital, police and emergency officials said. Police said the man, identified as Justin Carr, 26, was wounded on the second night of protests following the death of Scott, 43, who was shot this week as police were searching for a different person with an outstanding warrant, police said." -- CW ...
... Alan Blinder, et al., of the New York Times: "The grieving relatives of [Keith Scott,] a man who was killed by the police [in Charlotte, North Carolina,] watched videos on Thursday of the fatal shooting, a wrenching experience that they said revealed no hint of aggression in him and left the family members convinced that the videos should be made public. But the city's police chief, who had arranged for the private viewing, held fast to his decision not to release the recordings." -- CW ...
... New York Times Editors: "... the Police Department in Charlotte, N.C., has responded in exactly the wrong way to a police officer's killing on Tuesday of another black man, Keith Scott. It has opted for stonewalling. The department -- which has said that Mr. Scott brandished a gun when he was shot dead -- has refused to make public the video that might show how the shooting occurred.... There is no legal reason to withhold the video from the public, and in this fraught situation.... The North Carolina legislature, however, made that far more difficult when it passed an ill-advised measure this year that allows police departments to withhold camera footage from the public unless a court orders the release. That law takes effect on Oct 1. But until then, the Charlotte Police Department is free to release the video.... Unfortunately, the city's mayor, Jennifer Roberts, seems largely at sea and distressingly out of touch with how lack of an open governmental response led to demonstrations in places like Ferguson, Mo., Cleveland and Baltimore. She said Thursday morning that she had not even viewed the video." -- CW
... Richard Fausset & Alan Blinder of the New York Times: Charlotte has "gained a reputation for racial amity, from its nationally recognized commitment to busing and integrated schools in the 1970s and '80s, to the election of Harvey Gantt in 1983 as one of the South's first prominent black mayors. But the fatal police shooting on Tuesday of a black resident, Keith Lamont Scott, and the protests that have followed are among numerous bumps and jolts that have shaken Charlotte's sense of itself recently as it emerged from a successful small city to a more complicated larger one." -- CW ...
** Gene Robinson: "If you are a black man in America, exercising your constitutional right to keep and bear arms can be fatal. You might think the National Rifle Association and its amen chorus would be outraged, but apparently they believe Second Amendment rights are for whites only. In reaching that conclusion I am accepting, for the sake of argument, the account given by the Charlotte police of how they came to fatally shoot Keith Lamont Scott on Tuesday.... Scott's relatives claim he was unarmed as well. But let's assume that police are telling the truth and he had a handgun.... North Carolina, after all, is an open-carry state. A citizen has the right to walk around armed if he or she chooses to do so. The mere fact that someone has a firearm is no reason for police to take action.... Our gun laws should be changed. Until then, however, they must be enforced equally." -- CW ...
... Freedom of Speech in Trump's Amerika: Protesters piss you off? Kill them. Elizabeth Preza ofAlternet: "What should peace-loving citizens do if they encounter protesters blocking a highway in Charlotte, NC? Well, if you're USA Today columnist and University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds, you should 'run them down.' Reynolds, who produces a website called 'Instapundit' and whose Twitter account presumably doesn't constitute legal advice, quickly deleted the tweet but this is the internet, and there's nothing like Instashaming to remind a person that advocating for the death of innocent people is really never a good idea." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... **Akhilleus: Only in an Amerika where millions of morons are lining up to vote for a racist demagogue could you find a professor of law from a major university suggesting the cold-blooded murder of citizens for daring to exercise their first amendment rights. Trump must be sending this guy a lot of love. ...
... CW Update. Reynolds, who also has a column in USA Today (thanks, USA Today!), now says he's very, very sorry that his tweet was misconstrued & taken out of context: "I retweeted a report of mobs 'stopping traffic and surrounding vehicles' with the comment, 'Run them down.' Those words can easily be taken to advocate drivers going out of their way to run down protesters. I meant no such thing, and I'm sorry it seemed I did. What I meant is that drivers who feel their lives are in danger from a violent mob should not stop their vehicles." He regrets he was "not clearer." CW: Note that in his non-apology apology, Reynolds defends himself by writing that he's written a whole lot of tweets where he didn't condone mass murder. Guess that's context, too. ...
