All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[Tami]

The Plot to Subvert an Election

In November, shortly after Donald J. Trump eked out a victory that Moscow had worked to assist, an even bigger banner appeared, this time on the Arlington Memorial Bridge in Washington: the face of President Barack Obama and “Goodbye Murderer” in big red letters.

The police never identified who had hung the banners, but there were clues. The earliest promoters of the images on Twitter were American-sounding accounts, including @LeroyLovesUSA, later exposed as Russian fakes operated from St. Petersburg to influence American voters.

The Kremlin, it appeared, had reached onto United States soil in New York and Washington. The banners may well have been intended as visual victory laps for the most effective foreign interference in an American election in history.

For many Americans, the Trump-Russia story as it has been voluminously reported over the past two years is a confusing tangle of unfamiliar names and cyberjargon, further obscured by the shout-fest of partisan politics. What Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel in charge of the investigation, may know or may yet discover is still uncertain. President Trump’s Twitter outbursts that it is all a “hoax” and a “witch hunt,” in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary, have taken a toll on public comprehension.

But to travel back to 2016 and trace the major plotlines of the Russian attack is to underscore what we now know with certainty: The Russians carried out a landmark intervention that will be examined for decades to come. Acting on the personal animus of Mr. Putin, public and private instruments of Russian power moved with daring and skill to harness the currents of American politics. Well-connected Russians worked aggressively to recruit or influence people inside the Trump campaign.

As Mr. Trump emerged in spring 2016 as the improbable favorite for the Republican nomination, the Russian operation accelerated on three fronts — the hacking and leaking of Democratic documents; massive fraud on Facebook and Twitter; and outreach to Trump campaign associates.

Consider 10 days in March. On March 15 of that year, Mr. Trump won five primaries, closing in on his party’s nomination, and crowed that he had become “the biggest political story anywhere in the world.” That same day in Moscow, a veteran hacker named Ivan Yermakov, a Russian military intelligence officer working for a secret outfit called Unit 26165, began probing the computer network of the Democratic National Committee. In St. Petersburg, shift workers posted on Facebook and Twitter at a feverish pace, posing as Americans and following instructions to attack Mrs. Clinton.

On March 21 in Washington, Mr. Trump announced his foreign policy team, a group of fringe figures whose advocacy of warmer relations with Russia ran counter to Republican orthodoxy. Meanwhile, Unit 26165 was poring over the bounty from a separate attack it had just carried out: 50,000 emails stolen from the Clinton campaign’s chairman.

On March 24, one of the members of the Trump foreign policy team, George Papadopoulos, sat in the cafe of an upscale London hotel with a Russian woman who introduced herself as Mr. Putin’s niece and offered to help set up a meeting between the Russian president and Mr. Trump. The woman and the adviser exchanged frequent messages in the weeks that followed. Today, Mr. Padadopoulos is unsure that those messages came from the person he met in the cafe.

The Russian intervention was essentially a hijacking — of American companies like Facebook and Twitter; of American citizens’ feelings about immigration and race; of American journalists eager for scoops, however modest; of the naïve, or perhaps not so naïve, ambitions of Mr. Trump’s advisers. The Russian trolls, hackers and agents totaled barely 100, and their task was to steer millions of American voters. They knew it would take a village to sabotage an election.

Russians or suspected Russian agents — including oligarchs, diplomats, former military officers and shadowy intermediaries — had dozens of contacts during the campaign with Mr. Trump’s associates. They reached out through email, Facebook and Twitter. They sought introductions through trusted business connections of Mr. Trump’s, obscure academic institutions, veterans groups and the National Rifle Association.

[Mister Mets]

Also...

The GOP are framing this like the nominee's accuser is confused and/or making things up. What kind of a kook calls for a FBI investigation of something they are fabricating?

It's essentially saying "Why, yes. I would like to be charged with a felony when I lie to a Fed."

I'll note that I'm going to articulate views that I don't necessarily hold here.

The general establishment GOP argument is that she may be mistaken somehow, based on what we know about the unreliability of the memory, and some of the circumstances (IE- this was an allegation about someone she didn't know very well at the time, and never saw again, who she became aware of again when he was a middle-aged judge.)

