Friday, February 03, 2017 6:44:20 PM
Full Show - Why Trump Deserves A Nobel Peace Prize - 02/01/2017
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvsye7V9psc-APX6wV1twLg / http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel , http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel/videos ]
On this Wednesday, Feb. 1st 2017 edition of the Alex Jones Show [with appearances by Jerome Corsi and Mark Dice, and Roger Stone guest-hosting the fourth hour with guests Franklin Brothers, Tyler Nixon and Ezili Danto], Alex Jones broadcasts live from LA after flying there for an appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast. We analyze Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court who’s literally a Scalia 2.0, which is an ironic turn of events given the cover-up surrounding the late Justice Scalia’s death.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZYSnX5tsQw [with comments]
*
Joe Rogan Experience #911 - Alex Jones & Eddie Bravo
Streamed live on Feb 1, 2017 by PowerfulJRE [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzQUP1qoWDoEbmsQxvdjxgQ / http://www.youtube.com/user/PowerfulJRE , http://www.youtube.com/user/PowerfulJRE/videos ]
Alex Jones is a radio show host, filmmaker, writer, and conspiracy theorist. Eddie Bravo is a jiujitsu black belt, music producer, and author.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZPCp8SPfOM [with (over 26,000) comments]
--
Doggett condemns ‘vindictiveness’ of Abbott cutting Travis County grants
Updated Feb. 1, 2017
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/doggett-condemns-vindictiveness-abbott-cutting-travis-county-grants/iX4p28qylrW5sFnz5bShJI/ [with embedded video, and comments]
Texas governor threatens defiant sheriff's job and funds after she pledges to uphold sanctuary protections
February 2, 2017
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-sanctuary-cities-republican-states-2017-story.html [with embedded video, and comments]
Texas governor blocks funding over sanctuary policy
02/02/17 10:31
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/317522-tx-gov-blocks-funding-over-sanctuary-policy [with comments]
Gov. Greg Abbott cuts money to Travis County amid sanctuary city fight
Updated Feb. 2, 2017
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2017/02/01/gov-greg-abbott-cuts-money-travis-county-amid-sanctuary-city-fight [with comment]
Protests grow as Texas moves against 'sanctuary' cities
Texas Governor Greg Abbott cuts funding to law enforcement to penalise Austin, a 'sanctuary' city offering safety to the undocumented.
2 Feb 2017
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/02/protests-grow-texas-moves-sanctuary-cities-170202205015258.html
Texas legislators seek funding ban for 'sanctuary cities'
Feb. 3, 2017
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/7bb645a91ffc42be8afcdf4f010a7637/texas-legislators-seek-funding-ban-sanctuary-cities
--
Donald Trump is Aiding the Enemy | The Resistance with Keith Olbermann | GQ
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by GQ [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsEukrAd64fqA7FjwkmZ_Dw / http://www.youtube.com/user/GQVideos/videos , http://www.youtube.com/user/GQVideos/videos , http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0hKMB1-xkc-XWNf9VL-LxVYysdHpjyMF ]
Why reinforce the twisted narrative that America is at war with Islam?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LBBb-6hEPE [with (approaching 4,000) comments]
--
Leaked Draft of Trump’s Religious Freedom Order Reveals Sweeping Plans to Legalize Discrimination
Donald Trump speaks to a gathering of clergy at the New Spirit Revival Center in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, September 21, 2016.
(Reuters / Jonathan Ernst)
If signed, the order would create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity.
By Sarah Posner
February 1, 2017
A leaked copy of a draft executive order titled “Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom,” obtained by The Investigative Fund and The Nation, reveals sweeping plans by the Trump administration to legalize discrimination.
The four-page draft order, a copy of which is currently circulating among federal staff and advocacy organizations, construes religious organizations so broadly that it covers “any organization, including closely held for-profit corporations,” and protects “religious freedom” in every walk of life: “when providing social services, education, or healthcare; earning a living, seeking a job, or employing others; receiving government grants or contracts; or otherwise participating in the marketplace, the public square, or interfacing with Federal, State or local governments.”
The draft order seeks to create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious or moral objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity, and it seeks to curtail women’s access to contraception and abortion through the Affordable Care Act. The White House did not respond to requests for comment, but when asked Monday about whether a religious freedom executive order was in the works, White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters [ https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/31/statement-press-secretary-sean-spicer ], “I’m not getting ahead of the executive orders that we may or may not issue. There is a lot of executive orders, a lot of things that the president has talked about and will continue to fulfill, but we have nothing on that front now.”
Language in the draft document specifically protects the tax-exempt status of any organization that “believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the belief that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, sexual relations are properly reserved for such a marriage, male and female and their equivalents refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy, physiology, or genetics at or before birth, and that human life begins at conception and merits protection at all stages of life.”
The breadth of the draft order, which legal experts described as “sweeping” and “staggering,” may exceed the authority of the executive branch if enacted. It also, by extending some of its protections to one particular set of religious beliefs, would risk violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
“This executive order would appear to require agencies to provide extensive exemptions from a staggering number of federal laws—without regard to whether such laws substantially burden religious exercise,” said Marty Lederman, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and an expert on church-state separation and religious freedom.
The exemptions, Lederman said, could themselves violate federal law or license individuals and private parties to violate federal law. “Moreover,” he added, “the exemptions would raise serious First Amendment questions, as well, because they would go far beyond what the Supreme Court has identified as the limits of permissive religious accommodations.” It would be “astonishing,” he said, “if the Office of Legal Counsel certifies the legality of this blunderbuss order.”
The leaked draft maintains that, as a matter of policy, “Americans and their religious organizations will not be coerced by the Federal Government into participating in activities that violate their conscience.”
It sets forth an exceptionally expansive definition of “religious exercise” that extends to “any act or refusal to act that is motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, whether or not the act is required or compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.” “It’s very sweeping,” said Ira Lupu, a professor emeritus at the George Washington University Law School and an expert on the Constitution’s religion clauses and on the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). “It raises a big question about whether the Constitution or the RFRA authorizes the president to grant religious freedom in such a broad way.”
In particular, said Lupu, the draft order “privileges” a certain set of beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity—beliefs identified most closely with conservative Catholics and evangelical Christians—over others. That, he said, goes beyond “what RFRA might authorize” and may violate the Establishment Clause.
Lupu added that the language of the draft “might invite federal employees,” for example, at the Social Security Administration or Veterans Administration, “to refuse on religious grounds to process applications or respond to questions from those whose benefits depend on same sex marriages.” If other employees do not “fill the gap,” he said, it could “lead to a situation where marriage equality was being de facto undermined by federal employees, especially in religiously conservative communities,” contrary to Supreme Court rulings.
Jenny Pizer, senior counsel and law and policy director for Lambda Legal, said some of the language in the draft order is similar to language in a law passed last year [ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/why-mississippis-law-on-religious-rights-and-lgbt-got-blocked/489731/ ] in Mississippi, which a federal district court ruled violated both the Establishment Clause and the Equal Protection Clause. (The case is now on appeal.) Pizer said the draft order would appear to violate the Establishment Clause by listing a “particular set of religious beliefs and giving special government protection to people who hold those beliefs as opposed to different beliefs.”
Section 4 of the order, “Specific Agency Responsibilities,” requires HHS to issue a rule exempting any person or organization with religious objections from complying with the ACA’s preventive-care mandate—42 U.S.C. 300gg-13(a)(4)—which includes contraceptive coverage. It requires HHS to ensure that anyone purchasing insurance on a health-care exchange have the option of purchasing a plan that neither covers abortions nor “subsidize[s] plans that do provide such coverage.”
And it bars HHS from taking any adverse action against federally funded child-welfare organizations, including those offering adoption, foster, or family support services, that deny anyone these services “due to a conflict with the organization’s religious beliefs.”
Pizer said this language constitutes “a license to discriminate with public money in a series of contexts in which people tend to be vulnerable,” such as against LGBT children in foster care, which is federally funded. More broadly, she said, it would permit organizations receiving federal grants or contracts to provide child welfare services not only to refuse necessary care but to refuse even to “refer the child to another agency or setting that would be protective and affirming and instead place the child in an environment that is aggressively hostile to who that child is, on religious grounds.” Even during the George W. Bush administration, she noted, “there were protections in executive orders that beneficiaries of grantees and contractors were not to be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Section 4 also requires the Department of Justice to establish a new section or working group dedicated to protecting “religious freedom.”
On Tuesday, the White House announced that it would continue President Obama’s executive order protecting federal contractors from anti-LGBT discrimination. Yet the new draft order codifies a laundry list of claims advanced by the Christian right in recent years of indications that the advance of LGBT rights has put the religious freedom of conservative Christians at risk. “They would say this is a nondiscrimination order,” said Lambda Legal’s Pizer. “We disagree. We would say being denied the ability to discriminate against others is not discrimination against you.”
This article was reported in partnership with The Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute.
Updated on 2/2/2017: A White House official, speaking with ABC News [ http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-executive-order-draft-curtail-lgbt-rights/story?id=45209220 ], did not dispute the authenticity of the draft religious freedom executive order, but officials said it is one of hundreds circulating, some drafted by the transition team, others by the White House, not all of which are likely to become policy. The official did not say who drafted this particular order.
*
Executive Order—Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom
EXECUTIVE ORDER
Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, in order to guide the executive branch in formulating and implementing policies with implications for the religious freedom of persons and organizations in America, and to further compliance with the Constitution, applicable statutes, and other legal authorities, it is hereby ordered:
Section 1. Policy. The United States Constitution enshrines and protects the fundamental natural right to religious liberty. This Constitutional protection ensures that Americans and their religious organizations will not be coerced by the Federal Government into participating in activities that violate their consciences, and will remain free to express their viewpoints without suffering adverse treatment from the Federal Government. It shall be the policy of this Administration to protect religious freedom.
Sec. 2. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
(a) “Person” shall have the same definition as “person” in 1 U.S.C. 1.
(b) “Religious exercise” includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, and includes any act or any refusal to act that is motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, whether or not the act is required or compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.
(c) “Religious organization” shall be construed broadly to encompass any organization, including closely held for-profit corporations, operated for a religious purpose, even if its purpose is not exclusively religious, and is not limited to houses of worship or tax-exempt organizations, or organizations controlled by or associated with a house of worship or a convention or association of churches.
Sec. 3 Religious Freedom Principles and Policymaking Criteria. All executive branch departments and agencies (“agencies”) shall, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, adhere to the following principles and criteria when formulating and implementing regulations, actions, or policies:
(a) Religious freedom is not confined to religious organizations or limited to religious exercise that takes place in houses of worship or the home. It is guaranteed to persons of all faiths and extends to all activities of life.
(b) Persons and organizations do not forfeit their religious freedom when providing social services, education, or healthcare; earning a living, seeking a job, or employing others; receiving government grants or contracts: or otherwise participating in the marketplace, the public square, or interfacing with Federal, State or local governments.
(c) As required by religious freedom laws such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq. (“RFRA”) and the religious provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 20003 et seq., agencies shall faithfully discharge their duty to accommodate the religion of federal employees and shall not promulgate regulations, take actions, or enact policies that substantially burden a person’s or religious organization’s religious exercise unless the imposition represents the least restrictive means of furthering a compelling governmental interest. Regulations, actions, or policies shall not be deemed “compelling” simply by virtue of their having been applied neutrally, broadly, or across the Federal Government.
Sec. 4. Specific agency Responsibilities to Avoid Potential Violation of Religious Freedom
(a) The Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Labor, and Treasury shall immediately issue an interim final rule that exempts from the preventative-care mandate set forth in 42 U.S.C. 300gg-13(a)(4) all persons and religious organizations that object to complying with the mandate for religious or moral reasons.
(b) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall take appropriate actions, through mechanisms to ensure compliance with existing statutory and other protections, if necessary, to ensure that any individuals purchasing health insurance in the individual market (whether through a federally facilitated exchange, a state-sponsored health insurance exchange, or otherwise) has the ability to purchase health insurance that does not provide coverage for abortion and does not subsidize plans that do provide such coverage.
(c) The Secretary of Health and human Services shall take all appropriate actions to ensure that the Federal Government shall not discriminate or take any adverse action against a religious organization that provides federally-funded child-welfare services, including promoting or providing adoption, foster, or family support services for children, or similar services, on the basis that the organization declines to provide , facilitate, or refer such services due to a conflict with the organization’s religious beliefs. The Secretary of Health and human Services shall, where authorized by law, promptly propose for notice and comment new regulations consistent with this policy.
(d) All agencies shall, with respect to any person, house of worship, or religious organization that is a recipient of or offeror for a Federal Government contract, subcontract, grant, purchase order, or cooperative agreement, provide protections and exceptions consistent with sections 702(a) and 703(e) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 20003-I(a) and 2000e-2(e)) and section 103(d) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12113(d)). The Secretary of Labor shall, where authorized by law, promptly propose for notice and comment new regulations consistent with this policy.
(e) The Secretary of the Treasury shall ensure that the Department of the Treasury shall not impose any tax or tax penalty, delay or deny tax-exempt status, or disallow tax deductions for contributions made under 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3), or otherwise make unavailable or deny any tax benefits to any person, church, synagogue, house of worship or other religious organization.
(1) on the basis of such person or organization speaking on moral or political issues from a religious perspective where religious speech of similar character has, consistent with law, not ordinarily been treated as an intervention in a political campaign by the Department of the Treasury, or
(2) on the basis that such person or organization believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the belief that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, sexual relations are properly reserved for such a marriage, male and female and their equivalents refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy, physiology, or genetics at or before birth, and that human life begins at conception and merits protection at all stages of life.
The Secretary of the Treasury and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue shall, where authorized by law, promptly propose for notice and comment new regulations consistent with this policy.
(b) No agency shall, to the extent allowed by law, not recognize any decisions or findings made by any federally-recognized accrediting body that revokes or denies accreditation to, or otherwise disadvantages, a religious organization on the basis that such organization believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with a belief described in section 4(e)(2) of this order.
(g) No agency shall exclude or otherwise make unavailable or deny any person or religious organization admission or access to charitable fundraising campaigns on the basis that such person or organization believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the beliefs described in Section 4(e)(2) of this order.
(k) No agency shall take adverse action against any person or religious organization that is a Federal employee, contractor, or grantee on the basis of their speaking or acting in accordance with the beliefs described in section 4(e)(2) of this order while outside the scope of their employment, contract, or grant, and shall reasonably accommodate such speech and action when made within the course of their employment, contract, or grant. This provision shall not be construed to diminish or otherwise limit any other protection provided by this order.
(l) The Attorney General shall establish with the Department of Justice a Section or working group that will ensure that the religious freedom of persons and religious organizations is protected throughout the United States, and shall investigate and, if necessary, take or coordinate appropriate action under applicable religious freedom laws.
Sec. 5. General Provisions.
(a) All agencies shall promptly withdraw or rescind any rulings, directives, regulations, guidance, positions, or interpretations that are inconsistent with this order to the extent of their inconsistency.
(b) The provisions of this order shall prevail in cases of conflict with any existing executive order and with any future executive order unless such future order explicitly refers to, and limited or excludes, the application of this order.
(c) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the authority granted by law to an agency, or the head thereof, or ii) the functions of the OMB Director relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(d) This order shall be carried out subject to the availability of appropriations and to the extent permitted by law.
(e) This order does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies or instrumentalities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
*
Copyright (c) 2017 The Nation Company LLC
https://www.thenation.com/article/leaked-draft-of-trumps-religious-freedom-order-reveals-sweeping-plans-to-legalize-discrimination/ [with comment; comments closed]
--
Democratic base: Obstruct
All In with Chris Hayes
2/1/17
President Donald Trump's nominee for Education Secretary is now perilously close to defeat in her confirmation battle and Democrats are putting pressure on senators from their own party to oppose every Trump nominee, particularly for the Supreme Court. Duration: 6:04
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/democratic-base-obstruct-868086851734
*
The erosion of the Senate's rules & procedures
All In with Chris Hayes
2/1/17
Chris Hayes talks with Republican Senator Ben Sasse about what this means for the president's Supreme Court nominee. Duration: 8:39
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/the-erosion-of-the-senate-s-rules-procedures-868095555761
*
Why did Trump's Yemen raid go wrong?
All In with Chris Hayes
2/1/17
President Trump's first military action resulted in the deaths of a Navy SEAL and an 8-year-old American girl. Duration: 4:35
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/why-did-trump-s-yemen-raid-go-wrong-868088387954
--
Anti-Trump concern sparks widespread activism
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/1/17
Rachel Maddow reports on how the negative response by Americans to the actions of the Donald Trump regime has fostered a new solidarity and a new level of local political activism and advocacy. Duration: 12:51
Christine Weick interrupts Texas Muslim Capitol Day speaker
Controversial activist Christine Weick interrupts a speaker at Texas Muslim Capitol Day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4-C0aZ3V1Q [with (nearly 4,000) comments]
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/anti-trump-concern-sparks-widespread-activism-868194883724 [and see also in particular (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110400989 and preceding and following]
*
Anti-Trump backlash rapidly outpacing tea party in its prime
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/1/17
Rachel Maddow reports on Democrats and anti-Trump opposition groups organizing more quickly and with greater popular support among Americans than the tea party of 2010. Duration: 11:29
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/anti-trump-backlash-rapidly-outpacing-tea-party-in-its-prime-868179523728 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4xmSPefMnI [with comments] [the YouTube also at/see (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128402789 and preceding (and any future following); left this item here for the original source description and link, and to keep this little slice of the record complete] [and see also in particular (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=47797824 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=59075857 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67241728 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90402843 and preceding and following, and http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101083965 and following]
*
Democrats forcing GOP to deal with confirmation system they broke
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/1/17
David Leonhardt, writer and editor for The New York Times, talks with Rachel Maddow about why he thinks Democrats should accept that Republicans broke the confirmation system when they refused to giving Merrick Garland a hearing and should give Neil Gorsuch the same treatment. Duration: 7:59
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/democrats-forcing-gop-to-deal-with-confirmation-system-they-broke-868197955665
*
Senator Booker: What's happening with Trump is worthy of outrage
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/1/17
Senator Cory Booker talks with Rachel Maddow about Democratic opposition to Donald Trump's Supreme Court pick, Neil Gorsuch, the concerns of his constituents about Trump, and the need to stay focused and resist fatigue in challenging Trump. Duration: 9:42
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/senator-booker-what-s-happening-with-trump-is-worthy-of-outrage-868144707700 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDdvwA2FuJM [with comments]
--
Merkley: Dems can't be ‘complicit’ in ‘stolen’ SCOTUS seat
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/1/17
Senator Jeff Merkley joins Lawrence to explain why Democrats must not confirm any nominee for the Supreme Court seat that he says Republicans stole from President Obama. Duration: 15:54
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/merkley-dems-can-t-be-complicit-in-stolen-scotus-seat-868180035786
*
Shocking reports of what Trump said on calls to foreign leaders
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/1/17
Two new reports have leaked details about Donald Trump's phone calls with foreign leaders; he reportedly "blasted" the Australian P.M. and threatened to send the U.S. military into Mexico. E.J. Dionne and Ken Vogel join Lawrence O'Donnell to discuss. Duration: 6:31
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/shocking-reports-of-what-trump-said-on-calls-to-foreign-leaders-868184131616 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ-Hs86LLD4 [with (nearly 4,000) comments]
*
Washington State Gov: Trump's immigration ban is 'un-American'
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/1/17
Lawrence talks to Washington Gov. Jay Inslee whose state was the first to sue President Trump over his executive order on immigration. Duration: 5:20
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/washington-state-governor-trump-s-immigration-ban-is-un-american-868187715555
--
What does it mean for the White House to put Iran 'on notice'
The 11th Hour with Brian Williams
2/1/17
MSNBC's Brian Williams speaks with NBC News's Andrea Mitchell about the White House putting Iran 'on notice,' plus the days other headlines about Trump's rocky phone calls with world leaders. Duration: 7:35
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/watch/what-does-it-mean-for-the-white-house-to-put-iran-on-notice-868209219933
*
Pres. Trump: Frederick Douglass 'has done an amazing job'
The 11th Hour with Brian Williams
2/1/17
The President's remarks about Frederick Douglass at the start of Black History Month created a lot of questions in Washington today. MSNBC's Brian Williams talks to Ali Velshi & Eugene Robinson. Duration: 3:05
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/watch/pres-trump-frederick-douglass-as-done-an-amazing-job-868208707525
--
The Danger Of 5 Year Olds
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by Mike Malloy [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpU4j-LN_aibXA1gONvWzxw / http://www.youtube.com/user/hschulein , http://www.youtube.com/user/hschulein/videos ]
On Saturday, a 5-year-old boy whose mother is Iranian was reportedly detained for hours by himself at Washington Dulles International Airport as President Donald Trump’s immigration order was enforced.
