Uninstalling Stephen Miller

In November 2019 , a former staffer from Breitbart leaked emails from 2015 in which White House advisor Stephen Miller recommended The Camp of the Saints , a book that describes immigrants as “ kinky-haired , swarthy-skinned , long-despised phantoms ” and “ teeming ants toiling for the white man ’ s comfort.
” Written by the late French explorer Jean Raspail , the book centers on a flotilla of impoverished Indians invading the “ white world , ” which seems “ bent on taking revenge against itself.
” The Indians , whom Raspail refers to as “ grotesque little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” are led by a feces-eating “ gigantic Hindu ” called “ the turd eater.
” The Western world lets them in , ushering in an onslaught of rape and murder .
Miller promoted the 1973 novel in an email to Breitbart staff , which became the impetus for a Breitbart article that aimed to draw parallels between Raspail ’ s dystopia and the migrant caravans then journeying to the Southern border of the United States .
Raspail summed up his outlook on immigration in two sentences .
“ To let them in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would destroy them.
” Miller took the book ’ s lesson to heart , exclaiming that he “ would be happy if not a single refugee foot ever again touched America ’ s soil.
” While much of the conservative intelligentsia asserts that Trump ’ s gains among minority voters somehow disproves the long-held allegations of bigotry directed at his administration , even voters who easily shrugged off headline-grabbing dog whistles like “ very fine people on both sides ” or “ stand back and stand by ” would be appalled by Stephen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his influence .
His implementation of an agenda that the vast majority of Americans oppose exploited our nation ’ s institutional vulnerabilities , disfiguring our immigration system in a way that will take years to reverse .
As a senior advisor to the president , Miller used his position to focus on immigration while avoiding the congressional scrutiny to which agency officials are subject .
Miller frequently circumvented department heads , opting instead to call lower-level staff to implement his orders , reportedly telling them things like “ This is the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agency.
” Without looping in cabinet secretaries , Miller would hold weekly meetings with their subordinates , occasionally helping get promotions for those who shared his beliefs .
Even senior officials reported that they frequently felt torn between Miller and the actual head of their agency .
Miller and his allies would go “ out of their way to vilify all immigrants , ” demanding press releases whenever a refugee or immigrant committed a gruesome crime .
This tendency of Miller ’ s was underscored by his correspondence with officials at the Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statistics linking immigrants to violent crime and terrorism—efforts that were the likely impetus for a misleading 2019 DOJ report claiming that immigrants now comprise 64 percent of all federal arrests , having “ more than tripled , ” between 1998-2018 .
The report arrived at these numbers by burying the fact that 95 percent of the increases in non-citizen arrests were specifically from immigration offenses .
It also neglected to mention that federal arrests comprise only 1.5 percent of total U.S. arrests , rendering the entire report moot .
But since the litany @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Miller ’ s views , he and his staff had no choice but to mischaracterize the data .
The report still hit the airways , with pundits citing the misleading figures in defense of the president ’ s restrictionist agenda .
Similarly , when the White House commissioned the Department of Health and Human Services ( HHS ) to draft a report assessing the net fiscal impact of refugees , Miller urged officials to scrub information detailing their fiscal contributions .
“ The President believes refugees cost more , and the results of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President , ” he said .
Before the administration could release Miller ’ s distorted report , the undoctored version was leaked to the public .
The report found that from 2005 to 2014 , refugees paid $ 63 billion more in federal , state , and local taxes than they consumed in benefits .
According to officials responsible for helping determine the maximum refugee admissions target for the year , Miller was responsible for lowering the number to 50,000—the lowest resettlement ceiling since the refugee program ’ s creation in 1980 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ September 11 attacks , the ceiling had never dipped below 70,000 .
Miller worked to keep slashing refugee admissions to new lows at the end of each fiscal year .
Then-Secretary of Defense James Mattis , along with other Pentagon officials , expressed grave concern that further cuts to admissions would jeopardize America ’ s promise to protect the Afghani and Iraqi interpreters facing violent backlash for assisting U.S. troops .
“ A failure to honor our commitments to those who have supported the U.S. in combat would undermine our diplomatic and military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ letter to the administration .
Miller would complain about being hamstrung by “ bureaucratic inertia , ” eventually convincing the president to “ drain the swamp ” so he could refill it with restrictionist acolytes .
One source from which Miller would draw talent was the Federation for American Immigration Reform ( FAIR ) , whose current president , Dan Stein , has warned about immigrants engaging in “ competitive breeding , ” and worried about “ people with low IQs , ” having “ as many children as possible.
” These comments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though he now seems happy to look the other way .
Miller was also a master at erecting bureaucratic roadblocks .
One particularly effective policy designed to dramatically lower the number of successful immigration petitions was a rule requiring U.S .
Citizenship and Immigration Services ( USCIS ) to reject applications if any spaces are left blank—even when it makes no sense for an applicant to fill out that field .
Instead , the applicant must write in “ N/A , ” as the answer for every single non-applicable question .
Many applications @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing to do with their eligibility .
For example , in the “ Name in native alphabet , ” section an applicant whose name in their native alphabet is the same in English must write “ N/A , ” or be rejected .
Only “ N/A , ” “ unknown , ” or “ none , ” will suffice .
( “ NA ” will result in rejection . )
The “ no-blanks policy , ” was first weaponized in the fall of 2019 against asylum seekers , a group that often lacks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was then expanded to include undocumented victims and witnesses of certain crimes applying for the U visa , which enables them to communicate with police without fear of deportation .
From late December to mid-January , 98 percent of U visa applications were rejected under the no blanks rule .
After the first six months of implementation , the policy still resulted in the rejection of roughly half of 24,000 total applications .
Had Trump been re-elected , USCIS would ’ ve extended the policy to green card applicants .
The expansion of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Miller ’ s big wish-list items .
The rule requires green card petitioners to fill out roughly 18 hours ’ worth of forms and supply dozens of pages to prove that they aren ’ t likely to go on welfare .
Under this rule , a professional earning $ 76,000 with a spouse and four kids may still be rejected .
But even those likely to have cleared the rule would ’ ve been deterred by the obstacle course of new paperwork .
Making the policy even more ridiculous is the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demonstrate they have the means to financially support their family members if necessary .
Although the official rule is currently vacated , the State Department issued guidance in 2018 to deny applicants on public charge grounds without an official regulation , resulting in thousands of denials from abroad .
Miller was adept at shrouding his cruelty in boring bureaucracy , making it difficult for news outlets to cover persistently .
Doug Rand , cofounder of Boundless Immigration , a company that helps immigrants obtain permanent residency and citizenship , told us that in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ official policies , “ we have no idea how many shadow directives were released behind the scenes.
” Rand cites the fact that rejections for “ genius ” -level green cards awarded to people like nuclear scientists and Nobel Prize winners increased by 26 percentage points .
“ This trend couldn ’ t have happened by accident , ” he told us .
But not all of Miller ’ s policies could evade the media spotlight .
One such exception was the family separations under “ zero tolerance , ” for which Miller @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions declared the administration ’ s zero tolerance policy of prosecuting all illegal border crossers in early 2018 , stories of toddlers being ripped from their mothers ’ arms dominated headlines .
The family separations were deemed so indefensible that the administration and its allies have since deflected blame , arguing that “ Obama built the cages.
” And while it ’ s true that the Obama administration built cages at the border and separated families , there are substantial differences between Miller ’ s policy and that of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of family units were generally deprioritized for criminal prosecution if their only crime was illegal entry ( although they would still be subject to civil penalties and deportation if found lacking a claim to stay ) .
Likewise , prosecutors and adjudicators were given discretion to focus their resources on targeting smugglers and human traffickers , not people whose only crime was crossing illegally .
Stephen Miller ’ s zero tolerance , on the other hand , required all illegal border crossers to be detained and criminally prosecuted in order to intimidate the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The separations were a feature , not a bug , of the Miller strategy .
Making matters even worse , the Trump administration forced asylum-seeking families to enter illegally by blocking ports of entry where they could legally claim asylum , triggering even more separations .
The administration justified the policy by claiming it didn ’ t have the personnel or holding space , but an OIG report proved this to be a lie .
Overall , zero tolerance resulted in over 5,000 children being separated from their parents .
The government has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 600 children , 129 of whom were younger than 5 years old when they were separated .
And while the policy was controversial enough for Trump to partially roll it back later that summer , it didn ’ t go far enough for Miller .
During a White House meeting in May 2018 , Miller articulated his plan of separating families going through civil court proceedings as well , including asylum hearings , which would have separated at least 25,000 additional children from their parents .
While this particular suggestion of Miller ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has succeeded in effectively shutting down asylum .
Near the end of 2018 , the administration enacted a policy forcing tens of thousands of asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their claims to be processed , inhibiting them from getting legal assistance and rendering them vulnerable to murder and torture as they waited in Tijuana and Juárez—cities with some of the highest homicides per capita in the world .
And when COVID-19 hit America , Miller used the crisis to invoke emergency powers denying all asylum seekers , a policy he previously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ measles outbreaks a pretense .
Yet the thousands of unaccompanied children turned away were required to test negative for the virus before boarding their deportation flights , undermining the entire justification behind their deportations .
Stephen Miller didn ’ t simply leave a mess for America to clean up—he installed his ideology within a system now accustomed to buckling to his will .
Uninstalling Stephen Miller will be an endeavor that takes several years , at minimum .
Despite—or perhaps because—of Trump and Miller ’ s efforts , American support for immigration has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s agenda , implemented through bureaucratic force of will , may take longer to end than the four years he spent enacting it .
Although Miller himself will leave , the culture he helped create will likely stay for a while .
And while Trump ’ s rhetoric has backfired with the general public , GOP primary voters still prioritize immigration as an issue much more than immigration supporters .
For the former , it ’ s their most salient issue .
This dynamic means that it will be an uphill battle for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the system .

