nationalobserver--2020-09-29--Must-see TV: Trump, Biden to square off in first face-to-face debate of 2020 election

To borrow a favourite phrase from a certain sitting U.S. president , Tuesday 's debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden promises to be something the likes of which no one 's ever seen .
What that something turns out to be ⏤ like much of 2020 so far ⏤ remains anyone 's guess .
`` Who knows what we 're going to see ? ''
said Mitchell McKinney , a professor of communication at the University of Missouri .
At the very least , it will surely be an `` untraditional '' affair , said McKinney , who as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Institute has been studying U.S. presidential debates for much of his career .
Unlike many of Trump 's detractors , however , McKinney sees method to the madness of someone he considers `` a very smart strategic communicator . ''
• Toronto school shut down over COVID-19 as Ontario reports 700 more cases • The COVID-19 pandemic is changing how students cheat – and get caught • Indigenous communities in Russia are begging Tesla not to get its nickel from this major polluter In campaigns of yore , the basic underlying premise of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incumbent president 's track record to explore whether he deserves four more years in the White House .
`` The strategy may very well be to keep the debate from taking up the primary proposition that usually the debates are focused on when an incumbent is seeking re-election , '' he said .
`` The antics , the taunting , the tirades , the conspiracies ⏤ for Joe Biden to have to clean it up , to have to respond , to have to defend , all of that could well keep the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
The debate , co-hosted by Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland and the Cleveland Clinic , will look a little different than in past years , said Peter Eyre , senior adviser to the Commission on Presidential Debates .
`` Because of COVID considerations , there will not be a handshake between the candidates or the moderator at the beginning of the debate , '' Eyre said .
Rather than opening statements , moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News will begin the proceedings by posing the first question to Trump .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the audience , he added .
To borrow a favourite phrase from a certain sitting U.S. president , Tuesday 's , September 29 , 2020 , debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden promises to be something the likes of which no one 's ever seen .
`` Everyone in the debate hall on Tuesday night will be subject to a variety of health safety protocols , including COVID testing . ''
It 's worth recalling Biden 's performance in 2012 against vice-presidential challenger Paul Ryan to remember he 's no stranger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Beckwith , the Flora Stone Mather professor in Case Western Reserve 's political science department .
`` The former vice-president is an accomplished debater , '' Beckwith said of Biden , who continues to enjoy a comfortable lead in national polls , and a narrower edge in key battleground states .
`` Biden also is a bit of a street fighter , and he knows how to handle bullies .
Biden was not kind to Paul Ryan during the vice-presidential debate eight years ago , and he 's also unlikely to be knocked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On that score , he need n't concern himself with the last four years .
The last four days should suffice .
The number of COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. , the highest on the planet , is closing in on 210,000 , with the world on the cusp of a second wave .
Unemployment is hovering at 8.4 per cent , up from historic lows but with analysts bracing for another downturn .
An explosive New York Times report paints a picture of Trump as a struggling , debt-addled businessman who paid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 2017 , owes $ 300 million in loans and wrote off more than $ 70,000 for hair styling during his tenure on `` The Apprentice . ''
On Saturday , despite what reports say was Ruth Bader Ginsburg 's dying wish , Trump forged ahead with nominating conservative judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace the iconic Supreme Court progressive , his eyes set on a long-coveted repeal of Obamacare .
`` If they win , they will nominate justices who will destroy the American way of life , the American dream .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' he said of the Democrats during a news conference Sunday .
The president 's own musings about the integrity of the coming vote and apparent unwillingness to permit a peaceful transition should he lose , fuelled by baseless claims of looming mail-in ballot fraud , have experts describing Trump as an existential threat to American democracy .
Paradoxically , that could end up breathing fresh life into the democratic process , said McKinney .
`` It may be that that perceived or real threat activates and motivates '' voters on both sides @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the turnout for early voting suggests is already happening .
`` I think this could still go both ways , and it can end up being a toss-up , '' he said .
`` Lord only knows what might happen in terms of all of the scenarios that might play out . ''
In true Trump style , meanwhile , the president doubled down on his pre-emptive excuse in case he is outperformed on Tuesday : his rival , he suggested , is using performance-enhancing drugs .
`` I ’ m not joking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willing to take a drug test , '' he said .
`` You can check out the internet .
You ’ ll see .
Plenty of people say it . ''
He also shrugged off the idea of debate prep , insisting that running the country has been preparation enough for Tuesday night 's showdown .
Biden , for his part , has a strategy of his own .
`` What do you feel you have to accomplish to be successful on Tuesday ? ''
the former vice-president was asked Sunday during a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do you have to do to win the debate ? ''
`` Just tell the truth , '' Biden replied , smiling .
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 28 , 2020 .

To borrow a favourite phrase from a certain sitting U.S. president, Tuesday's debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden promises to be something the likes of which no one's ever seen. What that something turns out to be ⏤ like much of 2020 so far ⏤ remains anyone's guess. "Who knows what we're going to see?" said Mitchell McKinney, a professor of communication at the University of Missouri. At the very least, it will surely be an "untraditional" affair, said McKinney, who as director of the university's Political Communication Institute has been studying U.S. presidential debates for much of his career. Unlike many of Trump's detractors, however, McKinney sees method to the madness of someone he considers "a very smart strategic communicator."
In campaigns of yore, the basic underlying premise of a televised debate was to assess the incumbent president's track record to explore whether he deserves four more years in the White House. "The strategy may very well be to keep the debate from taking up the primary proposition that usually the debates are focused on when an incumbent is seeking re-election," he said. Billion-dollar land deals in Ontario raise corruption suspicions "The antics, the taunting, the tirades, the conspiracies ⏤ for Joe Biden to have to clean it up, to have to respond, to have to defend, all of that could well keep the discussion off of the last four years."
The debate, co-hosted by Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland and the Cleveland Clinic, will look a little different than in past years, said Peter Eyre, senior adviser to the Commission on Presidential Debates. To borrow a favourite phrase from a certain sitting U.S. president, Tuesday's, September 29, 2020, debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden promises to be something the likes of which no one's ever seen. "Because of COVID considerations, there will not be a handshake between the candidates or the moderator at the beginning of the debate," Eyre said. Rather than opening statements, moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News will begin the proceedings by posing the first question to Trump. A small number of guests will be in the audience, he added. "Everyone in the debate hall on Tuesday night will be subject to a variety of health safety protocols, including COVID testing." It's worth recalling Biden's performance in 2012 against vice-presidential challenger Paul Ryan to remember he's no stranger to the debate stage, said Karen Beckwith, the Flora Stone Mather professor in Case Western Reserve's political science department.
"The former vice-president is an accomplished debater," Beckwith said of Biden, who continues to enjoy a comfortable lead in national polls, and a narrower edge in key battleground states. "Biden also is a bit of a street fighter, and he knows how to handle bullies. Biden was not kind to Paul Ryan during the vice-presidential debate eight years ago, and he's also unlikely to be knocked off his own debate agenda." On that score, he needn't concern himself with the last four years. The last four days should suffice.


nationalobserver--2020-09-29--Former New York Times editor says media has learned nothing in covering Trump