Asked on Monday whether Trump’s order — which critics have called a “Muslim ban” — should apply to 5-year-old children, White House press secretary Sean Spicer gave a clear answer: yes.
“That’s why we slow [the process] down a little,” Spicer said at the daily press briefing. “To make sure that if they are a 5-year-old, that maybe they’re with their parents and they don’t pose a threat. But to assume that just because of someone’s age or gender or whatever that they don’t pose a threat would be misguided and wrong.”
Full story: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/30/14442528/trump-muslim-ban-sean-spicer-5-year-old
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loT5nsLeSi0 [with comments]
*
Fascist America Has No Room For The Truth
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by Mike Malloy
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyklvUuqeMA [with comments]
--
The Not-A-Muslim-Ban Muslim Ban | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC18vz5hUUqxbGvym9ghtX_w , http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC18vz5hUUqxbGvym9ghtX_w/videos ]
This weekend, Trump reminded us of the Emma Lazarus poem: "Give me your tired, your poor, as long as they are not different from me.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RM2HtvLSLs [with (approaching 4,000) comments]
*
Refugees Refused | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
Refugees come here with the audacity to take the Statue of Liberty literally.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQk4t5rUQXA [with comments]
*
Full Frontal has a Heart-On: Lee Gelernt Edition | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
Sam heads back to her bunker to get some gentle Constitutional reassurance from civil rights lawyer Lee Gelernt of the ACLU.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prDkd60WzmU [with comments]
*
Loyal to a T | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
When you run the government, you can replace qualified staffers with whoever will hump your leg the hardest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqYM0Lo3He8 [with comments]
*
Nasty Women: Meet Bad Dudes | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
We're helping Trump identify all of the "bad dudes" in America, while also helping Karam Foundation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9EN-wrCoRg [with comments]
--
Profiles in Tremendousness - SCOTUS Nominee Neil Gorsuch: The Daily Show
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Daily Show with Trevor Noah [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwWhs_6x42TyRM4Wstoq8HA , http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwWhs_6x42TyRM4Wstoq8HA/videos ]
President Trump announces the Supreme Court nomination of Neil Gorsuch, a Colorado judge who may be more conservative than his predecessor, the late Antonin Scalia.
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtARYhz3tjw [with comments]
--
Beyoncé And Trump Celebrate Black History Month In Very Different Ways
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Late Show with Stephen Colbert [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMtFAi84ehTSYSE9XoHefig , http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMtFAi84ehTSYSE9XoHefig/videos ]
Beyoncé kicked off Black History Month with great news about her family, while the President celebrated by offering a salute of his own.
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZr94sKU19M [with comments]
*
President Trump Asks Judge Gorsuch: So You Think You Can SCOTUS?
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Late Show with Stephen Colbert
The President announced his nominee for the Supreme Court with all the class and flair of a rose ceremony on The Bachelor.
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTCLFxkMQPQ [with comments]
--
Amber Reads Donald Trump's Black History Month Speech with Commentary
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Late Night with Seth Meyers [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVTyTA7-g9nopHeHbeuvpRA / http://www.youtube.com/user/LateNightSeth , http://www.youtube.com/user/LateNightSeth/videos ]
Late Night writer Amber Ruffin reads between the lines of President Trump's widely criticized Black History Month speech to explain what he really meant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elg1BF_hfII [with comments]
*
Trump's Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch: Couple Things
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by Late Night with Seth Meyers
Seth calls out Donald Trump for announcing his Supreme Court nominee like a reality TV show.
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETEbVykUftM [with comments]
--
Donald Trump Through a Loudspeaker, Darkly
In the next four to eight years, American children will be born in a country led by a vainglorious man who wishes to subordinate facts to his ego.
PHOTOGRAPH BY MARK PETERSON / REDUX
By Jiayang Fan
February 2, 2017
If you were a child growing up in China in the late nineteen-eighties, you learned fairly early the universe of things that were less than dependable: hot water, the bus schedule, and, most irritatingly—if you were an introverted second grader—the capricious offerings of the itinerant book cart. But one aspect of our lives, from birth until, it seemed to me, death, remained as constant as the sunrise. This was the voice of the loudspeaker broadcasts in our Army hospital compound (my mother was a military doctor), which woke me every morning before I could witness the dawn, accompanying me through all three meals and, as I brushed my teeth for bed, sometimes long after dusk.
The first time I read “1984,” George Orwell’s classic dystopia, I was an eleventh grader in America, and its portrayal of a world rife with loudspeaker announcements and an omnipotent Party did not strike me as related to the world we had left behind when I was eight years old. Winston Smith, the protagonist of “1984,” is confined in an authoritarian prison, deprived of the most fundamental freedoms and inculcated with Newspeak. In my early childhood, at least as I remembered it, everyone I knew lived ordinary, unmolested lives.
An impassioned teacher, given to rhetorical drama, once tried to convince me otherwise: “Don’t you see? The Chinese government hurt its own people, and you were a helpless victim.” But I’m not hurt, I insisted. “I mean, a victim of that cruel society,” she pleaded, in the manner of a missionary, impatient with the pagan who won’t see the light. The two of us went on like this for some time, both growing increasingly exasperated, neither capable of explaining to the other her version of truth and reality. Other details in our conversation have been lost to time, but I never shook the expression on her face, flushed grapefruit pink and, it seemed to me, quivering on the precipice of tears.
Years later, I recognized the expression on my teacher’s face as one of profound frustration with perceived irrationality. I knew it because, when I tried to begin a conversation with my mother about the inglorious deeds of the Chinese Communist Party (of which she had been a dedicated member for two decades), she recoiled with such violence that I understood instantly that my catalogue of facts was irrelevant. A complete rejection of the Party would amount to a denial of the better part of her adult life. It was not political but personal, and rationality had nothing to do with it.
Rational reasoning and truth have been much on my mind as we enter a world of alternative facts and crypto-fascist edicts from the White House, less than two weeks into Donald Trump’s Administration. Last week, when “1984” rose toward the top of Amazon’s best-seller list, I dug out my dog-eared paperback copy and reread a quotation that I had underlined a decade and a half earlier: “For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?”
In recent days, as Trump and his cohorts have peddled blatant falsehoods—that his Inauguration attracted the largest crowd in history, or that he lost the popular vote owing to millions of votes by illegal aliens—I have wondered about the extent to which minds can be controlled, or, rather, commandeered, by the relentless deluge of misinformation.
Like many Chinese immigrants, my mother and I came to America so that my father could pursue graduate studies, not to seek political freedom. When I was old enough to study the Cultural Revolution and the Tiananmen massacre, periods in Chinese history when the authoritarian government subjected its citizenry to inexpressible brutality, I would wonder about everything I knew, or thought I had known. The one time I asked my mother about why she did not resist, she answered distractedly and somewhat defensively: it was a very confused time. Who could know what was true and what was false? What to believe and whom to trust?
The muddling of fact and fiction is a tried-and-true tactic of totalitarian regimes. What’s more, when the two are confused for long enough, or when an indefatigable war on truth has been waged for a year, or two years, or perhaps eight, it will likely be harder and more tiresome to untangle them and remember a time when a firm line was drawn between the true and the false as a matter of course. If amnesia breeds normalization, fatigue has always served as the authoritarian’s great accomplice.
At the time my mother and I were getting ready to leave for America, neither of us knew the ways in which the contours of the world could be different. For people of my mother’s generation, the Party’s truth had become so embedded in their understanding of themselves that the boundary between what they represented and what the government propagandized had faded, shifting to form the outline of a manufactured reality.
Perhaps this is exactly what Trump and his more ideological aides, Steve Bannon among them, envision. But it’s just as likely that they, too, have become so convinced of their alternative reality that what we recognize to be fiction genuinely constitutes their fact. Orwell again: “If you want to keep a secret, you must also hide it from yourself.” In any case, no matter what Trump thinks of China, something about the increasingly aggressive repression of the media by China’s President, Xi Jinping, may well hold some appeal for him as a model. How liberating would it be, Trump might wonder, to make all legislation a matter of executive orders and sign them at will without Congress, vexing million-strong protests, and a media that readily reports them?
In the next four to eight years, American children will be born in a country led by a vainglorious man who wishes to fit facts—and their future—into the convenient shape of his ego. But democracy, freedom of expression, and, above all, the right to truth are not antiquated pieties. They belong to citizens who can still make their voices heard, before resignation metastasizes into complacency, exhaustion into self-doubt. The struggle will be to maintain openness and tolerance as the norm, the values that our children absorb into their identities naturally—to be defended rather than be defensive about.
On the day that Donald Trump was inaugurated, I received a message from a man who had previously disparaged my work on social media: “Welcome to your destiny.” I imagined him smirking as he typed those words and I wanted to tell him that he got it backward, that I already know what it is like to live in a world with an omnipotent leader and a renovated reality. I have known loudspeakers, their mass persuasions, emotional arousals, and booming, relentless broadcasts. And I know that they are not my destiny, because I won’t let them be.
© 2017 Condé Nast (emphasis in original)
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/donald-trump-through-a-loudspeaker-darkly
--
White House nixed Holocaust statement naming Jews
The State Department wrote a message that recognized Jewish victims, but the White House used its own that didn’t.
President Donald Trump’s White House reportedly blocked the statement's release.
02/02/2017 Updated 02/02/2017
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/white-house-holocaust-jews-234572 [with comments]
--
Trump's Supreme Court Pick Is A Disciple Of Scalia's 'Originalist' Crusade
Supreme Court nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, faces members of the media while meeting with Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., in his Senate office.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
By Lauren Russell and Nina Totenberg
February 2, 2017 6:00 AM ET
The late Justice Antonin Scalia may not have been the original originalist [ http://www.npr.org/2016/02/14/466744465/originalism-a-primer-on-scalias-constitutional-philosophy ], but he popularized what once had been a fringe legal doctrine. He argued for it both on and off the U.S. Supreme Court and brought originalism into, if not the mainstream, then at least into the center of legal debate.
Judge Neil Gorsuch [ http://www.npr.org/2017/01/31/511850519/who-is-neil-gorsuch-trumps-first-pick-for-the-supreme-court ], who is nominated to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by Scalia's death, is a self-proclaimed disciple of Scalia's crusade. Indeed, in a recent speech, he recalled how he wept on the ski slopes of Colorado upon learning of Scalia's death.
So what is originalism?
Scalia famously described it this way:
The Constitution that I interpret and apply is not living but dead, or as I prefer to call it, enduring. It means today not what current society, much less the court, thinks it ought to mean, but what it meant when it was adopted.
What drove the increasing acceptance of originalism on the Supreme Court was Scalia's uncompromising commitment to his personal judicial philosophy and the growth of the conservative Federalist Society in academia, spawning, in turn, more and more advocates of the theory.
Also significantly contributing was the luck of the Supreme Court draw.
From 1980 on, Republican presidents got the chance to fill seven seats on the Supreme Court, and at each rotation, the new justice was more conservative than the person he or she replaced. That, too, reflected the increasing conservative drift of the Republican Party, with evangelicals and other social conservatives gaining more power and influence.
Scalia and other justices have embraced originalism as a way to check what they viewed as the growing and unbounded power of the judiciary. They contended that if policy changes take place, the changes should come through the democratic process rather than through the unelected courts.
At a 2016 lecture at a law school, Gorsuch said the "great project of Justice Scalia's career was to remind us of the differences between judges and legislators:"
"To remind us that legislators may appeal to their own moral convictions and to claims about social utility to reshape the law as they think it should be in the future. But that judges should do none of these things in a democratic society. That judges should instead strive (if humanly and so imperfectly) to apply the law as it is, focusing backward, not forward, and looking to text, structure, and history to decide what a reasonable reader at the time of the events in question would have understood the law to be— not to decide cases based on their own moral convictions or the policy consequences they believe might serve society best."
There are no transcripts of the framers' conversations while they drafted the Constitution, so no one knows precisely what they were thinking as they wrote it. There are, however, records of the ratification debates, which originalists rely on to determine intent.
"The modern version of originalism is looking for the original public meaning of the Constitution and isn't looking for subjective framers' views, so the views of the ratifiers, in that case, is more important," said Todd Gaziano, senior fellow in constitutional law at the Pacific Legal Foundation.
Critics of originalism contend that its advocates pick and choose when they are willing to defer to the elected branches. They note that originalists have been willing to strike down federal laws adopted by large congressional majorities, invalidating laws and reversing decades of legal precedents governing campaign finance regulations [ http://www.npr.org/2014/04/02/298347681/supreme-court-strikes-down-key-part-of-campaign-finance-law ] and voting rights [ http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/06/25/195627046/voting-rights-ruling-could-open-lawsuit-floodgates ], for instance.
The living constitutionalists' take on originalism
Gorsuch has stressed, as have other originalists, that the job of a judge should be to "look backward" at what the Founding Fathers meant at the time they wrote and ratified the Constitution. One-time constitutional law professor Barack Obama summarized the critique of that theory this way in his book The Audacity of Hope:
Anyone like Justice Scalia, looking to resolve our modern constitutional dispute through strict construction, has one big problem: The founders themselves disagreed profoundly, vehemently, on the meaning of their masterpiece. Before the ink on the constitutional parchment was dry, arguments had erupted not just about minor provisions, but about first principles; not just between peripheral figures, but within the revolution's very core.
Those critical of originalism argue that a static interpretation of the law lags behind society's progress.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg [ http://www.npr.org/2016/10/03/495820477/no-ruth-bader-ginsburg-does-not-intend-to-retire-anytime-soon ], currently the Supreme Court's leading liberal voice, embraces the idea of a "living constitution," a notion disdained by originalists as too flexible.
"As I see it, it isn't the Supreme Court that is deciding for the whole society, like an imperial ruler," she said at an event in February 2014. Speaking of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, she said, "there hasn't been any major change in which there wasn't a groundswell among the people before the Supreme Court put its stamp of approval on the inclusion in the equality concept of people who were once left out.
"It was a huge embarrassment that racism persisted in our country, that our troops in World War II until the very end were separated. I think that World War II made inevitable the change with respect to the status of racial minorities. And it was the same way with women's increasing demand to count as full citizens."
Sparring on the Supreme Court over constitutional interpretation
Some of the most discussed and controversial Supreme Court decisions come down to the justices' disagreements as to whether the Constitution should be viewed as a "dead" or "enduring" document, as Scalia called it, or a "living" one.
Those disagreements were never more apparent than in a series of decisions about gay rights written by the usually conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy [ http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/06/26/195917213/justice-kennedy-at-center-of-gay-rights-decisions-for-a-decade ], who is often dubbed the swing vote on the Supreme Court because he sometimes votes with the Court's liberals. In a decision striking down a Texas law that criminalized private, consensual "homosexual conduct," Kennedy asserted that the Founding Fathers did not specify all liberties because they expected that list to change.
"They knew times can blind us to certain truths, and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress," Kennedy said while summarizing his opinion from the bench.
"It is the promise of the Constitution that there is a realm of personal liberty which the government may not enter," he said.
Scalia dissented, declaring, "It is clear from this that the Court has taken sides in the culture war, and in particular, in that battle of the culture war that concerns whether there should be any moral opprobrium attached to homosexual conduct."
The same-sex marriage cases also divided along similar lines.
"The dynamic of our constitutional system is that individuals need not await legislative action before asserting a fundamental right," Kennedy said from the bench in announcing the 2015 same-sex marriage opinion.
In his dissent, Scalia included a scathing footnote on Kennedy's opinion.
If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: "The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity," I would hide my head in a bag.
Chief Justice John Roberts [ http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/06/26/417720924/roberts-celebrate-todays-decision-but-do-not-celebrate-the-constitution ], reading his dissent from the bench, said policy arguments for same-sex marriage are compelling.
"But allowing unelected judges to strike down democratically enacted laws based on rights that are not actually written in the Constitution raises obvious concerns about the judicial role," he said. Leave it to the democratic process, said Roberts.
© 2017 npr
http://www.npr.org/2017/02/02/512891485/trumps-supreme-court-pick-is-a-disciple-of-scalias-originalist-crusade
*
Gorsuch and Such
Some viewers were skeptical about a purported Columbia University yearbook entry for Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, but the image is genuine.
Claim: Neil Gorsuch quoted Henry Kissinger in his Columbial University yearbook entry.
TRUE
Feb 01, 2017
http://www.snopes.com/neil-gorsuch-yearbook/
--
Advice for Progressives from America’s Radical Feminist Governor
Kate Brown, the governor of Oregon, after her Inaugural Address, in Salem, in early January.
February 2, 2017
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/advice-for-progressives-from-americas-radical-feminist-governor
--
Evan McMullin Is Trying to Save Democracy
As Trump unleashes his id on the American people, Evan McMullin seeks to encourage civic engagement; point out the early signs of authoritarianism; and demonstrate that it is still O.K. to criticize our leaders.
The former C.I.A. operative and failed Presidential candidate has become an unlikely civic superego for the age of Trump.
February 2, 2017
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/persons-of-interest/evan-mcmullins-quest-to-save-democracy
--
President Trump complete remarks at National Prayer Breakfast (C-SPAN)
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by C-SPAN [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCb--64Gl51jIEVE-GLDAVTg / http://www.youtube.com/user/CSPAN , http://www.youtube.com/user/CSPAN/videos ]
President Trump delivers remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast.
Watch the complete event video here:
National Prayer Breakfast
President Trump and members of Congress deliver remarks at the 65th annual National Prayer Breakfast.
February 2, 2017
https://www.c-span.org/video/?423370-1/president-trump-delivers-remarks-national-prayer-breakfast
*
Donald Trump gave a doozy of a speech at the National Prayer Breakfast
February 2, 2017
Donald Trump spoke at the annual National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday. It was, um, unorthodox.