In November 2019, a former staffer from Breitbart leaked emails from 2015 in which White House advisor Stephen Miller recommended The Camp of the Saints, a book that describes immigrants as “kinky-haired, swarthy-skinned, long-despised phantoms” and “teeming ants toiling for the white man’s comfort.” Written by the late French explorer Jean Raspail, the book centers on a flotilla of impoverished Indians invading the “white world,” which seems “bent on taking revenge against itself.” The Indians, whom Raspail refers to as “grotesque little beggars from the streets of Calcutta,” are led by a feces-eating “gigantic Hindu” called “the turd eater.” The Western world lets them in, ushering in an onslaught of rape and murder.
Miller promoted the 1973 novel in an email to Breitbart staff, which became the impetus for a Breitbart article that aimed to draw parallels between Raspail’s dystopia and the migrant caravans then journeying to the Southern border of the United States. Raspail summed up his outlook on immigration in two sentences. “To let them in would destroy us. To reject them would destroy them.” Miller took the book’s lesson to heart, exclaiming that he “would be happy if not a single refugee foot ever again touched America’s soil.”
While much of the conservative intelligentsia asserts that Trump’s gains among minority voters somehow disproves the long-held allegations of bigotry directed at his administration, even voters who easily shrugged off headline-grabbing dog whistles like “very fine people on both sides” or “stand back and stand by” would be appalled by Stephen Miller’s beliefs and the extent of his influence. His implementation of an agenda that the vast majority of Americans oppose exploited our nation’s institutional vulnerabilities, disfiguring our immigration system in a way that will take years to reverse.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
As a senior advisor to the president, Miller used his position to focus on immigration while avoiding the congressional scrutiny to which agency officials are subject. Miller frequently circumvented department heads, opting instead to call lower-level staff to implement his orders, reportedly telling them things like “This is the most important thing you will do at your agency.” Without looping in cabinet secretaries, Miller would hold weekly meetings with their subordinates, occasionally helping get promotions for those who shared his beliefs. Even senior officials reported that they frequently felt torn between Miller and the actual head of their agency. Miller and his allies would go “out of their way to vilify all immigrants,” demanding press releases whenever a refugee or immigrant committed a gruesome crime. This tendency of Miller’s was underscored by his correspondence with officials at the Department of Justice (DOJ) to manufacture statistics linking immigrants to violent crime and terrorism—efforts that were the likely impetus for a misleading 2019 DOJ report claiming that immigrants now comprise 64 percent of all federal arrests, having “more than tripled,” between 1998-2018.
The report arrived at these numbers by burying the fact that 95 percent of the increases in non-citizen arrests were specifically from immigration offenses. It also neglected to mention that federal arrests comprise only 1.5 percent of total U.S. arrests, rendering the entire report moot. But since the litany of research on the topic largely contradicts Miller’s views, he and his staff had no choice but to mischaracterize the data. The report still hit the airways, with pundits citing the misleading figures in defense of the president’s restrictionist agenda.
Similarly, when the White House commissioned the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to draft a report assessing the net fiscal impact of refugees, Miller urged officials to scrub information detailing their fiscal contributions. “The President believes refugees cost more, and the results of this study shouldn’t embarrass the President,” he said. Before the administration could release Miller’s distorted report, the undoctored version was leaked to the public. The report found that from 2005 to 2014, refugees paid $63 billion more in federal, state, and local taxes than they consumed in benefits.
According to officials responsible for helping determine the maximum refugee admissions target for the year, Miller was responsible for lowering the number to 50,000—the lowest resettlement ceiling since the refugee program’s creation in 1980. Even in the years directly following the September 11 attacks, the ceiling had never dipped below 70,000. Miller worked to keep slashing refugee admissions to new lows at the end of each fiscal year. Then-Secretary of Defense James Mattis, along with other Pentagon officials, expressed grave concern that further cuts to admissions would jeopardize America’s promise to protect the Afghani and Iraqi interpreters facing violent backlash for assisting U.S. troops. “A failure to honor our commitments to those who have supported the U.S. in combat would undermine our diplomatic and military efforts,” Mattis wrote in a letter to the administration.
Miller would complain about being hamstrung by “bureaucratic inertia,” eventually convincing the president to “drain the swamp” so he could refill it with restrictionist acolytes. One source from which Miller would draw talent was the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), whose current president, Dan Stein, has warned about immigrants engaging in “competitive breeding,” and worried about “people with low IQs,” having “as many children as possible.” These comments even disgusted a young Tucker Carlson, though he now seems happy to look the other way.
Miller was also a master at erecting bureaucratic roadblocks. One particularly effective policy designed to dramatically lower the number of successful immigration petitions was a rule requiring U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to reject applications if any spaces are left blank—even when it makes no sense for an applicant to fill out that field. Instead, the applicant must write in “N/A,” as the answer for every single non-applicable question. Many applications have been declined for reasons that have nothing to do with their eligibility. For example, in the “Name in native alphabet,” section an applicant whose name in their native alphabet is the same in English must write “N/A,” or be rejected. Only “N/A,” “unknown,” or “none,” will suffice. (“NA” will result in rejection.) The “no-blanks policy,” was first weaponized in the fall of 2019 against asylum seekers, a group that often lacks access to legal counsel. The rule was then expanded to include undocumented victims and witnesses of certain crimes applying for the U visa, which enables them to communicate with police without fear of deportation. From late December to mid-January, 98 percent of U visa applications were rejected under the no blanks rule. After the first six months of implementation, the policy still resulted in the rejection of roughly half of 24,000 total applications. Had Trump been re-elected, USCIS would’ve extended the policy to green card applicants.
The expansion of the public charge rule was another one of Miller’s big wish-list items. The rule requires green card petitioners to fill out roughly 18 hours’ worth of forms and supply dozens of pages to prove that they aren’t likely to go on welfare. Under this rule, a professional earning $76,000 with a spouse and four kids may still be rejected. But even those likely to have cleared the rule would’ve been deterred by the obstacle course of new paperwork. Making the policy even more ridiculous is the fact that family sponsors are already required to demonstrate they have the means to financially support their family members if necessary.*
Miller was adept at shrouding his cruelty in boring bureaucracy, making it difficult for news outlets to cover persistently. Doug Rand, cofounder of Boundless Immigration, a company that helps immigrants obtain permanent residency and citizenship, told us that in addition to the Trump administration’s official policies, “we have no idea how many shadow directives were released behind the scenes.” Rand cites the fact that rejections for “genius”-level green cards awarded to people like nuclear scientists and Nobel Prize winners increased by 26 percentage points. “This trend couldn’t have happened by accident,” he told us.
But not all of Miller’s policies could evade the media spotlight. One such exception was the family separations under “zero tolerance,” for which Miller may be most famous. Shortly after then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions declared the administration’s zero tolerance policy of prosecuting all illegal border crossers in early 2018, stories of toddlers being ripped from their mothers’ arms dominated headlines.
The family separations were deemed so indefensible that the administration and its allies have since deflected blame, arguing that “Obama built the cages.” And while it’s true that the Obama administration built cages at the border and separated families, there are substantial differences between Miller’s policy and that of his predecessors. Under previous presidents, parents of family units were generally deprioritized for criminal prosecution if their only crime was illegal entry (although they would still be subject to civil penalties and deportation if found lacking a claim to stay). Likewise, prosecutors and adjudicators were given discretion to focus their resources on targeting smugglers and human traffickers, not people whose only crime was crossing illegally. Stephen Miller’s zero tolerance, on the other hand, required all illegal border crossers to be detained and criminally prosecuted in order to intimidate the Central American families making the trek. The separations were a feature, not a bug, of the Miller strategy. Making matters even worse, the Trump administration forced asylum-seeking families to enter illegally by blocking ports of entry where they could legally claim asylum, triggering even more separations. The administration justified the policy by claiming it didn’t have the personnel or holding space, but an OIG report proved this to be a lie.
Overall, zero tolerance resulted in over 5,000 children being separated from their parents. The government has yet to find parents of well over 600 children, 129 of whom were younger than 5 years old when they were separated. And while the policy was controversial enough for Trump to partially roll it back later that summer, it didn’t go far enough for Miller. During a White House meeting in May 2018, Miller articulated his plan of separating families going through civil court proceedings as well, including asylum hearings, which would have separated at least 25,000 additional children from their parents.
While this particular suggestion of Miller’s never came to fruition, he has succeeded in effectively shutting down asylum. Near the end of 2018, the administration enacted a policy forcing tens of thousands of asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their claims to be processed, inhibiting them from getting legal assistance and rendering them vulnerable to murder and torture as they waited in Tijuana and Juárez—cities with some of the highest homicides per capita in the world. And when COVID-19 hit America, Miller used the crisis to invoke emergency powers denying all asylum seekers, a policy he previously tried to enact using the flu and measles outbreaks a pretense. Yet the thousands of unaccompanied children turned away were required to test negative for the virus before boarding their deportation flights, undermining the entire justification behind their deportations.
Stephen Miller didn’t simply leave a mess for America to clean up—he installed his ideology within a system now accustomed to buckling to his will. Uninstalling Stephen Miller will be an endeavor that takes several years, at minimum. Despite—or perhaps because—of Trump and Miller’s efforts, American support for immigration has soared to historic highs.
Miller’s agenda, implemented through bureaucratic force of will, may take longer to end than the four years he spent enacting it. Although Miller himself will leave, the culture he helped create will likely stay for a while. And while Trump’s rhetoric has backfired with the general public, GOP primary voters still prioritize immigration as an issue much more than immigration supporters. For the former, it’s their most salient issue. This dynamic means that it will be an uphill battle for the incoming administration to restore sanity to the system.
*Correction: The article originally stated that the public charge rule was vacated, when actually it had only been enjoined in 18 states at the time of this writing