... No Wonder Reynolds is very, very sorry. Judd Legum of Think Progress: "Twitter suspended Reynolds' account, on the grounds that his tweet was an incitement of violence. After being suspended, however, Reynolds defended his tweet. He allowed that 'run them down' didn't capture his intent 'fully' -- but he blamed Twitter's character count, not his own judgment.... Reynolds' tweet was just 14 characters.... [In his apparently forced USA Today 'apology,'] Reynolds is still encouraging violence because he's saying there are still situations in which drivers should run over protesters in a roadway.... On his blog, Reynolds links to his so-called 'apology' and says, 'I don't apologize for saying that you shouldn't stop for angry mobs, even if they're blocking your way. But I could have said it better.' USA Today, however, is apparently satisfied with this. The publication said that Reynolds 'has apologized' and decided to suspend his column for one month." -- CW ...
... Oh, And This. Megan Boehnke of the Tennessean: "The University of Tennessee is investigating a tweet by one of its law professors [Glenn Reynolds] after the faculty member and contributing columnist for USA TODAY and the Knoxville News Sentinel urged motorists to run over demonstrators blocking traffic in Charlotte, N.C." CW: How long till Reynolds starts screaming about academic freedom & his free-speech rights? ...
... Trumpbots. John Bresnahan of Politico: "North Carolina GOP Rep. Robert Pittenger said protesters in Charlotte are motivated by racism rather than anger over the fatal police shooting of Keith Scott, an African-American man. 'The grievance in their mind is the animus, the anger,' Pittenger said during an interview with the BBC. 'They hate white people because white people are successful and they're not.'.... Pittenger -- who is under investigation by the FBI and IRS over his ties to his former real-estate firm -- insisted that the 'welfare state' has turned American citizens into slaves." --safari ...
... Update. Another Very, Very Sorry Winger Crank. Alice Ollstein of Think Progress: "After receiving wide condemnation for his comments, Pittenger apologized, insisted he has black friends, and accused [BBC News] of taking the remark out of context -- though both the question and his full answer were aired in full. This is somewhat of a pattern for Pittenger." -- CW ...
Jessica Glenza of the Guardian: "Prison officials have sentenced Chelsea Manning to 14 days in solitary confinement following an attempt to kill herself in July. Manning is serving 35 years in Fort Leavenworth prison in Kansas for leaking a vast collection of secret US government documents about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan." CW: Great idea. Put someone who is suicidal in a situation that invariably causes or exacerbates depression. Federal prison officials are more heartless & dumb than you already thought they were.
***
Marc Santora, et al., of the New York Times: "The father of the man accused of carrying out bombings last weekend in New York and New Jersey said that, two years ago, he warned federal agents explicitly about his son's interest in terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda and his fascination with jihadist music, poetry and videos. In a series of interviews with The New York Times on Wednesday and Thursday, Mohammad Rahami, whose son Ahmad Khan Rahami has been charged with using weapons of mass destruction and bombing a place of public use, recounted his interactions with the Federal Bureau of Investigation after he raised his concerns about his son.... His description of that contact differs starkly from the one given by law enforcement officials, who on Thursday challenged the father's account.... [Ahmad] Rahami is accused of building 10 bombs. One exploded in Lower Manhattan, injuring 31 people; another exploded in Seaside Park, N.J., but no one was injured. Five were discovered on Sunday night outside a train station in Elizabeth, N.J." -- CW
... Max Bearak of the Washington Post: President "Obama was so moved by Alex's letter that he read it aloud at the United Nations summit on refugees earlier this week. The president also shared a video of Alex reading the letter on his Facebook page on Wednesday, where it has been shared more than 150,000 times and watched by 8 million people (and counting)." (Akhilleus linked a CNN story about Alex in yesterday's Comments.) -- CW
Beyond the Beltway
This Is Quaint. William Rashbaum, et al., of the New York Times: "Federal corruption charges were announced on Thursday against two former close aides to Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, a senior state official and six other people, in a devastating blow to the governor's innermost circle and a repudiation of how his prized upstate economic development programs were managed.... The charges against the former aides, Joseph Percoco and Todd R. Howe, and the state official, Alain Kaloyeros..., stemmed from 'two overlapping criminal schemes involving bribery, corruption and fraud in the award of hundreds of millions of dollars in state contracts and other official state benefits,' federal prosecutors said in the complaint." CW: Maybe not up to par with bundles of cash in the freezer, but good, old-fashioned, Supreme Court-approved bribery: "In emails and other correspondence, Mr. Percoco and Mr. Howe referred to the bribes as 'ziti,' according to the complaint." (Also linked yesterday.)