TRUMP: Thank you, Mark. So nice.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you very much, thank you. (APPLAUSE)
Thank you very much, it's a great honor to be here this morning. And so many faith leaders -- very, very important people to me -- from across our magnificent nation, and so many leaders from all across the globe. Today we continue a tradition begun by President Eisenhower some 64 years ago.
This gathering is a testament to the power of faith and is one of the great customs of our nation. And I hope to be here seven more times with you.
(APPLAUSE)
I want very much to thank our co-chair Senator Boozman and Senator Coons. And all of the congressional leadership; they're all over the place. We have a lot of very distinguished guests. And we have one guest who was just sworn in last night, Rex Tillerson, secretary of state.
(APPLAUSE)
Gonna do a great job.
(APPLAUSE)
Some people didn't like Rex because he actually got along with leaders of the world. I said, no, you have to understand that's a good thing. That's a good thing, not a bad thing. He's respected all over the world and I think he's going to go down as one of our great, great secretaries.
We appreciate it.
Thank you, thank you, Rex.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you as well to Senate Chaplain Barry Black, for his moving words. And I don't know Chaplain whether or not that's an appointed position -- is that an appointed position? I don't even know if you're Democrat or if you're Republican, but I'm appointing you for another year, the hell with it.
(LAUGHTER)
And I think it's not even my appointment, it's the Senate's appointment, but we'll talk to them. You're very -- you're -- your son is here. Your job is very, very secure. OK?
(LAUGHTER)
Thank you, Barry. Appreciate it very much.
I also want to thank my great friends the Roma. Where's Roma, beautiful Roma Downey, the voice of an angel. She's got the voice -- every time I hear that voice; it's so beautiful. That -- everything is so beautiful about Roma, including her husband because he's a special, special friend. Mark Burnett for the wonderful introduction.
So true, so true. I said to the agent, I'm sorry, the only thing wrong -- I actually got on the phone and fired him myself because he said, you don't want to do it, it'll never work, it'll never, ever work, you don't want to do it. I said, listen. When I really fired him after it became the number one show, it became so successful and he wanted a commission and he didn't want to this.
That's when I really said -- but we had tremendous success on The Apprentice. And when I ran for president, I had to leave the show. That's when I knew for sure that I was doing it. And they hired a big, big movie star, Arnold Schwarzenegger, to take my place. And we know how that turned out.
The ratings went down the tubes. It's been a total disaster and Mark will never, ever bet against Trump again. And I want to just pray for Arnold if we can, for those ratings, OK?
(LAUGHTER)
But we've had an amazing life together the last 14, 15 years. And a -- an outstanding man and thank you very much for introducing. Appreciate it. It's a great honor.
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: I also want to thank my dear friend, Vice President Mike Pence, who has been incredible.
(APPLAUSE)
And incredible wife, Karen.
And every time I was in a little trouble with something where they were questioning me, they'd say, "But he picked Mike Pence."
(LAUGHTER)
"So he has to know what he's doing."
(LAUGHTER)
And it's true, he's been -- you know on the scale of zero to 10, I rate him a 12, OK?
So I wanna thank you, thank you very much, appreciate it.
(APPLAUSE)
But most importantly, today I wanna thank the American people. Your faith and prayers have sustained me and inspired me through some very, very tough times. All around America, I have met amazing people whose words of worship and encouragement have been a constant source of strength.
What I hear most often as I travel the country are five words that never, ever fail to touch my heart, that's "I am praying for you." I hear it so often, I am praying for you, Mr. President.
(APPLAUSE)
No one has inspired me more in my travels than the families of the United States military. Men and women who have put their lives on the line everyday for their country and their countrymen. I just came back yesterday, from Dover Air Force Base, to join the family of Chief William "Ryan" Owens as America's fallen hero was returned home.
Very, very sad, but very, very beautiful, very, very beautiful. His family was there, incredible family, loved him so much, so devastated, he was so devastated, but the ceremony was amazing. He died in defense of our nation. He gave his life in defense of our people. Our debt to him and our debt to his family is eternal and everlasting. "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."
We will never forget the men and women who wear the uniform, believe me.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
From generation to generation, their vigilance has kept our liberty alive. Our freedom is won by their sacrifice and our security has been earned with their sweat and blood and tears. God has blessed this land to give us such incredible heroes and patriots. They are very, very special and we are going to take care of them.
(APPLAUSE)
Our soldiers understand that what matters is not party or ideology or creed, but the bonds of loyalty that link us all together as one. America is a nation of believers. In towns all across our land, it's plain to see what we easily forget -- so easily we forget this, that the quality of our lives is not defined by our material success, but by our spiritual success.
I will tell you that and I tell you that from somebody that has had material success and knows tremendous numbers of people with great material success, the most material success. Many of those people are very, very miserable, unhappy people.
And I know a lot of people without that, but they have great families. They have great faith; they don't have money, at least, not nearly to the extent. And they're happy. Those, to me, are the successful people, I have to tell you.
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: I was blessed to be raised in a churched home. My mother and father taught me that to whom much is given, much is expected. I was sworn in on the very Bible from which my mother would teach us as young children, and that faith lives on in my heart every single day.
The people in this room come from many, many backgrounds. You represent so many religions and so many views. But we are all united by our faith, in our creator and our firm knowledge that we are all equal in His eyes. We are not just flesh and bone and blood, we are human beings with souls. Our republic was formed on the basis that freedom is not a gift from government, but that freedom is a gift from God.
(APPLAUSE)
It was the great Thomas Jefferson who said, the God who gave us life, gave us liberty. Jefferson asked, can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God. Among those freedoms is the right to worship according to our own beliefs. That is why I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution. I will do that, remember.
(APPLAUSE)
Freedom of religion is a sacred right, but it is also a right under threat all around us, and the world is under serious, serious threat in so many different ways. And I've never seen it so much and so openly as since I took the position of president.
The world is in trouble, but we're going to straighten it out. OK? That's what I do. I fix things. We're going to straighten it out.
(APPLAUSE)
Believe me. When you hear about the tough phone calls I'm having, don't worry about it. Just don't worry about it. They're tough. We have to tough. It's time we're going to be a little tough folks. We're taking advantage of by every nation in the world virtually. It's not going to happen anymore. It's not going to happen anymore. We have seen unimaginable violence carried out in the name of religion. Acts of wantonness (ph) (inaudible) just minorities. Horrors on a scale that defy description.
Terrorism is a fundamental threat to religious freedom. It must be stopped and it will be stopped. It may not be pretty for a little while. It will be stopped. We have seen...
(APPLAUSE)
And by the way, General, as you know James "Mad Dog", shouldn't say it in this room, Mattis, now there's a reason they call him "Mad Dog" Mattis, never lost a battle, always wins them, and always wins them fast. He's our new secretary of Defense, will be working with Rex. He's right now in South Korea, going to Japan, going to some other spots. I'll tell you what, I've gotten to know him really well. He's the real deal. We have somebody who's the real deal working for us and that's what we need. So, you watch. You just watch.
(APPLAUSE)
Things will be different. We have seen peace loving Muslims brutalize, victimize, murdered and oppressed by ISIS killers. We have seen threats of extermination against the Jewish people. We have seen a campaign of ISIS and genocide against Christians, where they cut of heads. Not since the Middle Ages have we seen that. We haven't seen that, the cutting off of heads. Now they cut off the heads, they drown people in steel cages. Haven't seen this. I haven't seen this. Nobody's seen this for many, many years.
TRUMP: All nations have a moral obligation to speak out against such violence. All nations have a duty to work together to confront it and to confront it viciously if we have to.
So I want to express clearly today, to the American people, that my administration will do everything in its power to defend and protect religious liberty in our land. America must forever remain a tolerant society where all face are respected and where all of our citizens can feel safe and secure.
We have to feel safe and secure. In recent days, we have begun to take necessary action to achieve that goal. Our nation has the most generous immigration system in the world. But these are those and there are those that would exploit that generosity to undermine the values that we hold so dear. We need security.
There are those who would seek to enter our country for the purpose of spreading violence, or oppressing other people based upon their faith or their lifestyle, not right. We will not allow a beachhead of intolerance to spread in our nation. You look all over the world and you see what's happening.
So in the coming days, we will develop a system to help ensure that those admitted into our country fully embrace our values of religious and personal liberty. And that they reject any form of oppression and discrimination. We want people to come into our nation, but we want people to love us and to love our values, not to hate us and to hate our values.
We will be a safe country, we will be a free country and we will be a country where all citizens can practice their beliefs without fear of hostility or a fear of violence. America will flourish, as long as our liberty, and in particular, our religious liberty is allowed to flourish.
(APPLAUSE)
America will succeed, as long as our most vulnerable citizens -- and we have some that are so vulnerable -- have a path to success. And America will thrive, as long as we continue to have faith in each other and faith in God.
(APPLAUSE)
That faith in God has inspired men and women to sacrifice for the needy, to deploy to wars overseas and to lock arms at home, to ensure equal rights for every man, woman and child in our land. It's that faith that sent the pilgrims across the oceans, the pioneers across the plains and the young people all across America, to chase their dreams. They are chasing their dreams. We are going to bring those dreams back.
As long as we have God, we are never, ever alone. Whether it's the soldier on the night watch, or the single parent on the night shift, God will always give us solace and strength, and comfort. We need to carry on and to keep carrying on.
For us here in Washington, we must never, ever stop asking God for the wisdom to serve the public, according to his will. That's why...
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
That's why President Eisenhower and Senator Carlson had the wisdom to gather together 64 years ago, to begin this truly great tradition. But that's not all they did together. Lemme tell you the rest of the story.
Just one year later, Senator Carlson was among the members of Congress to send to the president's desk a joint resolution that added, "Under God," to our Pledge of Allegiance. It's a great thing.
(APPLAUSE)
Because that's what we are and that is what we will always be and that is what our people want; one beautiful nation, under God.
Thank you, God bless you and God bless America. Thank you very much. Thank you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/02/donald-trump-gave-a-doozy-of-a-speech-at-the-national-prayer-breakfast/ [with embedded video and annotations, and comments]
*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1OeUXQ2k8c [with comments]
*
Donald Trump Declares a Vision of Religious Nationalism
Donald Trump attends the National Prayer Breakfast.
At the annual prayer breakfast in Washington, the president focused on the violent, ideological threats to America.
Emma Green
Feb 1, 2017
When Donald Trump looks out on the world, he sees a landscape of potential threats to the United States and its values. “Freedom of religion is a sacred right, but also a right under threat all around us,” the president said at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday. “The world is under serious, serious threat in so many different ways,” he went on, “but we’re going to straighten it out. That’s what I do. I fix things.”
He laid out a vision of what it means to end these threats to United States: Stop terrorism. End the persecution of Middle Eastern Christians. Defend the country’s borders from those who “would exploit that generosity to undermine the values we hold so dear.” Religious Americans also feel threatened within the U.S., he said: “That is why I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment,” a provision of the tax code that prohibits [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/how-trump-is-trying-to-put-more-money-in-politics/493823/ ] religious leaders and institutions endorsing or opposing political candidates, “and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution.” Repealing the Johnson Amendment would theoretically allow houses of worship and religious leaders to openly advocate for political candidates while retaining their tax-exempt status, while also allowing them to funnel religious donations [id.] into explicitly political efforts.
Trump is championing an agenda of religious nationalism [ https://thinkprogress.org/trump-is-creating-a-new-form-of-christian-nationalism-centered-around-himself-d8687f41cc49 ]. Along with key White House staffers like Stephen Bannon [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trump-america-first/514037/ ], he believes America represents a set of values, rooted in the country’s religious identity. While there’s little evidence [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/trumps-sunday-school/492653/ ] that Trump himself is religiously devout, he has benefited [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/the-religious-liberty-showdowns-coming-in-2017/511400/ ] from affiliations with largely white evangelical leaders such as Jerry Falwell Jr.
During his speech, Trump argued that America’s religiously grounded values are being attacked—not just through acts of violence, but through ideological erosion. “We will not allow a beachhead of intolerance to spread in our nation,” Trump said on Thursday, seeming to refer to the “radical Islamic extremism” he has emphasized [ https://www.theatlantic.com/liveblogs/2017/01/live-coverage-of-the-presidential-inauguration/513785/13973/ ] in past speeches. “You look all over the world and see what’s happening.” He will defend these values, he said, because “that’s what people want: one beautiful nation under God.”
America was not always “one nation under God”—at least, not officially. The words “under God” weren’t added to the pledge of allegiance until 1954, during the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower—not coincidentally, the first president to convene the National Prayer Breakfast. Over time, this relatively new tradition has become a mandatory exercise for commanders in chief; and during the breakfast this year, Trump specifically praised Eisenhower for kicking it off.
In many ways, Trump’s vision of religious nationalism is a continuation of Republican presidents before him. In an interview [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/donald-trump-christian-libertarianism/494843/ ] in August, the Princeton University professor Kevin Kruse pointed out that Trump’s religious rhetoric more closely resembles Nixon’s than Eisenhower’s: “He used it to justify the extent of the Vietnam War and Cambodia; he used it to advance all sorts of Silent Majority proposals before Congress,” Kruse told me. “That’s what you see in Trump today: It’s much more of a defensive pushback against people who are seen as outside one nation under God.”
This echoes recent findings [ http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/02/01/faith-few-strong-links-to-national-identity/ ] of the Pew Research Center on Americans’ sense of their own national identity. While only a third of Americans believe being Christian is a very important part of being American, the numbers are split neatly along party and denominational lines: 43 percent of Republicans were likely to say that’s the case, compared to 29 percent of Democrats, and 57 percent of white evangelical Protestants said the same. Trump’s message seems to be directed toward these groups: He is affirming their sense of the tie between national and religious identity, and pushing back against those who would diminish either of those identities.
And he’s doing this through fear. In his comments at the prayer breakfast, Trump gave a graphic description of Christians being murdered overseas: “They cut off the heads, they drown people in steel cages,” he said. He also spoke “peace-loving Muslims brutalized, victimized, murdered and oppressed by ISIS killers,” and the threats against the Jewish people. He was inclusive in his description of those who are under threat, for the sake of emphasizing the need for fear: “We have seen unimaginable violence carried out in the name of religion,” he said, “acts of wanton abuse of minorities, horrors on a scale that defy description.” The fundamental threat to religious freedom, he said, is terrorism.
While Trump has often spoken about the need for safety and security, his comments at the prayer-breakfast offer a look at the ideological framework beneath that call. Like his Republican predecessors, he has aligned himself with a vision of America that is strong and powerful because of its piety. Against the threat of foreigners, terrorists, and corrupting ideologies, the United States will be one, beautiful nation—and in Trump’s view, that’s only possible under God.
Related Story
Why Donald Trump Appeals to Evangelicals
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/donald-trump-christian-libertarianism/494843/
Copyright © 2017 by The Atlantic Monthly Group
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/donald-trump-national-prayer-breakfast/515445/ [with comments]
*
The religious right understood Trump perfectly. Now he’s delivering for them.
February 2, 2017
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/02/02/the-religious-right-understood-trump-perfectly-now-hes-delivering-for-them/ [with embedded video, and comments]
*
Donald Trump threatens to "straighten out" the world in chilling speech to religious leaders
The President said we shouldn't worry about "tough phone calls" he's had with world leaders, like the one where he reportedly threatened to send troops into Mexico
2 FEB 2017 Updated 2 FEB 2017
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/donald-trump-threatens-straighten-out-9745335 [with embedded video, and comments]
*
Arnold Schwarzenegger Responds to Trump | ABC News
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by ABC News [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBi2mrWuNuyYy4gbM6fU18Q / http://www.youtube.com/user/ABCNews , http://www.youtube.com/user/ABCNews/videos ]
Arnold Schwarzenegger responds after Pres. Donald J. Trump jokes he'll pray for him over The New Celebrity Apprentice ratings: "Why don't we switch jobs?" http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-trump-attend-national-prayer-breakfast/story?id=45203891
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6im-gTsGzkc [with comments]
--
Full Show - Berkeley Riot Aftermath: 1st Amendment Under Attack - 02/02/2017
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel
On this Thursday, Feb. 2nd 2017 broadcast of the ["the most classic form of total projection the world has ever seen"] Alex Jones Show [with Anthony Cumia guest-hosting the fourth hour], protests erupt at UC Berkeley as social justice warriors combine their special snowflake powers to shut down the evil Milo Yiannopoulos. Meanwhile President Trump addresses Iran's missile testing, continues to work on the border wall, and negotiates with Australian leaders. On today's show, we speak with Irish journalist and documentary filmmaker Phelim McAleer about his latest film, "Gosnell: The Untold Story of America's Most Prolific Serial Killer," covering an abortionist who was convicted of killing four people, including three babies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VAZyn9CeDM [with comments]
--
Conway cites "Bowling Green Massacre" to defend refugee ban [original title: "Matthews pushes Conway on use of Executive Power"]
Hardball with Chris Matthews
2/2/17
Chris Matthews pushes Kellyanne Conway, Counselor to the President, on whether President Trump can insist that federal workers agree with his policies and further discuss the executive order on immigration. [following sentence added February 3, 2017:] This morning [February 3, 2017], Conway tweeted a clarification saying she meant to say “Bowling Green terrorists.” Duration: 5:42
A top White House adviser cited a nonexistent terror attack in MSNBC interview
Kellyanne Conway
Feb. 3, 2017
http://www.businessinsider.com/bowling-green-massacre-fake-kellyanne-conway-immigration-donald-trump-2017-2 [with this YouTube embedded]
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/hardball/watch/matthews-pushes-conway-on-use-of-executive-power-868952643695 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-w16cyQ8wQ [with comments]
--
US nonprofits reject funds to fight extremism due to Trump
In this image from video, taken Feb. 1, 2017, Suehaila Amen, a board member of the Dearborn, Mich.-based nonprofit Leaders Advancing and Helping Communities, speaks during an interview with The Associated Press in Dearborn, Mich. LAHC was awarded federal grant money to combat violent extremism, but is rejecting the money.
Feb. 2, 2017
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/29ad5c88c132422f91600d2e818b62f5/us-nonprofits-reject-funds-fight-extremism-due-trump
--
Melania Trump’s $150-Million Lawsuit Against The Daily Mail Has Been Dismissed
The first lady had sued the Daily Mail and a political blogger for claiming in stories she worked as a “high-end escort” and suffered from a “full-blown nervous breakdown.”
Feb. 2, 2017
https://www.buzzfeed.com/claudiarosenbaum/maryland-judge-dismisses-melania-trumps-150-million-lawsuit [with comments]
--
Trump Is Running the Government Like a Cheap Reality TV Show
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by GQ
In the latest episode of Trumped, the President treats the nomination of the next Supreme Court justice like a low-rent version of The Bachelor’s rose ceremony.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzMc6_Atpx0 [with comments]
--
Tim Kaine: Trump is strengthening our enemies
All In with Chris Hayes
2/2/17
The new president has harsh words and threats for allies Australia and Mexico - but is curiously silent on Russian aggression in Ukraine. Duration: 14:43
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Sean Spicer, 2/2/2017, #7
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/02/press-briefing-press-secretary-sean-spicer-222017-7
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/tim-kaine-trump-is-strengthening-our-enemies-869026371912
*
Sources contradict White House on Yemen raid
All In with Chris Hayes
2/2/17
The Trump administration's characterization of Sunday's SEAL team raid in Yemen is evolving as more questions have been raised about the operation and contradictions are arising. Duration: 8:34
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Sean Spicer, 2/2/2017, #7
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/02/press-briefing-press-secretary-sean-spicer-222017-7
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/sources-contradict-white-house-on-yemen-raid-869027907533
--
Exposed: Who Really Instigated The Berkley Protests
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel
If you have never heard of Robert Reich, it is time to make him famous, not for a good reason. This mentally deranged liberal professor is promoting protests that have turned violent every time.