thebulwark--2020-12-17--Inside the Epically Murky ‘Epoch Times’ Ad Campaign

If you ’ ve spent any time watching videos on YouTube , you surely have seen the ads from the Epoch Times , the “ news source ” of the Falun Gong , a Chinese cult that operates out of a compound in New York state .
Many of the ads feature a handsome , nerdy-looking fella named Roman Balmakov who might otherwise be cast as a Peter Parker-type in a low-rent Spider-Man spin-off , but has instead found himself rising through the ranks of an agitprop news outlet .
In the ads he ’ s asking you to subscribe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ real news ” that the evil mainstream media has decided isn ’ t fit to print .
You know , things like : • How Americans have lost their appreciation for traditional values [ Okay , can see the value in this .
.
. ]
• The fact that Donald Trump is a brilliant leader who is being slandered by the media [ record-scratch ] • An inside look at how President Obama spied on Donald Trump in the greatest scandal in history [ wait , this is not what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The shocking investigative report on how Chinese are harvesting the organs of Falun Gong members because their god-leader—who must be referred to exclusively as Master Li—has created exercises that make Falun Gong members ’ spleens stronger than any spleens in the entire world [ wtf just happened ? ]
So yeah , maybe when the Epoch Times ads say the publication offers the “ real news ” — —they mean it with some artistic license .
The way the movie Dodgeball was based on “ a true underdog story.
” To say that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favorable would be an epochal understatement ( or if you go based on Roman ’ s weird Keanu Reeves-esque pronunciation of the outlet , an “ epic understatement ” ) .
In a recent interview with the New York Times , a former Epoch Times reporter said that the paper ’ s leadership has an “ almost messianic view ” of Trump .
Former practitioners of the Falun Gong cult told NBC that Trump is helping to bring about a “ judgment day ” that will damn the Communists to hell .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we now have two different conspiracy-addled groups who each see Trump as ushering in a Götterdämmerung .
The QAnons think Trump is breaking the Deep State and using The Storm to round up all the Satanic child pedophiles .
The Falun Gong think Trump is destroying the Chicoms .
But funnily enough , even though the QAnons and the Falun Gongs are working from different conspiracy theories , they ’ re using the same playbook .
For instance , this week the ET published an editorial call to invoke the Insurrection Act to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election and “ arrest those who have conspired to deprive the people of their rights through election fraud.
” Where we go one we go all , I guess ?
But here ’ s the thing : The QAnons aren ’ t organized enough to have their own house organ , which pretends for all the world to be a normal news outlet .
And the Falun Gongs do .
The Epoch Times has been around for two decades , but only really took off in the American consciousness over the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dogma about Prophet Trump .
At which point—by coincidence—ET was able to go from being a fringe alt-news operation to a major presence on social media .
Last year , the Epoch Times got into a spot of bother with Facebook after it was discovered that they spent more money on pro-Trump advertising on the platform than any group except the Trump campaign itself .
Which was kind of weird for a news source , right ?
In an effort to avoid further scrutiny , the Epoch Times was then caught trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by using sockpuppet accounts with super-subtle names such as “ Pure American Journalism.
” And for this , Facebook banned them .
Yet despite having some of their biggest accounts booted from the platform , they continue to drive big traffic through pages such as Epoch Times Canada and—according to a recent report from the New York Times—other linked pages such as “ America Daily , ” which has 1.1 million Facebook followers who are delivered content that runs the gamut from cat pics to COVID-19 trutherism .
Fortunately for Master Li , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems on YouTube , where its propaganda ads run and run and run and run and run .
According to the Google ads library—which requires transparency around “ election ” -related ads—Epoch has spent over $ 2 million on the platform since 2018 .
You can see the ads that were reported here .
They mostly relate to the ET ’ s breathless promotion of the Durham Report and some direct discussion of the campaign .
But other Epoch Times ads are missing from the archive thanks to a “ carve-out ” for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here ’ s a pre-roll ad that I was served on Monday of this week that doesn ’ t show up in the Google archive for ads that have run in December ( the ad is listed as having run for two days in August ) .
It features Mr .
Handsome mansplaining to his sweet , innocent lady friend about how the countries that have been hit the hardest by the pandemic are the ones with the deepest ties to the Communists .
Which , given the infection and death totals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rate , probably says something about Donald Trump ’ s administration that the Epoch Times doesn ’ t intend .
But whatever .
The point is , this ad has been running for the past few weeks , first appeared in May , and it ’ s not clear that we know how much money they have put behind it .
When I asked YouTube about this , a company representative confirmed that all the ads “ in the scope of their political ads policies ” are in the report and could not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be in the report .
¯\_ ( ツ ) _/¯ The same goes for this search ad—which lands you on an Epoch Times subscription page featuring hot endorsements from influencers such as Sean Hannity and Larry Elder and highlighting the paper ’ s work “ at the forefront of exposing problems with the FBI ’ s investigation of the Trump campaign ” —but doesn ’ t appear in the archive : This has been happening for a while .
In November , Mark Bergen of Bloomberg was served an Epoch Times ad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s political ad library on an “ election fraud ” video and was told later in the day that the ad was being removed from the video .
But that same screenshot appeared in an ad delivered to a different Twitter user four days later .
The Epoch Times has also taken its ad campaign international .
Earlier this week a Canadian Twitter user reported seeing this ad about the aforementioned organ harvest , and in this truly enjoyable fisking of the Falun Gong , Canadian YouTuber J.J. McCullough reported that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the paper unsolicited in Canada and is running ads all over YouTube in the Great White North .
While there isn ’ t any evidence that the Epoch Times is advertising on claims of voter fraud and election rigging , the “ news ” site that the ads take you to and the ET ‘ s main YouTube page are both replete with such claims .
Despite promises by YouTube that such videos would be taken down .
So in summary here is what we know : • A foreign cult that thinks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a “ news site ” that has spent at least $ 2 million on YouTube ads since 2018 , mostly in 2020 .
• This “ news site ” has called for a violent insurrection to keep Trump in power .
• We have evidence that there are additional ads running on top of the $ 2 million that has been reported , but the extent of this buy is unknown .
• This “ news ” organization has a history of using sockpuppets to avoid reporting the full extent of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Epoch Times ads may be running at an unusually high volume as there are myriad complaints of this nature on Twitter and in the comments section of the YouTube videos .
• The group behind the ads has seemingly unlimited resources and was the second-largest pro-Trump advertiser on Facebook before such ads were banned .
• They believe the stakes are a literal apocalyptic battle between good and evil .
Kind of makes you wonder just how much money this “ news ” organization really poured into the election in order to boost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes at a time when the big social media platforms are making big shows of their draconian crackdowns on political advertisers in the name of stunting “ disinformation ” and “ fake news.
” Political ads are now banned on many social media platforms and YouTube is among the few that are limiting the targeting capabilities of political ads in response to the moral panic .
But in what world does it make sense to throttle the advertising capabilities of a mayoral campaign in Dayton that ’ s trying to talk to voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fake news site run by a literal foreign cult that thinks the president is a tiny-fingered prophet ushering in the end times to spend unreported millions on their propaganda ?
Because that ’ s the world that ET has landed on .
And it ’ s working out damn well for Master Li .
Not so much for the rest of us , though .