Matt Zapotosky of the Washington Post: "The New York Police Department and a U.S. attorney in North Carolina have begun examining former congressman Anthony Weiner's alleged sexually suggestive online messages with a teenage girl that were reported by a British media outlet, authorities said Thursday. The exact parameters of the investigation remain unclear, but officials said that investigators are interested in a report from DailyMail.com that Weiner chatted with a 15-year-old girl for some months last year. The website reported that the girl had told Weiner she was in high school, and he once commented on her youth." -- CW
Share Article
Reader Comments (17)
I have a question for readers that I honestly don't know the answer to & can't figure out how to Google. What can law enforcement do when they learn an individual has "terrorist leanings"?
Let's suppose the FBI had followed up, with some intensity, on Ahmed Rahami's activities. They already knew Rahami was violent -- he was convicted & jailed for stabbing his brother. They knew he traveled to Afghanistan. For what? Tourism? They could have found out -- assuming this is true -- that he was visiting pro-terrorist Websites, was a fan of ISIS, & was checking out the 15-ways-to-build-a-bomb Websites. Let's just assume (and I don't know this to be the case) that he was not a card-carrying member of any terrorist organizations, or that at least authorities could not find evidence that was anything but a lone wolf. He is an American citizen.
So then what? Rahami had already paid for the stabbing of his brother. It is not a crime to go to Afghanistan. Neither is it a crime to read pro-terrorist propaganda. I assume many people do so for legitimate reasons or they're just curious & they have no intention or likelihood of buying into those views. Is Juan Cole a terrorist because the reads the Terrorist News? Of course not.
We don't lock people up for crimes they haven't committed, even if you expect they might commit a crime in the near future. There are plenty of repeat offenders of all kinds of crimes who are walking around free & will repeat again. Law enforcement can't tail all of them.
Can anybody tell me what the FBI or another agency "should have done" to prevent Rahami from (allegedly) planting all those bombs and detonating some of them? The only thing I can think of is that they could have investigated further his travels in Afghanistan, which would be quite costly and probably unlikely to produce evidence that met the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard of proof he had gone to bomb-making school.
Marie
Looks to me N.C.'s governor, along with Charlotte's mayor and police department might just want to reconsider some of their mandates. Charlotte is on fire and its people are crying for something to change in their lives–––soon––now. Taking it to the streets is one way to make this happen they hope. Kathy Miller, the woman who said there was no racism until Obama became President, is not alone –– many believe this to be true. But even if you live in Ohio, as Betty does, does not give you an excuse to be so ignorant.
America's religious landscape might just be changing for good.
https://newrepublic.com/minutes/137036/americas-religious-landscape-change-good
I was watching the Wells Fargo congressional hearing and noticed that the swearing in was devoid of the "so help me God" at the end of the swearing to tell the truth. When did this change I wonder.
Marie: Here's a link to some info on this, but in the end it's the same old message of "the Feds can't stop everything" and only in hindsight in the case of Rahami, it might have been prudent to keep an eagle eye out on this guy, but they have so many others, it's difficult if near impossible to do. The suggestion for local surveillance on someone like Rahami is something that should be done; of course that would perhaps mean more hiring of these kinds of watchdogs and the towns/ cities would have to fork over the dough, I would think, unless the Federal budget would include that extra money and fat chance of that happening.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/terrorists-us-feds-stop-fbi-official/story?id=42252775
Here's Clinton's new powerful ad:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-ad-mirrors_us_57e494f9e4b08d73b83098cd?section=&
Marie, my sarcastic comment yesterday and your follow up says it all. I see lots of words about the FBI doing more but not one word about how they could have stopped the attack. If he thought he was under surveillance he still could have pulled it off. The thing that pisses me off the most is a fact ignored, he went to Virginia to legally by a gun. So we arm criminals. It wasn't ISIS that provided the weapon, it was the NRA. Lastly, all we have here is a loser looking for some way to feel important. That's what we call terrorism.
Welcome to America.
PD: as an aside to your comment about Kathy Miller, I found the only way to get through to my dad about Obama was to call him the Jackie Robinson of American politics. Most formerly normal Republicans recognize that Jackie was a stellar American and would never publicly talk smack about him. The association of Jackie Robinson with Barack Obama serves the purpose of showing the Trumpbots for their real racist selves. There are a lot of normal church-going Republican men and women who can be reached so they don't vote for a carnival barker in a month and a half.