[from the February 2, 2017 Infowars Nightly News]
100 Days Resistance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sueka7aZLsg [with comments]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiSXXwLPrec [with comments]
*
Hollywood Calls For The Overthrow Of President Trump
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel
Despite Trump protests getting more violent, liberal hollywood is still promoting the anti-Trump protests, instigating the destruction of our great nation.
[from the February 2, 2017 Infowars Nightly News]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBCODUcogew [with comments]
*
Democrats Are Organizing A Coup Against Trump
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel
Alex Jones covers the latest news about the left's attempts to overthrow Trump.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BghC7JHYpI [with (over 6,000) comments] [a must-watch, from beginning to end]
--
New Trump era emboldens Putin, a perilous time for Putin critics
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/2/17
Rachel Maddow reports on how the Donald Trump era has emboldened Vladimir Putin, and reminds viewers of the murder of Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov and the poisoning of Putin critic Vladimir Kara-Murza. Duration: 20:38
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/new-trump-era-emboldens-putin-a-perilous-time-for-putin-critics-869105731970 [and see also in particular (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128235280 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128229535 and preceding and following]
*
Persecution of Putin opposition a test for Tillerson
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/2/17
Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia, talks with Rachel Maddow about dangers political opponents of Vladimir Putin face, and the increased anxiety with Putin admirer Donald Trump in the White House and Putin friend Rex Tillerson installed as Secretary of State. Duration: 6:02
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/persecution-of-putin-opposition-a-test-for-tillerson-869111875703
*
Trump's ill-fated Yemen raid raises risk/reward questions
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/2/17
David Sanger, national security correspondent for the New York Times, talks with Rachel Maddow about the planning and unanticipated obstacles that befell Donald Trump's first ordered counter-terrorism raid in Yemen. Duration: 11:14
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/trump-s-ill-fated-yemen-raid-raises-risk-reward-questions-869077571519
--
Leaks throw Trump White House into chaos
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/2/17
Donald Trump's mishaps in the White House are being made public thanks to an unprecedented level of leaks – some by aides trying to influence him, others to sound the alarm. Lawrence discusses with John Heilemann and Eli Stokols. Duration: 12:40
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/leaks-throw-trump-white-house-into-chaos-869099075808
*
Rewrite: Why Donald Trump is wrong about Harley-Davidson
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/2/17
Trump was forced to meet Harley-Davidson executives at the White House after fear of protests led to the cancellation of an event at a Wisconsin factory. In the Rewrite, Lawrence corrects what Trump said about Harley-Davidson – with the help of some old photos. Duration: 6:19
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/rewrite-why-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-harley-davidson-869109315952
--
Trump White House could be hours away from new Iran sanctions
The 11th Hour with Brian Williams
2/2/17
MSNBC's Brian Williams covers the days fast-moving details in the world of U.S. foreign policy with Kasie Hunt, Michael Crowley, Megan Murphy, and Hugh Hewitt. Duration: 10:02
For Europe, There’s a New Threat in Town: The U.S.
The combative tone from the White House has given European leaders a mounting sense of anxiety and puzzlement over how to proceed.
FEB. 2, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/europe/trump-european-union.html
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/watch/trump-white-house-could-be-hours-away-from-new-iran-sanctions-869119043693
--
President Trump Tangles with Foreign Leaders: The Daily Show
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Daily Show with Trevor Noah
Straining relationships with key U.S. allies, President Trump threatens to invade Mexico and hangs up on the prime minister of Australia after a heated phone call.
[originally aired February 2, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22uvRSqFj98 [with comments]
--
Cartoon Donald Trump Has A Few Thoughts For Australia
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Late Show with Stephen Colbert
Cartoon Donald Trump is learning the hard way just how challenging international relations can be.
[originally aired February 2, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cml78dSpVGo [with comments]
*
President Trump Prays For His Haters At National Prayer Breakfast
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Late Show with Stephen Colbert
This POTUS never misses an opportunity to talk smack, and that's exactly what he did in the most unlikely of venues: the National Prayer Breakfast.
[originally aired February 2, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_Kurq_HW7c [with comments]
--
Trump's Second Week Is as Chaotic as His First: A Closer Look
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by Late Night with Seth Meyers
Seth takes a closer look at the confusion surrounding President Trump's controversial travel ban and his bizarre calls with foreign leaders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x4p59C1E8U [with comments]
--
House of Cards: Building Our National Security on the Alt-Right’s Alternative Threats
By Jane Chong
Thursday, February 2, 2017, 11:42 PM
In November, I cautioned [ https://www.lawfareblog.com/deep-risk-under-trump-bannon-and-flynn-are-national-security-problem ] that then-President-elect Trump’s appointment of Breitbart CEO Stephen Bannon as his chief strategist and Michael “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL [ https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/us/politics/michael-flynn-national-security-adviser-donald-trump.html ]” Flynn as his national security adviser would create “deep risk” for U.S. security. More specifically, I argued that the problem was one of “architecture”: from inside the Oval Office, these extreme advisers would be positioned to orchestrate “the construction of an alt-right reality that denies and derides facts and insists on setting U.S. national security priorities without regard for what the threat data actually tells us [ https://www.lawfareblog.com/deep-risk-under-trump-bannon-and-flynn-are-national-security-problem ].”
What does it mean to construct an alt-right national security reality? As to Bannon, I offered this example:
Among other things, [Breitbart] systematically dismisses any attempt to recognize right-wing terrorism and extremism as a real problem in this country. It has long derided “this so-called terror threat” as a nonsense invention of the Department of Homeland Security. And it has equated President Obama’s efforts to address right-wing extremism to a “refusal to acknowledge radical Islam as a threat [ http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/02/21/breitbarts-dr-sebastian-gorka-obama-focus-on-right-wing-extremism-endangers-american-lives/ ]” and a political ploy that puts American lives in danger.
The idea that the mastermind behind this project will now serve as our commander-in-chief’s right-hand strategist creates a genuine security predicament. Going forward, such an appointment should be expected to fundamentally undermine the public’s trust in the new administration’s will and ability to even-handedly deal with homegrown terrorist threats on a factual, and not religious or ideological, basis.
That future is now. Last night, Reuters broke [ http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-extremists-program-exclusiv-idUSKBN15G5VO ] the story that the administration is allegedly looking to overhaul and rename the "Countering Violent Extremism" (CVE) program to focus exclusively on Islamist extremism. If these changes are made, according to sources briefed on the changes, CVE would no longer target right-wing groups such as white supremacists that have carried out bombings and shootings in the United States.
We are talking about the possibility of a newly revised America, where the only real terrorist is an Islamic terrorist. Whatever your thoughts on the efficacy of particular CVE efforts, that the Trump administration is contemplating such a change is, frankly, terrifying. (If you seek a glimpse of the possible consequences of denying or downplaying the severity of right-wing extremism as a matter of executive policy, check out the big piece [ https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31/the-fbi-has-quietly-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforcement/ ] The Intercept just published yesterday detailing the FBI’s longtime battle against white supremacists’ infiltration of law enforcement agencies.) It suggests we have already completed the jump from Kellyanne Conway’s amusing world of “alternative facts [ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/22/how-kellyanne-conway-ushered-in-the-era-of-alternative-facts/ ]” to a security edifice that incorporates “alternative threats”—by which I mean threats defined in blatant disregard of the empirical reality.
After this last week, we can’t really claim to be surprised by the CVE news. After all, alternative threat construction is the only way to explain the contents of Trump’s immigration executive order [ https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states ], which imposed a sloppy, sweeping 90-day ban on the entry of immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries, 120-day ban on all refugees, and indefinite ban on Syrian refugees. And the very next day, Trump sent the clearest possible signal that this is the new normal—that he sees no problem with conflating ideology and actuality, the political and the factual—when he signed a presidential memorandum [ https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/28/presidential-memorandum-organization-national-security-council-and ] granting Bannon a permanent seat on the Principals Committee of the National Security Council (NSC) (and bumping the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Director of National Intelligence from theirs).
All this brings me to my conclusion: these are strategic choices that indicate systematic alt-right world-building from deep inside the White House. I do not say this lightly. I say this based on facts.
Let’s track back to that immigration order Trump dropped last Friday. The consensus view of the U.S. national security community is that this order is not just a failure of morality, diplomacy, practicability, and probably legality; it also has no chance of accomplishing its stated objective of making America safer. The order rewrites reality not only in the sense that it does things to thousands of aliens from Muslim-majority countries. It also—baselessly—redefines them as a collective national security threat that must be subjected to “extreme vetting” or else near-total exclusion as a matter of public safety.
Others have already taken the administration to task for its supreme disinterest in ascertaining the truth value of the propositions underlying the order. Over the weekend, in a piece [ https://lawfareblog.com/malevolence-tempered-incompetence-trumps-horrifying-executive-order-refugees-and-visas ] criticizing the immigration order for both its malevolence and sheer drafting [ https://lawfareblog.com/malevolence-tempered-incompetence-trumps-horrifying-executive-order-refugees-and-visas ] incompetence, Ben pointed to specific provisions of the order that belie the administration’s stated purpose of securing our national security. I agree with Ben’s analysis and would take it even further. It’s not just that the substance of the order is so “utterly orthogonal to any relevant security interest” as to suggest “a deliberate decision to burden human lives to make a public point.” I would add that the detailed rundown Ben provides of the deliberateness with which the administration bypassed the normal executive vetting procedures is itself particularly important evidence of the administration’s “malevolence.” The subversion of process not just utter perversion of substance—is what signals intentional disregard for both the harm that this order would cause and for the objective the order was supposed to fulfill (you know, increasing our security).
In some sense, the press is playing “useful idiot” to the Trump administration on those occasions when it downplays the significance of the administration’s repudiation of anything approaching normal decision-making protocol. Consider this bizarre snippet of weekend analysis [ http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban/index.html ] from CNN:
Trump's unilateral moves, which have drawn the ire of human rights groups and prompted protests at US airports, reflect the President's desire to quickly make good on his campaign promises. But they also encapsulate the pitfalls of an administration largely operated by officials with scant federal experience.
If this description strikes you as unobjectionable in its face, look closer: actually, it reduces the mess that the administration has made of countless lives to some kind of collision of honest intentions and administrative naïveté. This framing gives the order’s supporters a nonsense defense to rally around however obvious the ensuing fallout and underestimates the strategic course charted by the fringe elements inside the White House. It is one thing to say the order itself is incompetent—it absolutely is—but to suggest Trump’s team simply didn’t know any better is almost surely false.
As Ben emphasized, and notwithstanding the administration’s vague denials, the order was reportedly not submitted for normal review by the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, the State Department or the Department of Defense (Secretary of Defense James Mattis [ https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/politics/donald-trump-rush-immigration-order-chaos.html ], a vocal opponent of Trump’s Muslim ban during the campaign was not asked for input), and NSC lawyers were barred from even assessing it. These protocols are in place specifically to ensure that executive policies satisfy legal requirements, account for practical complications, and avoid unintended consequences. You sidestep this process if your goal is to get a directive or order to press irrespective of those parameters—in other words, if you decide your policy or political goals simply trumps them.
Process is crucial to factual accuracy, ideological neutrality and operational efficacy—and that’s precisely why Trump’s presidential memorandum inserting Bannon, a political adviser, into the NSC Principals Committee is disturbing to so many (the technical phrase, courtesy of former national security adviser Susan Rice, is “stone cold crazy [ http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/316764-susan-rice-trumps-nsc-order-stone-cold-crazy ]”). The change strikes fear in us because it is a formalization, at the NSC level, of what we just witnessed with the drafting and issuing of the immigration order: the wrong people calling the shots and the wrong people being left out. And let’s dispense with the shoptalk in favor of real candor: we are not this upset simply because the national security adviser is sitting in that seat—as unusual and inadvisable as it may be, past presidents have in the past used all sorts of configurations to customize their use of the NSC and Principals Committee. What truly has us jumping up and down is that the man sitting in that seat is Stephen Bannon.
This is not an overreaction. We are living in an age when Reddit has taken it upon itself to ban an alt-right group from its megaforum [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/02/01/reddit-bans-alt-right-group.html ], but the White House is allegedly being run by the man responsible for building the biggest alt-right platform in the world.
I woke up Sunday to David Rothkopf’s warning [ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-danger-of-steve-bannon-on-the-national-security-council/2017/01/29/ba3982a2-e663-11e6-bf6f-301b6b443624_story.html ] in the Washington Post that Bannon’s addition to the NSC could pose, in the long term, more dangerous consequences for our national security than Trump’s immigration order. But given the president’s broad discretion when it comes to NSC meetings, and more importantly, given that Bannon’s fingerprints are all over the immigration order—both what’s in it and how it was issued—we should focus not on which edict is worse but on the total continuity between them. Both evince the administration’s anti-professional approach to security decisions of the utmost magnitude. And many in the national security community are rightly frightened.
I believe deepening that fright is the apparent gap between how so much of the national security community feels and how our lawmakers are behaving. Almost nothing Trump had done is at odds with the person and president he promised to be on the campaign trail. This is true, too, of his top advisers. And yet from the outset, denial has been the favored approach of several prominent legislators. In November, when civil rights groups and commentators on both sides of the aisle sounded the alarm about Bannon’s appointment, Rand Paul and others insisted on “giv[ing] the guy a chance.” We don’t have reason to think he is personally racist, their argument went [ http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/306139-rand-paul-defends-bannon-give-him-a-chance ], notwithstanding the concededly horrific material he had built his professional career disseminating and his numerous personal statements endorsing ideology [ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/01/31/bannon-odds-islam-china-decades-us-foreign-policy-doctrine/97292068/ ] repugnant to American values. This line of argument is most disingenuous because it ignores the very talent for which Bannon was explicitly recruited by the Trump campaign: he is a strategy professional with an astonishingly successful track record in reality distortion. As I emphasized [ https://www.lawfareblog.com/deep-risk-under-trump-bannon-and-flynn-are-national-security-problem ] in November: “Bannon’s website, Breitbart, is not a vacuous hate site, as is so often suggested. Breitbart is a carefully honed platform, and its clear and consistent approach to communicating the alt-right messaging on national security issues [ http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/ ] should give policy experts and principled politicians pause.”
This thing goes deep and wide. The project now underway in the highest office in the land—the sowing of prejudice as fact in what, at least so far, amounts to methodical alt-right revisionism—already extends well beyond immigration policy and counterrorism. Trump’s fondness for Putin dominated news cycles before the inauguration, and rabid anti-Islam policy has been the administration’s focus since, but we should take careful stock of all the other reality revisions emerging in the overlap between the alt-right and White House agendas.
A conspicuous example that we too readily forgive as an inherently divisive political issue, notwithstanding shifting public trends and growing poll data [ https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/us/politics/survey-of-republican-voters-shows-a-majority-believe-in-climate-change.html ] to the contrary [ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/many-more-republicans-now-believe-in-climate-change/ ]: climate change. The administration has signaled its likely rejection of climate change as a national and global security priority, despite the nonpartisan assessments of U.S. intelligence [ https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Reports%20and%20Pubs/Implications_for_US_National_Security_of_Anticipated_Climate_Change.pdf ] and military [ https://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/603440 ] experts who have made clear that climate change is a “threat multiplier” creating expansive national security risks. Trump has already made numerous statements that indicate his readiness to dismantle the previous administration’s far-reaching work on the issue. Most worryingly, his administration has already moved to cut off public access to facts. Last week the communications head for Trump's EPA transition team declared that EPA scientists will undergo "case by case [ http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/25/511572169/epa-scientists-work-may-face-case-by-case-review-by-trump-team-official-says ]" review before presenting or publishing their work outside the agency. Days earlier, references to climate change were eliminated [ https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/2017/live-updates/politics/live-coverage-of-trumps-inauguration/references-to-climate-change-disappear-from-white-house-website/ ] from the White House website. And Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s pick to head the staggeringly powerful Office of Management and Budget is not just a climate change denier; he has, on the record, suggested doing away [ http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2016/12/20/trump_omb_chief_pick_mick_mulvaney_questions_need_for_funding_science.html ] with government-backed scientific research altogether.
***
The bottom line is that in less than two weeks, the Trump administration has ripped any semblance of facade off the palazzo and has asserted its commitment to building a new national security order—one centered not on empirical reality but on an alternative threat reality.
This may not be 1925 Italy, but anyone who thought Bannon and Flynn would stand quietly in the wings, whispering in the president’s ear—that they would be a nefarious, largely unseeable fringe force—has been proven wrong. Bannon, in particular, is pursuing his revisionist project with high-level visibility and underappreciated deliberation. At minimum, principled politicians should refuse to confirm Trump’s remaining cabinet picks until Bannon is removed—not from the NSC Principals Committee [ http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/316886-sanders-bannon-must-be-removed-from-national-security-council ] but from the White House altogether.
The stakes really are that high. They are reality itself.
© 2017 The Lawfare Institute
https://www.lawfareblog.com/house-cards-building-our-national-security-alt-rights-alternative-threats
--
Trump to Order Review of Dodd-Frank, Halt Obama Fiduciary Rule
Barack Obama signs the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act on July 21, 2010.
Move delays April implementation of rule prohibiting conflicts
Moves emphasize removal of regulatory burdens: Official
February 3, 2017 Updated February 3, 2017
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-02-03/trump-to-halt-obama-fiduciary-rule-order-review-of-dodd-frank
--
A special warfare unit was spotted flying a Trump flag in public. Now the Navy is investigating.