If you’ve spent any time watching videos on YouTube, you surely have seen the ads from the Epoch Times, the “news source” of the Falun Gong, a Chinese cult that operates out of a compound in New York state.
Many of the ads feature a handsome, nerdy-looking fella named Roman Balmakov who might otherwise be cast as a Peter Parker-type in a low-rent Spider-Man spin-off, but has instead found himself rising through the ranks of an agitprop news outlet. In the ads he’s asking you to subscribe to the ET to learn about all the “real news” that the evil mainstream media has decided isn’t fit to print.
You know, things like:
The Chinese Communist Party’s dishonest track record [okay, cool . . .]
How Americans have lost their appreciation for traditional values [Okay, can see the value in this . . .]
The fact that Donald Trump is a brilliant leader who is being slandered by the media [record-scratch]
An inside look at how President Obama spied on Donald Trump in the greatest scandal in history [wait, this is not what I was . . .]
The shocking investigative report on how Chinese are harvesting the organs of Falun Gong members because their god-leader—who must be referred to exclusively as Master Li—has created exercises that make Falun Gong members’ spleens stronger than any spleens in the entire world [wtf just happened?]
So yeah, maybe when the Epoch Times ads say the publication offers the “real news”—
—they mean it with some artistic license. The way the movie Dodgeball was based on “a true underdog story.”
To say that the Epoch Times coverage of Trump is favorable would be an epochal understatement (or if you go based on Roman’s weird Keanu Reeves-esque pronunciation of the outlet, an “epic understatement”). In a recent interview with the New York Times, a former Epoch Times reporter said that the paper’s leadership has an “almost messianic view” of Trump. Former practitioners of the Falun Gong cult told NBC that Trump is helping to bring about a “judgment day” that will damn the Communists to hell.
In case you’re keeping score, we now have two different conspiracy-addled groups who each see Trump as ushering in a Götterdämmerung. The QAnons think Trump is breaking the Deep State and using The Storm to round up all the Satanic child pedophiles. The Falun Gong think Trump is destroying the Chicoms.
But funnily enough, even though the QAnons and the Falun Gongs are working from different conspiracy theories, they’re using the same playbook. For instance, this week the ET published an editorial call to invoke the Insurrection Act to force a “military audit” of the election and “arrest those who have conspired to deprive the people of their rights through election fraud.”
Where we go one we go all, I guess?
But here’s the thing: The QAnons aren’t organized enough to have their own house organ, which pretends for all the world to be a normal news outlet.
And the Falun Gongs do.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
The Epoch Times has been around for two decades, but only really took off in the American consciousness over the last two years when Master Li issued his dogma about Prophet Trump. At which point—by coincidence—ET was able to go from being a fringe alt-news operation to a major presence on social media.
Last year, the Epoch Times got into a spot of bother with Facebook after it was discovered that they spent more money on pro-Trump advertising on the platform than any group except the Trump campaign itself. Which was kind of weird for a news source, right?
In an effort to avoid further scrutiny, the Epoch Times was then caught trying to go around the transparency rules for advertising by using sockpuppet accounts with super-subtle names such as “Pure American Journalism.” And for this, Facebook banned them.
Yet despite having some of their biggest accounts booted from the platform, they continue to drive big traffic through pages such as Epoch Times Canada and—according to a recent report from the New York Times—other linked pages such as “America Daily,” which has 1.1 million Facebook followers who are delivered content that runs the gamut from cat pics to COVID-19 trutherism.
Fortunately for Master Li, the Epoch Times has had no such problems on YouTube, where its propaganda ads run and run and run and run and run.
According to the Google ads library—which requires transparency around “election”-related ads—Epoch has spent over $2 million on the platform since 2018. You can see the ads that were reported here. They mostly relate to the ET’s breathless promotion of the Durham Report and some direct discussion of the campaign.
But other Epoch Times ads are missing from the archive thanks to a “carve-out” for “news” orgs advertising on YouTube.
Here’s a pre-roll ad that I was served on Monday of this week that doesn’t show up in the Google archive for ads that have run in December (the ad is listed as having run for two days in August). It features Mr. Handsome mansplaining to his sweet, innocent lady friend about how the countries that have been hit the hardest by the pandemic are the ones with the deepest ties to the Communists.
Epoch Times Advertisement
Watch this video on YouTube
Which, given the infection and death totals in America, and our case fatality rate, probably says something about Donald Trump’s administration that the Epoch Times doesn’t intend. But whatever.
The point is, this ad has been running for the past few weeks, first appeared in May, and it’s not clear that we know how much money they have put behind it. When I asked YouTube about this, a company representative confirmed that all the ads “in the scope of their political ads policies” are in the report and could not “pinpoint” why some ads might not be in the report. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The same goes for this search ad—which lands you on an Epoch Times subscription page featuring hot endorsements from influencers such as Sean Hannity and Larry Elder and highlighting the paper’s work “at the forefront of exposing problems with the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign”—but doesn’t appear in the archive:
This has been happening for a while. In November, Mark Bergen of Bloomberg was served an Epoch Times ad that doesn’t show in Google’s political ad library on an “election fraud” video and was told later in the day that the ad was being removed from the video.
A new morning ritual: open up the latest OAN 'Trump won' YouTube video. See ad. Ask Google about it. Hear from Google later in day that they are removing ads from that video. Rinse, repeat. pic.twitter.com/EtYkNM9TwZ — Mark Bergen (@mhbergen) November 12, 2020
But that same screenshot appeared in an ad delivered to a different Twitter user four days later.
https://twitter.com/seraph_xo_/status/1328379768794968071
The Epoch Times has also taken its ad campaign international. Earlier this week a Canadian Twitter user reported seeing this ad about the aforementioned organ harvest, and in this truly enjoyable fisking of the Falun Gong, Canadian YouTuber J.J. McCullough reported that the Epoch Times is delivering hard copies of the paper unsolicited in Canada and is running ads all over YouTube in the Great White North.
While there isn’t any evidence that the Epoch Times is advertising on claims of voter fraud and election rigging, the “news” site that the ads take you to and the ET‘s main YouTube page are both replete with such claims. Despite promises by YouTube that such videos would be taken down.
So in summary here is what we know:
A foreign cult that thinks Donald Trump is on a messianic mission has a “news site” that has spent at least $2 million on YouTube ads since 2018, mostly in 2020.
This “news site” has called for a violent insurrection to keep Trump in power.
We have evidence that there are additional ads running on top of the $2 million that has been reported, but the extent of this buy is unknown.
This “news” organization has a history of using sockpuppets to avoid reporting the full extent of their ad spending.
Anecdata suggests that Epoch Times ads may be running at an unusually high volume as there are myriad complaints of this nature on Twitter and in the comments section of the YouTube videos.
The group behind the ads has seemingly unlimited resources and was the second-largest pro-Trump advertiser on Facebook before such ads were banned.
They believe the stakes are a literal apocalyptic battle between good and evil.
Kind of makes you wonder just how much money this “news” organization really poured into the election in order to boost Donald Trump.
The Falun Gong adgasm comes at a time when the big social media platforms are making big shows of their draconian crackdowns on political advertisers in the name of stunting “disinformation” and “fake news.” Political ads are now banned on many social media platforms and YouTube is among the few that are limiting the targeting capabilities of political ads in response to the moral panic.
But in what world does it make sense to throttle the advertising capabilities of a mayoral campaign in Dayton that’s trying to talk to voters about community issues, while allowing a fake news site run by a literal foreign cult that thinks the president is a tiny-fingered prophet ushering in the end times to spend unreported millions on their propaganda?
Because that’s the world that ET has landed on.
And it’s working out damn well for Master Li.
Not so much for the rest of us, though.


