Tag Archives: nbc

A Virtual Lexicon of Trump’s Outrageous behavior recounted in ‘A Sacred Oath’

Former Defense Secretary, Mark Esper has a new memoir that is available, “A Sacred Oath”, in which he reveals his time spent during the Trump administration.  And like many that have served under Donald Trump, Esper fell from his grace, getting fired several days after the 2020 election.

The book is a whopping 752 pages, where he holds nothing back, capturing Trump as the ill-tempered, ill-informed President who was overly concerned with power and self-image.

Below are just some of the headlines and quotes from his book released and available for purchase starting May 10. 

‘Esper says Trump wanted to reactivate McChrystal, McRaven to court-martial them over criticism’ (The Hill)

“Worse yet, people were removed from positions simply because the White House wanted to replace them with more hard-core Trump loyalists, regardless of qualifications,” Esper wrote of Trump’s motive towards those that did not fall in line with his political agenda. 

‘Former Pentagon chief Esper says Trump asked about shooting protesters’ (NPR)

“We reached that point in the conversation where he looked frankly at [Joint Chiefs of Staff] Gen. [Mark] Milley and said, ‘Can’t you just shoot them, just shoot them in the legs or something?’ … It was a suggestion and a formal question. And we were just all taken aback at that moment as this issue just hung very heavily in the air.”

‘Mark Esper says Trump’s refusal to attend Biden’s presidential inauguration was ‘a final act of petulance’: book’ (Business Insider)

“Donald Trump did not even bother to attend the Inauguration — the first sitting and able president to skip his successor’s inauguration since 1869,” Esper wrote in his book, “It was a final act of petulance that defied tradition, tarnished our democracy, and further damaged Biden’s legitimacy with millions of Americans.”

‘Trump was the ‘biggest leaker of all’ in his administration and it was ‘generally bad’ for the country, his former Pentagon chief says’ (Business Insider)

“The individual motivations for the leaks ranged from advancing a preferred policy outcome to enhancing the leaker’s own role or credentials to currying favor with the president. It was a noxious behavior learned from the top. The president was the biggest leaker of all. It turned colleague against colleague, department against department, and it was generally bad for the administration and the country,” Esper writes in memoir.

As one would easily predict, Trump attempted to censor the release of the book. In response to a 60 Minutes interview with Esper promoting his book, the former President provided a statement on the interview, calling Esper a “Yesper”, “Weak and Totally Ineffective”. 

Related Articles:


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Congressional Chair Asks Google and Apple to Help Stop Fraud Against U.S. Taxpayers on Telegram

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Apple / Telegram

The chairman of a congressional subcommittee has asked Apple and Google to help stop fraud against U.S. taxpayers on Telegram, a fast-growing messaging service distributed via their smartphone app stores. The request from the head of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis came after ProPublica reports last July and in January revealed how cybercriminals were using Telegram to sell and trade stolen identities and methods for filing fake unemployment insurance claims.

Rep. James E. Clyburn, D-S.C., who chairs the subcommittee (which is part of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform), cited ProPublica’s reporting in March 23 letters to the CEOs of Apple and Alphabet, Google’s parent company. The letters pointed out that enabling fraud against American taxpayers is inconsistent with Apple’s and Google’s policies for their respective app stores, which forbid apps that facilitate or promote illegal activities.

“There is substantial evidence that Telegram has not complied with these requirements by allowing its application to be used as a central platform for the facilitation of fraud against vital pandemic relief programs,” Clyburn wrote. He asked whether Apple and Alphabet “may be able to play a constructive role in combating this Telegram-facilitated fraud against the American public.”

Clyburn also requested that Apple and Google provide “all communications” between the companies and Telegram “related to fraud or other unlawful conduct on the Telegram platform, including fraud against pandemic relief programs” as well as what “policies and practices” the companies have implemented to monitor whether applications disseminated through their app stores are being used to “facilitate fraud” and “disseminate coronavirus misinformation.” He gave the companies until April 7 to provide the records.

Apple, which runs the iOS app store for its iPhones, did not reply to a request for comment. Google, which runs the Google Play app store for its Android devices, also did not respond.

The two companies’ app stores are vital distribution channels for messaging services such as Telegram, which markets itself as one of the world’s 10 most downloaded apps.The company has previously acknowledged theimportance of complying with Apple’s and Google’s app store policies. “Telegram — like all mobile apps — has to follow rules set by Apple and Google in order to remain available to users on iOS and Android,” Telegram CEO Pavel Durov wrote in a September blog post. He noted that, should Apple’s and Google’s app stores stop supporting Telegram in a given locale, the move would prevent software updates to the messaging service and ultimately neuter it.

By appealing to the two smartphone makers directly, Clyburn is increasing pressure on Telegram to take his concerns seriously. His letter noted that “Telegram’s very brief terms of service only prohibit users from ‘scam[ming]’ other Telegram users, appearing to permit the use of the platform to conspire to commit fraud against others.” He faulted Telegram for letting its users disseminate playbooks for defrauding state unemployment insurance systems on its platform and said its failure to stop that activity may have enabled large-scale fraud.

Clyburn wrote to Durov in December asking whether Telegram has “undertaken any serious efforts to prevent its platform from being used to enable large-scale fraud” against pandemic relief programs. Telegram “refused to engage” with the subcommittee, a spokesperson for Clyburn told ProPublica in January. (Since then, the app was briefly banned in Brazil for failing to respond to judicial orders to freeze accounts spreading disinformation. Brazil’s Supreme Court reversed the ban after Telegram finally responded to the requests.)

Telegram said in a statement to ProPublica that it’s working to expand its terms of service and moderation efforts to “explicitly restrict and more effectively combat” misuse of its messaging platform, “such as encouraging fraud.” Telegram also said that it has always “actively moderated harmful content” and banned millions of chats and accounts for violating its terms of service, which prohibit users from scamming each other, promoting violence or posting illegal pornographic content.

But ProPublica found that the company’s moderation efforts can amount to little more than a game of whack-a-mole. After a ProPublica inquiry last July, Telegram shut some public channels on its app in which users advertised methods for filing fake unemployment insurance claims using stolen identities. But various fraud tutorials are still openly advertised on the platform. Accounts that sell stolen identities can also pop back up after they’re shut down; the users behind them simply recycle their old account names with a small variation and are back in business within days.

The limited interventions are a reflection of Telegram’s hands-off approach to policing content on its messenger app, which is central to its business model. Durov asserted in his September blog post that “Telegram gives its users more freedom of speech than any other popular mobile application.” He reiterated that commitment in March, saying that Telegram users’ “right to privacy is sacred. Now — more than ever.”

The approach has helped Telegram grow and become a crucial communication tool in authoritarian regimes. Russia banned Telegram in 2018 for refusing to hand over encryption keys that would allow authorities to access user data, only to withdraw the ban two years later at least in part because users were able to get around it. More recently, Telegram has been credited as a rare place where Russians can find uncensored news about the invasion of Ukraine.

But the company’s iron-clad commitment to privacy also attracts cybercriminals looking to make money. After the COVID-19 pandemic prompted Congress to authorize hundreds of billions of small-business loans and extra aid to workers who lost their jobs, Telegram lit up with channels offering methods to defraud the programs. The scale of the fraud is yet unknown, but it could stretch into tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars. Its sheer size prompted the Department of Justice to announce, on March 10, the appointment of a chief prosecutor to focus on the most egregious cases of pandemic fraud, including identity theft by criminal syndicates.

Article first published on ProPublica by Cezary Podkul and republished under a Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Related Articles:


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

How MacKenzie Scott’s $12 billion in gifts to charity reflect an uncommon trust in the groups she supports

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic

MacKenzie Scott disclosed on March 23, 2022, that she had given US$3.9 billion to 465 nonprofits in the previous nine months. These no-strings-attached donations bring the total she has given away in the past two years to at least $12 billion. We asked philanthropy historian Tyrone Freeman to weigh in on Scott’s approach to donating large sums of money and her emphasis on other forms of generosity.

Is Scott’s philanthropic philosophy unique?

After her 2019 divorce from Jeff Bezos, Scott signed the Giving Pledge, a commitment that extremely affluent people make to give away at least half their wealth.

The pledge’s signatories may write a letter summing up why they are giving so much to charity and what their priorities are, which gets posted to the internet. Scott did that and amended the letter when she remarried. What makes her stand out from others who have signed the Giving Pledge is that she continues to write about her donations and what she’s learning about giving in general. As a historian of philanthropy, I study the philosophies and motivations of donors, which I call their “gospels of giving.”

Her approach is clearly unique among her peers – other billionaire donors – because of how she relates to the organizations she supports and the diversity of those causes. She says her overarching goal is “to support the needs of underrepresented people from groups of all kinds.”

Scott values the expertise of the groups she supports and their leadership. She says she doesn’t adhere to the conventional concept of philanthropy, and she questions the way many of us think about generosity. To her it is not just a numbers game. It’s more about the spirit of giving, the sacrifice in the gift.