February 3, 2017
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/02/03/a-special-warfare-unit-was-spotted-flying-a-trump-flag-in-public-now-the-navy-is-investigating/ [with embedded video, and comments]
--
in addition to (linked in) the post to which this is a reply and preceding and (other) following (including in particular http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128354177 [and any future following]), see also (linked in):
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=47797824 and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=59075857 and preceding and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67241728 and preceding and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90402843 and preceding and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101083965 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=93476719 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101373779 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=105604167 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109057017 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110400989 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128229535 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128235280 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128352902 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128353689 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128353202 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128353789 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128356256 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128357488 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128369611 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128372104 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128388665 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128355040 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128357396 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128357461 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128364576 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128386087 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128359984 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128387216 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128361088 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128369797 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128374229 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128375704 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128375703 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128376139 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128377342 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128380005 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128391545 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128392034 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128393186 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128378593 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128378761 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128402789 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128381877 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128386955 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128387984 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128391805 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128406739 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128388719 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128389214 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128389410 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128388756 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128390269 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128423048 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128393576 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128393642 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128394482 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128400498 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128408337 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128413492 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128423207 (and any future following)
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvsye7V9psc-APX6wV1twLg / http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel , http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel/videos ]
On this Wednesday, Feb. 1st 2017 edition of the Alex Jones Show [with appearances by Jerome Corsi and Mark Dice, and Roger Stone guest-hosting the fourth hour with guests Franklin Brothers, Tyler Nixon and Ezili Danto], Alex Jones broadcasts live from LA after flying there for an appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast. We analyze Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court who’s literally a Scalia 2.0, which is an ironic turn of events given the cover-up surrounding the late Justice Scalia’s death.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZYSnX5tsQw [with comments]
*
Joe Rogan Experience #911 - Alex Jones & Eddie Bravo
Streamed live on Feb 1, 2017 by PowerfulJRE [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzQUP1qoWDoEbmsQxvdjxgQ / http://www.youtube.com/user/PowerfulJRE , http://www.youtube.com/user/PowerfulJRE/videos ]
Alex Jones is a radio show host, filmmaker, writer, and conspiracy theorist. Eddie Bravo is a jiujitsu black belt, music producer, and author.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZPCp8SPfOM [with (over 26,000) comments]
--
Doggett condemns ‘vindictiveness’ of Abbott cutting Travis County grants
Updated Feb. 1, 2017
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/doggett-condemns-vindictiveness-abbott-cutting-travis-county-grants/iX4p28qylrW5sFnz5bShJI/ [with embedded video, and comments]
Texas governor threatens defiant sheriff's job and funds after she pledges to uphold sanctuary protections
February 2, 2017
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-sanctuary-cities-republican-states-2017-story.html [with embedded video, and comments]
Texas governor blocks funding over sanctuary policy
02/02/17 10:31
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/317522-tx-gov-blocks-funding-over-sanctuary-policy [with comments]
Gov. Greg Abbott cuts money to Travis County amid sanctuary city fight
Updated Feb. 2, 2017
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2017/02/01/gov-greg-abbott-cuts-money-travis-county-amid-sanctuary-city-fight [with comment]
Protests grow as Texas moves against 'sanctuary' cities
Texas Governor Greg Abbott cuts funding to law enforcement to penalise Austin, a 'sanctuary' city offering safety to the undocumented.
2 Feb 2017
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/02/protests-grow-texas-moves-sanctuary-cities-170202205015258.html
Texas legislators seek funding ban for 'sanctuary cities'
Feb. 3, 2017
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/7bb645a91ffc42be8afcdf4f010a7637/texas-legislators-seek-funding-ban-sanctuary-cities
--
Donald Trump is Aiding the Enemy | The Resistance with Keith Olbermann | GQ
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by GQ [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsEukrAd64fqA7FjwkmZ_Dw / http://www.youtube.com/user/GQVideos/videos , http://www.youtube.com/user/GQVideos/videos , http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0hKMB1-xkc-XWNf9VL-LxVYysdHpjyMF ]
Why reinforce the twisted narrative that America is at war with Islam?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LBBb-6hEPE [with (approaching 4,000) comments]
--
Leaked Draft of Trump’s Religious Freedom Order Reveals Sweeping Plans to Legalize Discrimination
Donald Trump speaks to a gathering of clergy at the New Spirit Revival Center in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, September 21, 2016.
(Reuters / Jonathan Ernst)
If signed, the order would create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity.
By Sarah Posner
February 1, 2017
A leaked copy of a draft executive order titled “Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom,” obtained by The Investigative Fund and The Nation, reveals sweeping plans by the Trump administration to legalize discrimination.
The four-page draft order, a copy of which is currently circulating among federal staff and advocacy organizations, construes religious organizations so broadly that it covers “any organization, including closely held for-profit corporations,” and protects “religious freedom” in every walk of life: “when providing social services, education, or healthcare; earning a living, seeking a job, or employing others; receiving government grants or contracts; or otherwise participating in the marketplace, the public square, or interfacing with Federal, State or local governments.”
The draft order seeks to create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious or moral objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity, and it seeks to curtail women’s access to contraception and abortion through the Affordable Care Act. The White House did not respond to requests for comment, but when asked Monday about whether a religious freedom executive order was in the works, White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters [ https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/31/statement-press-secretary-sean-spicer ], “I’m not getting ahead of the executive orders that we may or may not issue. There is a lot of executive orders, a lot of things that the president has talked about and will continue to fulfill, but we have nothing on that front now.”
Language in the draft document specifically protects the tax-exempt status of any organization that “believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the belief that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, sexual relations are properly reserved for such a marriage, male and female and their equivalents refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy, physiology, or genetics at or before birth, and that human life begins at conception and merits protection at all stages of life.”
The breadth of the draft order, which legal experts described as “sweeping” and “staggering,” may exceed the authority of the executive branch if enacted. It also, by extending some of its protections to one particular set of religious beliefs, would risk violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
“This executive order would appear to require agencies to provide extensive exemptions from a staggering number of federal laws—without regard to whether such laws substantially burden religious exercise,” said Marty Lederman, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and an expert on church-state separation and religious freedom.
The exemptions, Lederman said, could themselves violate federal law or license individuals and private parties to violate federal law. “Moreover,” he added, “the exemptions would raise serious First Amendment questions, as well, because they would go far beyond what the Supreme Court has identified as the limits of permissive religious accommodations.” It would be “astonishing,” he said, “if the Office of Legal Counsel certifies the legality of this blunderbuss order.”
The leaked draft maintains that, as a matter of policy, “Americans and their religious organizations will not be coerced by the Federal Government into participating in activities that violate their conscience.”
It sets forth an exceptionally expansive definition of “religious exercise” that extends to “any act or refusal to act that is motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, whether or not the act is required or compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.” “It’s very sweeping,” said Ira Lupu, a professor emeritus at the George Washington University Law School and an expert on the Constitution’s religion clauses and on the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). “It raises a big question about whether the Constitution or the RFRA authorizes the president to grant religious freedom in such a broad way.”
In particular, said Lupu, the draft order “privileges” a certain set of beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity—beliefs identified most closely with conservative Catholics and evangelical Christians—over others. That, he said, goes beyond “what RFRA might authorize” and may violate the Establishment Clause.
Lupu added that the language of the draft “might invite federal employees,” for example, at the Social Security Administration or Veterans Administration, “to refuse on religious grounds to process applications or respond to questions from those whose benefits depend on same sex marriages.” If other employees do not “fill the gap,” he said, it could “lead to a situation where marriage equality was being de facto undermined by federal employees, especially in religiously conservative communities,” contrary to Supreme Court rulings.
Jenny Pizer, senior counsel and law and policy director for Lambda Legal, said some of the language in the draft order is similar to language in a law passed last year [ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/why-mississippis-law-on-religious-rights-and-lgbt-got-blocked/489731/ ] in Mississippi, which a federal district court ruled violated both the Establishment Clause and the Equal Protection Clause. (The case is now on appeal.) Pizer said the draft order would appear to violate the Establishment Clause by listing a “particular set of religious beliefs and giving special government protection to people who hold those beliefs as opposed to different beliefs.”
Section 4 of the order, “Specific Agency Responsibilities,” requires HHS to issue a rule exempting any person or organization with religious objections from complying with the ACA’s preventive-care mandate—42 U.S.C. 300gg-13(a)(4)—which includes contraceptive coverage. It requires HHS to ensure that anyone purchasing insurance on a health-care exchange have the option of purchasing a plan that neither covers abortions nor “subsidize[s] plans that do provide such coverage.”
And it bars HHS from taking any adverse action against federally funded child-welfare organizations, including those offering adoption, foster, or family support services, that deny anyone these services “due to a conflict with the organization’s religious beliefs.”
Pizer said this language constitutes “a license to discriminate with public money in a series of contexts in which people tend to be vulnerable,” such as against LGBT children in foster care, which is federally funded. More broadly, she said, it would permit organizations receiving federal grants or contracts to provide child welfare services not only to refuse necessary care but to refuse even to “refer the child to another agency or setting that would be protective and affirming and instead place the child in an environment that is aggressively hostile to who that child is, on religious grounds.” Even during the George W. Bush administration, she noted, “there were protections in executive orders that beneficiaries of grantees and contractors were not to be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Section 4 also requires the Department of Justice to establish a new section or working group dedicated to protecting “religious freedom.”
On Tuesday, the White House announced that it would continue President Obama’s executive order protecting federal contractors from anti-LGBT discrimination. Yet the new draft order codifies a laundry list of claims advanced by the Christian right in recent years of indications that the advance of LGBT rights has put the religious freedom of conservative Christians at risk. “They would say this is a nondiscrimination order,” said Lambda Legal’s Pizer. “We disagree. We would say being denied the ability to discriminate against others is not discrimination against you.”
This article was reported in partnership with The Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute.
Updated on 2/2/2017: A White House official, speaking with ABC News [ http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-executive-order-draft-curtail-lgbt-rights/story?id=45209220 ], did not dispute the authenticity of the draft religious freedom executive order, but officials said it is one of hundreds circulating, some drafted by the transition team, others by the White House, not all of which are likely to become policy. The official did not say who drafted this particular order.
*
Executive Order—Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom
EXECUTIVE ORDER
Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, in order to guide the executive branch in formulating and implementing policies with implications for the religious freedom of persons and organizations in America, and to further compliance with the Constitution, applicable statutes, and other legal authorities, it is hereby ordered:
Section 1. Policy. The United States Constitution enshrines and protects the fundamental natural right to religious liberty. This Constitutional protection ensures that Americans and their religious organizations will not be coerced by the Federal Government into participating in activities that violate their consciences, and will remain free to express their viewpoints without suffering adverse treatment from the Federal Government. It shall be the policy of this Administration to protect religious freedom.
Sec. 2. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
(a) “Person” shall have the same definition as “person” in 1 U.S.C. 1.
(b) “Religious exercise” includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, and includes any act or any refusal to act that is motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, whether or not the act is required or compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief.
(c) “Religious organization” shall be construed broadly to encompass any organization, including closely held for-profit corporations, operated for a religious purpose, even if its purpose is not exclusively religious, and is not limited to houses of worship or tax-exempt organizations, or organizations controlled by or associated with a house of worship or a convention or association of churches.
Sec. 3 Religious Freedom Principles and Policymaking Criteria. All executive branch departments and agencies (“agencies”) shall, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, adhere to the following principles and criteria when formulating and implementing regulations, actions, or policies:
(a) Religious freedom is not confined to religious organizations or limited to religious exercise that takes place in houses of worship or the home. It is guaranteed to persons of all faiths and extends to all activities of life.
(b) Persons and organizations do not forfeit their religious freedom when providing social services, education, or healthcare; earning a living, seeking a job, or employing others; receiving government grants or contracts: or otherwise participating in the marketplace, the public square, or interfacing with Federal, State or local governments.
(c) As required by religious freedom laws such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq. (“RFRA”) and the religious provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 20003 et seq., agencies shall faithfully discharge their duty to accommodate the religion of federal employees and shall not promulgate regulations, take actions, or enact policies that substantially burden a person’s or religious organization’s religious exercise unless the imposition represents the least restrictive means of furthering a compelling governmental interest. Regulations, actions, or policies shall not be deemed “compelling” simply by virtue of their having been applied neutrally, broadly, or across the Federal Government.
Sec. 4. Specific agency Responsibilities to Avoid Potential Violation of Religious Freedom
(a) The Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Labor, and Treasury shall immediately issue an interim final rule that exempts from the preventative-care mandate set forth in 42 U.S.C. 300gg-13(a)(4) all persons and religious organizations that object to complying with the mandate for religious or moral reasons.
(b) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall take appropriate actions, through mechanisms to ensure compliance with existing statutory and other protections, if necessary, to ensure that any individuals purchasing health insurance in the individual market (whether through a federally facilitated exchange, a state-sponsored health insurance exchange, or otherwise) has the ability to purchase health insurance that does not provide coverage for abortion and does not subsidize plans that do provide such coverage.
(c) The Secretary of Health and human Services shall take all appropriate actions to ensure that the Federal Government shall not discriminate or take any adverse action against a religious organization that provides federally-funded child-welfare services, including promoting or providing adoption, foster, or family support services for children, or similar services, on the basis that the organization declines to provide , facilitate, or refer such services due to a conflict with the organization’s religious beliefs. The Secretary of Health and human Services shall, where authorized by law, promptly propose for notice and comment new regulations consistent with this policy.
(d) All agencies shall, with respect to any person, house of worship, or religious organization that is a recipient of or offeror for a Federal Government contract, subcontract, grant, purchase order, or cooperative agreement, provide protections and exceptions consistent with sections 702(a) and 703(e) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 20003-I(a) and 2000e-2(e)) and section 103(d) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12113(d)). The Secretary of Labor shall, where authorized by law, promptly propose for notice and comment new regulations consistent with this policy.
(e) The Secretary of the Treasury shall ensure that the Department of the Treasury shall not impose any tax or tax penalty, delay or deny tax-exempt status, or disallow tax deductions for contributions made under 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3), or otherwise make unavailable or deny any tax benefits to any person, church, synagogue, house of worship or other religious organization.
(1) on the basis of such person or organization speaking on moral or political issues from a religious perspective where religious speech of similar character has, consistent with law, not ordinarily been treated as an intervention in a political campaign by the Department of the Treasury, or
(2) on the basis that such person or organization believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the belief that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, sexual relations are properly reserved for such a marriage, male and female and their equivalents refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy, physiology, or genetics at or before birth, and that human life begins at conception and merits protection at all stages of life.
The Secretary of the Treasury and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue shall, where authorized by law, promptly propose for notice and comment new regulations consistent with this policy.
(b) No agency shall, to the extent allowed by law, not recognize any decisions or findings made by any federally-recognized accrediting body that revokes or denies accreditation to, or otherwise disadvantages, a religious organization on the basis that such organization believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with a belief described in section 4(e)(2) of this order.
(g) No agency shall exclude or otherwise make unavailable or deny any person or religious organization admission or access to charitable fundraising campaigns on the basis that such person or organization believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the beliefs described in Section 4(e)(2) of this order.
(k) No agency shall take adverse action against any person or religious organization that is a Federal employee, contractor, or grantee on the basis of their speaking or acting in accordance with the beliefs described in section 4(e)(2) of this order while outside the scope of their employment, contract, or grant, and shall reasonably accommodate such speech and action when made within the course of their employment, contract, or grant. This provision shall not be construed to diminish or otherwise limit any other protection provided by this order.
(l) The Attorney General shall establish with the Department of Justice a Section or working group that will ensure that the religious freedom of persons and religious organizations is protected throughout the United States, and shall investigate and, if necessary, take or coordinate appropriate action under applicable religious freedom laws.
Sec. 5. General Provisions.
(a) All agencies shall promptly withdraw or rescind any rulings, directives, regulations, guidance, positions, or interpretations that are inconsistent with this order to the extent of their inconsistency.
(b) The provisions of this order shall prevail in cases of conflict with any existing executive order and with any future executive order unless such future order explicitly refers to, and limited or excludes, the application of this order.
(c) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the authority granted by law to an agency, or the head thereof, or ii) the functions of the OMB Director relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(d) This order shall be carried out subject to the availability of appropriations and to the extent permitted by law.
(e) This order does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies or instrumentalities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
*
Copyright (c) 2017 The Nation Company LLC
https://www.thenation.com/article/leaked-draft-of-trumps-religious-freedom-order-reveals-sweeping-plans-to-legalize-discrimination/ [with comment; comments closed]
--
Democratic base: Obstruct
All In with Chris Hayes
2/1/17
President Donald Trump's nominee for Education Secretary is now perilously close to defeat in her confirmation battle and Democrats are putting pressure on senators from their own party to oppose every Trump nominee, particularly for the Supreme Court. Duration: 6:04
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/democratic-base-obstruct-868086851734
*
The erosion of the Senate's rules & procedures
All In with Chris Hayes
2/1/17
Chris Hayes talks with Republican Senator Ben Sasse about what this means for the president's Supreme Court nominee. Duration: 8:39
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/the-erosion-of-the-senate-s-rules-procedures-868095555761
*
Why did Trump's Yemen raid go wrong?
All In with Chris Hayes
2/1/17
President Trump's first military action resulted in the deaths of a Navy SEAL and an 8-year-old American girl. Duration: 4:35
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/why-did-trump-s-yemen-raid-go-wrong-868088387954
--
Anti-Trump concern sparks widespread activism
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/1/17
Rachel Maddow reports on how the negative response by Americans to the actions of the Donald Trump regime has fostered a new solidarity and a new level of local political activism and advocacy. Duration: 12:51
Christine Weick interrupts Texas Muslim Capitol Day speaker
Published on Jan 29, 2015 by FOX 7 Austin [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5maSolHQX9er0BOxrzjMwA / http://www.youtube.com/user/myfoxaustin , http://www.youtube.com/user/myfoxaustin/videos ]
Controversial activist Christine Weick interrupts a speaker at Texas Muslim Capitol Day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4-C0aZ3V1Q [with (nearly 4,000) comments]
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/anti-trump-concern-sparks-widespread-activism-868194883724 [and see also in particular (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110400989 and preceding and following]
*
Anti-Trump backlash rapidly outpacing tea party in its prime
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/1/17
Rachel Maddow reports on Democrats and anti-Trump opposition groups organizing more quickly and with greater popular support among Americans than the tea party of 2010. Duration: 11:29
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/anti-trump-backlash-rapidly-outpacing-tea-party-in-its-prime-868179523728 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4xmSPefMnI [with comments] [the YouTube also at/see (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128402789 and preceding (and any future following); left this item here for the original source description and link, and to keep this little slice of the record complete] [and see also in particular (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=47797824 and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=59075857 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67241728 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90402843 and preceding and following, and http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101083965 and following]
*
Democrats forcing GOP to deal with confirmation system they broke
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/1/17
David Leonhardt, writer and editor for The New York Times, talks with Rachel Maddow about why he thinks Democrats should accept that Republicans broke the confirmation system when they refused to giving Merrick Garland a hearing and should give Neil Gorsuch the same treatment. Duration: 7:59
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/democrats-forcing-gop-to-deal-with-confirmation-system-they-broke-868197955665
*
Senator Booker: What's happening with Trump is worthy of outrage
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/1/17
Senator Cory Booker talks with Rachel Maddow about Democratic opposition to Donald Trump's Supreme Court pick, Neil Gorsuch, the concerns of his constituents about Trump, and the need to stay focused and resist fatigue in challenging Trump. Duration: 9:42
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/senator-booker-what-s-happening-with-trump-is-worthy-of-outrage-868144707700 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDdvwA2FuJM [with comments]
--
Merkley: Dems can't be ‘complicit’ in ‘stolen’ SCOTUS seat
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/1/17
Senator Jeff Merkley joins Lawrence to explain why Democrats must not confirm any nominee for the Supreme Court seat that he says Republicans stole from President Obama. Duration: 15:54
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/merkley-dems-can-t-be-complicit-in-stolen-scotus-seat-868180035786
*
Shocking reports of what Trump said on calls to foreign leaders
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/1/17
Two new reports have leaked details about Donald Trump's phone calls with foreign leaders; he reportedly "blasted" the Australian P.M. and threatened to send the U.S. military into Mexico. E.J. Dionne and Ken Vogel join Lawrence O'Donnell to discuss. Duration: 6:31
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/shocking-reports-of-what-trump-said-on-calls-to-foreign-leaders-868184131616 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ-Hs86LLD4 [with (nearly 4,000) comments]
*
Washington State Gov: Trump's immigration ban is 'un-American'
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/1/17
Lawrence talks to Washington Gov. Jay Inslee whose state was the first to sue President Trump over his executive order on immigration. Duration: 5:20
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/washington-state-governor-trump-s-immigration-ban-is-un-american-868187715555
--
What does it mean for the White House to put Iran 'on notice'
The 11th Hour with Brian Williams
2/1/17
MSNBC's Brian Williams speaks with NBC News's Andrea Mitchell about the White House putting Iran 'on notice,' plus the days other headlines about Trump's rocky phone calls with world leaders. Duration: 7:35
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/watch/what-does-it-mean-for-the-white-house-to-put-iran-on-notice-868209219933
*
Pres. Trump: Frederick Douglass 'has done an amazing job'
The 11th Hour with Brian Williams
2/1/17
The President's remarks about Frederick Douglass at the start of Black History Month created a lot of questions in Washington today. MSNBC's Brian Williams talks to Ali Velshi & Eugene Robinson. Duration: 3:05
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/watch/pres-trump-frederick-douglass-as-done-an-amazing-job-868208707525
--
The Danger Of 5 Year Olds
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by Mike Malloy [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpU4j-LN_aibXA1gONvWzxw / http://www.youtube.com/user/hschulein , http://www.youtube.com/user/hschulein/videos ]
On Saturday, a 5-year-old boy whose mother is Iranian was reportedly detained for hours by himself at Washington Dulles International Airport as President Donald Trump’s immigration order was enforced.