Abramson has had a storied career at the highest levels of mainstream journalism .
Educated at Harvard , and after stints at American Lawyer magazine and at the Wall Street Journal , Abramson joined the New York Times in 1997 .
She soon became the paper ’ s Washington bureau chief , and was eventually promoted to executive editor — the first woman to hold that post in the 160-year history of the Times .
In 2012 , Abramson was ranked fifth on the Forbes list of most powerful women .
Today , she is a senior lecturer at Harvard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discussed what ’ s happening with the American media with Jill Abramson , 66 , the first woman executive editor of the New York Times ( 2011-14 ) and author of a well-received book on the media industry , Merchants of Truth , published last year .
Did the mainstream media help get Donald Trump elected in 2016 ?
And will they help him again this year ?
Q : If you go back to the 2016 election , one of the things from the post-mortems was the media was surprised there was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clearly responded to Trump .
Maybe it ’ s an aggregate that it becomes so smelly altogether that a segment of voters who would consider voting for Trump won ’ t .
But I think they merge into each other and that the scandals one after the other become like tweets – here today and gone tomorrow .
A : Not much , I do n't think there are that many undecided voters left that any one of these revelations would persuade , “ Oh , now I see the light .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Q : Every day with Trump , there seems to be new revelations , the latest being with Bob Woodword ’ s book Rage .
In regards to affecting the election , do these revelations have any impact ?
Q : What about in regards to the impact of Fox , because the network seems to be the propaganda arm of Trump and the Republican Party .
Q : And so nothing in that respect has changed in the past four years , that 's what you 're saying ?
A : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organizations like the Washington Post and New York Times , Los Angeles Times , CBS News , no , they 're still perceived as part of the elite — that part of the country which they still despise .
Q : Would you agree that support for Trump came from blue-collar workers impacted by globalization and the impact of deindustrialisation ?
A : At the New York Times , ( executive editor ) Dean Baquet and ( publisher ) Arthur Sulzberger Jr. , published that letter to readers admitting that , saying , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ efforts to cover the people who constituted this wave of angry white voters that elected Trump.
” And I do n't want to single out the New York Times , but I do n't think that the news media has really fulfilled that promise .
I do n't feel I have a better intellectual understanding of Trump voters than I did in 2016 .
A : I do n't think so .
Yesterday I had a long drive from New York back to Boston , and I actually listened to Fox News on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s program because I want to know what Trump voters are being told about voter fraud , which is , you know , something that ’ s been made up .
But it really was eye-opening to listen to his show and ( hear ) about the supposed 1,000 cases of voter fraud that the Heritage Foundation documented .
I mean , it sounds very persuasive if you ’ re a listener and think Fox News is a purveyor of the truth .
Q : Again , do we really appreciate the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a force ?
But I do n't think most political reporters at the places I previously named , I do n't think they spend any time listening to Fox radio or right-wing talk radio — which may be more influential than Fox News channel on TV .
I do n't think they listen to it , they do n't know what 's being said .
They 're pretty out of touch .
Q : In regards to the media at this time , do you feel it has any real influence on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
A : Well , I guess that tracks back to what is the point of journalism ?
What is the mission of journalism ?
And the mission is to provide reliable , important information to the public , which should help them make decisions like how to vote .
And I think that journalism in many ways still fulfils that mission , but because of technological change and the bitter partisanship that has riven the country — the information they get is very different and polarized .
And so on both the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a situation of the news media providing information to an audience that already thinks in line with the kinds of , in the case of liberals , the kinds of critical stories that have been investigations on Trump , or on the right , the defenders of him , like Fox .
Q : If you go back 30 or 40 years , we had a handful of networks , you did n't have the internet , you had large , rich newspapers in most metropolitan areas that tended to be mostly centrist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ landscape today ?
A : I would describe the landscape as much more polarized , and this is because there 's never been a president like Donald Trump .
He defies all of the norms of both human and political decency , and that has meant that the formerly centrist establishment media has — I think by force of the rank evils of this administration — been forced to cover him and the administration in ways that would strike ( former New York Times executive editor ) Abe Rosenthal , if he came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slanted and opinionated .
Q : And this raises the issue of what 's happened to truth , what 's happened to a verifiable fact now ?
A : It used to be you 're entitled to your opinion , but you 're not entitled to your own facts .
But now it is you are entitled to your own facts .
It 's terrible .
And corrosive to democracy .
Q : But would you say that partially the reason people are now questioning what is a fact is that the mainstream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last 20 years about facts ?
A : I do n't think it 's the scandals .
The important thing here is the perception of political bias , I really do .
And the facts I could cite to back that up are the recent Gallup/Knight study that shows , again , the erosion of trust in news media .
The percentage is like 80-something per cent of the public believe the news media is biased , and that number has really grown .
And I think that 's the major contributor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That may be a factor , but I think the perception of bias is the driver to why public trust has been going down .
Q : But does the bias stem from the fact that the media is corporate-owned , funded by advertisers , and reflects a narrow ideological perspective itself ?
A : Yes , I do think concentrated ownership , the fact that local newspapers in the U.S. have died at such an alarming way , and they tended to be the most trusted sources for the news .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ big media companies has contributed to the erosion of trust , for sure .
Q : The internet has had multiple effects , one of which was to undermine the economic foundations of the legacy media .
But it 's also , as you wrote in your book Merchants of Truth , introduced new forms of media like VICE , Buzzfeed , Vox , etc .
How good a job is the new digital media doing ?
A : It figures in because the two places I wrote about , Buzzfeed and VICE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigative pieces and are producing some worthwhile journalism .
It ’ s just they do n't have the kinds of newsrooms and size or experience to cover the political landscape as broadly and deeply as a place like the New York Times can .
So their coverage is episodically good , but not comprehensively good .
Q : And they are also having problems sustaining themselves .
A : Yes , their economic model is digital advertising , which is crumbling away and not worth all that much .
New digital media is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the new digital media , is it less impactful than , say , the old days of the legacy media ?
A : It ’ s less impactful .
I 'm not sure it matters whether it 's new media , old media , but the atomization of how news is delivered — there are so many different new sites on the web means that the impact of any one place is lessened .
And then the technology has disaggregated the news so that it exists in individual stories spread on social media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credibility of these organizations .
Q : In respect to the election coverage today , how would you characterize it ?
A : I think , unfortunately , it 's been inhibited by COVID-19 in many ways because it 's much harder now to get in touch with and get the real reflections of voters , which is important in scandal-saturated and controversy-saturated news .
Real voters can be ignored except for their cameo appearances on televised town halls and the like .
I wish I felt the coverage was a truer reflection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I do n't once again .
Q : How good a job has the media done covering the issue of race in the United States ?
Has it not been a stellar subject for the media , or does it really vary ?
A : It varies .
I would say one of the main issues that was under covered during my career in journalism is the still incredible wealth gap between Blacks and whites in the United States .
That the spotlight on that issue was episodic and the lights would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and tragedies like the George Floyd murder or the Rodney King beating — then you 'd see more stories about that aspect of race in America .
But everything does eventually rest on economics and economic well-being , and that disparity is as bad as it was in the 1950s .
Q : The other aspect of Trump is his demonization of the press … A : And I 'm surprised that there has n't been a journalist killed , quite frankly .
Q : Well , it 's early days yet .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ touch into a vein of hostility towards the media that is very prevalent ?
A : Well , he definitely taps into the distrust , growing distrust , that we were discussing earlier .
But again , it 's an effort on his part to undermine democracy itself , and I 'm not going to give you a long turgid lecture on the First Amendment , but the press was the very institution the founders of the country trusted to keep over-centralized authority in check .
And what Trump wants is over-centralized authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the role and legitimacy of the press to carry out its long spelled-out role in American democracy .
Q : In regards to the state of the occupation of journalism , how would you characterize it in 2020 ?
A : The state of the profession , if you 're looking at the big concentrated companies that are left , like the New York Times , has never been stronger .
They have so many more subscribers now than when I was executive editor , with all of the digital subscribers .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever , they 're economically much better off than when I was there .
So the survivors are fitter than they were , but the small local and regional parts of the press that are closest to the people are in terrible shape .
Trump has done wonders for media 's bottom line Q : The irony is that Trump has been fantastic for the media .
A : Yes , it 's the Trump bump .
He ’ s great for business .
I do n't think that that is incidental to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any ( web ) page of any major news organization there are like a dozen or more different Trump stories .
Like leading stories .
They get big audiences and those audiences mean more money .
Q : Is it a bit of a myth about America , the idea of a free press and democracy going hand in hand ?
Because you have a political system that has revealed itself to be terribly dysfunctional in terms of dealing with the problems American face .
A : Which seems despotic rather than democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ influenced by the vast sums of money flowing into the system .
So is the American media doing a good job of keeping what 's left of democracy going — or is it actually part of the problem ?
A : No , I think it ’ s part of the solution and without it , we would be in very desperate shape .
Q : The fact that someone like Jeff Bezos , the richest man in the world , bought the Washington Post , even though the Post has done very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of reality concern you ?
A : It depends .
Having Jeff Bezos owning the Washington Post is a lot better than the late period under the ( former owners ) Grahams when the Post was in desperate financial shape .
So I 'd rather have the Washington Post with more reporters than not .
Q : But now we have a situation where some of the most prominent media outlets are owned by the super rich ?
A : In some ways , they were always owned by those people .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is different now and the cost structure of these places is different .
Q : It ’ s ironic that when wealth inequality is one of the burning issues of our times that some of the biggest media are owned by the richest people in the world .
A : Yeah , but it 's better than if they were struggling to stay in business .