One major difference is that very wealthy donors tend to drill down in a single focused area, such as higher education, or a few causes – perhaps the arts or medical research. There are advisers who often recommend this approach to have the most impact.

But the nonprofits she has funded cover pretty much everything charitable donors support, from education to health, from social justice to the arts. Her latest donations even include global organizations like CARE and HIAS that are serving the needs of Ukrainians whose lives have been turned upside down.

Which other gifts stand out?

Some of the largest gifts among the most recently announced are for Girls & Boys Clubs of America, Communities in Schools, Habitat for Humanity and Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

I think it’s important that she didn’t give to only their affiliates in major cities. Foundations have been underinvesting in rural America for years. Scott’s supporting dozens of local and regional affiliates in suburban and rural counties.

As I have explained before, her support for historically Black colleges and universities is important. Two recent gifts that she made, to Meharry Medical College and Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, $20 million apiece, were very significant in light of how elite white donors undercut Black higher ed institutions in the early 20th century.

Does it matter when she publicly discloses information?

Scott posted an update in December 2021 without any details about her latest donations.

Instead, she praised other forms of giving by people without billions to their name. One thing she has drawn attention to is how there’s a lot of informal giving, and that it’s not valued. This puts Scott where the average person is, especially in communities of color, where people look after neighbors and family members regularly in their giving.

Since these are charitable activities you can’t deduct from your taxes, you might not think of these helping behaviors and many forms of civic engagement as philanthropy.

Unlike nearly all donors operating on a big scale, she has no offices and, so far, no website. She’s been criticized for a lack of transparency, especially after she didn’t divulge details in December. This sentiment has to do with the widespread belief that the public has a right to know when private interests spread their resources around for public benefit.

Her blog posts draw attention to trends people might miss regarding the groups she supports. She states the percentage of these organizations that are led by women, people of color or people she says have “lived experience in the regions they support and the issues they seek to address.”

When somebody shows you how they’re thinking about their giving and what they support, that could have an impact on others. It may change whether they donate only to their alma mater, for example. Colleges and museums are used to getting these big gifts, but many of the organizations Scott is giving tens of millions of dollars to say these are the largest donations they’ve ever received. She’s shattering the notion of who is a worthy recipient – the unspoken idea that only the elite institutions and the most well-known are worthy of big gifts.

How does Scott talk about giving that isn’t purely monetary?

For her it’s about generosity, not just dollars. She’s definitely thinking beyond the tax breaks she’ll get for charitable gifts.

Her December 2021 post alludes to volunteering and other activities she calls the “work of practical beneficence” practiced by millions of people, estimating that it’s worth about $1 trillion. Researchers have reached similar conclusions.

She also highlighted the estimated $68 billion in annual global remittances in that post. When people come to this country, begin working and send money to their homelands, that is a form of philanthropy. They may not use the word, but it’s the same idea, because it’s giving back to your family and your country of origin, and it responds to the same motivation as a donation to an established charity.

I agree that there’s much more to American philanthropy than the roughly half a trillion dollars donated annually. There are other kinds of giving that fly below the radar screen that are important for survival, community-building, meeting basic needs and even for democracy.

She also addresses the role and value of using your voice as an important part of social change. The history of the abolition, women’s suffrage, civil rights movements and various movements today bear this out. That is something I focus on in my research. https://www.youtube.com/embed/KS2n7VUBOa0?wmode=transparent&start=0 Historian Tyrone McKinley Freeman joined Bridgid Coulter Cheadle and Kimberly Jeffries Leonard to discuss how Black leaders are following in the footsteps of history’s trailblazers by devoting their time, talent and voice to many causes.

What do you hope the public takes away from Scott’s approach to giving?

Scott has emerged as the most notable practitioner of what’s called trust-based philanthropy. That refers to the notion that there should be fewer strings attached to donations and that reporting requirements and other expectations that often come with grants from foundations can be excessive.

In December 2020, Scott mentioned that she has a team of advisers to help her with screening, although she hasn’t shared what that process looks like. But after that, she is not asking anything else of the organizations she funds. Instead, she has chosen to step back and let them exercise responsibility, giving them space and flexibility.

I hope the public hears her answers to what I like to ask: Who counts as a philanthropist and what counts as philanthropy? I agree with Scott that it’s about more than money and that philanthropy is not only the domain of the wealthy.

Tyrone McKinley Freeman, Associate Professor of Philanthropic Studies, IUPUI

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Related Articles:


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Judge Rules that Trump Likely Committed Felony Obstruction

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

As reported by Politico, U.S. District Court Judge David Carter ruled on Monday that former President Trump more likely than not made attempts to obstruct Congress during the 2020 elections on January 6, 2021.

This historic ruling may be the first, where a federal judge determined that a President appeared to have committed a crime while in office. Carter’s decision will not have a direct correlation to the issue of wether Trump will be faced with criminal charges or not, however it could place more pressure on the Justice Department to do so.

“Based on the evidence, the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021”

U.S. District Court Judge David Carter

Read More at:


Related Articles:


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Watchdogs Say if Clarance Thomas Resign, ‘Congress Must Move to Impeach’

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic Pixels / Adobe Stock

Fresh calls for the Supreme Court justice’s removal came amid “damning” new evidence of his wife’s involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

JAKE JOHNSON March 25, 2022 first published on Common Dreams

Calls for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to resign—or face impeachment proceedings—mounted late Thursday after text messages revealed that his wife urged former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to aggressively pursue efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

The Washington Post and CBS News obtained dozens of texts that Ginni Thomas, a long-time far-right activist who attended the January 6 rally that preceded the Capitol assault, sent to Meadows in the wake of Trump’s election loss, which she characterized as fraudulent while her husband was hearing election-related cases.

“Clarence Thomas must immediately resign from his seat on the Supreme Court.”

“Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down,” Thomas wrote in a November 19 message to Meadows, echoing a slogan that served as a rallying cry for pro-Trump groups.

All but one of the texts between Thomas and Meadows, most of which were written by Thomas, were sent between November 4 and November 24, 2020. One text was sent on January 10, 2021 in the wake of the Capitol insurrection.

“Clarence Thomas must immediately resign from his seat on the Supreme Court.”

Justice Thomas, who is currently hospitalized with an infection, has thus far declined to recuse himself from Supreme Court cases in which his wife’s right-wing activism could pose a conflict of interest.

Thomas was the only justice to publicly argue that the high court should have granted former President Donald Trump’s motion to block the National Archives from handing White House documents over to a congressional panel investigating the January 6 attack. The Supreme Court ultimately rejected Trump’s request.

Sarah Lipton-Lubet, executive director of the Take Back the Court Action Fund, said in a statement Thursday night that “if one thing is clear” from the newly revealed text messages, “it’s that there’s much more to the story of Ginni Thomas’ participation in the January 6 attack that the House Select Committee and the American public deserve to know.”

“Given that Justice Thomas has already made known he won’t recuse himself from cases related to his wife’s right-wing activism, and the damning evidence of his wife’s involvement in this attack on our democracy, Thomas is clearly unfit to serve on the nation’s highest court,” said Lipton-Lubet. “Clarence Thomas must immediately resign from his seat on the Supreme Court.”

“If he refuses, Congress must move to impeach him,” she added. “The integrity of the court, our judicial system, and our democracy as a whole depends on it.”

At least one member of Congress, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), echoed the call for Thomas’ impeachment. The House can impeach a Supreme Court justice with a simple-majority vote, but a two-thirds majority is required in the Senate for conviction and removal.

At the very least, the new revelations demonstrate why Thomas “must recuse from any Supreme Court cases or petitions related to the January 6 Committee or efforts to overturn the election,” argued Gabe Roth, executive director of the nonpartisan advocacy group Fix the Court.

“Democrats should be loudly drawing attention to the fact that the wife of a sitting Supreme Court justice supported Trump’s coup attempt.”

“Ginni’s direct participation in this odious anti-democracy work, coupled with the new reporting that seems to indicate she may have spoken to Justice Thomas about it, leads to the conclusion that the justice’s continued participation in cases related to these efforts would only further tarnish the court’s already fading public reputation,” Roth said.

“Democrats should be loudly drawing attention to the fact that the wife of a sitting Supreme Court justice supported Trump’s coup attempt.”

The New Yorker‘s Jane Mayer reported in January that Ginni Thomas has in recent years aligned herself “with many activists who have brought issues in front of” the Supreme Court.

“She has been one of the directors of CNP Action, a dark-money wing of the conservative pressure group the Council for National Policy,” Mayer noted. “CNP Action, behind closed doors, connects wealthy donors with some of the most radical right-wing figures in America. Ginni Thomas has also been on the advisory board of Turning Point USA, a pro-Trump student group, whose founder, Charlie Kirk, boasted of sending busloads of protesters to Washington on January 6th.”

Mayer also observed that Ginni Thomas received payments from the Center for Security Policy (CSP), a right-wing anti-Muslim think tank. Despite disclosure requirements, Justice Thomas failed to report his wife’s income from CSP in 2017 and 2018.