Asked on Monday whether Trump’s order — which critics have called a “Muslim ban” — should apply to 5-year-old children, White House press secretary Sean Spicer gave a clear answer: yes.
“That’s why we slow [the process] down a little,” Spicer said at the daily press briefing. “To make sure that if they are a 5-year-old, that maybe they’re with their parents and they don’t pose a threat. But to assume that just because of someone’s age or gender or whatever that they don’t pose a threat would be misguided and wrong.”
Full story: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/30/14442528/trump-muslim-ban-sean-spicer-5-year-old
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loT5nsLeSi0 [with comments]
*
Fascist America Has No Room For The Truth
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by Mike Malloy
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyklvUuqeMA [with comments]
--
The Not-A-Muslim-Ban Muslim Ban | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC18vz5hUUqxbGvym9ghtX_w , http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC18vz5hUUqxbGvym9ghtX_w/videos ]
This weekend, Trump reminded us of the Emma Lazarus poem: "Give me your tired, your poor, as long as they are not different from me.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RM2HtvLSLs [with (approaching 4,000) comments]
*
Refugees Refused | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
Refugees come here with the audacity to take the Statue of Liberty literally.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQk4t5rUQXA [with comments]
*
Full Frontal has a Heart-On: Lee Gelernt Edition | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
Sam heads back to her bunker to get some gentle Constitutional reassurance from civil rights lawyer Lee Gelernt of the ACLU.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prDkd60WzmU [with comments]
*
Loyal to a T | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
When you run the government, you can replace qualified staffers with whoever will hump your leg the hardest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqYM0Lo3He8 [with comments]
*
Nasty Women: Meet Bad Dudes | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee | TBS
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Full Frontal with Samantha Bee
We're helping Trump identify all of the "bad dudes" in America, while also helping Karam Foundation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9EN-wrCoRg [with comments]
--
Profiles in Tremendousness - SCOTUS Nominee Neil Gorsuch: The Daily Show
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Daily Show with Trevor Noah [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwWhs_6x42TyRM4Wstoq8HA , http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwWhs_6x42TyRM4Wstoq8HA/videos ]
President Trump announces the Supreme Court nomination of Neil Gorsuch, a Colorado judge who may be more conservative than his predecessor, the late Antonin Scalia.
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtARYhz3tjw [with comments]
--
Beyoncé And Trump Celebrate Black History Month In Very Different Ways
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Late Show with Stephen Colbert [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMtFAi84ehTSYSE9XoHefig , http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMtFAi84ehTSYSE9XoHefig/videos ]
Beyoncé kicked off Black History Month with great news about her family, while the President celebrated by offering a salute of his own.
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZr94sKU19M [with comments]
*
President Trump Asks Judge Gorsuch: So You Think You Can SCOTUS?
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Late Show with Stephen Colbert
The President announced his nominee for the Supreme Court with all the class and flair of a rose ceremony on The Bachelor.
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTCLFxkMQPQ [with comments]
--
Amber Reads Donald Trump's Black History Month Speech with Commentary
Published on Feb 1, 2017 by Late Night with Seth Meyers [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVTyTA7-g9nopHeHbeuvpRA / http://www.youtube.com/user/LateNightSeth , http://www.youtube.com/user/LateNightSeth/videos ]
Late Night writer Amber Ruffin reads between the lines of President Trump's widely criticized Black History Month speech to explain what he really meant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elg1BF_hfII [with comments]
*
Trump's Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch: Couple Things
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by Late Night with Seth Meyers
Seth calls out Donald Trump for announcing his Supreme Court nominee like a reality TV show.
[originally aired February 1, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETEbVykUftM [with comments]
--
Donald Trump Through a Loudspeaker, Darkly
In the next four to eight years, American children will be born in a country led by a vainglorious man who wishes to subordinate facts to his ego.
PHOTOGRAPH BY MARK PETERSON / REDUX
By Jiayang Fan
February 2, 2017
If you were a child growing up in China in the late nineteen-eighties, you learned fairly early the universe of things that were less than dependable: hot water, the bus schedule, and, most irritatingly—if you were an introverted second grader—the capricious offerings of the itinerant book cart. But one aspect of our lives, from birth until, it seemed to me, death, remained as constant as the sunrise. This was the voice of the loudspeaker broadcasts in our Army hospital compound (my mother was a military doctor), which woke me every morning before I could witness the dawn, accompanying me through all three meals and, as I brushed my teeth for bed, sometimes long after dusk.
The first time I read “1984,” George Orwell’s classic dystopia, I was an eleventh grader in America, and its portrayal of a world rife with loudspeaker announcements and an omnipotent Party did not strike me as related to the world we had left behind when I was eight years old. Winston Smith, the protagonist of “1984,” is confined in an authoritarian prison, deprived of the most fundamental freedoms and inculcated with Newspeak. In my early childhood, at least as I remembered it, everyone I knew lived ordinary, unmolested lives.
An impassioned teacher, given to rhetorical drama, once tried to convince me otherwise: “Don’t you see? The Chinese government hurt its own people, and you were a helpless victim.” But I’m not hurt, I insisted. “I mean, a victim of that cruel society,” she pleaded, in the manner of a missionary, impatient with the pagan who won’t see the light. The two of us went on like this for some time, both growing increasingly exasperated, neither capable of explaining to the other her version of truth and reality. Other details in our conversation have been lost to time, but I never shook the expression on her face, flushed grapefruit pink and, it seemed to me, quivering on the precipice of tears.
Years later, I recognized the expression on my teacher’s face as one of profound frustration with perceived irrationality. I knew it because, when I tried to begin a conversation with my mother about the inglorious deeds of the Chinese Communist Party (of which she had been a dedicated member for two decades), she recoiled with such violence that I understood instantly that my catalogue of facts was irrelevant. A complete rejection of the Party would amount to a denial of the better part of her adult life. It was not political but personal, and rationality had nothing to do with it.
Rational reasoning and truth have been much on my mind as we enter a world of alternative facts and crypto-fascist edicts from the White House, less than two weeks into Donald Trump’s Administration. Last week, when “1984” rose toward the top of Amazon’s best-seller list, I dug out my dog-eared paperback copy and reread a quotation that I had underlined a decade and a half earlier: “For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?”
In recent days, as Trump and his cohorts have peddled blatant falsehoods—that his Inauguration attracted the largest crowd in history, or that he lost the popular vote owing to millions of votes by illegal aliens—I have wondered about the extent to which minds can be controlled, or, rather, commandeered, by the relentless deluge of misinformation.
Like many Chinese immigrants, my mother and I came to America so that my father could pursue graduate studies, not to seek political freedom. When I was old enough to study the Cultural Revolution and the Tiananmen massacre, periods in Chinese history when the authoritarian government subjected its citizenry to inexpressible brutality, I would wonder about everything I knew, or thought I had known. The one time I asked my mother about why she did not resist, she answered distractedly and somewhat defensively: it was a very confused time. Who could know what was true and what was false? What to believe and whom to trust?
The muddling of fact and fiction is a tried-and-true tactic of totalitarian regimes. What’s more, when the two are confused for long enough, or when an indefatigable war on truth has been waged for a year, or two years, or perhaps eight, it will likely be harder and more tiresome to untangle them and remember a time when a firm line was drawn between the true and the false as a matter of course. If amnesia breeds normalization, fatigue has always served as the authoritarian’s great accomplice.
At the time my mother and I were getting ready to leave for America, neither of us knew the ways in which the contours of the world could be different. For people of my mother’s generation, the Party’s truth had become so embedded in their understanding of themselves that the boundary between what they represented and what the government propagandized had faded, shifting to form the outline of a manufactured reality.
Perhaps this is exactly what Trump and his more ideological aides, Steve Bannon among them, envision. But it’s just as likely that they, too, have become so convinced of their alternative reality that what we recognize to be fiction genuinely constitutes their fact. Orwell again: “If you want to keep a secret, you must also hide it from yourself.” In any case, no matter what Trump thinks of China, something about the increasingly aggressive repression of the media by China’s President, Xi Jinping, may well hold some appeal for him as a model. How liberating would it be, Trump might wonder, to make all legislation a matter of executive orders and sign them at will without Congress, vexing million-strong protests, and a media that readily reports them?
In the next four to eight years, American children will be born in a country led by a vainglorious man who wishes to fit facts—and their future—into the convenient shape of his ego. But democracy, freedom of expression, and, above all, the right to truth are not antiquated pieties. They belong to citizens who can still make their voices heard, before resignation metastasizes into complacency, exhaustion into self-doubt. The struggle will be to maintain openness and tolerance as the norm, the values that our children absorb into their identities naturally—to be defended rather than be defensive about.
On the day that Donald Trump was inaugurated, I received a message from a man who had previously disparaged my work on social media: “Welcome to your destiny.” I imagined him smirking as he typed those words and I wanted to tell him that he got it backward, that I already know what it is like to live in a world with an omnipotent leader and a renovated reality. I have known loudspeakers, their mass persuasions, emotional arousals, and booming, relentless broadcasts. And I know that they are not my destiny, because I won’t let them be.
© 2017 Condé Nast (emphasis in original)
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/donald-trump-through-a-loudspeaker-darkly
--
White House nixed Holocaust statement naming Jews
The State Department wrote a message that recognized Jewish victims, but the White House used its own that didn’t.
President Donald Trump’s White House reportedly blocked the statement's release.
02/02/2017 Updated 02/02/2017
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/white-house-holocaust-jews-234572 [with comments]
--
Trump's Supreme Court Pick Is A Disciple Of Scalia's 'Originalist' Crusade
Supreme Court nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, faces members of the media while meeting with Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., in his Senate office.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
By Lauren Russell and Nina Totenberg
February 2, 2017 6:00 AM ET
The late Justice Antonin Scalia may not have been the original originalist [ http://www.npr.org/2016/02/14/466744465/originalism-a-primer-on-scalias-constitutional-philosophy ], but he popularized what once had been a fringe legal doctrine. He argued for it both on and off the U.S. Supreme Court and brought originalism into, if not the mainstream, then at least into the center of legal debate.
Judge Neil Gorsuch [ http://www.npr.org/2017/01/31/511850519/who-is-neil-gorsuch-trumps-first-pick-for-the-supreme-court ], who is nominated to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by Scalia's death, is a self-proclaimed disciple of Scalia's crusade. Indeed, in a recent speech, he recalled how he wept on the ski slopes of Colorado upon learning of Scalia's death.
So what is originalism?
Scalia famously described it this way:
The Constitution that I interpret and apply is not living but dead, or as I prefer to call it, enduring. It means today not what current society, much less the court, thinks it ought to mean, but what it meant when it was adopted.
What drove the increasing acceptance of originalism on the Supreme Court was Scalia's uncompromising commitment to his personal judicial philosophy and the growth of the conservative Federalist Society in academia, spawning, in turn, more and more advocates of the theory.
Also significantly contributing was the luck of the Supreme Court draw.
From 1980 on, Republican presidents got the chance to fill seven seats on the Supreme Court, and at each rotation, the new justice was more conservative than the person he or she replaced. That, too, reflected the increasing conservative drift of the Republican Party, with evangelicals and other social conservatives gaining more power and influence.
Scalia and other justices have embraced originalism as a way to check what they viewed as the growing and unbounded power of the judiciary. They contended that if policy changes take place, the changes should come through the democratic process rather than through the unelected courts.
At a 2016 lecture at a law school, Gorsuch said the "great project of Justice Scalia's career was to remind us of the differences between judges and legislators:"
"To remind us that legislators may appeal to their own moral convictions and to claims about social utility to reshape the law as they think it should be in the future. But that judges should do none of these things in a democratic society. That judges should instead strive (if humanly and so imperfectly) to apply the law as it is, focusing backward, not forward, and looking to text, structure, and history to decide what a reasonable reader at the time of the events in question would have understood the law to be— not to decide cases based on their own moral convictions or the policy consequences they believe might serve society best."
There are no transcripts of the framers' conversations while they drafted the Constitution, so no one knows precisely what they were thinking as they wrote it. There are, however, records of the ratification debates, which originalists rely on to determine intent.
"The modern version of originalism is looking for the original public meaning of the Constitution and isn't looking for subjective framers' views, so the views of the ratifiers, in that case, is more important," said Todd Gaziano, senior fellow in constitutional law at the Pacific Legal Foundation.
Critics of originalism contend that its advocates pick and choose when they are willing to defer to the elected branches. They note that originalists have been willing to strike down federal laws adopted by large congressional majorities, invalidating laws and reversing decades of legal precedents governing campaign finance regulations [ http://www.npr.org/2014/04/02/298347681/supreme-court-strikes-down-key-part-of-campaign-finance-law ] and voting rights [ http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/06/25/195627046/voting-rights-ruling-could-open-lawsuit-floodgates ], for instance.
The living constitutionalists' take on originalism
Gorsuch has stressed, as have other originalists, that the job of a judge should be to "look backward" at what the Founding Fathers meant at the time they wrote and ratified the Constitution. One-time constitutional law professor Barack Obama summarized the critique of that theory this way in his book The Audacity of Hope:
Anyone like Justice Scalia, looking to resolve our modern constitutional dispute through strict construction, has one big problem: The founders themselves disagreed profoundly, vehemently, on the meaning of their masterpiece. Before the ink on the constitutional parchment was dry, arguments had erupted not just about minor provisions, but about first principles; not just between peripheral figures, but within the revolution's very core.
Those critical of originalism argue that a static interpretation of the law lags behind society's progress.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg [ http://www.npr.org/2016/10/03/495820477/no-ruth-bader-ginsburg-does-not-intend-to-retire-anytime-soon ], currently the Supreme Court's leading liberal voice, embraces the idea of a "living constitution," a notion disdained by originalists as too flexible.
"As I see it, it isn't the Supreme Court that is deciding for the whole society, like an imperial ruler," she said at an event in February 2014. Speaking of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, she said, "there hasn't been any major change in which there wasn't a groundswell among the people before the Supreme Court put its stamp of approval on the inclusion in the equality concept of people who were once left out.
"It was a huge embarrassment that racism persisted in our country, that our troops in World War II until the very end were separated. I think that World War II made inevitable the change with respect to the status of racial minorities. And it was the same way with women's increasing demand to count as full citizens."
Sparring on the Supreme Court over constitutional interpretation
Some of the most discussed and controversial Supreme Court decisions come down to the justices' disagreements as to whether the Constitution should be viewed as a "dead" or "enduring" document, as Scalia called it, or a "living" one.
Those disagreements were never more apparent than in a series of decisions about gay rights written by the usually conservative Justice Anthony Kennedy [ http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/06/26/195917213/justice-kennedy-at-center-of-gay-rights-decisions-for-a-decade ], who is often dubbed the swing vote on the Supreme Court because he sometimes votes with the Court's liberals. In a decision striking down a Texas law that criminalized private, consensual "homosexual conduct," Kennedy asserted that the Founding Fathers did not specify all liberties because they expected that list to change.
"They knew times can blind us to certain truths, and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress," Kennedy said while summarizing his opinion from the bench.
"It is the promise of the Constitution that there is a realm of personal liberty which the government may not enter," he said.
Scalia dissented, declaring, "It is clear from this that the Court has taken sides in the culture war, and in particular, in that battle of the culture war that concerns whether there should be any moral opprobrium attached to homosexual conduct."
The same-sex marriage cases also divided along similar lines.
"The dynamic of our constitutional system is that individuals need not await legislative action before asserting a fundamental right," Kennedy said from the bench in announcing the 2015 same-sex marriage opinion.
In his dissent, Scalia included a scathing footnote on Kennedy's opinion.
If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: "The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity," I would hide my head in a bag.
Chief Justice John Roberts [ http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/06/26/417720924/roberts-celebrate-todays-decision-but-do-not-celebrate-the-constitution ], reading his dissent from the bench, said policy arguments for same-sex marriage are compelling.
"But allowing unelected judges to strike down democratically enacted laws based on rights that are not actually written in the Constitution raises obvious concerns about the judicial role," he said. Leave it to the democratic process, said Roberts.
© 2017 npr
http://www.npr.org/2017/02/02/512891485/trumps-supreme-court-pick-is-a-disciple-of-scalias-originalist-crusade
*
Gorsuch and Such
Some viewers were skeptical about a purported Columbia University yearbook entry for Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, but the image is genuine.
Claim: Neil Gorsuch quoted Henry Kissinger in his Columbial University yearbook entry.
TRUE Feb 01, 2017
http://www.snopes.com/neil-gorsuch-yearbook/
--
Advice for Progressives from America’s Radical Feminist Governor
Kate Brown, the governor of Oregon, after her Inaugural Address, in Salem, in early January.
February 2, 2017
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/advice-for-progressives-from-americas-radical-feminist-governor
--
Evan McMullin Is Trying to Save Democracy
As Trump unleashes his id on the American people, Evan McMullin seeks to encourage civic engagement; point out the early signs of authoritarianism; and demonstrate that it is still O.K. to criticize our leaders.
The former C.I.A. operative and failed Presidential candidate has become an unlikely civic superego for the age of Trump.
February 2, 2017
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/persons-of-interest/evan-mcmullins-quest-to-save-democracy
--
President Trump complete remarks at National Prayer Breakfast (C-SPAN)
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by C-SPAN [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCb--64Gl51jIEVE-GLDAVTg / http://www.youtube.com/user/CSPAN , http://www.youtube.com/user/CSPAN/videos ]
President Trump delivers remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast.
Watch the complete event video here:
National Prayer Breakfast
President Trump and members of Congress deliver remarks at the 65th annual National Prayer Breakfast.
February 2, 2017
https://www.c-span.org/video/?423370-1/president-trump-delivers-remarks-national-prayer-breakfast
*
Donald Trump gave a doozy of a speech at the National Prayer Breakfast
February 2, 2017
Donald Trump spoke at the annual National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday. It was, um, unorthodox.
TRUMP: Thank you, Mark. So nice.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you very much, thank you. (APPLAUSE)
Thank you very much, it's a great honor to be here this morning. And so many faith leaders -- very, very important people to me -- from across our magnificent nation, and so many leaders from all across the globe. Today we continue a tradition begun by President Eisenhower some 64 years ago.