Q: Every day with Trump, there seems to be new revelations, the latest being with Bob Woodword’s book Rage . In regards to affecting the election, do these revelations have any impact?
Abramson has had a storied career at the highest levels of mainstream journalism. Educated at Harvard, and after stints at American Lawyer magazine and at the Wall Street Journal, Abramson joined the New York Times in 1997. She soon became the paper’s Washington bureau chief, and was eventually promoted to executive editor — the first woman to hold that post in the 160-year history of the Times. In 2012, Abramson was ranked fifth on the Forbes list of most powerful women. Today, she is a senior lecturer at Harvard University.
Canada’s National Observer discussed what’s happening with the American media with Jill Abramson, 66, the first woman executive editor of the New York Times (2011-14) and author of a well-received book on the media industry, Merchants of Truth, published last year.
Did the mainstream media help get Donald Trump elected in 2016? And will they help him again this year?
Q: If you go back to the 2016 election, one of the things from the post-mortems was the media was surprised there was a large portion of the population that clearly responded to Trump.
Maybe it’s an aggregate that it becomes so smelly altogether that a segment of voters who would consider voting for Trump won’t. But I think they merge into each other and that the scandals one after the other become like tweets – here today and gone tomorrow.
A: Not much, I don't think there are that many undecided voters left that any one of these revelations would persuade, “Oh, now I see the light. I'm going to vote against President Trump.”
A: No, journalists and the establishment news organizations like the Washington Post and New York Times, Los Angeles Times, CBS News, no, they're still perceived as part of the elite — that part of the country which they still despise.
Q: Would you agree that support for Trump came from blue-collar workers impacted by globalization and the impact of deindustrialisation?
A: At the New York Times, (executive editor) Dean Baquet and (publisher) Arthur Sulzberger Jr., published that letter to readers admitting that, saying, “We'll make all these new efforts to cover the people who constituted this wave of angry white voters that elected Trump.” And I don't want to single out the New York Times, but I don't think that the news media has really fulfilled that promise. I don't feel I have a better intellectual understanding of Trump voters than I did in 2016.
Q: And so nothing in that respect has changed in the past four years, that's what you're saying?
Mainstream media overlooks power and influence of Fox News
Q: What about in regards to the impact of Fox, because the network seems to be the propaganda arm of Trump and the Republican Party.
A: It’s Trump’s Pravda.
Q: Again, do we really appreciate the impact of Fox in the United States as a force?
A: I don't think so. Yesterday I had a long drive from New York back to Boston, and I actually listened to Fox News on the radio and listened to Sean Hannity’s program because I want to know what Trump voters are being told about voter fraud, which is, you know, something that’s been made up. But it really was eye-opening to listen to his show and (hear) about the supposed 1,000 cases of voter fraud that the Heritage Foundation documented. I mean, it sounds very persuasive if you’re a listener and think Fox News is a purveyor of the truth.
But I don't think most political reporters at the places I previously named, I don't think they spend any time listening to Fox radio or right-wing talk radio — which may be more influential than Fox News channel on TV. I don't think they listen to it, they don't know what's being said. They're pretty out of touch.
Q: In regards to the media at this time, do you feel it has any real influence on how people vote or how they think?
A: Well, I guess that tracks back to what is the point of journalism? What is the mission of journalism? And the mission is to provide reliable, important information to the public, which should help them make decisions like how to vote.
And I think that journalism in many ways still fulfils that mission, but because of technological change and the bitter partisanship that has riven the country — the information they get is very different and polarized.
And so on both the left and the right, you have a situation of the news media providing information to an audience that already thinks in line with the kinds of, in the case of liberals, the kinds of critical stories that have been investigations on Trump, or on the right, the defenders of him, like Fox.
Q: If you go back 30 or 40 years, we had a handful of networks, you didn't have the internet, you had large, rich newspapers in most metropolitan areas that tended to be mostly centrist. How would you describe the media landscape today?
A: I would describe the landscape as much more polarized, and this is because there's never been a president like Donald Trump. He defies all of the norms of both human and political decency, and that has meant that the formerly centrist establishment media has — I think by force of the rank evils of this administration — been forced to cover him and the administration in ways that would strike (former New York Times executive editor) Abe Rosenthal, if he came back to life, as being very slanted and opinionated.
Q: And this raises the issue of what's happened to truth, what's happened to a verifiable fact now?
A: It used to be you're entitled to your opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts. But now it is you are entitled to your own facts. It's terrible. And corrosive to democracy.
Public trust in media is low
Q: But would you say that partially the reason people are now questioning what is a fact is that the mainstream media has had its own scandals over the last 20 years about facts?
A: I don't think it's the scandals. The important thing here is the perception of political bias, I really do. And the facts I could cite to back that up are the recent Gallup/Knight study that shows, again, the erosion of trust in news media. The percentage is like 80-something per cent of the public believe the news media is biased, and that number has really grown.
And I think that's the major contributor.
I'm not discounting the scandals. That may be a factor, but I think the perception of bias is the driver to why public trust has been going down.
Q: But does the bias stem from the fact that the media is corporate-owned, funded by advertisers, and reflects a narrow ideological perspective itself?
A: Yes, I do think concentrated ownership, the fact that local newspapers in the U.S. have died at such an alarming way, and they tended to be the most trusted sources for the news. So that the concentration of ownership and big media companies has contributed to the erosion of trust, for sure.
Q: The internet has had multiple effects, one of which was to undermine the economic foundations of the legacy media. But it's also, as you wrote in your book Merchants of Truth, introduced new forms of media like VICE, Buzzfeed, Vox, etc. How good a job is the new digital media doing?
A: It figures in because the two places I wrote about, Buzzfeed and VICE, are doing some really good political investigative pieces and are producing some worthwhile journalism. It’s just they don't have the kinds of newsrooms and size or experience to cover the political landscape as broadly and deeply as a place like the New York Times can. So their coverage is episodically good, but not comprehensively good.
Q: And they are also having problems sustaining themselves.
A: Yes, their economic model is digital advertising, which is crumbling away and not worth all that much.
New digital media is less impactful
Q: In regards to the new digital media, is it less impactful than, say, the old days of the legacy media?
A: It’s less impactful. I'm not sure it matters whether it's new media, old media, but the atomization of how news is delivered — there are so many different new sites on the web means that the impact of any one place is lessened. And then the technology has disaggregated the news so that it exists in individual stories spread on social media rather than by organizations and by acquired credibility of these organizations.
Q: In respect to the election coverage today, how would you characterize it?
A: I think, unfortunately, it's been inhibited by COVID-19 in many ways because it's much harder now to get in touch with and get the real reflections of voters, which is important in scandal-saturated and controversy-saturated news. Real voters can be ignored except for their cameo appearances on televised town halls and the like.
I wish I felt the coverage was a truer reflection of the people in the country, and I don't once again.
Q: How good a job has the media done covering the issue of race in the United States? Has it not been a stellar subject for the media, or does it really vary?
A: It varies. I would say one of the main issues that was under covered during my career in journalism is the still incredible wealth gap between Blacks and whites in the United States.
That the spotlight on that issue was episodic and the lights would turn on when there were big controversies and tragedies like the George Floyd murder or the Rodney King beating — then you'd see more stories about that aspect of race in America. But everything does eventually rest on economics and economic well-being, and that disparity is as bad as it was in the 1950s.
Q: The other aspect of Trump is his demonization of the press …
A: And I'm surprised that there hasn't been a journalist killed, quite frankly.
Q: Well, it's early days yet. Is that just him or does he touch into a vein of hostility towards the media that is very prevalent?
A: Well, he definitely taps into the distrust, growing distrust, that we were discussing earlier. But again, it's an effort on his part to undermine democracy itself, and I'm not going to give you a long turgid lecture on the First Amendment, but the press was the very institution the founders of the country trusted to keep over-centralized authority in check.
And what Trump wants is over-centralized authority, and so he is systematically undermining the role and legitimacy of the press to carry out its long spelled-out role in American democracy.
Q: In regards to the state of the occupation of journalism, how would you characterize it in 2020?
A: The state of the profession, if you're looking at the big concentrated companies that are left, like the New York Times, has never been stronger. They have so many more subscribers now than when I was executive editor, with all of the digital subscribers.
So they're reaching a bigger readership than ever, they're economically much better off than when I was there. So the survivors are fitter than they were, but the small local and regional parts of the press that are closest to the people are in terrible shape.
Trump has done wonders for media's bottom line
Q: The irony is that Trump has been fantastic for the media.
A: Yes, it's the Trump bump. He’s great for business.
I don't think that that is incidental to the fact that if you go on any (web) page of any major news organization there are like a dozen or more different Trump stories. Like leading stories. They get big audiences and those audiences mean more money.
Q: Is it a bit of a myth about America, the idea of a free press and democracy going hand in hand? Because you have a political system that has revealed itself to be terribly dysfunctional in terms of dealing with the problems American face.
A: Which seems despotic rather than democratic.
Q: Increasingly oligarchic and increasingly influenced by the vast sums of money flowing into the system. So is the American media doing a good job of keeping what's left of democracy going — or is it actually part of the problem?
A: No, I think it’s part of the solution and without it, we would be in very desperate shape.
Q: The fact that someone like Jeff Bezos, the richest man in the world, bought the Washington Post, even though the Post has done very well under him, does that sort of reality concern you?
A: It depends. Having Jeff Bezos owning the Washington Post is a lot better than the late period under the (former owners) Grahams when the Post was in desperate financial shape. So I'd rather have the Washington Post with more reporters than not.
Q: But now we have a situation where some of the most prominent media outlets are owned by the super rich?
A: In some ways, they were always owned by those people. It’s just the level of billionaire is different now and the cost structure of these places is different.
Q: It’s ironic that when wealth inequality is one of the burning issues of our times that some of the biggest media are owned by the richest people in the world.
A: Yeah, but it's better than if they were struggling to stay in business.


nationalobserver--2020-09-29--Vague response in throne speech to B.C.'s opioid crisis sparks cross-party outrage