thebulwark--2020-12-17--Too Much Democracy Is Killing Democracy

Too Much Democracy Is Killing Democracy

Not too long ago , political scientists were concerned about the “ hollowing out ” of Western democracies .
In the United States , voter turnout in presidential election was in a steady decline for over three decades after 1960 , as the Democratic and Republican platforms were almost indistinguishable and voters were apathetic .
In Europe , the late Irish political scientist Peter Mair warned in his 2013 book that “ neo-liberal ” technocracy ruled , resulting in shrinking turnout and party membership , and demoralized partisans .
Recent years have put such concerns to rest .
Not only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often existentially so .
Numerous complaints can be made about partisanship in the United States , but not that either side lacks enthusiasm or energy—or that the two sides share an identical policy outlook .
Indeed , a candidate and a political party with real or imagined penchants for voter suppression helped mobilize voter turnout to the highest level in over a century and , moreover , received the second-highest number of votes in the history of U.S. presidential elections .
Whether or not those who care about political participation want to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their cause is irrelevant .
What matters is that the price of this un-hollowing has been far too steep , making compromise impossible and turning every election into a perceived “ Flight 93 ” event .
In fact , evidence from around the world is ambiguous about whether massive political participation is a blessing—and , conversely , whether “ hollowing out ” is necessarily a curse .
Viktor Orbán ’ s takeover in Hungary 2010 , facilitated by a deep financial crisis , led to significant backsliding : a partisan rewriting of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , court-packing , and crackdowns on civil society .
Yet , what Orbán ’ s critics sometimes miss is that his arrival in power came on the back of extremely high levels of citizen participation and engagement in elections , protests , or activism .
In comparison , Baltic states also suffered greatly from the same financial shock—in 2009 their GDP fell by over 14 percent .
Yet , as a 2015 paper by the Hungarian political scientist Béla Greskovits shows , one difference between Hungary and the Baltic democracies was that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the time the crisis hit .
As a result , there was relatively little popular resistance to bold and effective fiscal and structural reforms to address the fallout of the crisis .
Those included drastic wage and employment cuts across the public sector .
Instead of bitter partisan fights and an ascent of budding authoritarians to power , the Balts took their bitter technocratic medicine , quickly recovered , and moved on .
In contrast , the political turmoil in Hungary ushered in a highly unorthodox mix of economic policies , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funds and targeted levies on large , foreign-owned businesses , arguably slowing down the recovery—not to mention the lasting political changes enacted by Orbán .
It seems uncontroversial that better informed citizenries tend to reach better decisions over politicians and policy platforms .
Boosts to political participation driven by rising polarization and the presence of divisive personalities are not unalloyed goods if they bring low-information non-voters to the polls .
The more national politics is treated as a mass spectator sport , the harder it is for anyone to ignore it .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engaged citizenry at the time of Orbán ’ s rise to power was simply a result of an extreme rise of partisan polarization during the 2000s .
Likewise , in the United States , rising polarization—first among political elites , then among the public—has been slowing pushing turnout back up .
Earnest conspiracy theorists might have once believed that elections did not matter and that all important decisions were made by lizard people .
Political candidates like Marjorie Taylor Greene help them reconsider their political disengagement .
Or , as Wisconsin Senator Ron @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had no choice but to go along with the president ’ s conspiracies and irresponsible behavior simply because of the “ massive amounts of people Donald Trump brought into the party , many of whom have never cared about politics before.
” Needless to say , there are good reasons to doubt that this boost to political participation will have salutary effects on policy outcomes or on the health of America ’ s body politic .
Not of this should be read as a reason for restricting the right to vote or necessarily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which the votes of more knowledgeable citizens are given extra weight ) advocated by Garett Jones or Jason Brennan .
There is a great deal of value in making sure that all citizens have the option of political participation if they so choose , without having to face arbitrary or excessive hurdles .
Yet , it is an argument for a political , social , and cultural compact that makes participation by many unnecessary , in their own eyes .
A more boring politics , populated by forgettable yet basically competent figures instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great place to start .