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...e-fake/281558/

https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...e-worse-091313

https://www.newyorker.com/science/ma...y-recollection

In this case, she wouldn't really know that she's in the wrong, so she wouldn't really consider the possibility that an FBI investigation would demonstrate she's mistaken. There would also be limited legal penalties for being mistaken (It's really difficult to have a perjury trial if someone doesn't know they were wrong.)

It would also be unlikely that an FBI investigation would be able to establish what happened, given the vagueness of the details (she's not sure where exactly it happened, or when, or who all the other people were.) So if she were lying completely, it doesn't stand to reason she would be afraid of being caught. The FBI investigation of Anita Hill's allegations (which were more recent and dealt with workplace misconduct in a federal agency) led the White House to conclude they were unfounded, which hasn't exonerated Thomas in the views of the mainstream media today.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/19/polit...ine/index.html

There are three things I've considered on this mess.

In Kavanaugh's favor, it seems very unlikely that if he were to sexually assault one woman, it would be someone who would end up being a law professor. In addition, when prominent abusers have been accused in the past, other victims tend to come forward (see Harvey Weinstein, Donald Trump, and even Al Franken.) So, if her story is true, it does suggest there are others out there, and that the lack of further allegations is an example of a dog not barking. It could very well be that Ronan Farrow is submitting his final draft of a story with multiple sourced allegations against Kavanaugh, but if nothing else comes out that increases the possibility Kavanaugh is innocent.

In Ford's favor, she started mentioning the encounter well before the current #metoo moment, so it can't be seen as a response to the moment.

One problem with the discussion is that it seems there are people on the different sides who think that the other side is arguing in bad faith. Some of the arguments in favor of rejecting Kavanaugh suggest that conservatives know that he's probably guilty, while some of the defenses of Kavanaugh are based on the presumption that his critics know that he's likely innocent. That's not really the case. Some people have information that others don't (Kavanaugh has many friends in conservative Washington circles who can speak to his character; there are people who have been abused and know others who have been abused who see parallels in Ms. Ford's experiences.)

[Tami]

I'll note that I'm going to articulate views that I don't necessarily hold here.

The general establishment GOP argument is that she may be mistaken somehow, based on what we know about the unreliability of the memory, and some of the circumstances (IE- this was an allegation about someone she didn't know very well at the time, and never saw again, who she became aware of again when he was a middle-aged judge.)

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...e-fake/281558/

https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...e-worse-091313

https://www.newyorker.com/science/ma...y-recollection

In this case, she wouldn't really know that she's in the wrong, so she wouldn't really consider the possibility that an FBI investigation would demonstrate she's mistaken. There would also be limited legal penalties for being mistaken (It's really difficult to have a perjury trial if someone knows they were wrong.)

It would also be unlikely that an FBI investigation would be able to establish what happened, given the vagueness of the details (she's not sure where exactly it happened, or when, or who all the other people were.) So if she were lying completely, it doesn't stand to reason she would be afraid of being caught. The FBI investigation of Anita Hill's allegations (which were more recent and dealt with workplace misconduct in a federal agency) led the White House to conclude they were unfounded, which hasn't exonerated Thomas in the views of the mainstream media today.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/19/polit...ine/index.html

There are three things I've considered on this mess.

In Kavanaugh's favor, it seems very unlikely that if he were to sexually assault one woman, it would be someone who would end up being a law professor. In addition, when prominent abusers have been accused in the past, other victims tend to come forward (see Harvey Weinstein, Donald Trump, and even Al Franken.) So, if her story is true, it does suggest there are others out there, and that the lack of further allegations is an example of a dog not barking. It could very well be that Ronan Farrow is submitting his final draft of a story with multiple sourced allegations against Kavanaugh, but if nothing else comes out that increases the possibility Kavanaugh is innocent.

In Ford's favor, she started mentioning the encounter well before the current #metoo moment, so it can't be seen as a response to the moment.

One problem with the discussion is that it seems there are people on the different sides who think that the other side is arguing in bad faith. Some of the arguments in favor of rejecting Kavanaugh suggest that conservatives know that he's probably guilty, while some of the defenses of Kavanaugh are based on the presumption that his critics know that he's likely innocent. That's not really the case. Some people have information that others don't (Kavanaugh has many friends in conservative Washington circles who can speak to his character; there are people who have been abused and know others who have been abused who see parallels in Ms. Ford's experiences.)