B.C .
MPs from different opposition parties united last week in their outrage over what they saw as a weak federal government response to the opioid crisis in their province .
The Liberal government ’ s speech from the throne was mainly built around the notion of riding out the second wave of COVID-19 , although it did touch on many other topics — including that the government would “ continue to address the opioid epidemic tearing through communities , which is an ongoing and worsening public health crisis.
” It did not , however , go into detail about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread of that epidemic , which has killed more than 6,000 people in B.C .
since 2016 , and more than 1,000 just this year , according to the coroners service , compared to 230 deaths in B.C .
related to COVID-19 .
“ In my riding , Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge , I have cried with parents and grandparents who have lost a beloved child , ” said Conservative MP Marc Dalton in one of the first opposition party responses to the throne speech in the House of Commons on Sept. 23 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ need is more than just a safe place to get help or access to clean drugs .
What they need is hope , deliverance and a future ... we absolutely must make significant investments in healing and treatment.
” • Toronto school shut down over COVID-19 as Ontario reports 700 more cases • The COVID-19 pandemic is changing how students cheat – and get caught • Indigenous communities in Russia are begging Tesla not to get its nickel from this major polluter As of August , there have been 120 overdose deaths since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in northeastern Greater Vancouver , Dalton ’ s riding .
Dalton said he toured recovery centres in Maple Ridge this month and was “ deeply moved ” when he heard the stories from people there .
“ There are not enough of these centres ” and they “ lack funding , ” he concluded .
“ When will the Liberals work with the provinces to help addicts obtain treatment ?
When will we see real action to resolve these problems ?
I am not talking about just some nice words buried in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , representing the Toronto riding of Davenport , responded to Dalton .
She acknowledged it was “ absolutely heart-wrenching to hear these stories ” and that the government had heard “ loud and clear ” that there was “ another pandemic happening across Canada.
” Dzerowicz touted federal funding for two new safer drug supply sites in Toronto , to be operated by two community health centres in the city .
“ The government has worked directly with the City of Toronto to be able to provide this as quickly as possible , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal government also announced $ 2 million for a safer supply pilot project in B.C .
that would provide pharmaceutical-grade drugs to “ selected patients at risk of overdose ” at the Cowichan Valley Wellness and Recovery Centre .
“ When will the Liberals work with the provinces to help addicts obtain treatment ? ''
B.C .
opposition MPs criticize feds over response to provincial opioid crisis .
# cdnpoli @ MarcDalton @ Cathy_McLeod @ GordJohns Dzerowicz also pointed to a Health Canada public consultation on proposed new regulations for supervised consumption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increase these ( safer supply ) pilot projects.
” The public consultation opened last month and runs until Oct. 14 .
Dalton had previously indicated that the opioid crisis was a main topic of discussion amongst B.C .
Conservatives at a meeting this month .
During question period Thursday , his caucus colleague Cathy McLeod , who represents the riding of Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo , also offered a personal story .
“ Three years ago , almost to the day , a dear friend died of a drug overdose , ” said McLeod .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegal drug overdoses in the first half of 2020 than in all of 2019.
” All the government did in the throne speech was “ acknowledge there is an opioid epidemic , ” she said .
“ It gave no hint of a plan .
There was one sentence , when more than 1,000 people in B.C .
have died .
There are heartbroken families .
Fentanyl is being smuggled unchecked and there is no plan from the Liberals .
How does the government justify such neglect ?
” Health Minister Patty Hajdu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ member opposite might realize , in fact , this government has done more than any previous government to meet substance users where they are , ” said Hajdu .
The government has been “ making sure that there is easier access to medications , ” she said , and working with provinces and territories to “ make sure that there are overdose prevention sites supporting community-based projects or substance use and addiction programs for treatment — safer supply programs.
” “ We are tirelessly working with provinces and communities to ensure that people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for them , ” Hajdu concluded .
On Thursday , Gord Johns , the NDP MP for Courtenay-Alberni , also raised the opioid crisis during a long speech in which he took issue with various portions of the throne speech .
Canadians had been expecting “ transformational change , ” but the government “ missed so many things , ” said Johns .
First on his list of disappointments was the fact that “ the Liberal government still has not even declared the opioid crisis a public health emergency.
” “ In August @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 147 lives lost .
These are daughters , sons , brothers , sisters and cousins .
Families and community members are dying from a tainted drug supply and the government still has not rolled out a plan to save those people 's lives , ” said Johns .
Johns moved on to other topics .
After he was finished , Toronto MP Adam Vaughan , parliamentary secretary to the minister of families , children and social development , offered his gratitude .
“ I would like first to thank the honorary member for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been tirelessly advocating for stronger federal , provincial , municipal ... action on that front , ” said Vaughan .
“ I join him in that , as we have lost too many people .
”

B.C. MPs from different opposition parties united last week in their outrage over what they saw as a weak federal government response to the opioid crisis in their province. The Liberal government’s speech from the throne was mainly built around the notion of riding out the second wave of COVID-19, although it did touch on many other topics — including that the government would “continue to address the opioid epidemic tearing through communities, which is an ongoing and worsening public health crisis.” It did not, however, go into detail about Ottawa's latest plans to slow the spread of that epidemic, which has killed more than 6,000 people in B.C. since 2016, and more than 1,000 just this year, according to the coroners service, compared to 230 deaths in B.C. related to COVID-19. “In my riding, Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge, I have cried with parents and grandparents who have lost a beloved child,” said Conservative MP Marc Dalton in one of the first opposition party responses to the throne speech in the House of Commons on Sept. 23. “What young and not-so-young drug users need is more than just a safe place to get help or access to clean drugs. What they need is hope, deliverance and a future ... we absolutely must make significant investments in healing and treatment.”
As of August, there have been 120 overdose deaths since 2016 in the city of Maple Ridge in northeastern Greater Vancouver, Dalton’s riding. Dalton said he toured recovery centres in Maple Ridge this month and was “deeply moved” when he heard the stories from people there. “There are not enough of these centres” and they “lack funding,” he concluded. Billion-dollar land deals in Ontario raise corruption suspicions “When will the Liberals work with the provinces to help addicts obtain treatment? When will we see real action to resolve these problems? I am not talking about just some nice words buried in this throne speech.”
Liberal MP Julie Dzerowicz, representing the Toronto riding of Davenport, responded to Dalton. She acknowledged it was “absolutely heart-wrenching to hear these stories” and that the government had heard “loud and clear” that there was “another pandemic happening across Canada.” “When will the Liberals work with the provinces to help addicts obtain treatment?" B.C. opposition MPs criticize feds over response to provincial opioid crisis. #cdnpoli @MarcDalton @Cathy_McLeod @GordJohns Dzerowicz touted federal funding for two new safer drug supply sites in Toronto, to be operated by two community health centres in the city. “The government has worked directly with the City of Toronto to be able to provide this as quickly as possible,” she said. In July, the federal government also announced $2 million for a safer supply pilot project in B.C. that would provide pharmaceutical-grade drugs to “selected patients at risk of overdose” at the Cowichan Valley Wellness and Recovery Centre. Dzerowicz also pointed to a Health Canada public consultation on proposed new regulations for supervised consumption sites “to see how we could increase these (safer supply) pilot projects.” The public consultation opened last month and runs until Oct. 14. Dalton had previously indicated that the opioid crisis was a main topic of discussion amongst B.C. Conservatives at a meeting this month. During question period Thursday, his caucus colleague Cathy McLeod, who represents the riding of Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo, also offered a personal story.
“Three years ago, almost to the day, a dear friend died of a drug overdose,” said McLeod. “Kamloops has seen more people die of illegal drug overdoses in the first half of 2020 than in all of 2019.” All the government did in the throne speech was “acknowledge there is an opioid epidemic,” she said. “It gave no hint of a plan. There was one sentence, when more than 1,000 people in B.C. have died. There are heartbroken families. Fentanyl is being smuggled unchecked and there is no plan from the Liberals. How does the government justify such neglect?”


nationalobserver--2020-09-29--Could forests be our best strategy for COVID-19 recovery and reducing future pandemics?

Deforestation and forest degradation have played an important role in triggering the pandemic .
According to a new study in Nature , the populations of animals hosting zoonotic diseases , like the coronavirus , are up to 2.5 times higher in degraded places , and the number of species carrying these pathogens has increased by up to 70 per cent , compared to undamaged ecosystems .
The world 's forests act as shields , protecting humans from emerging infectious diseases .
But as we are now witnessing , their destruction can have devastating consequences for global public health .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biodiversity Summit , it is disheartening to note that the world has not met its targets to stem the destruction of wildlife and ecosystems in the last decade , according to a new report from the UN on the state of nature .
The Global Biodiversity Outlook 5 found that despite progress in some countries , natural habitats continue to disappear and vast numbers of species remain threatened by extinction from human activities .
While global deforestation rates have slowed in the past decade , the degradation and fragmentation of biodiversity-rich ecosystems in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school shut down over COVID-19 as Ontario reports 700 more cases • The COVID-19 pandemic is changing how students cheat – and get caught • Indigenous communities in Russia are begging Tesla not to get its nickel from this major polluter Wilderness areas and wetlands are disappearing .
Freshwater ecosystems remain critically threatened .
The pandemic has clearly shown that humanity ’ s devastating impact on nature comes with some severe consequences , and unless we restore the balance between the natural and human worlds , these outbreaks will become increasingly prevalent .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and removal potential , health benefits , provision of livelihoods and food security for many rural poor and their potential to create an additional 80 million green jobs — are crucial for a sustainable , long-term global recovery .
When the economic engines of growth start up again , they can not run at the expense of climate or nature .
Now is the time to step up and commit to conserving and restoring biodiversity .
Otherwise , we will continue to feel the impacts of climate change , pollution and pandemics .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 400 million jobs by 2030 , while pivoting the global economy , according to a recent report published by the World Economic Forum .
As noted in the report , decisions on how to deploy the post-COVID crisis stimulus packages will likely shape societies and economies for decades .
Many countries have already made significant strides in rebuilding their economies with a focus on green recovery to stimulate jobs , income and sustainable growth .
But this work can and should be scaled up .
We need ambitious , clear and shared commitments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capacity development , transparency and accountability .
We need buy-in from all sectors , including agriculture , business and finance .
While the immediate priority is to tackle the global health emergency , a long-term response must deal with biodiversity loss and climate change to prevent further outbreaks .
This week ’ s UN Biodiversity Summit presents a key moment for heads of state and government to scale up efforts to halt and reverse deforestation .
The recovery must be green and sustainable , or we will face these same issues over and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time to step up and commit to conserving and restoring biodiversity .
Otherwise , we will continue to feel the impacts of climate change , pollution and pandemics . ''
@ BoccucciMario The urgency with which governments around the world acted in response to the pandemic shows that a response to the climate emergency could be equally swift and decisive .
Forests are our best ally in the fight against future pandemics .
Separating health and economics from environmental policy is a dangerous delusion .
Saving and restoring our forests will deliver jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate change response , all while reducing the risk of future pandemics .