Not too long ago, political scientists were concerned about the “hollowing out” of Western democracies. In the United States, voter turnout in presidential election was in a steady decline for over three decades after 1960, as the Democratic and Republican platforms were almost indistinguishable and voters were apathetic. In Europe, the late Irish political scientist Peter Mair warned in his 2013 book that “neo-liberal” technocracy ruled, resulting in shrinking turnout and party membership, and demoralized partisans.
Recent years have put such concerns to rest. Not only do elections seem consequential again, but often existentially so. Numerous complaints can be made about partisanship in the United States, but not that either side lacks enthusiasm or energy—or that the two sides share an identical policy outlook. Indeed, a candidate and a political party with real or imagined penchants for voter suppression helped mobilize voter turnout to the highest level in over a century and, moreover, received the second-highest number of votes in the history of U.S. presidential elections.
Whether or not those who care about political participation want to make Donald Trump and other populist figures champions of their cause is irrelevant. What matters is that the price of this un-hollowing has been far too steep, making compromise impossible and turning every election into a perceived “Flight 93” event.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
In fact, evidence from around the world is ambiguous about whether massive political participation is a blessing—and, conversely, whether “hollowing out” is necessarily a curse. Viktor Orbán’s takeover in Hungary 2010, facilitated by a deep financial crisis, led to significant backsliding: a partisan rewriting of the country’s constitution, gerrymandering, court-packing, and crackdowns on civil society. Yet, what Orbán’s critics sometimes miss is that his arrival in power came on the back of extremely high levels of citizen participation and engagement in elections, protests, or activism.
In comparison, Baltic states also suffered greatly from the same financial shock—in 2009 their GDP fell by over 14 percent. Yet, as a 2015 paper by the Hungarian political scientist Béla Greskovits shows, one difference between Hungary and the Baltic democracies was that the latter had been “hollowed out” by the time the crisis hit.
As a result, there was relatively little popular resistance to bold and effective fiscal and structural reforms to address the fallout of the crisis. Those included drastic wage and employment cuts across the public sector. Instead of bitter partisan fights and an ascent of budding authoritarians to power, the Balts took their bitter technocratic medicine, quickly recovered, and moved on. In contrast, the political turmoil in Hungary ushered in a highly unorthodox mix of economic policies, including the seizing of assets of private pension funds and targeted levies on large, foreign-owned businesses, arguably slowing down the recovery—not to mention the lasting political changes enacted by Orbán.
It seems uncontroversial that better informed citizenries tend to reach better decisions over politicians and policy platforms. Boosts to political participation driven by rising polarization and the presence of divisive personalities are not unalloyed goods if they bring low-information non-voters to the polls. The more national politics is treated as a mass spectator sport, the harder it is for anyone to ignore it. In Hungary, for example, the highly engaged citizenry at the time of Orbán’s rise to power was simply a result of an extreme rise of partisan polarization during the 2000s. Likewise, in the United States, rising polarization—first among political elites, then among the public—has been slowing pushing turnout back up.
Earnest conspiracy theorists might have once believed that elections did not matter and that all important decisions were made by lizard people. Political candidates like Marjorie Taylor Greene help them reconsider their political disengagement. Or, as Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson put it, Republican legislators have had no choice but to go along with the president’s conspiracies and irresponsible behavior simply because of the “massive amounts of people Donald Trump brought into the party, many of whom have never cared about politics before.”
Needless to say, there are good reasons to doubt that this boost to political participation will have salutary effects on policy outcomes or on the health of America’s body politic.
Not of this should be read as a reason for restricting the right to vote or necessarily for “epistocratic” reforms (in which the votes of more knowledgeable citizens are given extra weight) advocated by Garett Jones or Jason Brennan. There is a great deal of value in making sure that all citizens have the option of political participation if they so choose, without having to face arbitrary or excessive hurdles.
Yet, it is an argument for a political, social, and cultural compact that makes participation by many unnecessary, in their own eyes. A more boring politics, populated by forgettable yet basically competent figures instead of fame-craving clowns and provocateurs would be a great place to start.


thebulwark--2020-12-17--Beethoven at 250: Four Masterpieces to Celebrate the Big Day

Among the countless COVID cultural casualties has been the big Beethoven birthday bash .
The 2020 calendar is jam-packed with canceled concerts and commemorations of Ludwig van Beethoven ’ s sestercentennial .
We don ’ t know for sure the date of his birth , but we know from church records that today , December 17 , is the 250th anniversary of his baptism .
He was likely born a day or two earlier , so we can think of this as his birthday week .
In lieu of a global gala , how can we best celebrate the great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change the course of music but changed the course of history ?
I ’ m sitting alone at a desk in rural New Hampshire watching snow cover the grand pine trees and I dreamily transport myself to the concert hall : Putting on my tails and tying my white bowtie , checking over my cello and bow to make sure everything is in order before walking on stage , flipping through the music to remind myself of any tricky turns or moments of special delicacy that need attending to , the lights dimming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ starting .
Waves of earthy tones written down two centuries ago sweep over the audience and the orchestra as we are gripped , willingly or unwillingly , by the force and the magnetism of the music .
.
.
.
“ Okay Dan , enough , ” I tell myself , my charming simulation over .
It ’ s 2020 : no big concerts , no live audiences .
But as I listen to Beethoven here at my desk , the power of the music remains undiminished—and I want to tell you about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really love because I think his spell is going to work on you too .
I won ’ t tell you what these pieces should mean to you , though : Great music is great in part because it has both a collective message and infinite personal messages .
I have picked extraordinary recordings to go along with the works here , and I hope you ’ ll listen and love these as I do .
So I invite you to take a little tour with me through a few of Beethoven ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2021 will end up being your Beethoven year .
For the string quartet—an ensemble of two violins , a viola , and a cello—Beethoven wrote sixteen pieces , starting early in his career and finishing the last in 1826 , just months before his death .
The first movement of this 1806 piece , which has been a favorite since I was a kid , starts off with strange-sounding chords , extremely slow .
Mystery meets melancholy .
Then , after a minute and a half , suddenly , as only Beethoven can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we are launched into one of the greatest jaunty , upbeat movements Beethoven ever wrote .
It ’ s unabashedly fun , it ’ s lighthearted , it ’ s carefree .
A wonderful example of the almost symphonic world that he could create with just four instruments .
Speaking of symphonies , we ’ ve lately been hearing a lot about the famous Fifth , and of course everybody seems to know the Ninth , with its glorious choral finale .
But I want to take you to Symphony No .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Beethoven ever wrote with a “ program ” —that is , music that represents specific things and has a story attached to it , rather than just being “ pure ” music .
Each movement of the Sixth has a title , and I want you to listen to the last two movements , titled “ Thunder , Storm ” and then “ Shepherd ’ s song .
Cheerful and thankful feelings after the storm.
” ( Start at 34:27 in the video below . )
The storm is scary , violent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the low strings and thunder created by the percussion section .
But its tense mood dissipates rather quickly , and what follows might be single most beautiful movement in any Beethoven symphony .
The stereotypical image of a wild , crazy , manic Beethoven couldn ’ t be farther from this music .
This is gentle and warm , true peace put into music that can be heard best in the context of surviving a great storm—and finding the calm after .
If you wanted the manic and wild Beethoven , here he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but I want to focus here on the first movement .
If you listen to thirty seconds and think to yourself “ What the hell is going on here ?
” don ’ t worry , you ’ re not alone .
The piece , written in 1817-18 , long baffled listeners and was deemed totally unplayable due its immense technical difficulties .
Listen for the jarring mood shifts , the key shifts , and the aggressiveness of the volume modulations .
You ’ ll have the feeling that suddenly you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if Beethoven shifted gears so radically that the one piece ended and another began !
Don ’ t worry—it ’ s all one .
This piece can seem intimidating , but if you feel that , you ’ re in good company .
It ’ s one of the great , ambitious movements ever written for a solo instrument .
It ’ s tough to listen to—but listen a second time , then a third .
I guarantee it will resonate with you more with each successive hearing .
Beethoven composed two settings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the second , he finished late in his career , in 1824 .
He was by then completely deaf ( as he was when he wrote the Hammerklavier ) , emotionally alone , and cut off from society .
Some fine musicians I know believe the Missa Solemnis to be the greatest musical work of all time , period .
It ’ s a huge work , but I ’ m thinking about the Sanctus movement and its Benedictus , only about fifteen minutes of music , where Beethoven goes places no one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ listen to the first minute or so of the Sanctus ( at the start of the video below ) .
Can you believe any one person actually wrote this , let alone someone who was completely deaf ?
It is mind-boggling .
The main part of the Sanctus movement , the Benedictus ( starting at 4:01 in the video ) , is where Beethoven ’ s incredible ingenuity is on full display .
Like a normal mass , we have here a chorus , orchestra , and four solo singers—soprano , alto , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this movement , that ’ s not enough for Beethoven .
He needs a vehicle to rise above even the highest range of the soprano soloist , and so he selects a solo violin ( starting at 5:40 ) , giving it some of the most stunning lines ever written for an instrument playing alone in the orchestra .
The violin , in concert with the soprano but playing in a much higher range , leaves the singers earthbound as it climbs ever closer to the heavens .
This violin solo , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is Beethoven ascending to the cosmos .
We listeners—believers and nonbelievers alike—are left in awe .
Think of this as a lightly guided audio tour .
Of course there ’ s nothing exhaustive about this list of four excerpts of very different pieces , but I think when you listen you will be struck not just by the variety and depth of these works , but also by how immediately and urgently they speak to us in 2020 .
The best person to make the case for the importance of this music is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t get the year-long birthday celebrations he deserved , but maybe when your life needs a little more celebrating , he will be right there for you .