Dr. Ford is a psychology Professor, not a law professor.

[JCAll]

**********

Federal Agency Says It Lost Track Of 1,488 Migrant Children

The Health and Human Services Department first disclosed that it had lost track of 1,475 children late last year, as it came under fire at a Senate hearing in April. That's absolutely abominable!

**********

That's so oddly specific I'd almost think it was done on purpose.

[Tami]

Police Investigating After Multiple People Shot Near Aberdeen, Maryland

Latest report is the suspect is in custody after a hunt for her within the warehouse.

[Tami]

They Were Seeking Mental Health Care. Instead They Drowned in a Sheriff’s Van.

MULLINS, S.C. — Nicolette Green had decided to get better. The medication she was taking to treat her schizophrenia had calmed her and cleared her head. On Tuesday morning, her oldest daughter, Rose, with whom she had spent the weekend waiting out Hurricane Florence, drove her to her regular counseling session.

A new therapist saw Ms. Green, 43, that day. And within a half-hour of evaluating her, he wanted her committed, said Donnela Green-Johnson, Ms. Green’s sister.

After hours of filling out paperwork, Ms. Green said goodbye to her daughter. She told Rose that this was a good thing, that she would be O.K., that they would soon all be a happy family again watching movies together at home.

Then Rose watched, troubled, as sheriff’s deputies patted her mother down and put her in a van to take her to a hospital almost two hours away. Rose, 19, recalled the deputies having handcuffs out when they frisked her mother, though she did not know if they put them on.

Sometime that evening, the van, carrying Ms. Green and Wendy Newton, another woman being transported to a mental health facility, was overtaken by the flooding waters of the Pee Dee River. The two sheriff’s deputies in the van managed to get out, said Sheriff Phillip E. Thompson of Horry County in a Wednesday afternoon news conference. The women did not.

By the time emergency workers arrived by boat and found the deputies on the van’s roof, it was too dark to dive. The van, with Ms. Green and Ms. Newton inside, remained in the waters by Highway 76 overnight. Their bodies were recovered Wednesday evening.

For the families of the two dead women, there was one big question: How could the state take someone in, ostensibly to make her better, to protect her even from herself — and then let her drown by the side of a highway?

“Why the hell would they leave a safe, dry area to go to God knows what?” asked Allison Newton, Wendy Newton’s daughter. “Something feels wrong about this.”

[4saken1]

They Were Seeking Mental Health Care. Instead They Drowned in a Sheriff’s Van.

That's horrible! :-(

[Tami]

That's horrible! :-(

It's also horrible that they were being transported by the police like criminals, when they would have gone voluntarily with their families. If they had simply been told to report to the instituion, this might not have happened. But yeah, there is no excusing what happened to them.

[BruceWayneJr.]

Sick burn, dude.

What you did there....

I see it.

[BeastieRunner]

What you did there....

I see it.

[worstblogever]

On this date in 2014, 2015, as well as 2016, "Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day" published profiles of North Carolina Congresswoman Renee Ellmers, who used a unique strategy for reaching Congress... she rode the 2010 Tea Party Wave on the strength of her campaigning hard against the “Ground Zero Mosque” in New York City, and while spewing out that sort of bigoted nonsense, accused Anderson Cooper of being anti-religion for questioning her pro-Christian/anti-Muslim worldview. After barely winning her first term, North Carolina’s 2nd District was gerrymandered after redistricting to be far more conservative, and keep her in office. During her second term, she voted for the 2013 Government Shutdown, and drew headlines for saying she was keeping her Congressional salary, saying, “I need my paycheck.” She’s also argued for men getting to pay less for health insurance through the Affordable Care Act because “they won’t be using the maternity leave”, tried spinning the GOP’s “War on Women” by saying the real war was being pulled off with the ACA, and in July 2014, advised her fellow Republicans that the only way they, as a party, would win over female voters in elections was to “bring policy down to a woman’s level”. After Ellmers' bailed on the harsh anti-choice bill, HR 7, because was not thrilled with the language about the definition of rape in the bill and angered the anti-abortion movement, Ellmers fell from grace with the anti-choice movement so fast, they were demanding she be left off the GOP's special committee to investigate Planned Parenthood. Between that, and rumors of an affair began to swirl involving Ellmers, and California Congressman Kevin McCarthy, she was damaged enough to finish third in the GOP Primary in 2016. She is now mercifully out of office, so we'll retire her CSGOPOTD profile at time and go ahead and take a look at a different wacky Republican today instead. (Current crazy/stupid scoreboard, is now 606-20, since this was established in July 2014.)