In an op-ed published before the text messages between Ginni Thomas and Meadows surfaced, MSNBC‘s Mehdi Hasan cited Mayer’s reporting to argue that “Democrats should be loudly drawing attention to the fact that the wife of a sitting Supreme Court justice supported Trump’s coup attempt.”

“There is a clear value in holding impeachment hearings to draw attention to Thomas and his wife and their inappropriate behavior, especially as an increasingly partisan, conservative-majority court guts voting and reproductive rights,” Hasan wrote. “What would Republicans be doing if they had held a House majority and, say, Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s spouse had supported attempts to block a duly elected GOP president from taking office and she refused to recuse herself from related cases?”

This article was first published on Common Dreams and republished under Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Federal Prosecutor: Trump ‘guilty of numerous felony violations’

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Adobe Stock

According to Mark F. Pomerantz, a former federal prosecutor that came out of retirement to work on the Trump investigation and then resigned last month, Trump is ‘guilty of numerous felony violations’.   A copy of his resignation letter obtained by the New York Times read “The team that has investigated Mr. Trump harbors no doubt about whether he committed crimes — he did” which is a direct criticism of the lack of further prosecution to date.  

Anger over lack of prosecution now confirmed

Pomerantz submitted his resignation after Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg stopped pursuing an indictment of Donald Trump.  He believed the former president was “guilty of numerous felony violations” as well as it being “a grave failure of justice” not to pursue charges.

Read More at:


Related Articles:


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Petition Calls on Biden to Go Beyond Reversing Trump Policies to ‘Save Life on Earth’

Above: Photo/ Pexels

“Extinction is not inevitable—it is a political choice,” says a new petition calling for bold changes to the Endangered Species Act.

The Center for Biological Diversity on Tuesday laid out a comprehensive case for the Biden administration to go far beyond simply mending the damage done by President Donald Trump to the Endangered Species Act, calling on officials to strengthen the law “to save life on Earth from the extinction crisis.”

In a legal petition, the organization made the case that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service must not only fully implement the Endangered Species Act (ESA) but also add new provisions to the law to counter “years of overt political and industry pressure designed to weaken the Act.”

The petition argues erosion of the landmark legislation has left implementation of the Act “no longer primarily driven by the best science or conservation principles” but instead “by avoiding political controversy.”

“Combating the extinction crisis and restoring our natural heritage are monumental challenges that will require the services to be more visionary than any other administration in history,” said Stephanie Kurose, senior policy specialist at CBD. “We challenge Interior Secretary Deb Haaland and the Biden administration to change the status quo and do whatever it takes to protect our planet for future generations.”

Under the Trump administration, CBD said in the 50-page legal filing, officials “caused unprecedented damage to the Act” by gutting a rule which provided threatened species and endangered species with the same level of protection and issuing guidance which said the USFWS need not tell landowners that they need a permit if their activities will harm species, among other rollbacks.

“The United States can prevent future extinctions, but it must take swift action that matches the extent and scale of the problem.”

The Biden administration has taken “sluggish” steps to restore the protections stripped by former President Donald Trump, said CBD, including rescinding two regulations which limited habitat protections for endangered species.

However, wrote the group, “the extensive damage done during Trump’s four years in office must be put in the context of a law that was already not being fully enforced.”

“We need a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that holds the line, not one that compromises in the face of political pressure,” tweeted Noah Greenwald, endangered species program director for CBD.

Federal agencies must strengthen enforcement of the ESA, ensure accountability for extractive industries that harm habitats, and “holistically address the threat of climate change,” said the group.

Specifically, the petition calls for:

  • Empowering career scientists to make science-based decisions without fear of political reprisal;
  • Guaranteeing that federal agencies can no longer ignore the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions from their actions on climate change and climate-imperiled species;
  • Strengthening protections for critical habitat to protect key areas where species can live;
  • Creating a scientifically defensible definition of recovery;
  • Defining “significant portion of its range” to fulfill Congress’ intent that species be protected before they are threatened with worldwide extinction;
  • Requiring all federal agencies to have proactive conservation programs in place for listed species harmed by their actions;
  • Requiring habitat conservation plans to confer a net benefit whenever development activities harm endangered species;
  • Strengthening protections for foreign listed species;
  • Strengthening the regulations governing the reintroduction of experimental populations; and
  • Revamping the enhancement permitting program to address dubious trophy hunting practices overseas that do not actually enhance the survival or propagation of species.

“Extinction is not inevitable—it is a political choice,” wrote CBD. “The United States can prevent future extinctions, but it must take swift action that matches the extent and scale of the problem.”

Originally published on Common Dreams by JULIA CONLEY and republished under  a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Related Articles:

!function(d,i){if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(“script”);j.id=i;j.src=”https://widgets.getpocket.com/v1/j/btn.js?v=1″;var w=d.getElementById(i);d.body.appendChild(j);}}(document,”pocket-btn-js”);

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Enjoy Lynxotic at Google News or Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Trump Just Endorsed an Oath Keeper’s Plan to Seize Control of the Republican Party

The “precinct strategy” widely promoted by Steve Bannon has already inspired thousands of Trump supporters to fill local GOP positions, intent on preventing a “stolen election.”

Former President Donald Trump has officially endorsed a plan, created by a man who has self-identified with the Oath Keeper militia, that aims to have Trump supporters consolidate control of the Republican Party.

The plan, known as the “precinct strategy,” has been repeatedly promoted on Steve Bannon’s popular podcast. As ProPublica detailed last year, it has already inspired thousands of people to fill positions at the lowest rung of the party ladder. Though these positions are low-profile and often vacant, they hold critical powers: They help elect higher-ranking party officers, influence which candidates appear on the ballot, turn out voters on Election Day and even staff the polling precincts where people vote and the election boards that certify the results.

“Just heard about an incredible effort underway that will strengthen the Republican Party,” Trump said Sunday in a statement emailed to his supporters. “If members of our Great movement start getting involved (that means YOU becoming a precinct committeeman for your voting precinct), we can take back our great Country from the ground up.”

Trump’s email named Dan Schultz, an Arizona lawyer and local party official who first developed the precinct strategy more than a decade ago. Schultz spent years trying to promote his plan and recruit precinct officers. In 2014, he posted a callout to an internal forum for the Oath Keepers militia group, according to hacked records obtained by ProPublica.

“Why don’t you all join me and the other Oath Keepers who are ‘inside’ the Party already,” Schultz wrote under a screen name. “If we conservatives were to do that, we’d OWN the Party.”

Federal prosecutors in January charged the leader of the Oath Keepers and 10 of its other members with seditious conspiracy in last year’s attack on the U.S. Capitol. One of them pleaded guilty, as have several members of the group in related cases who are cooperating with the investigation. The group’s leader, Stewart Rhodes, pleaded not guilty.

There is no indication that Schultz had any involvement in the Capitol riot.

Schultz told ProPublica he never became a formal member of the Oath Keepers organization. “I have taken oaths to support and defend the Constitution as a West Point cadet, as a commissioned U.S. Army officer and as a practicing attorney,” Schultz said in a text message. “Those oaths do not have expiration dates, by my way of thinking, and I have kept my oaths. In that sense, I am an ‘oath keeper.’”

According to experts on extremist groups, the Oath Keepers recruit military and law enforcement veterans using the idea that their oath to defend the Constitution never expired. The group then urges people to resist what they say are impending orders to take away Americans’ guns or create concentration camps.

“I don’t ever want to be pulling the trigger on an AR-15 in my neighborhood,” Schultz said in a 2015 conference call with fellow organizers, referring to the semi-automatic rifle. “Oath Keepers, I love them for instilling the oath. But what they need to do also, I think, is spread the message that hey, we can do stuff politically so we never get to the cartridge box.”

In more recent interviews on right-wing podcasts and internet talk shows, Schultz has repeatedly described his precinct strategy as a last alternative to violence.

“It’s not going to be peaceful the next go-round, perhaps,” Schultz said in a June interview with the pro-Trump personality David Clements. “But it ought to be, and the way to ensure that it will be is we’ve got to get enough of these good decent Americans to take over one of the two major political parties.”

It was not clear whether Trump or his aides were aware that Schultz has self-identified with the Oath Keepers. Trump’s spokesperson, Liz Harrington, did not respond to requests for comment.

Schultz has spent months trying to get his idea in front of Trump. Steve Stern, a fellow movement organizer, told ProPublica that he met a former Trump administration official for lunch at Mar-a-Lago, the ex-president’s private club in Palm Beach, in December. While there, Stern said, he got a chance to briefly mention the project to Trump.

Then, last month, Schultz and Stern landed an interview on a talk show hosted by Mike Lindell, the MyPillow CEO who promotes conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. Lindell said he would discuss the plan with Trump personally. Schultz and Stern followed up with a conference call with Harrington and Bannon, according to Stern. Harrington previously worked at Bannon’s “War Room” website.