Among the countless COVID cultural casualties has been the big Beethoven birthday bash. The 2020 calendar is jam-packed with canceled concerts and commemorations of Ludwig van Beethoven’s sestercentennial. We don’t know for sure the date of his birth, but we know from church records that today, December 17, is the 250th anniversary of his baptism. He was likely born a day or two earlier, so we can think of this as his birthday week.
In lieu of a global gala, how can we best celebrate the great Bonn-born master who didn’t just change the course of music but changed the course of history?
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
I’m sitting alone at a desk in rural New Hampshire watching snow cover the grand pine trees and I dreamily transport myself to the concert hall: Putting on my tails and tying my white bowtie, checking over my cello and bow to make sure everything is in order before walking on stage, flipping through the music to remind myself of any tricky turns or moments of special delicacy that need attending to, the lights dimming, the conductor entering, the music starting. Waves of earthy tones written down two centuries ago sweep over the audience and the orchestra as we are gripped, willingly or unwillingly, by the force and the magnetism of the music. . . .
“Okay Dan, enough,” I tell myself, my charming simulation over. It’s 2020: no big concerts, no live audiences. But as I listen to Beethoven here at my desk, the power of the music remains undiminished—and I want to tell you about a few of his works that I really love because I think his spell is going to work on you too. I won’t tell you what these pieces should mean to you, though: Great music is great in part because it has both a collective message and infinite personal messages. I have picked extraordinary recordings to go along with the works here, and I hope you’ll listen and love these as I do. So I invite you to take a little tour with me through a few of Beethoven’s great pieces, and who knows—maybe 2021 will end up being your Beethoven year.
String Quartet No. 9 (Op. 59 No. 3)
For the string quartet—an ensemble of two violins, a viola, and a cello—Beethoven wrote sixteen pieces, starting early in his career and finishing the last in 1826, just months before his death. The first movement of this 1806 piece, which has been a favorite since I was a kid, starts off with strange-sounding chords, extremely slow. Mystery meets melancholy. Then, after a minute and a half, suddenly, as only Beethoven can do—hope! The slow introduction is over and we are launched into one of the greatest jaunty, upbeat movements Beethoven ever wrote. It’s unabashedly fun, it’s lighthearted, it’s carefree. A wonderful example of the almost symphonic world that he could create with just four instruments.
Beethoven - String quartet n°9 op.59 n°3 - Budapest 1951
Watch this video on YouTube
Symphony No. 6 Pastoral (Op. 68), movements IV and V
Speaking of symphonies, we’ve lately been hearing a lot about the famous Fifth, and of course everybody seems to know the Ninth, with its glorious choral finale. But I want to take you to Symphony No. 6, one of the few pieces Beethoven ever wrote with a “program”—that is, music that represents specific things and has a story attached to it, rather than just being “pure” music. Each movement of the Sixth has a title, and I want you to listen to the last two movements, titled “Thunder, Storm” and then “Shepherd’s song. Cheerful and thankful feelings after the storm.” (Start at 34:27 in the video below.) The storm is scary, violent, and dark, with brooding rumblings from the low strings and thunder created by the percussion section. But its tense mood dissipates rather quickly, and what follows might be single most beautiful movement in any Beethoven symphony. The stereotypical image of a wild, crazy, manic Beethoven couldn’t be farther from this music. This is gentle and warm, true peace put into music that can be heard best in the context of surviving a great storm—and finding the calm after.
L. van Beethoven - Symphonie n.6 und Ah! perfido
Watch this video on YouTube
Piano Sonata No. 29 Hammerklavier (Op. 106), movement I
If you wanted the manic and wild Beethoven, here he is. The so-called Hammerklavier is gargantuan, but I want to focus here on the first movement. If you listen to thirty seconds and think to yourself “What the hell is going on here?” don’t worry, you’re not alone. The piece, written in 1817-18, long baffled listeners and was deemed totally unplayable due its immense technical difficulties.
Yuja Wang @ Carnegie 2016: Beethoven Piano Sonata No. 29 'Hammerklavier'
Watch this video on YouTube
Listen for the jarring mood shifts, the key shifts, and the aggressiveness of the volume modulations. You’ll have the feeling that suddenly you’re in a different piece, as if Beethoven shifted gears so radically that the one piece ended and another began! Don’t worry—it’s all one. This piece can seem intimidating, but if you feel that, you’re in good company. It’s one of the great, ambitious movements ever written for a solo instrument. It’s tough to listen to—but listen a second time, then a third. I guarantee it will resonate with you more with each successive hearing.
Missa Solemnis (Op. 123), Sanctus
Beethoven composed two settings of the Catholic mass; this, the second, he finished late in his career, in 1824. He was by then completely deaf (as he was when he wrote the Hammerklavier), emotionally alone, and cut off from society. Some fine musicians I know believe the Missa Solemnis to be the greatest musical work of all time, period. It’s a huge work, but I’m thinking about the Sanctus movement and its Benedictus, only about fifteen minutes of music, where Beethoven goes places no one else went before or since. Just listen to the first minute or so of the Sanctus (starting at about 45:40 in the video below). Can you believe any one person actually wrote this, let alone someone who was completely deaf? It is mind-boggling.
Beethoven - Missa solemnis - Amsterdam / Klemperer
Watch this video on YouTube
The main part of the Sanctus movement, the Benedictus (starting at 49:40 in the video), is where Beethoven’s incredible ingenuity is on full display. Like a normal mass, we have here a chorus, orchestra, and four solo singers—soprano, alto, tenor, and bass. But in this movement, that’s not enough for Beethoven. He needs a vehicle to rise above even the highest range of the soprano soloist, and so he selects a solo violin (starting at 51:40), giving it some of the most stunning lines ever written for an instrument playing alone in the orchestra. The violin, in concert with the soprano but playing in a much higher range, leaves the singers earthbound as it climbs ever closer to the heavens. This violin solo, one of the great creations in music, is Beethoven ascending to the cosmos. We listeners—believers and nonbelievers alike—are left in awe.
Think of this as a lightly guided audio tour. Of course there’s nothing exhaustive about this list of four excerpts of very different pieces, but I think when you listen you will be struck not just by the variety and depth of these works, but also by how immediately and urgently they speak to us in 2020. The best person to make the case for the importance of this music is the composer himself. Beethoven didn’t get the year-long birthday celebrations he deserved, but maybe when your life needs a little more celebrating, he will be right there for you.