It was one year ago today that “Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day” published its first profile of Mark Holbrook, who ran for Congress in 2016, attempting to win office in Maine's 1st Congressional District and pulling an upset in the GOP Primary by all of 58 votes. He thus advanced to attempt to unseat Democratic Congresswoman Chellie Pingree, but lost in that effort with only 42% of the vote. That is ironically an improvement upon his performance in the 2014 elections, when he only got 28% of the vote in an attempt to get into the Maine state legislature, and we're not sure how his bizarre football-themed ad could have helped elevate his profile. Especially when you consider Maine's 1st District is pretty far away from Foxboro, Massachusetts, where the nearest NFL team plays. Well, Holbrook's TV ads were also centered around portraying himself as an "anti-establishment" candidate, which got him as far as it did, adding in a little irrational criticism of Barack Obama, and winning over GOP voters by supporting Donald Trump's insane idea for a border wall. Which, if there's a state that shouldn't be worried about folks coming across the U.S./Mexico border on foot, you'd think it would be Maine, right? Well, Holbrook was actually claiming he was harder to the right on immigration than even Donald Trump, if you can believe that.

Looking at Holbrook's issue stances, it's noteworthy that under his stance on abortion, he gripes about "selling baby parts" which tells you he still believes in the hoax perpetrated by the Center for Medical Progress. But on the majority of issues, Holbrook's stances are vague, or unspecified. He was contemplating running for U.S. Senate, but announced he was mounting a challenge to Rep. Pingree again in 2018, this time not even having an opponent to face off against in the GOP Primary for the seat. Frankly, we're starting to wish that he would keep his opinions to himself permanently, and just go away.

In July of 2017, Holbrook decided he would write an op-ed in the Portland Press Herald where he gave his humble thoughts that "fear-mongering by liberals on ACA repeal incites hostility and violence". How dare you tell people that the Republican plan to repeal the ACA would leave 23 million people without insurance and tens of thousands more people would die ANNUALLY as a result! Those facts provided by the Congressional Budget Office and medical organizations nationwide are just "fear-mongering"...

This was only a slightly less inflammatory quote than seeing Mark Holbrook actually echo the disgusting comments by Donald Trump after white supremacists and Neo-Nazis carried out a terror attack and blamed "both sides" for the violence, saying they were "both sides of the same hate-filled coin". Y'know, the same way the people who stormed the beaches of Normandy to fight the Nazis were equally to blame, right?

If there's any justice left in this world, Mark Holbrook is going to get obliterated at the polls by Chellie Pingree in about six weeks. We'll keep tabs on him until them, because we're expecting more stupidity from him between now and Election Day 2018.

[JCAll]

He knows he's saying dumb stuff. He just thinks that it doesn't matter and that he can get away with it.

He's right. He does it all the time and he gets away with it all the time. Nobody ever calls him on it and he never suffers any consequences.

[Tami]

Trump admin moves $260M from cancer research, HIV/AIDS and other programs to cover custody of immigrant children costs

Washington (CNN)The Trump administration is planning to shift more than $260 million to cover the rising cost and strain of housing thousands of undocumented immigrant children in their custody -- including millions of dollars from programs like cancer research and HIV/AIDS prevention.

The request comes as the program has been strained by record-high levels of children in custody, driven in large part by new policies that are holding kids longer and making it more difficult for them to be released to adults, such as family members.

It also comes amid news that the Department of Health and Human Services once again could not locate 1,500 children it had released over a three-month period.
There are more than 13,000 children currently in HHS custody, spokeswoman Evelyn Stauffer told CNN. The number fluctuates daily, but that is higher than the record-setting 12,800 in custody last week.

The program request is detailed in a letter to Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, and other lawmakers from HHS Secretary Alex Azar dated September 5, which was obtained by CNN.

[JCAll]

If they keep moving money around, maybe they'll eventually loot enough to pay for the wall.

[Kevinroc]

Trump admin moves $260M from cancer research, HIV/AIDS and other programs to cover custody of immigrant children costs

This is the kind of evil I would only expect from comic book villains.