“I know the president’s very jacked up about it,” Bannon said on his podcast, speaking with Schultz after Trump released the endorsement. “Help MAGA, help the America First movement, right? Help the deplorables, help President Trump, help yourself, your country, community, your kids, grandkids, all of it. Put your shoulder to the wheel.”

Bannon, who led Trump’s 2016 campaign, originally lifted the precinct strategy to prominence in a podcast interview with Schultz last year. After the episode aired, thousands of people answered Bannon’s call to become precinct officers in pivotal swing states, according to data compiled by ProPublica from county records and interviews with local party officials.

As of last August, GOP leaders in 41 counties reported an unusual increase in sign-ups since Bannon’s first interview with Schultz, adding a total of more than 8,500 new precinct officers. The trend appears to have continued since then. New precinct officers started using their powers to remove or censure Republican leaders who contradicted Trump’s election lies and to recruit people who believe the election was stolen into positions as poll watchers and poll workers.

Bannon received a last-minute pardon from Trump after the former adviser was charged with financial fraud. He has pleaded not guilty to contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack. Bannon’s spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment.

In addition to Bannon and Lindell, the precinct strategy has won support from pro-Trump figures such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who urged Trump to impose martial law, and lawyers Sidney Powell and Lin Wood, who led some of the lawsuits seeking to overturn the election results. Right-wing groups such as Turning Point Action, which organized buses to transport rallygoers on Jan. 6, also joined the effort to recruit precinct officers.

While Stern said he’s thrilled about Trump’s written statement endorsing the precinct strategy, he said he hopes to hear it from Trump’s own lips at an upcoming rally. Stern said he plans to be there with tables to sign more people up.

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Originally published on ProPublica by Isaac Arnsdorf and republished under a Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Related Articles:

!function(d,i){if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(“script”);j.id=i;j.src=”https://widgets.getpocket.com/v1/j/btn.js?v=1″;var w=d.getElementById(i);d.body.appendChild(j);}}(document,”pocket-btn-js”);

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Enjoy Lynxotic at Google News and Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Top US Banks and Investors Responsible for Nearly as Much Emissions as Russia, Report Finds

Above: Collage by Lynxotic, Original Photo by Unsplash

“Wall Street’s toxic fossil fuel investments threaten the future of our planet and the stability of our financial system and put all of us, especially our most vulnerable communities, at risk.”

Fueling fresh calls for swift, sweeping action by President Joe Biden and financial regulators, a report published Tuesday reveals that if the planet-heating pollution of the 18 largest U.S. asset managers and banks is compared to that of high-emissions countries, Wall Street is a top-five emitter.

“Financial regulators have the authority to rein in this risky behavior, and this report makes it clear that there is no time to waste.”

The new report—entitled Wall Street’s Carbon Bubble: The global emissions of the U.S. financial sector—was released by the Center for American Progress (CAP) and Sierra Club. The analysis was done by South Pole, which replicated an approach it used earlier this year for a U.K.-focused effort commissioned by Greenpeace and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).

Though likely a “gross underestimate,” as Sierra Club put it, because the analysis relies on public disclosures that exclude key data, the researchers found that “just the portions of the portfolios of the eight banks and 10 asset managers studied in this report financed an estimated total of 1.968 billion tons CO2e based on year-end disclosures from 2020.”

Putting that CO2e—or carbon dioxide equivalent, which is used to compare emissions from various greenhouse gases—figure into context, the report notes:

  • If the financial institutions (FIs) in this study were a country, they would have the fifth largest emissions in the world, falling just short of Russia;
  • Financed emissions from the 18 institutions covered in this report are equivalent to 432 million passenger vehicles driven for one year;
  • Financed emissions from the eight banks studied in this report are equivalent to 80 million homes’ energy use for one year; and
  • Financed emissions from the 10 asset managers studied in this report are equivalent to three billion barrels of oil consumed.

The banks analyzed are Bank of America, Bank of New York (BNY) Mellon, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, State Street, and Wells Fargo.

The asset managers included are BNY Mellon Investment Management, BlackRock, Capital Group, Fidelity Investments, Goldman Sachs Asset Management, JPMorgan Asset Management, Morgan Stanley Investment Management, PIMCO, State Street Global Advisors, and the Vanguard Group.

When Wall Street is factored into the list of the world’s top 10 countries responsible for the most annual greenhouse gas emissions, it falls after China, the United States, India, and Russia but ranks ahead of Indonesia, Brazil, Japan, Iran, and Germany, according to Climate Watch data.

As the new publication warns:

The findings of this report make clear that the U.S. financial sector is a major contributor to climate change. Given that the indirect emissions of the U.S. financial sector are just below the total emissions of Russia, it should be considered a high-carbon sector and treated as such. Therefore, if President Biden and his administration do not put in place measures to mitigate U.S.-financed emissions, the United States will almost certainly fall far short of its targets to achieve a 50% to 52% reduction from 2005 levels in 2030 and net-zero emissions economy-wide by no later than 2050.

The implications of falling short would be dire. Continued unfettered emissions supported by the financial industry would mean that the deadly wildfires, droughts, heatwaves, hurricanes, floods, and other extreme weather events that Americans and communities around the world are already experiencing will only become worse, and efforts to mitigate emissions will only become more challenging and costly.

Representatives from the groups behind the report echoed its call to action in a statement Tuesday.

“Climate change poses a large systemic risk to the world economy. If left unaddressed, climate change could lead to a financial crisis larger than any in living memory,” said Andres Vinelli, vice president of economic policy at CAP. “The U.S. banking sector is endangering itself and the planet by continuing to finance the fossil fuel sector.”

Vinelli added that “because the industry has proven itself to be unwilling to govern itself,” regulators including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency “must urgently develop a framework to reduce banks’ contributions to climate change.”

Ben Cushing, Sierra Club’s Fossil-Free Finance campaign manager, agreed that “regulators can no longer ignore Wall Street’s staggering contribution to the climate crisis.”

“The U.S. banking sector is endangering itself and the planet by continuing to finance the fossil fuel sector.”

“Wall Street’s toxic fossil fuel investments threaten the future of our planet and the stability of our financial system and put all of us, especially our most vulnerable communities, at risk,” he said. “Financial regulators have the authority to rein in this risky behavior, and this report makes it clear that there is no time to waste.”

The report comes as financial institutions worldwide face mounting criticism for their contributions to the climate emergency—including at the COP26 climate summit in Scotland last month—and as the Koch-funded American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is pushing model legislation that opposes fossil fuel divestment.

More than three dozen climate advocacy groups argued Monday that “what ALEC claims to be discriminatory action”—referring to divestment from major polluters—”is instead prudent action to ensure the stability of our financial system and economy.”

“We know from the Great Recession that the financial sector won’t take responsibility,” the organizations noted. “It’s up to regulators to protect people from the impact on climate and financial risk of fossil fuel investment.”

Originally published on Common Dreams by JESSICA CORBETT and republished under a  Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Related Articles:


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

‘Our Democracy Faces an Existential Threat’: Progressives Warn of GOP Attack on 2022 Elections

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic / Pexels

“There are steps we can take to prevent this dire outcome,” 58 advocacy groups write in an open letter, “but we must take swift action.”

Citing “unprecedented and coordinated” Republican efforts to undermine public trust in the U.S. electoral system, nearly 60 advocacy groups warned Monday of the need defend democracy ahead of the 2022 midterm elections—including by passing the Freedom to Vote Act.

“We have already seen tragic consequences in the form of a violent insurrection at the Capitol on January 6.”

“Our democracy faces an existential threat—the very real possibility that the outcome of an election could be ignored and the will of the people overturned by hyperpartisan actors,” 58 groups including MoveOn.org, Protect Democracy, Public Citizen, SEIU, and the Sierra Club assert in an open letter.

“Since the 2020 election, we have seen unprecedented and coordinated efforts to cast doubt on the U.S. election system,” the letter states.

“These efforts have taken many forms,” the authors explain, including “widespread disinformation campaigns and baseless claims of election fraud,… intimidation of election officials and administrators just for doing their jobs, new state laws to make election administration more partisan and more susceptible to manipulation or sabotage, and outright violence.”

Noting that “exaggerated and unsubstantiated fears about voter fraud have been a vote suppression tool for some time,” the letter argues that “these efforts took on entirely new ferocity with the advent of former President [Donald] Trump’s ‘Big Lie’ regarding the 2020 presidential election.”

“The danger posed by the concerted effort to spread disinformation and undermine confidence in our elections is not hypothetical or speculative,” the authors assert. “We have already seen tragic consequences in the form of a violent insurrection at the Capitol on January 6.”

“Despite the fact that experts across the political spectrum—including Trump’s own Department of Homeland Security—have confirmed that the 2020 election was as free, fair, and secure as any in American history, Trump and his supporters have done all they can to cast doubt on the integrity of the process,” the letter says.

While warning that the GOP could work to overturn future elections, the signatories assure that “there are steps we can take to prevent this dire outcome, but we must take swift action.”