This gathering is a testament to the power of faith and is one of the great customs of our nation. And I hope to be here seven more times with you.
(APPLAUSE)
I want very much to thank our co-chair Senator Boozman and Senator Coons. And all of the congressional leadership; they're all over the place. We have a lot of very distinguished guests. And we have one guest who was just sworn in last night, Rex Tillerson, secretary of state.
(APPLAUSE)
Gonna do a great job.
(APPLAUSE)
Some people didn't like Rex because he actually got along with leaders of the world. I said, no, you have to understand that's a good thing. That's a good thing, not a bad thing. He's respected all over the world and I think he's going to go down as one of our great, great secretaries.
We appreciate it.
Thank you, thank you, Rex.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you as well to Senate Chaplain Barry Black, for his moving words. And I don't know Chaplain whether or not that's an appointed position -- is that an appointed position? I don't even know if you're Democrat or if you're Republican, but I'm appointing you for another year, the hell with it.
(LAUGHTER)
And I think it's not even my appointment, it's the Senate's appointment, but we'll talk to them. You're very -- you're -- your son is here. Your job is very, very secure. OK?
(LAUGHTER)
Thank you, Barry. Appreciate it very much.
I also want to thank my great friends the Roma. Where's Roma, beautiful Roma Downey, the voice of an angel. She's got the voice -- every time I hear that voice; it's so beautiful. That -- everything is so beautiful about Roma, including her husband because he's a special, special friend. Mark Burnett for the wonderful introduction.
So true, so true. I said to the agent, I'm sorry, the only thing wrong -- I actually got on the phone and fired him myself because he said, you don't want to do it, it'll never work, it'll never, ever work, you don't want to do it. I said, listen. When I really fired him after it became the number one show, it became so successful and he wanted a commission and he didn't want to this.
That's when I really said -- but we had tremendous success on The Apprentice. And when I ran for president, I had to leave the show. That's when I knew for sure that I was doing it. And they hired a big, big movie star, Arnold Schwarzenegger, to take my place. And we know how that turned out.
The ratings went down the tubes. It's been a total disaster and Mark will never, ever bet against Trump again. And I want to just pray for Arnold if we can, for those ratings, OK?
(LAUGHTER)
But we've had an amazing life together the last 14, 15 years. And a -- an outstanding man and thank you very much for introducing. Appreciate it. It's a great honor.
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: I also want to thank my dear friend, Vice President Mike Pence, who has been incredible.
(APPLAUSE)
And incredible wife, Karen.
And every time I was in a little trouble with something where they were questioning me, they'd say, "But he picked Mike Pence."
(LAUGHTER)
"So he has to know what he's doing."
(LAUGHTER)
And it's true, he's been -- you know on the scale of zero to 10, I rate him a 12, OK?
So I wanna thank you, thank you very much, appreciate it.
(APPLAUSE)
But most importantly, today I wanna thank the American people. Your faith and prayers have sustained me and inspired me through some very, very tough times. All around America, I have met amazing people whose words of worship and encouragement have been a constant source of strength.
What I hear most often as I travel the country are five words that never, ever fail to touch my heart, that's "I am praying for you." I hear it so often, I am praying for you, Mr. President.
(APPLAUSE)
No one has inspired me more in my travels than the families of the United States military. Men and women who have put their lives on the line everyday for their country and their countrymen. I just came back yesterday, from Dover Air Force Base, to join the family of Chief William "Ryan" Owens as America's fallen hero was returned home.
Very, very sad, but very, very beautiful, very, very beautiful. His family was there, incredible family, loved him so much, so devastated, he was so devastated, but the ceremony was amazing. He died in defense of our nation. He gave his life in defense of our people. Our debt to him and our debt to his family is eternal and everlasting. "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."
We will never forget the men and women who wear the uniform, believe me.
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
From generation to generation, their vigilance has kept our liberty alive. Our freedom is won by their sacrifice and our security has been earned with their sweat and blood and tears. God has blessed this land to give us such incredible heroes and patriots. They are very, very special and we are going to take care of them.
(APPLAUSE)
Our soldiers understand that what matters is not party or ideology or creed, but the bonds of loyalty that link us all together as one. America is a nation of believers. In towns all across our land, it's plain to see what we easily forget -- so easily we forget this, that the quality of our lives is not defined by our material success, but by our spiritual success.
I will tell you that and I tell you that from somebody that has had material success and knows tremendous numbers of people with great material success, the most material success. Many of those people are very, very miserable, unhappy people.
And I know a lot of people without that, but they have great families. They have great faith; they don't have money, at least, not nearly to the extent. And they're happy. Those, to me, are the successful people, I have to tell you.
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: I was blessed to be raised in a churched home. My mother and father taught me that to whom much is given, much is expected. I was sworn in on the very Bible from which my mother would teach us as young children, and that faith lives on in my heart every single day.
The people in this room come from many, many backgrounds. You represent so many religions and so many views. But we are all united by our faith, in our creator and our firm knowledge that we are all equal in His eyes. We are not just flesh and bone and blood, we are human beings with souls. Our republic was formed on the basis that freedom is not a gift from government, but that freedom is a gift from God.
(APPLAUSE)
It was the great Thomas Jefferson who said, the God who gave us life, gave us liberty. Jefferson asked, can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God. Among those freedoms is the right to worship according to our own beliefs. That is why I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution. I will do that, remember.
(APPLAUSE)
Freedom of religion is a sacred right, but it is also a right under threat all around us, and the world is under serious, serious threat in so many different ways. And I've never seen it so much and so openly as since I took the position of president.
The world is in trouble, but we're going to straighten it out. OK? That's what I do. I fix things. We're going to straighten it out.
(APPLAUSE)
Believe me. When you hear about the tough phone calls I'm having, don't worry about it. Just don't worry about it. They're tough. We have to tough. It's time we're going to be a little tough folks. We're taking advantage of by every nation in the world virtually. It's not going to happen anymore. It's not going to happen anymore. We have seen unimaginable violence carried out in the name of religion. Acts of wantonness (ph) (inaudible) just minorities. Horrors on a scale that defy description.
Terrorism is a fundamental threat to religious freedom. It must be stopped and it will be stopped. It may not be pretty for a little while. It will be stopped. We have seen...
(APPLAUSE)
And by the way, General, as you know James "Mad Dog", shouldn't say it in this room, Mattis, now there's a reason they call him "Mad Dog" Mattis, never lost a battle, always wins them, and always wins them fast. He's our new secretary of Defense, will be working with Rex. He's right now in South Korea, going to Japan, going to some other spots. I'll tell you what, I've gotten to know him really well. He's the real deal. We have somebody who's the real deal working for us and that's what we need. So, you watch. You just watch.
(APPLAUSE)
Things will be different. We have seen peace loving Muslims brutalize, victimize, murdered and oppressed by ISIS killers. We have seen threats of extermination against the Jewish people. We have seen a campaign of ISIS and genocide against Christians, where they cut of heads. Not since the Middle Ages have we seen that. We haven't seen that, the cutting off of heads. Now they cut off the heads, they drown people in steel cages. Haven't seen this. I haven't seen this. Nobody's seen this for many, many years.
TRUMP: All nations have a moral obligation to speak out against such violence. All nations have a duty to work together to confront it and to confront it viciously if we have to.
So I want to express clearly today, to the American people, that my administration will do everything in its power to defend and protect religious liberty in our land. America must forever remain a tolerant society where all face are respected and where all of our citizens can feel safe and secure.
We have to feel safe and secure. In recent days, we have begun to take necessary action to achieve that goal. Our nation has the most generous immigration system in the world. But these are those and there are those that would exploit that generosity to undermine the values that we hold so dear. We need security.
There are those who would seek to enter our country for the purpose of spreading violence, or oppressing other people based upon their faith or their lifestyle, not right. We will not allow a beachhead of intolerance to spread in our nation. You look all over the world and you see what's happening.
So in the coming days, we will develop a system to help ensure that those admitted into our country fully embrace our values of religious and personal liberty. And that they reject any form of oppression and discrimination. We want people to come into our nation, but we want people to love us and to love our values, not to hate us and to hate our values.
We will be a safe country, we will be a free country and we will be a country where all citizens can practice their beliefs without fear of hostility or a fear of violence. America will flourish, as long as our liberty, and in particular, our religious liberty is allowed to flourish.
(APPLAUSE)
America will succeed, as long as our most vulnerable citizens -- and we have some that are so vulnerable -- have a path to success. And America will thrive, as long as we continue to have faith in each other and faith in God.
(APPLAUSE)
That faith in God has inspired men and women to sacrifice for the needy, to deploy to wars overseas and to lock arms at home, to ensure equal rights for every man, woman and child in our land. It's that faith that sent the pilgrims across the oceans, the pioneers across the plains and the young people all across America, to chase their dreams. They are chasing their dreams. We are going to bring those dreams back.
As long as we have God, we are never, ever alone. Whether it's the soldier on the night watch, or the single parent on the night shift, God will always give us solace and strength, and comfort. We need to carry on and to keep carrying on.
For us here in Washington, we must never, ever stop asking God for the wisdom to serve the public, according to his will. That's why...
(APPLAUSE)
Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
That's why President Eisenhower and Senator Carlson had the wisdom to gather together 64 years ago, to begin this truly great tradition. But that's not all they did together. Lemme tell you the rest of the story.
Just one year later, Senator Carlson was among the members of Congress to send to the president's desk a joint resolution that added, "Under God," to our Pledge of Allegiance. It's a great thing.
(APPLAUSE)
Because that's what we are and that is what we will always be and that is what our people want; one beautiful nation, under God.
Thank you, God bless you and God bless America. Thank you very much. Thank you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/02/donald-trump-gave-a-doozy-of-a-speech-at-the-national-prayer-breakfast/ [with embedded video and annotations, and comments]
*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1OeUXQ2k8c [with comments]
*
Donald Trump Declares a Vision of Religious Nationalism
Donald Trump attends the National Prayer Breakfast.
At the annual prayer breakfast in Washington, the president focused on the violent, ideological threats to America.
Emma Green
Feb 1, 2017
When Donald Trump looks out on the world, he sees a landscape of potential threats to the United States and its values. “Freedom of religion is a sacred right, but also a right under threat all around us,” the president said at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday. “The world is under serious, serious threat in so many different ways,” he went on, “but we’re going to straighten it out. That’s what I do. I fix things.”
He laid out a vision of what it means to end these threats to United States: Stop terrorism. End the persecution of Middle Eastern Christians. Defend the country’s borders from those who “would exploit that generosity to undermine the values we hold so dear.” Religious Americans also feel threatened within the U.S., he said: “That is why I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment,” a provision of the tax code that prohibits [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/how-trump-is-trying-to-put-more-money-in-politics/493823/ ] religious leaders and institutions endorsing or opposing political candidates, “and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution.” Repealing the Johnson Amendment would theoretically allow houses of worship and religious leaders to openly advocate for political candidates while retaining their tax-exempt status, while also allowing them to funnel religious donations [id.] into explicitly political efforts.
Trump is championing an agenda of religious nationalism [ https://thinkprogress.org/trump-is-creating-a-new-form-of-christian-nationalism-centered-around-himself-d8687f41cc49 ]. Along with key White House staffers like Stephen Bannon [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trump-america-first/514037/ ], he believes America represents a set of values, rooted in the country’s religious identity. While there’s little evidence [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/trumps-sunday-school/492653/ ] that Trump himself is religiously devout, he has benefited [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/the-religious-liberty-showdowns-coming-in-2017/511400/ ] from affiliations with largely white evangelical leaders such as Jerry Falwell Jr.
During his speech, Trump argued that America’s religiously grounded values are being attacked—not just through acts of violence, but through ideological erosion. “We will not allow a beachhead of intolerance to spread in our nation,” Trump said on Thursday, seeming to refer to the “radical Islamic extremism” he has emphasized [ https://www.theatlantic.com/liveblogs/2017/01/live-coverage-of-the-presidential-inauguration/513785/13973/ ] in past speeches. “You look all over the world and see what’s happening.” He will defend these values, he said, because “that’s what people want: one beautiful nation under God.”
America was not always “one nation under God”—at least, not officially. The words “under God” weren’t added to the pledge of allegiance until 1954, during the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower—not coincidentally, the first president to convene the National Prayer Breakfast. Over time, this relatively new tradition has become a mandatory exercise for commanders in chief; and during the breakfast this year, Trump specifically praised Eisenhower for kicking it off.
In many ways, Trump’s vision of religious nationalism is a continuation of Republican presidents before him. In an interview [ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/donald-trump-christian-libertarianism/494843/ ] in August, the Princeton University professor Kevin Kruse pointed out that Trump’s religious rhetoric more closely resembles Nixon’s than Eisenhower’s: “He used it to justify the extent of the Vietnam War and Cambodia; he used it to advance all sorts of Silent Majority proposals before Congress,” Kruse told me. “That’s what you see in Trump today: It’s much more of a defensive pushback against people who are seen as outside one nation under God.”
This echoes recent findings [ http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/02/01/faith-few-strong-links-to-national-identity/ ] of the Pew Research Center on Americans’ sense of their own national identity. While only a third of Americans believe being Christian is a very important part of being American, the numbers are split neatly along party and denominational lines: 43 percent of Republicans were likely to say that’s the case, compared to 29 percent of Democrats, and 57 percent of white evangelical Protestants said the same. Trump’s message seems to be directed toward these groups: He is affirming their sense of the tie between national and religious identity, and pushing back against those who would diminish either of those identities.
And he’s doing this through fear. In his comments at the prayer breakfast, Trump gave a graphic description of Christians being murdered overseas: “They cut off the heads, they drown people in steel cages,” he said. He also spoke “peace-loving Muslims brutalized, victimized, murdered and oppressed by ISIS killers,” and the threats against the Jewish people. He was inclusive in his description of those who are under threat, for the sake of emphasizing the need for fear: “We have seen unimaginable violence carried out in the name of religion,” he said, “acts of wanton abuse of minorities, horrors on a scale that defy description.” The fundamental threat to religious freedom, he said, is terrorism.
While Trump has often spoken about the need for safety and security, his comments at the prayer-breakfast offer a look at the ideological framework beneath that call. Like his Republican predecessors, he has aligned himself with a vision of America that is strong and powerful because of its piety. Against the threat of foreigners, terrorists, and corrupting ideologies, the United States will be one, beautiful nation—and in Trump’s view, that’s only possible under God.
Related Story
Why Donald Trump Appeals to Evangelicals
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/donald-trump-christian-libertarianism/494843/
Copyright © 2017 by The Atlantic Monthly Group
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/donald-trump-national-prayer-breakfast/515445/ [with comments]
*
The religious right understood Trump perfectly. Now he’s delivering for them.
February 2, 2017
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/02/02/the-religious-right-understood-trump-perfectly-now-hes-delivering-for-them/ [with embedded video, and comments]
*
Donald Trump threatens to "straighten out" the world in chilling speech to religious leaders
The President said we shouldn't worry about "tough phone calls" he's had with world leaders, like the one where he reportedly threatened to send troops into Mexico
2 FEB 2017 Updated 2 FEB 2017
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/donald-trump-threatens-straighten-out-9745335 [with embedded video, and comments]
*
Arnold Schwarzenegger Responds to Trump | ABC News
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by ABC News [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBi2mrWuNuyYy4gbM6fU18Q / http://www.youtube.com/user/ABCNews , http://www.youtube.com/user/ABCNews/videos ]
Arnold Schwarzenegger responds after Pres. Donald J. Trump jokes he'll pray for him over The New Celebrity Apprentice ratings: "Why don't we switch jobs?" http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-trump-attend-national-prayer-breakfast/story?id=45203891
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6im-gTsGzkc [with comments]
--
Full Show - Berkeley Riot Aftermath: 1st Amendment Under Attack - 02/02/2017
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel
On this Thursday, Feb. 2nd 2017 broadcast of the ["the most classic form of total projection the world has ever seen"] Alex Jones Show [with Anthony Cumia guest-hosting the fourth hour], protests erupt at UC Berkeley as social justice warriors combine their special snowflake powers to shut down the evil Milo Yiannopoulos. Meanwhile President Trump addresses Iran's missile testing, continues to work on the border wall, and negotiates with Australian leaders. On today's show, we speak with Irish journalist and documentary filmmaker Phelim McAleer about his latest film, "Gosnell: The Untold Story of America's Most Prolific Serial Killer," covering an abortionist who was convicted of killing four people, including three babies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VAZyn9CeDM [with comments]
--
Conway cites "Bowling Green Massacre" to defend refugee ban [original title: "Matthews pushes Conway on use of Executive Power"]
Hardball with Chris Matthews
2/2/17
Chris Matthews pushes Kellyanne Conway, Counselor to the President, on whether President Trump can insist that federal workers agree with his policies and further discuss the executive order on immigration. [following sentence added February 3, 2017:] This morning [February 3, 2017], Conway tweeted a clarification saying she meant to say “Bowling Green terrorists.” Duration: 5:42
A top White House adviser cited a nonexistent terror attack in MSNBC interview
Kellyanne Conway
Feb. 3, 2017
http://www.businessinsider.com/bowling-green-massacre-fake-kellyanne-conway-immigration-donald-trump-2017-2 [with this YouTube embedded]
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/hardball/watch/matthews-pushes-conway-on-use-of-executive-power-868952643695 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-w16cyQ8wQ [with comments]
--
US nonprofits reject funds to fight extremism due to Trump
In this image from video, taken Feb. 1, 2017, Suehaila Amen, a board member of the Dearborn, Mich.-based nonprofit Leaders Advancing and Helping Communities, speaks during an interview with The Associated Press in Dearborn, Mich. LAHC was awarded federal grant money to combat violent extremism, but is rejecting the money.
Feb. 2, 2017
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/29ad5c88c132422f91600d2e818b62f5/us-nonprofits-reject-funds-fight-extremism-due-trump
--
Melania Trump’s $150-Million Lawsuit Against The Daily Mail Has Been Dismissed
The first lady had sued the Daily Mail and a political blogger for claiming in stories she worked as a “high-end escort” and suffered from a “full-blown nervous breakdown.”
Feb. 2, 2017
https://www.buzzfeed.com/claudiarosenbaum/maryland-judge-dismisses-melania-trumps-150-million-lawsuit [with comments]
--
Trump Is Running the Government Like a Cheap Reality TV Show
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by GQ
In the latest episode of Trumped, the President treats the nomination of the next Supreme Court justice like a low-rent version of The Bachelor’s rose ceremony.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzMc6_Atpx0 [with comments]
--
Tim Kaine: Trump is strengthening our enemies
All In with Chris Hayes
2/2/17
The new president has harsh words and threats for allies Australia and Mexico - but is curiously silent on Russian aggression in Ukraine. Duration: 14:43
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Sean Spicer, 2/2/2017, #7
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/02/press-briefing-press-secretary-sean-spicer-222017-7
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/tim-kaine-trump-is-strengthening-our-enemies-869026371912
*
Sources contradict White House on Yemen raid
All In with Chris Hayes
2/2/17
The Trump administration's characterization of Sunday's SEAL team raid in Yemen is evolving as more questions have been raised about the operation and contradictions are arising. Duration: 8:34
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Sean Spicer, 2/2/2017, #7
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/02/press-briefing-press-secretary-sean-spicer-222017-7
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/sources-contradict-white-house-on-yemen-raid-869027907533
--
Exposed: Who Really Instigated The Berkley Protests
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel
If you have never heard of Robert Reich, it is time to make him famous, not for a good reason. This mentally deranged liberal professor is promoting protests that have turned violent every time.