I have no evidence of this but I have this feeling that Rahami's father is dumping his son in an effort to keep his chicken store alive. One would expect that given what happened he would lose 90% of his customers. So I am not sure that his account of what he told the FBI is accurate.
@Marie, unless we become a "Minority Report" country, you can't yet be arrested for something you haven't done yet. Short of 24/7 surveillance of suspected terrorist sympathizer there is really no way to stop these attacks. Vigilance is our best defense.
If somebody had noticed and questioned the Boston Marathon bombers setting down a backpack and walking away maybe lives could have been spared. I hate to think I'm paranoid, but I've become hyper vigilant about unattended packages.
What to do?
Someone, an acquaintance or a friend of a friend is or knows someone who has "terrorist leanings". What do you do? Once information like this is reported, it apparently goes through multiple screenings that could be anything from a few interviews to full scale surveillance. If the individual is connected to the military, that information goes through a different strainer. Eventually, it all ends up, if there appears to be enough information to warrant it (and the trigger point for any kind of information is unclear in many instances; it could be rumor or pure innuendo. Maybe a Decider wannabe gulps down a bad baloney sandwich, gets a tummy ache, and decides that brown skinned fellow who just cut him off in traffic needs to be on a watch list and so forwards his license plate number with "information" to the FBI).
And here's where it gets really crazy. Names from all these sources go into a general database maintained by the Federal Terrorist Screening Center This is called the TIDE, the Terrorist Identification Datamart Environment (whatever would we do without acronyms? Half of all government agencies would disappear overnight due to the exhaustion caused by spitting out paragraphical desginations). If you end up on TIDE, your name has been filtered somehow through the National Counter Terrorism Center into which flows information from 19 federal agencies and local authorities, including the various military branches or tips from private citizens. Clear?
As of 2013, this list had over one million names on it. Let's set aside, for a moment, the very real problem of how people get onto this list (getting off is nearly impossible and you can be detained even if your name is close to someone on the list. Senator Ted Kennedy was stopped several times from boarding flights during the heyday of the Bush/Cheney Bogeyman Scare. Kennedy was stopped at airports in Boston and Washington, places where he was not exactly an unknown figure, because a "T. Kennedy" had popped up on a no-fly list.
On the other hand, plenty of people who should have appeared on no-fly lists didn't. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Underwear Bomber , whose name made it pretty high up the list of suspected terrorists never made it to the no-fly list. Why? It was top secret. Or they weren't sure he was a real terrorist. Or it was just a fuck up. Or something. Interpretations vary.
So there are problems with the list.
But what if there weren't? Let's say, for the sake of argument, that the list is hunky dory, that "reasonable suspicion", which can range from the bad baloney sandwich scenario above to seeing someone through his basement window making a pipe bomb, surrounded by guys dressed in black masks with star and crescent tattoos on their asses, was much more of a consistent and reliable predictor of future outcomes.
Okay. Now what do we have? What can the FBI or any other law enforcement agency do about it?
From the Thirties, when it was founded, right up to modern times, the FBI has worked tirelessly to corral organized crime, mostly under the heading of La Cosa Nostra, the Mafia, the Mob, the Syndicate, or Pancho's Happy Hunting Ground and Riding Club. Whatever. There have been libraries of memoirs and true crime tomes detailing the exhaustive efforts of authorities to stay on top of organized crime figures. At one point the FBI estimated there to be about 3,000 members of the Mafia (made men) in the US. Three Thousand. And the amount of manpower, money, and time that went into surveillance of the mob was tremendous, and didn't always pan out.
Yesterday, Marvin suggested putting five guys on full time surveillance of each terror suspect in the country. That's not far off from what the FBI did with the mob. And even if you figure they were trying to surveil the big bosses and their capos, let's say, only 500 guys, it still required that level of intensity to be even a little effective. So they relied, instead, on flipping guys, on informants, on walk-ins, on hunches. And don't forget, after a while, authorities had a pretty good idea of what they were dealing with. They understood the mob hierarchy and the structures and minutiae of organized crime. They just had to figure out how to catch someone with enough evidence to put them away. A terrorist threat is much different. When you can have thousands of people self-radicalizing, with no observable structure or rules, where do you start?
The answer, in an open society, is very difficult. We've run into similar situations in the past and the solutions were anything but ideal. In the 1880's, many of the nations of the west were beset by the rise of anarchy. This also coincided with the rejuvenation of communism (which had a bloody first go during the 1840's) as workers of the world decided to unite and not to take being treated like shit anymore.