“We must push back on dangerous state initiatives that endanger democracy; Congress must enact critical provisions to protect federal elections and elections officials from partisan attacks and subversion, such as those included in the Freedom to Vote Act; and legal remedies must be brought to bear as needed,” the coalition says.

“Further, elected officials and public servants at all levels must condemn attacks on the processes that allow for free and fair democratic election, free of partisanship,” the signers add.

Many of the groups that signed the letter also support abolishing the Senate filibuster, a procedure historically used to block civil rights legislation—including the Freedom to Vote Act late last month.

Originally published on Common Dreams by BRETT WILKINS and republished under Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Related Articles:


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Sustainable Energy Solutions and Climate Science and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Burr’s Brother-in-Law Called Stock Broker, One Minute After Getting Off Phone With Senator

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic

According to the SEC, Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, then chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, had material nonpublic information about coronavirus impact. He and his brother-in-law dumped stock before the market dropped in March 2020.

After Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina dumped more than $1.6 million in stocks in February 2020 a week before the coronavirus market crash, he called his brother-in-law, according to a new Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

They talked for 50 seconds.

Burr, according to the SEC, had material nonpublic information regarding the incoming economic impact of coronavirus.

The very next minute, Burr’s brother-in-law, Gerald Fauth, called his broker.

ProPublica previously reported that Fauth, a member of the National Mediation Board, had dumped stock the same day Burr did. But it was previously unknown that Burr and Fauth spoke that day, and that their contact came just before Fauth began the process of dumping stock himself.

The revelations come as part of an effort by the SEC to force Fauth to comply with a subpoena that the agency said he has stonewalled for more than a year, and which was filed not long after ProPublica’s story.

In the filings, the SEC also revealed that there is an ongoing insider trading investigation into both Burr and Fauth’s trades.

It had previously been reported that federal prosecutors had decided not to charge Burr.

Burr’s spokesperson did not immediately respond to questions. Fauth’s lawyer and the SEC did not respond to questions. Fauth hung up on a ProPublica reporter.

According to the SEC, Fauth has cited a medical condition for why he cannot comply with the subpoena, even as he has been healthy enough to continue his duties at the National Mediation Board. In its filings, the SEC accuses Fauth of engaging in “a relentless battle” to dodge the subpoena.

In 2017, President Donald Trump appointed Fauth to the three-person board, a federal agency that facilitates labor-management relations within the nation’s railroad and airline industries. President Joe Biden reappointed him to the board.

On the day he received the call from Burr, Fauth sold between $97,000 and $280,000 worth of shares in six companies — including several that were hit particularly hard in the market swoon and economic downturn. According to the SEC, the first broker he called after hearing from Burr was out of the office, so he immediately called another broker to execute the trades.

In its filings, the SEC also alleges, for the first time, that Burr had material nonpublic information about the economic impact of the coming coronavirus crisis, based on his role at the time as chairman of the intelligence committee, as a member of the health committee and through former staffers who were directing key aspects of the government response to the virus.

The week after the trades, the market began its crash, falling by more than 30% in the subsequent month.

Burr came under scrutiny after ProPublica reported that he sold off a significant percentage of his stocks shortly before the market tanked, unloading between $628,000 and $1.72 million of his holdings on Feb. 13 in 33 separate transactions. The precise amount of his stock sales, more than $1.6 million, is also a new detail from this week’s SEC filings. In his roles on the intelligence and health committees, Burr had access to the government’s most highly classified information about threats to America’s security and public health concerns.

Before his sell-off, Burr had assured the public that the federal government was well prepared to handle the virus. In a Feb. 7 op-ed that he co-authored with another senator, he said “the United States today is better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats, like the coronavirus.”

That month, however, according to a recording obtained by NPR, Burr had given a VIP group at an exclusive social club a much more dire preview of the economic impact of the coronavirus, warning it could curtail business travel, cause schools to be closed and result in the military mobilizing to compensate for overwhelmed hospitals.

Burr defended his actions, saying he relied solely on public information, including CNBC reports, to inform his trades and did not rely on information he obtained as a senator.

Alice Fisher, Burr’s attorney, told ProPublica at the time that “Sen. Burr participated in the stock market based on public information and he did not coordinate his decision to trade on Feb. 13 with Mr. Fauth.”

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Originally published on ProPublica by Robert Faturechi and republished under a Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Related Articles:


Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Politics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Rolling Stone: Jan. 6 Protest Organizers Say They Participated in ‘Dozens’ of Planning Meetings With Members of Congress and White House Staff

Above: Collage by Lynxotic, from photos by various sources

Stunning allegations as revealed to Rolling Stone, including a promise of a “blanket pardon” from the Oval Office…

The Jan. 6th congressional investigations are beginning to yield more explosive results, according to statements made by some of the planners of the pro-Trump rallies, who have communicated with house investigators and have shared new details about the Jan. 6 attacks and what took place when the Trump supporting crowds stormed the U.S. Capitol.

Rolling Stone reports that two of the planners spoke with them extensively in recent weeks and that “explosive allegations” were detailed, stating that multiple members of Congress were “intimately involved” in planning both Trump’s efforts to overturn his election loss, as well as the violent events at the U.S. Captol on January 6th.

“Rolling Stone separately confirmed a third person involved in the main Jan. 6 rally in D.C. has communicated with the committee. This is the first report that the committee is hearing major new allegations from potential cooperating witnesses.”

Read More at:


Related Articles:


Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Trump Won the County in a Landslide. His Supporters Still Hounded the Elections Administrator Until She Resigned.

Michele Carew, an elections administrator with 14 years of experience, has resigned after a monthslong campaign by Trump loyalists to oust her. “I’m leaving on my own accord,” she said.

An elections administrator in North Texas submitted her resignation Friday, following a monthslong effort by residents and officials loyal to former President Donald Trump to force her out of office.

Michele Carew, who had overseen scores of elections during her 14-year career, had found herself transformed into the public face of an electoral system that many in the heavily Republican Hood County had come to mistrust, which ProPublica and The Texas Tribune covered earlier this month.

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Her critics sought to abolish her position and give her duties to an elected county clerk who has used social media to promote baseless allegations of widespread election fraud.

Carew, who was hired to run elections in Hood County two-and-a-half months before the contested presidential race, said in an interview that she worried that the forces that tried to drive her out will spread to other counties in the state.

“When I started out, election administrators were appreciated and highly respected,” she said. “Now we are made out to be the bad guys.”

Critics accused Carew of harboring a secret liberal agenda and of violating a decades-old elections law, despite assurances from the Texas secretary of state that she was complying with Texas election rules.

Carew said she is joining an Austin-based private company and will work to help local elections administrator offices across the country run more efficiently. She will oversee her final election in early November before leaving Nov. 12.

David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, a nonprofit that seeks to increase voter participation and improve the efficiency of elections administration, said Carew’s departure is the latest example of an ominous trend toward independent election administrators being forced out in favor of partisan officials.

“She is not the first and won’t be the last professional election official to have to leave this profession because of the toll it is taking, the bullies and liars who are slandering these professionals,” said Becker, a former Department of Justice lawyer who helped oversee voting rights enforcement under presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. “We are losing a generation of professional expertise. We are only beginning to feel the effects.”

Though experts say it is difficult to determine how many elections officials have left their positions nationally, states like Pennsylvania and Ohio have seen numerous departures. According to the AP, about a third of Pennsylvania’s county election officials have left in the last year and a half; in Ohio, one in four directors or deputy auditors of elections have left in the southwestern part of the state, according to The New York Times.

Hood County would seem an unlikely place for disputes over the last presidential election given that Trump won 81% of the vote there, one of his largest margins of victory in the state. Across the country, partisans’ demands for audits have mostly focused on counties and states carried by President Joe Biden, particularly those that went for Trump four years earlier.

But Texas, despite going for Trump by 6 percentage points, has seen its fair share of blowback. Last month, the Texas secretary of state announced a “comprehensive forensic audit” of four of the state’s largest counties hours after Trump issued a public letter demanding audits of the state’s results.

Before that, in July, Texas passed sweeping voting legislation that critics say disenfranchises vulnerable voters and unfairly targets administrators and other elections officials. Among the law’s provisions are new criminal penalties for election workers accused of interfering with expanded powers given to poll watchers.

On Saturday, after blasting the four-county audit plan as “weak,” Trump threatened the speaker of the Texas House of Representatives with a primary challenge if the speaker didn’t advance a bill that would allow audits in more counties.

In Hood County, the local GOP executive committee likewise issued warnings to Republican officials who defended Carew. In July, the committee threatened County Judge Ron Massingill with a social media campaign that would tell voters he was “incapable of providing them with free and fair elections” if he didn’t convene the county’s elections commission to discuss Carew’s termination.

Massingill refused, arguing that no political party should be able to direct the activities of the independent elections administrator. Katie Lang, the county clerk and vice chair of the county’s election commission, convened the meeting and moved to fire Carew. Carew survived the vote by a 3-2 margin, with Massingill and the county tax assessor, both Republicans, joining the Hood County Democratic chair.