Deforestation and forest degradation have played an important role in triggering the pandemic. According to a new study in Nature, the populations of animals hosting zoonotic diseases, like the coronavirus, are up to 2.5 times higher in degraded places, and the number of species carrying these pathogens has increased by up to 70 per cent, compared to undamaged ecosystems. The world's forests act as shields, protecting humans from emerging infectious diseases. But as we are now witnessing, their destruction can have devastating consequences for global public health. On the eve of this week's UN Biodiversity Summit, it is disheartening to note that the world has not met its targets to stem the destruction of wildlife and ecosystems in the last decade, according to a new report from the UN on the state of nature. The Global Biodiversity Outlook 5 found that despite progress in some countries, natural habitats continue to disappear and vast numbers of species remain threatened by extinction from human activities. While global deforestation rates have slowed in the past decade, the degradation and fragmentation of biodiversity-rich ecosystems in the tropics remain high.
Wilderness areas and wetlands are disappearing. Freshwater ecosystems remain critically threatened. The pandemic has clearly shown that humanity’s devastating impact on nature comes with some severe consequences, and unless we restore the balance between the natural and human worlds, these outbreaks will become increasingly prevalent. Forests — with their significant carbon reduction and removal potential, health benefits, provision of livelihoods and food security for many rural poor and their potential to create an additional 80 million green jobs — are crucial for a sustainable, long-term global recovery. When the economic engines of growth start up again, they cannot run at the expense of climate or nature. Now is the time to step up and commit to conserving and restoring biodiversity. Otherwise, we will continue to feel the impacts of climate change, pollution and pandemics. Billion-dollar land deals in Ontario raise corruption suspicions A nature-based coronavirus recovery could actually create 400 million jobs by 2030, while pivoting the global economy, according to a recent report published by the World Economic Forum.


nationalobserver--2020-09-29--India-China conflict is bad for the planet

As Thomas Spencer , fellow at the New Delhi–based Energy and Resources Institute , noted on Twitter , China ’ s energy sector is fully developed in a way India ’ s is not .
Where China is already carbonized and needs mainly to clean its sector , India is still lacking in bringing efficient , accessible energy to its population .
While India figures out how to scale its renewables , it also desperately needs to make its cheaper , more intensive resources available to the entire population .
And of course , it can ’ t do either @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it can do just fine on its own .
A 2018 report by the upper house of India ’ s Parliament , the Rajya Sabha , claimed that many of these Chinese products , including solar panels , electrical machinery , chemicals , and LED bulbs , are tainted with unsafe or suboptimal materials that have an adverse impact on India and its environment .
The report also claims that , actually , India was doing great with manufacturing and exporting its own solar panels before China came in with its cheap goods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But it ’ s hard to believe that India was just a passive victim .
Consider that 80 percent of India ’ s solar panels come from China , and “ an estimated three in four power plants in India use Chinese equipment , ” according to a Brookings report .
Plus , China is still buying goods apace from India .
It ’ s hard to see all this as an attack rather than studied cooperation between Indian and Chinese companies and government officials .
India ’ s blockade against China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things it needs to achieve its climate goals .
So , where does this leave everyone ?
Not in a hopeful spot .
Keeping out Chinese companies ’ investments will wreck India and its climate goals .
India could , of course , point to its long-standing emphasis on “ differentiation , ” that the biggest emitters have the biggest responsibilities .
But with India itself being one of the top carbon belchers , it ’ s a moot point if the government doesn ’ t get its act together—and to achieve its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China more than it realizes .
This should be a matter of concern for everyone alarmed about the planet ’ s future , and particularly to those looking to China and India to be the world ’ s climate leaders as the U.S. ’ s case looks increasingly hopeless—and who hope India will bounce back after its decimation by COVID .
In an ideal world , the nations would engage in diplomacy , working together on making the future ’ s climate less dire .
India could then reallocate its burned-up finances toward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arms and attempting in vain to construct a new , wholesale manufacturing base .
The lockdown and ensuing drop in smog and pollution allowed Indians to literally envision a cleaner , more sustainable future , and that could have translated into innovative legislative and action , like it has in Seattle and Paris in spite of their deep recessions .
But that ’ s not likely to happen soon , and even if there ’ s no war , India ’ s bellicosity will have the effect of its population dying off nonetheless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or heat , or lack of essential goods , or starvation .
It doesn ’ t have to be this way .

As Thomas Spencer, fellow at the New Delhi–based Energy and Resources Institute, noted on Twitter, China’s energy sector is fully developed in a way India’s is not. Where China is already carbonized and needs mainly to clean its sector, India is still lacking in bringing efficient, accessible energy to its population. While India figures out how to scale its renewables, it also desperately needs to make its cheaper, more intensive resources available to the entire population. And of course, it can’t do either without China. India’s blockade against China is preventing it from receiving the very things it needs to achieve its climate goals. India will claim that it can do just fine on its own. A 2018 report by the upper house of India’s Parliament, the Rajya Sabha, claimed that many of these Chinese products, including solar panels, electrical machinery, chemicals, and LED bulbs, are tainted with unsafe or suboptimal materials that have an adverse impact on India and its environment. The report also claims that, actually, India was doing great with manufacturing and exporting its own solar panels before China came in with its cheap goods and trade tricks and messed everything up. But it’s hard to believe that India was just a passive victim. Consider that 80 percent of India’s solar panels come from China, and “an estimated three in four power plants in India use Chinese equipment,” according to a Brookings report. Plus, China is still buying goods apace from India. It’s hard to see all this as an attack rather than studied cooperation between Indian and Chinese companies and government officials. So, where does this leave everyone? Not in a hopeful spot. Keeping out Chinese companies’ investments will wreck India and its climate goals. India could, of course, point to its long-standing emphasis on “differentiation,” that the biggest emitters have the biggest responsibilities. But with India itself being one of the top carbon belchers, it’s a moot point if the government doesn’t get its act together—and to achieve its own ambitions, India needs business with China more than it realizes. This should be a matter of concern for everyone alarmed about the planet’s future, and particularly to those looking to China and India to be the world’s climate leaders as the U.S.’s case looks increasingly hopeless—and who hope India will bounce back after its decimation by COVID.
In an ideal world, the nations would engage in diplomacy, working together on making the future’s climate less dire. India could then reallocate its burned-up finances toward rebuilding its shattered state instead of stockpiling arms and attempting in vain to construct a new, wholesale manufacturing base. The lockdown and ensuing drop in smog and pollution allowed Indians to literally envision a cleaner, more sustainable future, and that could have translated into innovative legislative and action, like it has in Seattle and Paris in spite of their deep recessions. But that’s not likely to happen soon, and even if there’s no war, India’s bellicosity will have the effect of its population dying off nonetheless, whether from disease, or storms, or heat, or lack of essential goods, or starvation. It doesn’t have to be this way.


nationalobserver--2020-09-29--Federal Court to decide whether young activists can sue Ottawa over climate policy

Lawyers for 15 young people from across Canada will plead with a federal judge this week to allow their legal fight for tougher climate action to proceed to trial .
The youngsters and their legal team argue that Canada ’ s actions , particularly its support of the country ’ s fossil fuel industry , have breached their constitutional rights to life , liberty , security and equality before the law .
They are also seeking to secure the concept of public trust doctrine in Canadian case law , arguing the federal government has a duty to protect natural resources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefit of the public .
The federal Liberal government will meanwhile seek to have the complaint dismissed , arguing that the plaintiffs ’ arguments are “ political , ideological and policy-oriented ” and therefore not within the remit of the courts to judge .
The case is a key test of whether the climate policy decisions of government can be judged by the legal system .
At question is whether Ottawa has breached the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs by not doing enough to limit the emission of greenhouse gases ( GHGs ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 as Ontario reports 700 more cases • Former New York Times editor says media has learned nothing in covering Trump voters • The COVID-19 pandemic is changing how students cheat – and get caught “ Our rights as young people , our rights as members of this country , are being infringed upon and the government is responsible for it , and they need to be held accountable , ” said 16-year-old Cecilia La Rose , the lead plaintiff in the case .
Cecilia La Rose at her home in Toronto .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dealing with climate change shouldn ’ t be left to politics .
It ’ s not something we should allow to be used as a political weapon or pawn , ” said La Rose , who lives in downtown Toronto and has had to quit competitive sport due to asthma .
For Lauren Wright , a Grade 11 student from Saskatchewan , increasingly extreme weather associated with climate change is making it more difficult for her extended farming family to earn a living .
“ A huge part of our economy is based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of years , with all of the erratic weather we 've been having , we ’ re seeing crops being lost and livelihoods being lost , ” she said .
Colder winters and hotter summers are also directly hurting Wright , who is prone to heat stroke and severe sunburn and has Raynaud syndrome , which restricts her blood flow in cold weather .
Fifteen young people back by @ DavidSuzukiFDN and @ youthvgov want to sue Ottawa over its contribution to climate change .
The feds want the case thrown out .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saskatchewan is affecting her physical and mental well-being .
Photo supplied by Lauren Wright The plaintiffs ’ legal filing argues that Canada contributes to overall GHG emissions by “ promoting fossil fuel transport , export and import through interprovincial and international fossil fuel infrastructure , and by incentivizing fossil fuel exploration , extraction , production and consumption by way of industry subsidies , ” pointing to the purchase of the Trans Mountain pipeline as one example .
That pipeline purchase has been a major disappointment for climate activists , some of whom heckled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he joined a massive climate march in Montreal last year .
“ We ’ ve been forced to turn to the courts , ” said 16-year-old plaintiff Ira Reinhart-Smith , calling the justice system the “ only viable option right now.
” “ We ’ ve tried the good old-fashioned way of protesting .
We ’ ve tried all of the different ways , ” he said .
“ The courts have the power to bring about change in Canada and that is what we need.
” The legal fight comes as Ottawa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Canada on whether it overstepped its jurisdictional authority by imposing a carbon price on provinces that do not have an adequate plan of their own to cap emissions .
The young people are not asking the court to tell the government what policies they should enact .
They are instead seeking an order that Ottawa develop and deliver a plan to reduce emissions “ consistent with Canada ’ s fair share of the global carbon budget ” in order to help restore a “ stable climate system.
” “ This isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actions that affect , that have immediate , direct effect on the plaintiffs , ” said Catherine Boies Parker , one of the lawyers at Arvay Finlay LLP who is representing the youths .
“ Children and youth are particularly susceptible to the harms that manifest from climate change ” given their still-developing physiology , she said .
“ And in addition , they are losing their childhood and their future in a way that everyone else has enjoyed.
” Future generations will also pay more of the higher longer-term costs of dealing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exacerbating those costs , she said .
The case is also being argued by Tollefson Law Corporation and backed by Our Children ’ s Trust and the David Suzuki Foundation .
The hearings are scheduled to begin in Vancouver on Wednesday and are expected to last two days .
In its written submission seeking dismissal of the claim , Ottawa says it is working hard to combat climate change , but that fighting it “ requires an international effort engaging a multitude of complex policy and legislative considerations , ” including geopolitics , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other infrastructure , and the general state of the economy.
” The federal case mirrors a similar effort targeting Ontario ’ s provincial government , in which seven young plaintiffs are waiting to hear if they will get their day in court .
The young people in the federal case are looking to a Dutch example for inspiration , with the highest court in the Netherlands last year upholding a ruling that the country ’ s government must do much more to curb emissions .
A district judge in the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case , which also involved Our Children ’ s Trust , ruling that access to a clean environment was a fundamental right .
A circuit court later reversed the ruling , saying the youth should seek remedy from Congress and the executive rather than federal court .
That decision is now the subject of an appeal .