[from the February 2, 2017 Infowars Nightly News]
100 Days Resistance
Published on Jan 5, 2017 by Inequality Media [ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuDv5p8E-evaRSh542hDV5g , http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuDv5p8E-evaRSh542hDV5g/videos ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sueka7aZLsg [with comments]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiSXXwLPrec [with comments]
*
Hollywood Calls For The Overthrow Of President Trump
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel
Despite Trump protests getting more violent, liberal hollywood is still promoting the anti-Trump protests, instigating the destruction of our great nation.
[from the February 2, 2017 Infowars Nightly News]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBCODUcogew [with comments]
*
Democrats Are Organizing A Coup Against Trump
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by The Alex Jones Channel
Alex Jones covers the latest news about the left's attempts to overthrow Trump.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BghC7JHYpI [with (over 6,000) comments] [a must-watch, from beginning to end]
--
New Trump era emboldens Putin, a perilous time for Putin critics
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/2/17
Rachel Maddow reports on how the Donald Trump era has emboldened Vladimir Putin, and reminds viewers of the murder of Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov and the poisoning of Putin critic Vladimir Kara-Murza. Duration: 20:38
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/new-trump-era-emboldens-putin-a-perilous-time-for-putin-critics-869105731970 [and see also in particular (linked in) http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128235280 and preceding and following, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128229535 and preceding and following]
*
Persecution of Putin opposition a test for Tillerson
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/2/17
Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia, talks with Rachel Maddow about dangers political opponents of Vladimir Putin face, and the increased anxiety with Putin admirer Donald Trump in the White House and Putin friend Rex Tillerson installed as Secretary of State. Duration: 6:02
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/persecution-of-putin-opposition-a-test-for-tillerson-869111875703
*
Trump's ill-fated Yemen raid raises risk/reward questions
The Rachel Maddow Show
2/2/17
David Sanger, national security correspondent for the New York Times, talks with Rachel Maddow about the planning and unanticipated obstacles that befell Donald Trump's first ordered counter-terrorism raid in Yemen. Duration: 11:14
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/trump-s-ill-fated-yemen-raid-raises-risk-reward-questions-869077571519
--
Leaks throw Trump White House into chaos
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/2/17
Donald Trump's mishaps in the White House are being made public thanks to an unprecedented level of leaks – some by aides trying to influence him, others to sound the alarm. Lawrence discusses with John Heilemann and Eli Stokols. Duration: 12:40
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/leaks-throw-trump-white-house-into-chaos-869099075808
*
Rewrite: Why Donald Trump is wrong about Harley-Davidson
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell
2/2/17
Trump was forced to meet Harley-Davidson executives at the White House after fear of protests led to the cancellation of an event at a Wisconsin factory. In the Rewrite, Lawrence corrects what Trump said about Harley-Davidson – with the help of some old photos. Duration: 6:19
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/rewrite-why-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-harley-davidson-869109315952
--
Trump White House could be hours away from new Iran sanctions
The 11th Hour with Brian Williams
2/2/17
MSNBC's Brian Williams covers the days fast-moving details in the world of U.S. foreign policy with Kasie Hunt, Michael Crowley, Megan Murphy, and Hugh Hewitt. Duration: 10:02
For Europe, There’s a New Threat in Town: The U.S.
The combative tone from the White House has given European leaders a mounting sense of anxiety and puzzlement over how to proceed.
FEB. 2, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/europe/trump-european-union.html
©2017 NBCNews.com
http://www.msnbc.com/brian-williams/watch/trump-white-house-could-be-hours-away-from-new-iran-sanctions-869119043693
--
President Trump Tangles with Foreign Leaders: The Daily Show
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Daily Show with Trevor Noah
Straining relationships with key U.S. allies, President Trump threatens to invade Mexico and hangs up on the prime minister of Australia after a heated phone call.
[originally aired February 2, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22uvRSqFj98 [with comments]
--
Cartoon Donald Trump Has A Few Thoughts For Australia
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Late Show with Stephen Colbert
Cartoon Donald Trump is learning the hard way just how challenging international relations can be.
[originally aired February 2, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cml78dSpVGo [with comments]
*
President Trump Prays For His Haters At National Prayer Breakfast
Published on Feb 3, 2017 by The Late Show with Stephen Colbert
This POTUS never misses an opportunity to talk smack, and that's exactly what he did in the most unlikely of venues: the National Prayer Breakfast.
[originally aired February 2, 2017]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_Kurq_HW7c [with comments]
--
Trump's Second Week Is as Chaotic as His First: A Closer Look
Published on Feb 2, 2017 by Late Night with Seth Meyers
Seth takes a closer look at the confusion surrounding President Trump's controversial travel ban and his bizarre calls with foreign leaders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x4p59C1E8U [with comments]
--
House of Cards: Building Our National Security on the Alt-Right’s Alternative Threats
By Jane Chong
Thursday, February 2, 2017, 11:42 PM
In November, I cautioned [ https://www.lawfareblog.com/deep-risk-under-trump-bannon-and-flynn-are-national-security-problem ] that then-President-elect Trump’s appointment of Breitbart CEO Stephen Bannon as his chief strategist and Michael “Fear of Muslims is RATIONAL [ https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/us/politics/michael-flynn-national-security-adviser-donald-trump.html ]” Flynn as his national security adviser would create “deep risk” for U.S. security. More specifically, I argued that the problem was one of “architecture”: from inside the Oval Office, these extreme advisers would be positioned to orchestrate “the construction of an alt-right reality that denies and derides facts and insists on setting U.S. national security priorities without regard for what the threat data actually tells us [ https://www.lawfareblog.com/deep-risk-under-trump-bannon-and-flynn-are-national-security-problem ].”
What does it mean to construct an alt-right national security reality? As to Bannon, I offered this example:
Among other things, [Breitbart] systematically dismisses any attempt to recognize right-wing terrorism and extremism as a real problem in this country. It has long derided “this so-called terror threat” as a nonsense invention of the Department of Homeland Security. And it has equated President Obama’s efforts to address right-wing extremism to a “refusal to acknowledge radical Islam as a threat [ http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/02/21/breitbarts-dr-sebastian-gorka-obama-focus-on-right-wing-extremism-endangers-american-lives/ ]” and a political ploy that puts American lives in danger.
The idea that the mastermind behind this project will now serve as our commander-in-chief’s right-hand strategist creates a genuine security predicament. Going forward, such an appointment should be expected to fundamentally undermine the public’s trust in the new administration’s will and ability to even-handedly deal with homegrown terrorist threats on a factual, and not religious or ideological, basis.
That future is now. Last night, Reuters broke [ http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-extremists-program-exclusiv-idUSKBN15G5VO ] the story that the administration is allegedly looking to overhaul and rename the "Countering Violent Extremism" (CVE) program to focus exclusively on Islamist extremism. If these changes are made, according to sources briefed on the changes, CVE would no longer target right-wing groups such as white supremacists that have carried out bombings and shootings in the United States.
We are talking about the possibility of a newly revised America, where the only real terrorist is an Islamic terrorist. Whatever your thoughts on the efficacy of particular CVE efforts, that the Trump administration is contemplating such a change is, frankly, terrifying. (If you seek a glimpse of the possible consequences of denying or downplaying the severity of right-wing extremism as a matter of executive policy, check out the big piece [ https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31/the-fbi-has-quietly-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforcement/ ] The Intercept just published yesterday detailing the FBI’s longtime battle against white supremacists’ infiltration of law enforcement agencies.) It suggests we have already completed the jump from Kellyanne Conway’s amusing world of “alternative facts [ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/22/how-kellyanne-conway-ushered-in-the-era-of-alternative-facts/ ]” to a security edifice that incorporates “alternative threats”—by which I mean threats defined in blatant disregard of the empirical reality.
After this last week, we can’t really claim to be surprised by the CVE news. After all, alternative threat construction is the only way to explain the contents of Trump’s immigration executive order [ https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states ], which imposed a sloppy, sweeping 90-day ban on the entry of immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries, 120-day ban on all refugees, and indefinite ban on Syrian refugees. And the very next day, Trump sent the clearest possible signal that this is the new normal—that he sees no problem with conflating ideology and actuality, the political and the factual—when he signed a presidential memorandum [ https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/28/presidential-memorandum-organization-national-security-council-and ] granting Bannon a permanent seat on the Principals Committee of the National Security Council (NSC) (and bumping the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Director of National Intelligence from theirs).
All this brings me to my conclusion: these are strategic choices that indicate systematic alt-right world-building from deep inside the White House. I do not say this lightly. I say this based on facts.
Let’s track back to that immigration order Trump dropped last Friday. The consensus view of the U.S. national security community is that this order is not just a failure of morality, diplomacy, practicability, and probably legality; it also has no chance of accomplishing its stated objective of making America safer. The order rewrites reality not only in the sense that it does things to thousands of aliens from Muslim-majority countries. It also—baselessly—redefines them as a collective national security threat that must be subjected to “extreme vetting” or else near-total exclusion as a matter of public safety.
Others have already taken the administration to task for its supreme disinterest in ascertaining the truth value of the propositions underlying the order. Over the weekend, in a piece [ https://lawfareblog.com/malevolence-tempered-incompetence-trumps-horrifying-executive-order-refugees-and-visas ] criticizing the immigration order for both its malevolence and sheer drafting [ https://lawfareblog.com/malevolence-tempered-incompetence-trumps-horrifying-executive-order-refugees-and-visas ] incompetence, Ben pointed to specific provisions of the order that belie the administration’s stated purpose of securing our national security. I agree with Ben’s analysis and would take it even further. It’s not just that the substance of the order is so “utterly orthogonal to any relevant security interest” as to suggest “a deliberate decision to burden human lives to make a public point.” I would add that the detailed rundown Ben provides of the deliberateness with which the administration bypassed the normal executive vetting procedures is itself particularly important evidence of the administration’s “malevolence.” The subversion of process not just utter perversion of substance—is what signals intentional disregard for both the harm that this order would cause and for the objective the order was supposed to fulfill (you know, increasing our security).
In some sense, the press is playing “useful idiot” to the Trump administration on those occasions when it downplays the significance of the administration’s repudiation of anything approaching normal decision-making protocol. Consider this bizarre snippet of weekend analysis [ http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban/index.html ] from CNN:
Trump's unilateral moves, which have drawn the ire of human rights groups and prompted protests at US airports, reflect the President's desire to quickly make good on his campaign promises. But they also encapsulate the pitfalls of an administration largely operated by officials with scant federal experience.
If this description strikes you as unobjectionable in its face, look closer: actually, it reduces the mess that the administration has made of countless lives to some kind of collision of honest intentions and administrative naïveté. This framing gives the order’s supporters a nonsense defense to rally around however obvious the ensuing fallout and underestimates the strategic course charted by the fringe elements inside the White House. It is one thing to say the order itself is incompetent—it absolutely is—but to suggest Trump’s team simply didn’t know any better is almost surely false.
As Ben emphasized, and notwithstanding the administration’s vague denials, the order was reportedly not submitted for normal review by the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, the State Department or the Department of Defense (Secretary of Defense James Mattis [ https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/politics/donald-trump-rush-immigration-order-chaos.html ], a vocal opponent of Trump’s Muslim ban during the campaign was not asked for input), and NSC lawyers were barred from even assessing it. These protocols are in place specifically to ensure that executive policies satisfy legal requirements, account for practical complications, and avoid unintended consequences. You sidestep this process if your goal is to get a directive or order to press irrespective of those parameters—in other words, if you decide your policy or political goals simply trumps them.
Process is crucial to factual accuracy, ideological neutrality and operational efficacy—and that’s precisely why Trump’s presidential memorandum inserting Bannon, a political adviser, into the NSC Principals Committee is disturbing to so many (the technical phrase, courtesy of former national security adviser Susan Rice, is “stone cold crazy [ http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/316764-susan-rice-trumps-nsc-order-stone-cold-crazy ]”). The change strikes fear in us because it is a formalization, at the NSC level, of what we just witnessed with the drafting and issuing of the immigration order: the wrong people calling the shots and the wrong people being left out. And let’s dispense with the shoptalk in favor of real candor: we are not this upset simply because the national security adviser is sitting in that seat—as unusual and inadvisable as it may be, past presidents have in the past used all sorts of configurations to customize their use of the NSC and Principals Committee. What truly has us jumping up and down is that the man sitting in that seat is Stephen Bannon.
This is not an overreaction. We are living in an age when Reddit has taken it upon itself to ban an alt-right group from its megaforum [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/02/01/reddit-bans-alt-right-group.html ], but the White House is allegedly being run by the man responsible for building the biggest alt-right platform in the world.
I woke up Sunday to David Rothkopf’s warning [ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-danger-of-steve-bannon-on-the-national-security-council/2017/01/29/ba3982a2-e663-11e6-bf6f-301b6b443624_story.html ] in the Washington Post that Bannon’s addition to the NSC could pose, in the long term, more dangerous consequences for our national security than Trump’s immigration order. But given the president’s broad discretion when it comes to NSC meetings, and more importantly, given that Bannon’s fingerprints are all over the immigration order—both what’s in it and how it was issued—we should focus not on which edict is worse but on the total continuity between them. Both evince the administration’s anti-professional approach to security decisions of the utmost magnitude. And many in the national security community are rightly frightened.
I believe deepening that fright is the apparent gap between how so much of the national security community feels and how our lawmakers are behaving. Almost nothing Trump had done is at odds with the person and president he promised to be on the campaign trail. This is true, too, of his top advisers. And yet from the outset, denial has been the favored approach of several prominent legislators. In November, when civil rights groups and commentators on both sides of the aisle sounded the alarm about Bannon’s appointment, Rand Paul and others insisted on “giv[ing] the guy a chance.” We don’t have reason to think he is personally racist, their argument went [ http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/306139-rand-paul-defends-bannon-give-him-a-chance ], notwithstanding the concededly horrific material he had built his professional career disseminating and his numerous personal statements endorsing ideology [ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/01/31/bannon-odds-islam-china-decades-us-foreign-policy-doctrine/97292068/ ] repugnant to American values. This line of argument is most disingenuous because it ignores the very talent for which Bannon was explicitly recruited by the Trump campaign: he is a strategy professional with an astonishingly successful track record in reality distortion. As I emphasized [ https://www.lawfareblog.com/deep-risk-under-trump-bannon-and-flynn-are-national-security-problem ] in November: “Bannon’s website, Breitbart, is not a vacuous hate site, as is so often suggested. Breitbart is a carefully honed platform, and its clear and consistent approach to communicating the alt-right messaging on national security issues [ http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/ ] should give policy experts and principled politicians pause.”
This thing goes deep and wide. The project now underway in the highest office in the land—the sowing of prejudice as fact in what, at least so far, amounts to methodical alt-right revisionism—already extends well beyond immigration policy and counterrorism. Trump’s fondness for Putin dominated news cycles before the inauguration, and rabid anti-Islam policy has been the administration’s focus since, but we should take careful stock of all the other reality revisions emerging in the overlap between the alt-right and White House agendas.
A conspicuous example that we too readily forgive as an inherently divisive political issue, notwithstanding shifting public trends and growing poll data [ https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/us/politics/survey-of-republican-voters-shows-a-majority-believe-in-climate-change.html ] to the contrary [ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/many-more-republicans-now-believe-in-climate-change/ ]: climate change. The administration has signaled its likely rejection of climate change as a national and global security priority, despite the nonpartisan assessments of U.S. intelligence [ https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Newsroom/Reports%20and%20Pubs/Implications_for_US_National_Security_of_Anticipated_Climate_Change.pdf ] and military [ https://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/603440 ] experts who have made clear that climate change is a “threat multiplier” creating expansive national security risks. Trump has already made numerous statements that indicate his readiness to dismantle the previous administration’s far-reaching work on the issue. Most worryingly, his administration has already moved to cut off public access to facts. Last week the communications head for Trump's EPA transition team declared that EPA scientists will undergo "case by case [ http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/25/511572169/epa-scientists-work-may-face-case-by-case-review-by-trump-team-official-says ]" review before presenting or publishing their work outside the agency. Days earlier, references to climate change were eliminated [ https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/2017/live-updates/politics/live-coverage-of-trumps-inauguration/references-to-climate-change-disappear-from-white-house-website/ ] from the White House website. And Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s pick to head the staggeringly powerful Office of Management and Budget is not just a climate change denier; he has, on the record, suggested doing away [ http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2016/12/20/trump_omb_chief_pick_mick_mulvaney_questions_need_for_funding_science.html ] with government-backed scientific research altogether.
***
The bottom line is that in less than two weeks, the Trump administration has ripped any semblance of facade off the palazzo and has asserted its commitment to building a new national security order—one centered not on empirical reality but on an alternative threat reality.
This may not be 1925 Italy, but anyone who thought Bannon and Flynn would stand quietly in the wings, whispering in the president’s ear—that they would be a nefarious, largely unseeable fringe force—has been proven wrong. Bannon, in particular, is pursuing his revisionist project with high-level visibility and underappreciated deliberation. At minimum, principled politicians should refuse to confirm Trump’s remaining cabinet picks until Bannon is removed—not from the NSC Principals Committee [ http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/316886-sanders-bannon-must-be-removed-from-national-security-council ] but from the White House altogether.
The stakes really are that high. They are reality itself.
© 2017 The Lawfare Institute
https://www.lawfareblog.com/house-cards-building-our-national-security-alt-rights-alternative-threats
--
Trump to Order Review of Dodd-Frank, Halt Obama Fiduciary Rule
Barack Obama signs the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act on July 21, 2010.
Move delays April implementation of rule prohibiting conflicts
Moves emphasize removal of regulatory burdens: Official
February 3, 2017 Updated February 3, 2017
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-02-03/trump-to-halt-obama-fiduciary-rule-order-review-of-dodd-frank
--
A special warfare unit was spotted flying a Trump flag in public. Now the Navy is investigating.
February 3, 2017
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/02/03/a-special-warfare-unit-was-spotted-flying-a-trump-flag-in-public-now-the-navy-is-investigating/ [with embedded video, and comments]
--
in addition to (linked in) the post to which this is a reply and preceding and (other) following (including in particular http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128354177 [and any future following]), see also (linked in):
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=47797824 and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=59075857 and preceding and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67241728 and preceding and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90402843 and preceding and following;
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101083965 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=93476719 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=101373779 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=105604167 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109057017 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=110400989 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128229535 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128235280 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128352902 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128353689 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128353202 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128353789 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128356256 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128357488 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128369611 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128372104 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128388665 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128355040 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128357396 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128357461 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128364576 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128386087 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128359984 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128387216 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128361088 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128369797 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128374229 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128375704 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128375703 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128376139 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128377342 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128380005 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128391545 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128392034 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128393186 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128378593 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128378761 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128402789 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128381877 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128386955 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128387984 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128391805 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128406739 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128388719 and preceding and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128389214 and preceding (and any future following),
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128389410 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128388756 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128390269 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128423048 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128393576 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128393642 (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128394482 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128400498 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128408337 and following,
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128413492 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=128423207 (and any future following)
Greensburg, KS - 5/4/07
"Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty."
from John Philpot Curran, Speech
upon the Right of Election, 1790
F6
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