Republican County Chair David Fischer called on county commissioners to dissolve the independent office of elections administrator and transfer election duties to Lang, which he said would make the election administration process more accountable to the county’s Republican majority.

Counties in Texas can choose between hiring an independent elections administrator, who is meant to be insulated from political pressures, or letting a county official, often an elected county clerk, run elections. County clerks, who manage functions like property records and birth certificates, run elections in many of the state’s smallest counties.

Fischer has declined to speak with ProPublica and The Texas Tribune.

On social media, Lang has shared “Stop the Steal” and “Impeach Biden” memes and videos. Lang made national headlines in 2015 after refusing to issue a marriage license to a gay couple following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision legalizing same-sex marriage. Lang did not respond to a request for comment on Monday, but she previously told the Hood County News she wished Carew “the best in her future endeavors.”

Over the last year, Carew has come under fire for everything from her connection with the League of Women Voters, which critics say is anti-Trump, to her interest in a $29,000 grant, funded in part by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, that would have been used to pay for costs related to the pandemic.

She was also accused of harboring a hidden agenda after refusing to allow a reporter with the fervently pro-Trump One America News Network into a private training for election professionals in March when she headed the Texas Association of Elections Administrators.

The most sustained criticism of Carew came from critics who accused her of violating the law by not adhering to an obscure election law that requires ballots to be consecutively numbered.

But seven election experts and administrators told ProPublica and the Tribune that consecutively numbering ballots is out of step with best practices in election security and voter privacy, and that consecutive numbering is not required to conduct effective election audits.

Despite the toll the last year has taken on her, Carew on Monday remained defiant. “I’m leaving on my own accord,” she said. “I’m the one who wins in the end.”

Originally published on ProPublica by Jeremy Schwartz and republished under a Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Related Articles:


Find books on Politics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

UFO Report Teased by Major News Outlets Ahead of Actual Release

Clickbait is not exclusive to smaller news organizations, apparently

With titles like “Long Awaited UFO Report is Here” major news outlets are blowing up a leak, sighting “senior administration officials briefed on the findings” of the as yet unreleased report.

Taking a subject, already shrouded in mystery and intentionally misleading readers is not particularly professional but , unfortunately, par for the course when it comes to this subject.

The report is referred to universally as “highly anticipated”, which, yes, it is. That would also appear to be the incentive to relabel a round-up of mainly already reported facts and quotes as definitive.

What is, somewhat, new is the confirmation, again by those senior administration officials briefed on the findings, that there are no secret U.S. government technologies responsible for the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (U.A.P.) or UFO incidents. However, that is only said to be true of the “vast majority” of the more than 120 incidents.

As published in prior articles, including by Lynxotic, there are three “likely” potential sources for the unexplained phenomena:

  1. secret U.S. technology,
  2. an adversary’s spy vehicle
  3. something otherworldly

To break down what these initial leaks quoting the as yet to be released report have on these three would basically be as follows. As quoted above “the vast majority” (thought apparently not all) did not originate from secret U.S. technology.

https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1394072364250550273/vid/1280x720/x_kfMpT-EjEEegfj.mp4?tag=14

Although there is known research being done in “hypersonic”, mainly by Russia and China, and there is a “worry” that this could be one explanation, if true it would mean that those countries technology is not only a well kept secret, but also far beyond any current U.S. capability.

As for the third option, the leaks emphasized that though “difficult to explain” there is no proof that aliens are responsible.

Not all outlets are making light or obfuscating, but struggling with what can be stated as fact

The New York Times story on what is as of yet known of the contents of the report, likely the source for others quoted above, and that article has a clearer title and “spin” on the situation:

U.S. Finds No Evidence of Alien Technology in Flying Objects, but Can’t Rule It Out, Either” Though vague, this title is at least not intentionally misleading.

radio transmission “Whoa, got it — woo-hoo!” “Roger —” “What the expletive is that?” “Did you box a moving target?” “No, I took an auto track.” “Oh, OK.” “Oh my gosh, dude. Wow” “What is that man?” “There’s a whole screen of them. My gosh.” “They’re all going against the wind. The wind’s 120 knots from west.” “Dude.” “That’s not — is it?” “inaudible” “Look at that thing.”

If all of this is broken down, there is very little that is new or noteworthy in the revelations other than a kind of preview of the stance the report is likely to take.

Talking about this à la Rumsfeld with the patter boiling down to terms like “known unknowns” and “Unknown unknowns” is not the reason, obviously, that the report is “highly anticipated”. This is where the reality of this tricky category of information enters the discussion.

For example: If the kind of ultra advance technology had any of the above three sources would these realities actually be released and admitted to in an unclassified report?

Gov speak will always echo Rumsfeld

Imagine the report confirming the existence of aliens, even the strong likelihood of the same? Panic and a host and variety of potential public responses would be enough to justify keeping that classified. And if it was U.S. technology? That would be an obvious example of something that could not be leaked or admitted, unless there was a desire to use it for saber rattling or other political strategy.

And if it was true that this ultra advanced capability was to be in the hands of a potential foreign adversary? Cue the panic and consternation once more.

So what could be divulged? Apparently there is a desire to confirm publicly and in this unclassified report just what can not be said – that these numerous instances are with 100% certainty an illusion or malfunction of our people or measurement technology.

That, once again, is certainly something. For example, if it were to be admitted that there were flaws or limitations to our various high tech mechanisms to observe and measure flying objects, that would, in and of itself, be an admission of failure and lack of functionality of the devices and systems.

As the NYT subheading states: “A new report concedes that much about the observed phenomena remains difficult to explain, including their acceleration, as well as ability to change direction and submerge.”

If the “difficulty” to explain these parameters, observed by pilots and aircraft recording systems on multiple occasions (and apparently with increased frequency) is due to the lack of sophistication of our abilities to observe and measure, that is already an admission that, while this phenomena is “real” to the best of our knowledge, we do not, as of yet, possess the ability to see or record it in a way that can explain what it is.

The end and beginning of the future

And voilà! We are back to the definition of UAP and UFO: Unidentified.

And, as frustrating as all of this can be, somehow there is, under layers of caution and reticence, an admission of something here. The admission that, whatever these sitings are of, it would be in our interest to try and find out, and to take the effort to study these incidents seriously from now on, not just make jokes and relegate these questions to some kind of “anti-science” fantasy from a fictional story.

If nothing else, it is that revelation, that there is a strong, solid reason for this report to even be ordered and carried out, that moves us forward into a new era that might well, eventually, reveal some astounding information on these craft. Very fast, very nimble and very mysterious UAP craft.


Find books on Money and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

The Golden Trump (Statue) Fiasco has Just Begun

Just when you thought it couldn’t go lower dept.

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1365483668723105793/pu/vid/1280x720/Jd47DaRpQnu5E4OM.mp4?tag=10

Clearly there is something going on here and it seems blazingly obvious to everyone except those gathered to partake. The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) of 2021 began in Orlando, Florida on Friday. And nearly straight away this thing grabbed the show by the horns (above).

Or at least the Twitter reaction and meme factory was impressed. For all the wrong reasons. The four years of the “former guy” were hard to live through for sane people. But it is becoming more and more apparent that those that reveled in those times were not just angry political weirdos but, possibly, certifiable.

First was the warning from the Chief of the Capitol Police that pro-former-guy and right wing militia members were plotting to set bombs, literally, off at the Capitol to coincide with Biden’s upcoming State of the Union Address.

“We know that members of the militia groups that were present on January 6th have stated their desires that they want to blow up the Capitol and kill as many members as possible with a direct nexus to the State of the Union.”

Capitol Police Chief Yogananda Pittman

Now, as the always bizarre anyway CPAC conference convenes they decide to set up a Gold-calf worship statue and parade it around for the faithful.

Another seems to think BigBoy Burgers had something to do with the statue’s origin:

As long as the bible is in play one twitter user pointed out the obvious sins of the clown-father:

On a more somber note:


Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Hulu premieres ‘Nomadland’: Critics Fave, Golden Globe nominated film

Watch the drama on Surviving America in the Twenty-First Century

The film that was added to the AP best films and National Society of Film Critics 2020, as well as an Oscar contender will now be available for viewers to watch starting February 19, 2021.   Movie-goers can either visit the big screen available anywhere movie theaters are open, or opt for a stay-at-home watch.

Read More: AP Names ‘First Cow’ and ‘Nomadland’ the best films of 2020

https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1338269105892179969/vid/1280x720/z3x8TEf5wfneHknb.mp4?tag=13

Above: Official Trailer for “Nomadland”

The movie, starring Frances McDomand will be on the Hulu platform and will premiere on its regular service tier, meaning that as long as you are a subscriber, there will be no additional purchases necessary. 

The concept is sure to be relatable for many, as it deals with struggles to survive in hard economic times, and follows her journey and experience traveling across the American Heartland looking for ways to get back on her feet. 

Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

The story is based on the book of the same title, telling a tale of darker side of the American economy, one where many low-cost labor pools have resulted in many transient older adults, Americans that have to be incredibly resilient and find creative ways in order to survive. 