Lawyers for 15 young people from across Canada will plead with a federal judge this week to allow their legal fight for tougher climate action to proceed to trial. The youngsters and their legal team argue that Canada’s actions, particularly its support of the country’s fossil fuel industry, have breached their constitutional rights to life, liberty, security and equality before the law. They are also seeking to secure the concept of public trust doctrine in Canadian case law, arguing the federal government has a duty to protect natural resources, such as permafrost, for the benefit of the public. The federal Liberal government will meanwhile seek to have the complaint dismissed, arguing that the plaintiffs’ arguments are “political, ideological and policy-oriented” and therefore not within the remit of the courts to judge. The case is a key test of whether the climate policy decisions of government can be judged by the legal system. At question is whether Ottawa has breached the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs by not doing enough to limit the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs).
“Our rights as young people, our rights as members of this country, are being infringed upon and the government is responsible for it, and they need to be held accountable,” said 16-year-old Cecilia La Rose, the lead plaintiff in the case. Cecilia La Rose at her home in Toronto. Photo supplied by Cecilia La Rose Billion-dollar land deals in Ontario raise corruption suspicions “Dealing with climate change shouldn’t be left to politics. It’s not something we should allow to be used as a political weapon or pawn,” said La Rose, who lives in downtown Toronto and has had to quit competitive sport due to asthma.
For Lauren Wright, a Grade 11 student from Saskatchewan, increasingly extreme weather associated with climate change is making it more difficult for her extended farming family to earn a living. Fifteen young people back by @DavidSuzukiFDN and @youthvgov want to sue Ottawa over its contribution to climate change. The feds want the case thrown out. “A huge part of our economy is based on agriculture and over the past couple of years, with all of the erratic weather we've been having, we’re seeing crops being lost and livelihoods being lost,” she said. Colder winters and hotter summers are also directly hurting Wright, who is prone to heat stroke and severe sunburn and has Raynaud syndrome, which restricts her blood flow in cold weather. Lauren Wright says more extreme weather in Saskatchewan is affecting her physical and mental well-being. Photo supplied by Lauren Wright The plaintiffs’ legal filing argues that Canada contributes to overall GHG emissions by “promoting fossil fuel transport, export and import through interprovincial and international fossil fuel infrastructure, and by incentivizing fossil fuel exploration, extraction, production and consumption by way of industry subsidies,” pointing to the purchase of the Trans Mountain pipeline as one example.
That pipeline purchase has been a major disappointment for climate activists, some of whom heckled Prime Minister Justin Trudeau about it when he joined a massive climate march in Montreal last year. “We’ve been forced to turn to the courts,” said 16-year-old plaintiff Ira Reinhart-Smith, calling the justice system the “only viable option right now.” “We’ve tried the good old-fashioned way of protesting. We’ve tried all of the different ways,” he said. “The courts have the power to bring about change in Canada and that is what we need.”


nationalobserver--2020-09-29--World leaders pledge to halt earth’s destruction ahead of UN summit

This story was originally published by The Guardian and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration World leaders have pledged to clamp down on pollution , embrace sustainable economic systems and eliminate the dumping of plastic waste in oceans by the middle of the century as part of “ meaningful action ” to halt the destruction of nature on Earth .
Emmanuel Macron , Angela Merkel , Justin Trudeau , Jacinda Ardern and Boris Johnson are among 64 leaders from five continents warning that humanity is in a state of planetary emergency due to the climate crisis and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To restore the balance with nature , governments and the European Union have made a 10-point pledge to counteract the damage to systems that underpin human health and wellbeing .
The commitments include a renewed effort to reduce deforestation , halt unsustainable fishing practices , eliminate environmentally harmful subsidies and begin the transition to sustainable food production systems and a circular economy over the next decade .
The leaders describe the pledge as a “ turning point ” by which future generations will judge their willingness to act on environmental destruction .
All @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nature , launched virtually in New York on Monday , have committed to putting wildlife and the climate at the heart of post-pandemic economic recovery plans , promising to address the climate crisis , deforestation , ecosystem degradation and pollution .
• Toronto school shut down over COVID-19 as Ontario reports 700 more cases • Former New York Times editor says media has learned nothing in covering Trump voters • The COVID-19 pandemic is changing how students cheat – and get caught The announcement comes ahead of a major UN biodiversity summit on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from New York , and part way through negotiations on a Paris-style international agreement on nature .
The speaking slots at this week ’ s summit are oversubscribed , with more than 116 heads of states and governments asking to address the event .
“ Science clearly shows that biodiversity loss , land and ocean degradation , pollution , resource depletion and climate change are accelerating at an unprecedented rate .
This acceleration is causing irreversible harm to our life support systems and aggravating poverty and inequalities as well as hunger and malnutrition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Despite ambitious global agreements and targets for the protection , sustainable use and restoration of biodiversity , and notwithstanding many local success stories , the global trends continue rapidly in the wrong direction .
A transformative change is needed : we can not simply carry on as before.
” The leaders also commit to ending environmental crime and cracking down on organised crime groups involved in the illicit trafficking of wildlife and timber .
Boris Johnson will speak at the pledge ’ s launch on Monday .
The prime minister will say : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action and use them to build momentum , to agree ambitious goals and binding targets.
`` Extinction is forever – so our action must be immediate '' Boris Johnson .
Britain , Canada and Germany among 64 countries pledging a sustainable economic recovery .
# climatechange # wildlife # CovidRecovery “ We must act now – right now .
We can not afford to dither and delay because biodiversity loss is happening today and it is happening at a frightening rate .
Left unchecked , the consequences will be catastrophic for us all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action must be immediate.
” He will also announce that 30 % of the UK ’ s land will be protected for nature by 2030 , meaning an extra 400,000 hectares , the size of the Lake District and South Downs national parks combined , will be conserved .
Other signatories to the pledge include the leaders of Bangladesh , Bhutan , Colombia , Costa Rica , Fiji , Kenya , Seychelles and Mexico .
The presidents of the US , Brazil and China – Donald Trump , Jair Bolsonaro and Xi Jinping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ despite Xi spearheading global biodiversity talks .
Earlier this month , the UN announced that the world failed to meet a single target to slow the loss of the natural world for the second consecutive decade , including goals to protect coral reefs , preserve natural habitats and reduce plastic and chemical waste to levels that do not damage ecosystems .
There have been a series of damning reports and studies about the state of nature on Earth in recent weeks , including the WWF and the Zoological Society of London ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which found global populations of mammals , birds , fish , amphibians and reptiles plunged by 68 % on average between 1970 and 2016 .
The UN ’ s biodiversity head , Elizabeth Maruma Mrema , welcomed the new commitment by world leaders , describing it as an “ inspirational contribution ” to ongoing negotiations due to “ the urgency , unity and ambition of the pledge ” .
Sir Robert Watson , former chair of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services ( IPBES ) , described the pledge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ links leaders have made between the destruction of the natural world and the Sustainable Development Goals .
But Sir Watson cautioned what was possible without the signatures of major polluters .
“ Many of the most important countries in the world that are causing climate change due to their emissions of greenhouse gases , and/or are destroying their biodiversity , are not signatures to this pledge .
Without countries such as the USA , Brazil , China , Russia , India , and Australia we can not succeed in achieving the Paris Climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loss of biodiversity , ” he told the Guardian .
Marco Lambertini , the director general of WWF International , said : “ The Leaders ’ Pledge for Nature marks a pivotal moment with countries demonstrating real leadership from the highest political level , and committing to reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 .
We call on all leaders to build on this ambition at the forthcoming UN summit on biodiversity .
”