Union organizing got its first real shot in the arm. But in this country, unions were as hated as terrorists are now, at least by the authorities and the Trumps of that period. In 1886, during the Haymarket Riots in Chicago , someone tossed a bomb into the crowd. People were killed. Police rounded up known anarchists and labor leaders and, after a show trial, hung them all. No evidence was offered or needed. It was all "gut instinct", and it was an easy way to get rid of labor activists and throw the fear of god into the rest of them.
Similarly, during the early days of the Civil Rights Movement, anyone suspected of being a leader or a "nigger lover" was beaten, imprisoned, shot, hung, or all of the above. The Red Scare of the 40's and 50's prompted similar authoritarian approaches, although with less bloodshed.
This, undoubtedly is how the Donald Trumps of the world would like to deal with terrorism. Jail or shoot anyone they believe to be "guilty" of thinking of doing something in the future. Just in case.
But that, luckily, for the most part, is not how it works.
How it works is messy, and not always effective. Omar Mateen, who was investigated by the FBI and whose name appeared on the watch list, was still allowed to purchase the weapons he carried with him into that Florida nightclub. As FBI chief James Comey stated at the time, the agency can't stay on everyone all the time. Efforts to place names appearing on no-fly watch lists on no-buy lists for guns will never get NRA (and therefore congressional) approval. The excuse is that denying them the purchase of deadly weapons, will "tip them off" that they're being watched. Oh. Great. So what's worse? They know they're being watched, or they walk out of Joe's Bait and Gun Shop with a dozen AR-15s, a big box of Glocks, and enough ammo to hold off Seal Team Six for five weeks?
All that aside, we simply don't have the ability to monitor everyone someone thinks may be a terrorist. The effort would be outrageously costly in personnel, time, and money, and in some cases, unconstitutional, all of which are trademarks of most Trump ideas, but which are also pretty unworkable (again, most Trump ideas).
This is not to say we should not be watching those who come up on the radar showing the most likely chances of action or connection to terrorist organizations. It would be stupid not to. But there will be gaps. There will be failures. And as much as the Donald Trumps will use these human and administrative missteps as proof that the Constitution should be cast aside and authoritarian rule should be the order of the day, that is not what an open state does.
The real problem of terrorism will be much harder to address, and like any health scourge, treating the symptoms only gets you so far. Root causes are much more difficult to fix, but the alternative is to lock up everyone you don't like or shoot them on sight.
It would probably help to clear up some of the rules (the government has a pretty chaotic and somewhat contradictory 166 page rule book for handling terrorist watch lists) and clarifying who can be allowed to do what and with whom. But short of hiring five million agents to perform round the clock surveillance (which even then is no guarantee of success), there is no foolproof way to do this. Any security person worth their salt will tell you that a motivated individual who isn't afraid of dying can get to almost anyone and do a lot of damage and there's almost no way to stop them.
There are a lot of hard truths connected to the scourge of terrorism, but perhaps the hardest thing is being able to hear those truths. With someone like Donald Trump, that is a bridge too far. Truth is anathema to the Donald Trumps. The FBI, as all other law enforcement agencies, is, and should be, tempered by Constitutional control if we still wish to live in an open and free society.
If not, there's always Trump, and lots more terrorism.
It seems to me incredible (are there any aspects of the current abomination of a campaign that aren't incredible?) that the shooting of a black man by police in North Carolina could likely tip the scales of the election in that state toward an openly racist demagogue who treats black Americans as if they are chits in a game and has the unqualified support of KKK and white supremacist leaders.
Watch for Trump to amp up racial divisions to try to drum up more fervent support from racist haters in battleground states. Better elect them the Donald to keep pain in the ass uppity darkies down, y'all. He's the man to fix all them rayshul problims.
Rev Barber, who spoke at the Democratic convention, was interviewed on MSNBC last night as one of a group of clergy and community leaders who met with the mayor and police chief. He stated that 2 of the officers involved in the Scott shooting had not turned on their body cams. Rev Scott suggested they be fired, which I thought was an obvious move if the police are serious about transparency. Oh yeah, mostly they're not.
Charlie Pierce, in a piece on the unpredictable nature of this election refers to a film by Henri-Georges Clouzot, 1953's "La Salaire de la Peur". "Wages of Fear", as it was released in Britain and the US, is still a wild, scary ride of a picture. Watch the trailer and see if it doesn't remind you a bit of the road we're all on right now. It doesn't matter if your French is not up to snuff, you'll get the picture alright. Fear, hatred, greed, money, casual dismissal of human life in the service of capitalism, it's all there.