The movie with Frances McDormand, who plays as a widow, unable to afford her home during the recession, sells her home and packs up all her necessities into her van.  There she embarks on journey through the American West, living in her van, as a modern-day, nomad, picking up seasonal work and relying on the compassion and generosity in her travels. Written, edited and produced by Chloe Zhao.


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Team Trump makes Accusations on Impeachment Day 4

February 12, 2021 marks the fourth day of former President Trump’s second impeachment trial.  His lawyers have the chance today to rebut the House impeachment managers’ cases for Trump’s conviction. 

The impeachment managers shared never before seen video evidence, as well as media reports and court documents demonstrating how some perpetrators believed that they were acting at the direction of Trump.

Trump’s legal team took the tack, not usual from past explanations of Trump conduct, that it was all just typical talk and nothing unusual for a speech by a “politician”. Shades of “locker room talk” and other times so many went out of their way to poo poo an outrageous statement. Only in those cases no-one died.

This was followed by standard denials and refutations.

Trump’s lawyer, Michael van der Veen gave this opening statement

“This is ordinary political rhetoric that is virtually indistinguishable from the language that has been used by people across the political spectrum for hundreds of years. Countless politicians have spoken of fighting for our principals. “

van der Veen also added “You can’t incite what was already going to happen,” 

According to NPR

“No thinking person,” van der Veen said, “could seriously believe” that the speech “was in any way an incitement to violence or insurrection,” as Democratic House impeachment managers have charged. “Nothing in the text could remotely be construed as encouraging, condoning or enticing unlawful activity of any kind.”

Reactions:

https://twitter.com/AshaRangappa_/status/1360288814464458758?s=20

Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Politics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Trump Crusade against TikTok finally ended by Biden Administration

The plan for TikTok’s American operations to Oracle and Walmart has been delayed, most likely indefinitely. According to WSJ, in a recent court filing, the Biden admin has begun to review whether there are threats to national security as claimed by the Trump administration that would warrant the ban. 

Read more: Trump’s Best Impeachment Defense: “I’m a Buffoon and it was all a Joke”

Representative of ByteDance (TikTok’s owner) and US National security are in discussions regarding data security and preventions on American data being accessed by Chinese government. 

Read more: Clubhouse app: Factions, tribes, safe spaces and flirting collide

“We plan to develop a comprehensive approach to securing U.S. data that addresses the full range of threats we face,” National Security Council spokeswoman Emily Horne said. “This includes the risk posed by Chinese apps and other software that operate in the U.S. In the coming months, we expect to review specific cases in light of a comprehensive understanding of the risks we face.”

The revenge campaigned, couched in some kind of theory that China would use the platform to spy on, or gather and maliciously use the data of, U.S. citizens, was also, in a monumental coincidence, a reaction to K-pop fans sabotaging his campaign rally in Tulsa, OK, by using the platform.

Hilariously, after Trump and the then campaign chair, Brad Parscale, bragged at the projected 19,000 sold-out attendance, the venue was shown in numerous photos and videos as nearly empty. The TikTok mob had ordered thousands of tickets, which were free online, for reserved seats, causing the organizers to assume that the rally would have full attendance.

Read more: What is “Clubhouse” and Why is it The Next Big Thing in Social Media Networks?

Naturally the TikTok gang only wanted to embarrass the campaign and did a fantastic job. In retrospect this was the beginning of the end of Brad Parscale as Trumps main guy and, one could almost say, of Trump’s re-election campaign itself, as things generally went downhill from there.


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Politics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Netflix’s 2021 Release Plan: after 42 Globe Noms, 71 New Releases Coming

Aggressive release schedule for 2021continues…

At the beginning of the year, Netflix dropped a beautiful and major bombshell, that they will be premiering a brand new movie every week of 2021. That means, thee will be appropxiately, it appears, upwards of 71 new movies with all the various genres covered! (action, sequels, dramas, musicals and more). 

If you are not new to the platform, 2021 is streaming gold for Netflix (with 42 total Golden Globe nominations). With Bridgerton, Lupin, The Dig, Below Zero, Night Stalker and we are only barely into February.

Streaming is looking like a permanently dominant dissemination method for visual content going forward, as, in addition to Netflix, HBOmax is getting all of the WB theatrical slate based on the initial North American debut schedule, while Disney is going full bore with a string of Star Wars and Marvel spin offs. A slew of books are also getting film treatment including best selling titles: The Girl on the Train, The Woman in the Window, Munich, The Last Letter from Your Lover.

Below are some of the upcoming releases with trailers for the next two months:

MALCOLM & MARIE:

Sam Levinson teams up with Zendaya and John David Washington for an achingly romantic drama in which a filmmaker (Washington) and his girlfriend (Zendaya) return home following a celebratory movie premiere as he awaits what’s sure to be imminent critical and financial success. The evening suddenly takes a turn as revelations about their relationships begin to surface, testing the strength of their love. Working with cinematographer Marcell Rev, Levinson creates a film of rare originality; an ode to the great Hollywood romances as well as a heartfelt expression of faith in the medium’s future.

THE DIG:

As WWII looms, a wealthy widow (Carey Mulligan) hires an amateur archaeologist (Ralph Fiennes) to excavate the burial mounds on her estate. When they make a historic discovery, the echoes of Britain’s past are illuminated in the face of its uncertain future.

BELOW ZERO:

A Spanish gritty action thriller movie (Bajocero) that has English voice-over features  is set when a prisoner transfer van is attacked. The cop, Martin, who is in charge must fight those inside and outside while dealing with a silent foe: surviving the icy temperatures.

NIGHT STALKER

This historical limited series is a documentary that follows the young detective Gil Carrillo and legendary homicide investigator Frank Salerno as they work expeditiously to catch the “Night Stalker”. Beneath the sunlit glamour of 1985 LA lurks a relentlessly evil serial killer. In this true-crime story, two detectives won’t rest until they catch Richard Ramirez, who was eventually arrested for his terrible crimes.

I CARE A LOT:

A crooked legal guardian who drains the savings of her elderly wards meets her match when a woman she tries to swindle turns out to have equally shady ties of her own. Starring Rosamund Pike, Eiza Gonzalez, Dianne Wiest, Peter Dinklage, Chris Messina, and Isaiah Whitlock Jr.

PENGUIN BLOOM

Penguin Bloom tells the true story of Sam Bloom (Naomi Watts), a young mother whose world is turned upside down after a near-fatal accident leaves her unable to walk. Sa m’s husband, (Andrew Lincoln), her three young boys and her mother (Academy Award-nominated Jacki Weaver), are struggling to adjust to their new situation when an unlikely ally enters their world in the form of an injured baby magpie they name Penguin. The bird’s arrival is a welcome distraction for the Bloom family, eventually making a profound difference in the family’s life.

THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN

A bright city, a dull morning and a curious girl on the train. When a voyeuristic divorcee fixates on the lives of a perfect couple from afar, she soon gets embroiled in a murder mystery that unfolds revealing truths about her own life. Get on board a thrilling experience with Parineeti Chopra, Aditi Rao Hydari, Kirti Kulhari and Avinash Tiwary. Catch Ribhu Dasgupta’s The Girl On The Train on 26th February, only on Netflix.


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac 

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Apple’s Tim Cook: ‘A social dilemma, cannot be allowed to become a social catastrophe’

Apple gets serious about exploitative surveillance business models, and it’s about time

Six months ago when we first published “Cracks in The Wall: Apple, Google, Amazon and Facebook Silently Declare Wars Against Each Other” we were worried. Although we firmly believed it was a just war, and that the time was at hand for the rotten underbelly of the internet and, more than anything else, for the business model of Facebook to be excoriated out in the open, using the term “war” in conjunction with Apple seemed over-the-top and even inflammatory.

Read more: Facebook vs. Apple vs. Google vs. U.S. Gov: War of Giants is at Hand

We stuck with the title and now, looking back, it was accurate if not 100% polite. After new privacy features in iOS 14 and macOS Big Sur were made public, Facebook and Zuckerberg took it as an attack on its tracking-first-business model and fought back with some rhetoric about how Apple was going to harm small businesses.

The first feeble attempt at fighting back was a full page ad in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other outlets, where Facebook alleged: “these changes will be devastating to small businesses” with the supposition that small businesses depend on Facebook’s darling invention; tracking-based advertising, and need it to build their brands and to sell products.

Read more: Apple 32-core M1X chips for Mac Pro are just the tip of the tip of a very important iceberg

Missing from this self-serving logic is the price of this form of targeting and data collection – in dollars, literally billions of them charged to those same small businesses, and in the cost to virtually all “users” who’s privacy is sacrificed with little to no consumer benefit and many, many potential detriments.

This is not just some sort of scrap between rival companies, it’s all our futures at stake

With the salvo of clear and decisive comments made by Tim Cook at the Computers, Privacy and Data Protection conference, and in interviews with various magazines, the righteous and timely battle against demonstribly evil internet business models is for real now, with the unnamed but obviously targeted Facebook at the top of the list.