This story was originally published by The Guardian and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration World leaders have pledged to clamp down on pollution, embrace sustainable economic systems and eliminate the dumping of plastic waste in oceans by the middle of the century as part of “meaningful action” to halt the destruction of nature on Earth. Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, Justin Trudeau, Jacinda Ardern and Boris Johnson are among 64 leaders from five continents warning that humanity is in a state of planetary emergency due to the climate crisis and the rampant destruction of life-sustaining ecosystems. To restore the balance with nature, governments and the European Union have made a 10-point pledge to counteract the damage to systems that underpin human health and wellbeing. The commitments include a renewed effort to reduce deforestation, halt unsustainable fishing practices, eliminate environmentally harmful subsidies and begin the transition to sustainable food production systems and a circular economy over the next decade. The leaders describe the pledge as a “turning point” by which future generations will judge their willingness to act on environmental destruction. All signatories to the Leaders’ Pledge for Nature, launched virtually in New York on Monday, have committed to putting wildlife and the climate at the heart of post-pandemic economic recovery plans, promising to address the climate crisis, deforestation, ecosystem degradation and pollution.
The announcement comes ahead of a major UN biodiversity summit on Wednesday, which will be hosted virtually from New York, and part way through negotiations on a Paris-style international agreement on nature. The speaking slots at this week’s summit are oversubscribed, with more than 116 heads of states and governments asking to address the event. “Science clearly shows that biodiversity loss, land and ocean degradation, pollution, resource depletion and climate change are accelerating at an unprecedented rate. This acceleration is causing irreversible harm to our life support systems and aggravating poverty and inequalities as well as hunger and malnutrition,” the pledge reads. Billion-dollar land deals in Ontario raise corruption suspicions “Despite ambitious global agreements and targets for the protection, sustainable use and restoration of biodiversity, and notwithstanding many local success stories, the global trends continue rapidly in the wrong direction. A transformative change is needed: we cannot simply carry on as before.”
The leaders also commit to ending environmental crime and cracking down on organised crime groups involved in the illicit trafficking of wildlife and timber. " Extinction is forever – so our action must be immediate" Boris Johnson. Britain, Canada and Germany among 64 countries pledging a sustainable economic recovery. #climatechange #wildlife #CovidRecovery Boris Johnson will speak at the pledge’s launch on Monday. The prime minister will say: “We must turn these words into action and use them to build momentum, to agree ambitious goals and binding targets. “We must act now – right now. We cannot afford to dither and delay because biodiversity loss is happening today and it is happening at a frightening rate. Left unchecked, the consequences will be catastrophic for us all. Extinction is forever – so our action must be immediate.” He will also announce that 30% of the UK’s land will be protected for nature by 2030, meaning an extra 400,000 hectares, the size of the Lake District and South Downs national parks combined, will be conserved.
Other signatories to the pledge include the leaders of Bangladesh, Bhutan, Colombia, Costa Rica, Fiji, Kenya, Seychelles and Mexico. The presidents of the US, Brazil and China – Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro and Xi Jinping – have not signed the pledge, despite Xi spearheading global biodiversity talks. Earlier this month, the UN announced that the world failed to meet a single target to slow the loss of the natural world for the second consecutive decade, including goals to protect coral reefs, preserve natural habitats and reduce plastic and chemical waste to levels that do not damage ecosystems. There have been a series of damning reports and studies about the state of nature on Earth in recent weeks, including the WWF and the Zoological Society of London’s (ZSL) Living Planet Report 2020, which found global populations of mammals, birds, fish, amphibians and reptiles plunged by 68% on average between 1970 and 2016.


nationalobserver--2020-09-29--House of Commons first virtual vote had a bumpy start

Members of Parliament have completed their first-ever virtual vote in the House of Commons , a historic occasion marked by numerous technical glitches , lengthy delays and cameo appearances by some of their kids and even a family dog .
The vote was on a Bloc Quebecois sub-amendment to a Conservative amendment denouncing last week 's throne speech , a routine matter that normally would have taken 15 minutes .
It was roundly defeated by a vote of 293-33 — with help from one Bloc MP who accidentally voted against his own party 's motion `` due to all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But it took almost two hours Monday night to arrive at that result .
Right off the bat , a system failure by Microsoft delayed the vote for about 40 minutes .
• Toronto school shut down over COVID-19 as Ontario reports 700 more cases • Former New York Times editor says media has learned nothing in covering Trump voters • The COVID-19 pandemic is changing how students cheat – and get caught Once it finally got underway , only a few dozen MPs were physically present in the Commons while the rest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ excruciatingly slow , roll call videoconference vote .
Commons Speaker Anthony Rota had to repeatedly remind MPs to unmute their microphones and to slowly enunciate the statement `` I vote for ( or against ) the motion '' in order to give their computer cameras time to activate so that the Commons table officers recording each vote could visually verify who was voting .
He also had to remind them to mute their mics as soon as they 'd finished voting , noting that `` any movement like kissing your children activates the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
And indeed , the wrong MP 's face showed up repeatedly on the video screen when someone was casting their vote .
Numerous MPs had to try multiple times before their votes were properly recorded .
A couple of MPs seemed to be doing double duty minding their kids while voting .
Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith 's vote against the Bloc sub-amendment was punctuated by a squawk from a baby in the crib behind him , provoking laughter from MPs in the chamber .
Members of Parliament have completed their first-ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a historic occasion marked by numerous technical glitches , lengthy delays and cameo appearances by some of their kids and even a family dog .
One Conservative MP 's toddler was sitting beside him as he cast his vote against .
And Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner held a dog in her lap , waving its paw at the camera as she voted .
Several MPs were unable to connect to the video vote at all and had to register their votes separately in calls to the Commons ' table officers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's vote was not recorded , which Rota promised to look into .
Liberal MP Emmanuel Dubourg initially said he was voting for the motion but immediately corrected himself to say he was against it .
Xavier Barsalou-Duval , the first Bloc MP to vote electronically , generated much mirth in the Commons when he pronounced he was voting against the motion as well .
He did not immediately correct his error , however , and his attempt later to change his vote to a yea was rejected .
When it was finally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a number of male members voted without wearing jackets while others appeared to have `` props '' in view on screen , in violation of the rules of decorum that prevail in the House of Commons .
He also noted that some MPs posted pictures on social media of themselves voting virtually for the first time .
Rota reminded MPs that the background behind them while voting virtually must be `` as neutral as possible , '' with no props or anything that `` promotes a certain ideology . ''
Male MPs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them to wear a tie as well .
As for taking pictures of virtual proceedings , Rota said : `` I know they 're excited and this is a historic night and they want to take a picture , but they should not be taking pictures and posting them on the web .
That is against the rules . ''
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 29 , 2020 .

Members of Parliament have completed their first-ever virtual vote in the House of Commons, a historic occasion marked by numerous technical glitches, lengthy delays and cameo appearances by some of their kids and even a family dog. The vote was on a Bloc Quebecois sub-amendment to a Conservative amendment denouncing last week's throne speech, a routine matter that normally would have taken 15 minutes. It was roundly defeated by a vote of 293-33 — with help from one Bloc MP who accidentally voted against his own party's motion "due to all the confusion" over voting by videoconference. But it took almost two hours Monday night to arrive at that result. Right off the bat, a system failure by Microsoft delayed the vote for about 40 minutes.
Once it finally got underway, only a few dozen MPs were physically present in the Commons while the rest joined in from remote locations in an excruciatingly slow, roll call videoconference vote. Commons Speaker Anthony Rota had to repeatedly remind MPs to unmute their microphones and to slowly enunciate the statement "I vote for (or against) the motion" in order to give their computer cameras time to activate so that the Commons table officers recording each vote could visually verify who was voting. Billion-dollar land deals in Ontario raise corruption suspicions He also had to remind them to mute their mics as soon as they'd finished voting, noting that "any movement like kissing your children activates the mic and the camera comes on you."
And indeed, the wrong MP's face showed up repeatedly on the video screen when someone was casting their vote. Numerous MPs had to try multiple times before their votes were properly recorded. Members of Parliament have completed their first-ever virtual vote in the House of Commons, a historic occasion marked by numerous technical glitches, lengthy delays and cameo appearances by some of their kids and even a family dog. A couple of MPs seemed to be doing double duty minding their kids while voting. Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith's vote against the Bloc sub-amendment was punctuated by a squawk from a baby in the crib behind him, provoking laughter from MPs in the chamber. One Conservative MP's toddler was sitting beside him as he cast his vote against. And Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner held a dog in her lap, waving its paw at the camera as she voted. Several MPs were unable to connect to the video vote at all and had to register their votes separately in calls to the Commons' table officers. Even then, Green MP Jenica Atwin's vote was not recorded, which Rota promised to look into.
Liberal MP Emmanuel Dubourg initially said he was voting for the motion but immediately corrected himself to say he was against it. Xavier Barsalou-Duval, the first Bloc MP to vote electronically, generated much mirth in the Commons when he pronounced he was voting against the motion as well. He did not immediately correct his error, however, and his attempt later to change his vote to a yea was rejected. When it was finally over, Conservative whip Blake Richards noted that a number of male members voted without wearing jackets while others appeared to have "props" in view on screen, in violation of the rules of decorum that prevail in the House of Commons. He also noted that some MPs posted pictures on social media of themselves voting virtually for the first time.


nationalobserver--2020-09-29--Former New York Times editor says media has learned nothing in covering Trump voters


nationalobserver--2020-09-30--Mayhem reigns as Donald Trump, Joe Biden stage face-to-face fracas in election debate