The basic idea is that an American oil company in South America needs several truckloads of nitroglycerine to help extinguish a well fire. They find men without jobs and in need of money to do the dirty, but incredibly dangerous work (sound familiar? It's like a basso obligato of the song of capitalism, find poor people you can use as cannon fodder who have no money and little choice) of carting highly unstable material across terrible terrain.
The men chosen drive trucks over rocky mountain roads knowing that the whole thing could blow up at any instant. Just like the feeling of having the shade of Trumpy hanging over the entire American Experiment. Imminent demise awaits.
It's an existential noirish storyline with overtones of international capitalism hanging over it all. If you haven't seen it, check it out. Hopefully the ending won't match what happens in November. Hopefully we have more than "une chance sur mille" of surviving the Attack of the Small Handed Donaldo.
And now some more stupidity from Uday Trump.
Wahhh....wahh..
Uday defends his abominable Skittles mockery. I made the point, above, that there is no way, no how, we can realize 100% protection against any kind of terrorist (of the homegrown variety, especially) attacks. This is a mathematical and strategic certainty. But Uday is a tough, uncompromising guy like his daddy (read: ignorant moron) and he won't put up with even as small a chance as 1 in 3.64 billion (the odds of an American being killed by a recent refugee). No sirreebob, that ain't enough for Uday. It has to be zero.
The only thing there is zero chance of, is Uday and his autodidick dad growing a brain.
The Deseret News reports that "University of Utah political science professor Tim Chambless, associated with the U.'s Hinckley Institute of Politics, said Trump Jr. did nothing to help alleviate those concerns with his latest statements. 'You wonder where is his and his father's sense of humanity and decency,' Chambless said, noting that many Utahans trace their roots back to the Mormon pioneers who were driven out of their homes and came West as refugees themselves. He said Trump Jr. seems to be oblivious to the suffering embodied in a recent picture of a young boy, bloodied and stunned, after a recent attack in Syria, 'painfully unaware of the struggles that desperate people have.'"
A Trump unaware of the struggles of other people? Unpossible. But he's fully aware that they're not better than poisoned candy.
So, in Uday's mind, as in his moronic daddy's, there cannot be the tiniest sliver of a chance of danger to one of their voters, but Syrian refugees can die by the hundreds every day because, well, tough shit, foreign brown people who aren't rich like us.
Wonder if Trumpty Dumpty is making a Ziti List for when he gets his baby hands on the door knob of the Oval Office. He's sure to want all kinds: baked ziti, extra cheesy ziti, you name it. Is there a tax form that lists delivery of ziti? I guess we won't be seeing those tax returns after all.
@Akhilleus: Anyone who has a true concern about terrorism -- including an irrational concern -- will also favor strict gun controls laws that make it difficult for any person to obtain guns if he has a possible tendency to use firearms in an irresponsible way.
Trumpy & the Trumpbots, ergo, are not concerned about terrorism; they just don't want any of "those" people to sully Great White America.
Marie
..." What can law enforcement do when they learn an individual has "terrorist leanings"?"
Unless I have not read today's comments carefully enough, it seems to me there is a difference between the Chelsea bomber and almost all of the others. That is: his father reported to the FBI that his son was becoming a terrorist--that he had changed since he returned from Pakistan. When a parent (with a good record) reports that a previously well-behaved son has had a domestic violence incident with his brother, and has had a significant personality change since returning from Pakistan, I think this requires more vigilance from the FBI and terror community. If he had been under closer surveillance, he possibly could have been caught before he "did the deeds."
What is terror surveillance all about anyway, if not to keep close watch on a person whose father has reported him to the FBI? I have not heard there are any (perhaps a few) others on the terrorist watch list who have been reported by their families. This should have been taken more seriously, IMHO.
Prof. Reynolds has been writing smart-sounding stupid stuff for years.
The few times I've been directed to his comments by admirers, who also happened to be friends, I've held back my real opinion which was:
He's a Ted Cruz of punditry. Decent writer. Bad thinker. Intellectual and moral development frozen at 18.
He got himself in trouble by leaving his blog's comfortable home and spreading his nonsense too widely.
May Twitter soon treat DT (coincidentally, also what his ubiquitous media presence gives me) the same way.