The quote from Tim Cook in the title above exactly captured the current reality: the excellent documentary titled ‘The Social Dilemma’ did not go nearly far enough in exposing the danger of surveillance based business models that should not be allowed to exist

Read more: The Social Dilemma 2.0: Follow the Money Edition

As if Facebook has ever been a friend to small business. The concept that has been clear for many years is that the surveillance capitalism, for the most part invented by Facebook, that Apple is now declaring war against, was always an obscene and disastrous one for every person on the planet, other than Mark Zuckerberg.

“If a business is built on misleading users, on data exploitation, on choices that are no choices at all, it does not deserve our praise. It deserves reform,”

Apple CEO, Tim Cook, speaking at the Computers, Privacy and Data Protection conference

However, with a vast power over almost all digital advertising (sharing, with Google, more than 70%) and no competition to speak of where anyone could go for “social media” access, 3-5 years ago it was hard to imagine how anything could slowdown, let alone stop, Facebook’s inexorable rise.

In what will be a huge theme for this decade, only giants can fight and hope to win against other giants.

Right now, as of Tim Cook’s declaration of war on the “data-industrial complex” and with numerous anti-trust and other legal actions against Facebook pending, it suddenly seems plausible that a real change, a much needed change, could finally come in the way that human beings communicate via that immense network of devices we call the internet.

“Technology does not need vast troves of personal data, stitched together across dozens of websites and apps, in order to succeed.”

— Tim Cook

In an exclusive interview with Michael Grothaus at Fast Company Cook stated: “In terms of privacy—I think it is one of the top issues of the century, we’ve got climate change—that is huge. We’ve got privacy—that is huge. . . . And they should be weighted like that and we should put our deep thinking into that and to decide how can we make these things better and how do we leave something for the next generation that is a lot better than the current situation.” (emphasis mine)

This statement, though perhaps hyperbolic to some, is at the heart of our coverage of Apple, Google, Facebook and “Big Tech” in general over the last few years. In fact, this idea can go further and deeper as… “privacy” is just the tip of the iceberg and the predatory infrastructure that the data-collection and exploitation business model enables is even more dangerous and is a threat to the entire economy.

Of the new “Big 5” (Apple, Musk, Facebook, Google, Amazon) only Apple and the affiliated Elon Musk enterprises actually have proprietary products or products and services that benefit humanity in a concrete way.

Elon Musk has sustainable energy and sustainable transportation as stated goals of Tesla, while SpaceX, has reaching Mars (to give earthlings a second planet available in case we screw this one up) and, now with Starlink, building a second broadband internet backbone in space.

Apple, while on the one hand being inadvertently responsible for both Google and Facebook in different ways (more on that soon in a subsequent post), is at the heart of the real reason why internet business models and structures are key to our survival and to humanity’s ability to survive and reverse global warming by evolving, enhanced communication.

Apple is no longer just an electronic device maker. Software, hardware, A.I., possibly an electric car, and services are all merging and reaching what we call “Apple Singularity”. Apple has the potential to trigger a monumental shift in the ways we communicate online – networked human communication – away from the trash-filled nightmare of the present day – where three obscenely massive companies: Facebook, Google and Amazon, have built business models that do not rest on innovative products or services but on predatory systems that enslave users, gouge small businesses and do very little in adding benefit to humanity as a whole.

“At a moment of rampant disinformation and conspiracy theories juiced by algorithms, we can no longer turn a blind eye to a theory of technology that says all engagement is good engagement — the longer the better — and all with the goal of collecting as much data as possible. It is long past time to stop pretending that this approach doesn’t come with a cost — of polarization, of lost trust and, yes, of violence”

Tim Cook

What the three massive deadbeats do is make a small handful of individuals and shareholders very rich. Fortunately, the issues with these business models are finally being questioned. But this is only the beginning.

The unthinkable is now at least possible to imagine: a world where Facebook does not have unlimited power to take, and profit from, our data

Once a real understanding of the degree of inferiority of these models, when measured by the costs vs. the benefit to humanity itself, becomes clearer, the government regulation and involuntary changes forced by the market will begin and quickly accelerate.

It is the combination of the lack of substance or concrete contribution by firms with a predatory business model casing the harm, in ways that are partially invisible, up until now, and make them so dangerous.

The danger is social, political, and in then end affects our economy and the lives of nearly every person who uses the services of those companies. Which is very nearly the entire population.

The economic damage that is being caused by the business models invented by these companies is, much like global warning, so massive that it threatens the entire planet, but the lack of attention we are giving it is based on ignorance of the magnitude of the danger.

Apple and Tim Cook’s perspective is extremely important and key to lighting a spark to ignite fires that will burn away that ignorance. The “big-tech” world that Apple, led by Steve Jobs, had a huge hand in creating, desperately needs a shake up and it needs to start now. This has nothing to do with a handful of huge companies fighting over control of the internet – it’s not about one winning, it’s about further damage being stopped, and a new, better internet being allowed to emerge.

Now, Tim Cook and Apple are beginning a long battle to make that happen on behalf of all of us.


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Trump minions, Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley Excoriated in new Lincoln Project Ads

https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1349052964753735680/vid/1280x720/iuED49Qv_avQyzwZ.mp4?tag=13

Above: Video from The Lincoln Project

The Lincoln Project, the super PAC opposed to Trump and famous for great ads that help Biden beat Trump in the campaign, took direct aim at GOPs, specifically pointing out Cruz, Hawley and McCarthy. It has been Trump’s layer of corrupt minions that helped him to propagate the “Big Lie” – the lie that he won the 2020 election “in a landslide” and that there was massive fraud.

Many of Trump’s followers believe virtually every lie simply because a) Trump says it’s true and b) his minions, lackeys and sycophants back up his lies and lie further for him. This whole evil crap-shack is coming apart now. The brand “Trump-backer” is now a badge of shame and not a ticket to corrupt liar heaven.

The two videos from Lincoln project drive those points home and are the beginning of a well deserved reward of shame for those that lied for Trump for the last four years. Check them out and see what you think.

https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1349390978717683712/vid/1280x720/ZQFIIZuajS_qXNwH.mp4?tag=13
Follow the MOney
https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1349056046086590464?s=20

Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Politics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.

Observation: Forget the Alamo: Trump is still trying to incite an Insurrection

Above: Photo Collage / Lynxotic

Using a location that conjures a war reference about remembering a slaughter is already a veiled message to extremists 

Faced with a world without his Twitter account Trump appears to be reaching out to symbolism and and tacit messaging to continue to try and build anger and foment a civil war. 

Texas officials were quoted as saying that they oppose Trump’s visit outright, citing the possibility that he would be citing more violence and that maskless fans could create a coronavirus surge, as has happened in relation to other Trump events.

By choosing Alamo, TX, “coincidentally”, for some kind of news conference, vaguely related to his unfinished and disastrous border wall, he is likely sending a message to the most violent and most extreme of his “army” of followers across the nation. 

The Battle of the Alamo, which took place at the Alamo Mission (no where near Alamo, TX), a former Spanish religious outpost which had been converted to a makeshift fort, is a historic symbol of Texans’ resistance and their struggle for independence. The battle cry of “remember the Alamo” first became popular during the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848.

There is no sign that Trump is trying to reduce the potential for violence, more likely it’s the opposite

Already many of those that engaged in a terrorist attack on the U.S. Capitol have stated openly, either in interviews or in social media posts, that they believe that politicians not named Trump, regardless if they are Republican like Pence (who that were intent on hanging from gallows in sight of the Capitol Steps) or Democrat (“Put a bullet into Nancy Pelosi’s Head” was a threat from one individual) should be murdered.

Further, they say that they will never stop or give up “because this is like 1776”. Apparently, Trump would like to add “Remember the Alamo” to this brain-worm controlled thought process. Interestingly, since Trump began his run for president stating that “Mexicans are Rapists”, using a symbol from the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848 has a kind of dual purpose – Mexicans are the enemy in his book, apparently, and so is the U.S. government. 

Buried somehow in these references is the idea that somehow the “Patriots” in his “army” were “oppressed” by the U.S. Government (which he is the current “leader” of) and Mexico (by the racist belief that people are a threat simply due to their race & heritage) and they must therefore fight back and get revenge. 

This kind of convoluted circular logic is typical of the propaganda that has, amazingly, led to thousands of radicalized Trump followers looking for blood and wishing for a second civil war. Since this brainwashing is not a simple thing to reverse, once various “Big Lies” are accepted as truth, the situation has the potential to get much worse before it gets better.

“Remember the Alamo” is literally a battle cry that means it is time to fight back. Trump is not likely staging his circus at that location by chance. Should the press and the 84+ million Americans that do not want Trump as a dictator stand up to this insanity? Should the press take off the kid gloves and clearly state what this subterfuge os clearly all about?


Subscribe to our newsletter for all the latest updates directly to your inBox.

Find books on Politics and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Enjoy Lynxotic at Apple News on your iPhone, iPad or Mac.

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page.