A confident and combative Donald Trump wasted little time testing the limits of Joe Biden 's patience Tuesday in a bitter , angry and chaotic war of words and recriminations during the first in-person confrontation of the 2020 presidential election .
Within the first 15 minutes of the televised debate , hosted by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace , Trump had picked fights with the exasperated moderator as well as Biden , who could only grin ruefully and shake his head in disbelief .
Before long , Biden looked and sounded fed up as Trump , visibly in his element @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to control the Democratic party and the influence of the `` radical left . ''
`` Will you shut up , man ? ''
a frustrated Biden finally pleaded .
`` This is so unpresidential . ''
The other 75 minutes did n't get much better .
• Former New York Times editor says media has learned nothing in covering Trump voters • Toronto school shut down over COVID-19 as Ontario reports 700 more cases • Could forests be our best strategy for COVID-19 recovery and reducing future pandemics ?
Throughout a night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discussion and punctuated by all three men shouting over each other , Biden did his best to ignore his antagonist and address voters directly , speaking into the camera .
`` Everything he 's saying so far is simply a lie , '' he said .
`` I 'm not here to call out his lies .
Everybody knows he 's a liar . ''
But he was n't always able to resist rising to Trump 's bait .
`` The fact of the matter is I beat Bernie Sanders .
I beat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' Biden said when the president called him a proxy for the progressive Vermont senator who challenged him for the nomination .
`` I 'm here standing facing you , old buddy . ''
On the subject of the COVID-19 pandemic , Biden accused Trump of keeping to himself what he knew about the outbreak 's potential severity .
Within the first 15 minutes of the televised debate , hosted by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace , Trump had picked fights with the exasperated moderator as well as Biden , who could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in disbelief .
# debates2020 `` He knew all the way back in February how serious this crisis was .
He knew it was a deadly disease , '' Biden said .
`` He 's on tape is acknowledging he knew it .
He said he did n't tell us or give people a warning of it because he did n't want to panic the American people .
You do n't panic , he panicked . ''
Trump , as he often does , insisted that by closing U.S. borders to travellers from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tragedy .
`` If we would have listened to you , the country would have been left wide open , millions of people would have died , '' he said .
`` It 's China 's fault .
It should have never happened .
They stopped it from going in .
But it was China 's fault . ''
Any notion that Trump might use Tuesday 's debate to broaden his base was quickly shattered .
Asked to publicly condemn white supremacists , Trump instead told the Proud Boys to `` stand back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ committing to a peaceful transition after the election .
He called out Biden 's son for having a drug problem .
And he described racial sensitivity training as a `` radical revolution '' and a `` very sick '' idea .
`` If you were a certain person , you had no status in life , '' he said of why he cancelled such training for federal employees .
`` It was sort of a reversal . ''
There was a small , physically distanced audience at the venue at Case Western Reserve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were required to wear masks and pass a COVID-19 test to attend , including Trump 's family .
Pre-selected topics for the 90-minute debate included the pandemic , the economy , the Supreme Court , social justice issues and the integrity of the voting process .
Neither candidate was required to wear a mask , but Trump and Biden skipped the customary pre-debate handshake .
While Trump decided to largely forgo any formal debate preparation , the more conventional Biden reportedly spent days preparing , taking part in mock debates with a coterie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The president , meanwhile , was clearly more interested in relying on his now-familiar fondness for professional-wrestler showmanship .
Keen to portray Biden as a doddering oldster in a state of mental decline , the Trump campaign made hay earlier in the day with purported demands for an `` earpiece check '' to ensure no one offstage was feeding lines to his rival .
And for days , Trump has ⏤ with a straight face , seemingly ⏤ called on Biden to submit to a mutual drug test , claiming without any evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sort of performance-enhancing substance .
Biden , who played along Tuesday by tweeting a pre-debate photo of earbuds and a quart of ice cream , struggled at times to avoid stooping to Trump 's level , hoping to focus instead on the myriad weak spots in the president 's record while in office .
He was not lacking for options .
The number of COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. , the highest of any country on the planet , is closing in on 210,000 , with the world on the cusp of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 8.4 per cent , up from historic lows but with analysts bracing for another downturn .
An explosive New York Times report paints a picture of Trump as a struggling , debt-saddled businessman who paid just $ 750 in taxes in 2016 and 2017 , owes $ 300 million in loans and wrote off more than $ 70,000 for hair styling during his tenure on `` The Apprentice . ''
Trump derided the report as `` fake news , '' insisting he 'd paid millions in taxes over the years , and even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden was vice-president , for allowing him to claim generous tax credits .
`` You are the worst president America has ever had , '' Biden sighed .
Trump 's own musings about the integrity of the coming vote and apparent unwillingness to permit a peaceful transition should he lose , fuelled by baseless claims of looming mail-in ballot fraud , have experts describing him as an existential threat to American democracy .
That issue offered one of the night 's few moments of clarity .
Asked point-blank to commit to respecting certified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreed , then issued a plea to American voters .
`` Show up and vote .
You will determine the outcome of this election , '' he said into the camera .
`` He can not stop you from being able to determine the outcome of this election . ''
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 29 , 2020 .

A confident and combative Donald Trump wasted little time testing the limits of Joe Biden's patience Tuesday in a bitter, angry and chaotic war of words and recriminations during the first in-person confrontation of the 2020 presidential election. Within the first 15 minutes of the televised debate, hosted by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, Trump had picked fights with the exasperated moderator as well as Biden, who could only grin ruefully and shake his head in disbelief. Before long, Biden looked and sounded fed up as Trump, visibly in his element, needled him incessantly about his power to control the Democratic party and the influence of the "radical left." "Will you shut up, man?" a frustrated Biden finally pleaded. "This is so unpresidential." The other 75 minutes didn't get much better.
Throughout a night long on insults, short on substantive discussion and punctuated by all three men shouting over each other, Biden did his best to ignore his antagonist and address voters directly, speaking into the camera. "Everything he's saying so far is simply a lie," he said. "I'm not here to call out his lies. Everybody knows he's a liar." Billion-dollar land deals in Ontario raise corruption suspicions But he wasn't always able to resist rising to Trump's bait.
"The fact of the matter is I beat Bernie Sanders. I beat him a whole hell of a lot," Biden said when the president called him a proxy for the progressive Vermont senator who challenged him for the nomination. Within the first 15 minutes of the televised debate, hosted by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, Trump had picked fights with the exasperated moderator as well as Biden, who could only grin ruefully and shake his head in disbelief. #debates2020 "I'm here standing facing you, old buddy." On the subject of the COVID-19 pandemic, Biden accused Trump of keeping to himself what he knew about the outbreak's potential severity. "He knew all the way back in February how serious this crisis was. He knew it was a deadly disease," Biden said. "He's on tape is acknowledging he knew it. He said he didn't tell us or give people a warning of it because he didn't want to panic the American people. You don't panic, he panicked."
Trump, as he often does, insisted that by closing U.S. borders to travellers from China, he prevented an even greater tragedy. "If we would have listened to you, the country would have been left wide open, millions of people would have died," he said. "It's China's fault. It should have never happened. They stopped it from going in. But it was China's fault."


nationalobserver--2020-09-30--TC Energy inks deal for Indigenous ownership interest in Keystone XL pipeline

Indigenous communities are being given a chance to pursue an ownership interest in the Keystone XL pipeline project , builder TC Energy Corp. announced on Tuesday .
The Calgary-based company says a memorandum of understanding has been signed with Natural Law Energy , which represents four First Nations in Alberta and one in Saskatchewan .
“ Today ’ s announcement is a testament to what we can accomplish when industry and Indigenous groups work together , ” said Nekaneet First Nation Chief Alvin Francis , president of Natural Law .
“ This historic agreement is an important step for our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the energy wealth coming from our lands and traditional territories.
” TC Energy says a final agreement with Natural Law is expected to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2020 , formalizing its participation in Keystone XL .
It added it could participate in other potential related midstream and power projects .
• Former New York Times editor says media has learned nothing in covering Trump voters • Toronto school shut down over COVID-19 as Ontario reports 700 more cases • Could forests be our best strategy for COVID-19 recovery and reducing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which is one of the first of its kind for TC Energy with Indigenous communities , is a reflection of our commitment to working together to ensure Indigenous groups share the benefits of the Keystone XL Pipeline over the long-term as a valuable partner , ” said Keystone XL president Richard Prior .
In an interview , Prior would n't give specifics but said the deal will be for a minority interest in the pipeline and TC wo n't directly provide the funding .
In March , the company approved construction of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 830,000 barrels per day of oil from Alberta to Nebraska after the Alberta government agreed to invest about US $ 1.1 billion ( C $ 1.5 billion ) as equity and guarantee a US $ 4.2-billion project loan .
Its future is still in doubt , however , as Democratic candidate Joe Biden has said he would cancel its vital presidential permit if he is elected president in November .
`` This MOU affirms the shared importance Indigenous people and Alberta ’ s government place on projects such as Keystone XL , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic benefits to lift more people onto solid financial ground – now and for years to come , '' said Premier Jason Kenney in a statement .
`` The full participation of Indigenous people in our entire economy is central to reconciliation .
Likewise , Alberta ’ s recovery depends on Indigenous communities participating in economic prosperity . ''
Indigenous communities are being given a chance to pursue an ownership interest in the Keystone XL pipeline project , builder TC Energy Corp. announced on Tuesday , September 29 , 2020 .
The five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Saskatchewan and the Ermineskin Cree Nation , Montana First Nation , Louis Bull Tribe and Saddle Lake Cree Nation in Alberta .
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 29 , 2020

Indigenous communities are being given a chance to pursue an ownership interest in the Keystone XL pipeline project, builder TC Energy Corp. announced on Tuesday.
The Calgary-based company says a memorandum of understanding has been signed with Natural Law Energy, which represents four First Nations in Alberta and one in Saskatchewan.
“Today’s announcement is a testament to what we can accomplish when industry and Indigenous groups work together,” said Nekaneet First Nation Chief Alvin Francis, president of Natural Law.
“This historic agreement is an important step for our peoples and future generations to share in the energy wealth coming from our lands and traditional territories.”
TC Energy says a final agreement with Natural Law is expected to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2020, formalizing its participation in Keystone XL. It added it could participate in other potential related midstream and power projects.