thebulwark--2020-12-18--The Top 10 Worst Trump-Enabling Takes of 2020

As we close out the year , it ’ s tempting but futile to compile a list of President Trump ’ s worst lies .
But reprinting all of his tweets or entire transcripts of rally speeches would defeat the point of a list .
It ’ s just what he does .
The same goes for attempting to pinpoint the grossest moments from the likes of Sean Hannity and Lou Dobbs .
It ’ s too hard to settle on just a few 2020 bad takes for the media figures who have latched onto Trump ’ s tuchus .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rebroadcast their last twelve months of programming ?
No .
Please no .
So , one has to ask : What were the worst things to lie about in 2020 , and who among those who told those lies had the most responsibility to do better ?
The first part is easy .
Lies about subjects of national importance , such as the election and COVID , rise , like pond scum , to the top .
The second part of the question takes you to people who , at least in theory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than your run-of-the-mill Proud Boy-adjacent meme-maker .
Therefore , in the spirit of holiday cheer and the impending joy that will come in slamming the door shut on 2020 , and to memorialize this remarkable age of outrageous , magical , and maniacal thinking , here are my offerings for the year ’ s worst takes from politicians and other political figures aside from Trump himself .
Let us pray we never do this again .
10 .
Before 2020 , the tenure of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross would likely have been remembered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meetings and even during Trump ’ s speeches , or for defending Trump ’ s steel tariffs by holding up a can of soup on television .
But in January , Ross told Fox Business host and resident conspiracy theorist Maria Bartiromo that the coronavirus might help job creation .
Although he cautioned he didn ’ t want to take a “ victory lap , ” something no one was suggesting , he stated , “ It ’ s another risk factor that people need to take into account .
So , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of jobs to North America , some to the U.S. , probably some to Mexico as well.
” 9 .
Maine Sen. Susan Collins expressed various degrees of concern about Donald Trump throughout his presidency—while somehow managing to support him with her votes every step of the way .
In February , during the impeachment trial , Collins voted to acquit Trump , justifying her decision this way in an interview with CBS News : “ I believe that the president has learned from this case ” and that Trump “ will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Which he , of course , did not and was not .
When asked about Collins ’ s comments , Trump reiterated that he did nothing wrong and that the conversation with the Ukrainian president during which Trump solicited dirt on Joe Biden had been a “ perfect call.
” 8 .
Back in April , White House advisor and MBS-texting pal Jared Kusher beamed into Fox & Friends to tout his father-in-law ’ s response to COVID as a “ great success story.
” Kushner assured viewers , “ I think you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country should be back to normal , and the hope is by July , the country is really rocking again.
” Close , Jared .
If only you were talking July 2021 .
7 .
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was willing to give COVID more time than Kushner to disappear , attributing its existence not to medical reasons but to political ones .
On July 22 , he vowed : 6 .
The next take technically occurred in 2018 but came back to bite South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham in the backside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Just ask the woman who made this list . )
When Republicans were refusing to grant President Obama ’ s Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland a hearing because , according to them , it would be wrong to consider confirming a nominee in the run-up to a presidential election , Graham said : Democrats indeed did get their chance to use Graham ’ s words against him in 2020 , after Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away on September 18 , leading to the quick nomination of Amy Coney Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee , supported immediately proceeding to her confirmation .
When asked about his inconsistency , he cited Justice Brett Kavanaugh ’ s 2018 controversial confirmation hearings and said , “ The rules have changed , as far as I ’ m concerned.
” That ’ s right .
If people are mean to you , there are automatic take-backsies on all political promises .
Look it up .
5 .
Kayleigh McEnany—the Top Tribune of Trumpism , White House Press Secretary , Trump Campaign Advisor , and catch-all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new levels of toadyism while mouthing Trump ’ s lies about the election .
Earlier this month , citing the same pseudoscientific nonsense used by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton , McEnany proclaimed to the masses that the chances of Trump losing key swing states were “ one in a quadrillion to the 4th power.
” ( Conundrum of the Trump era : Who is worse ?
The person who comes up with the ridiculous lie or the one who sprints to the camera to champion it ?
Hmm .
A tree falling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Evil or stupid ?
We ’ ll never know . )
McEnany defended the insane computation to none other than Sean Hannity , beginning her argument by telling the audience how “ eye-opening and truthful ” it was .
( Which , by the way , is definitely something somebody would say who would never , ever lie to get themselves a plum gig with Donald Trump . )
McEnany elaborated : “ For President Trump to be ahead as far as he was at 3 a.m. in these four states—Michigan , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote to swing by as much as it did , the probability of that in one state is 1 in 1 quadrillion .
That ’ s one , comma , fifteen zeros .
To happen in all four , it ’ s one , comma , fifteen zeros to the fourth power.
” Commas , zeros , powers !
Case closed !
Someone ought to stop her before she throws out an elbow waving more papers around or she clocks dear ol ’ Lesley Stahl with a binder full of something or other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McEnany .
4 .
Sometimes it ’ s not what you say but how you say it that bumps you into the bad-take hall of fame .
Admittedly , it ’ s hard to claim that official Donald Trump Jr. girlfriend-slash-Trump campaign advisor Kimberly Guilfoyle has any real power .
Still , we all deserve to relive the most unintentionally hilarious political moment of 2020 .
In August , MAGA ’ s favorite former Fox News leg-chair occupant delivered an unforgettable speech at the Republican National Convention that shall forever and always remain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all things Trump .
After some par-for-the-course mendacity , like referring to “ Biden , Harris , and the rest of the Socialists , ” she yelled , “ President Trump believes in you !
He emancipates and lifts you up to live your American Dream ” and warned Republicans not to let the Democrats “ kill future generations because they told you and brainwashed you and fed you lies that you weren ’ t good enough.
” Then came her big finish that truly must be watched to appreciate all its mortifying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lieutenant colonel and former Florida congressman Allen West failed his way into becoming the chairman of the Republican Party of Texas .
Earlier this month , upon learning of the U.S. Supreme Court ’ s rejection of Texas Attorney General Paxton ’ s lawsuit to invalidate votes in Michigan , Pennsylvania , Wisconsin , and Georgia , West offered an epically bad take : He issued a statement on state party letterhead that suggested that secession was in order .
“ This decision will have far-reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution [ sic ] .
” 2 .
Among the many efforts from flunkies attempting to depict Trump in a more dignified manner than he deserves , the op-ed published on November 7 in the Wall Street Journal by former OMB Director and White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney stands out for its monumental wrongness .
The op-ed was titled , “ If He Loses , Trump Will Concede Gracefully.
” But shortly before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Press had called the election for Joe Biden .
Which is to say , Mulvaney ’ s take had already passed its expiration date when it was published .
Soon it had spoiled .
Eventually it had gone quite rancid .
As of today , Trump still has not conceded gracefully .
And no one who has truthfully observed him over the last four years would say that he ever will .
But yeah , the WSJ will take submissions from anyone these days .
See the next entry .
1 .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pence .
Given his political stature , the rank deception it contained , and his choice of placement for his carefully crafted horse excrement , this was an easy call .
Pence ’ s June 16 , 2020 Wall Street Journal op-ed titled “ There Isn ’ t a Coronavairus Second Wave ” admonished the big , bad media for its pandemic “ panic ” and said the administration ’ s actions were a “ cause for celebration , not the media ’ s fear mongering.
” On the day of his op-ed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported to have died from COVID-19 .
Within a week , the rate of hospitalizations began rising again , and the daily national death toll was back up over 1,000 .
And of course now , as we near the end of the year , the death toll has risen to new highs , with some 3,000 Americans reported dead each day , and the total number felled by the virus now above 310,000 .
So , who is celebrating this wonderful Trump-Pence achievement ?
No one outside of the White House superspreader @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right .
Happy New Year !
2021 can ’ t come soon enough .

As we close out the year, it’s tempting but futile to compile a list of President Trump’s worst lies. Reprinting all of his tweets or entire transcripts of rally speeches would defeat the point of a list. It’s just what he does.
The same goes for attempting to pinpoint the grossest moments from the likes of Sean Hannity and Lou Dobbs. It’s too hard to settle on just a few 2020 bad takes for the media figures who have latched onto Trump’s tuchus. What are you going to do? Rebroadcast their last twelve months of programming? No. Please no.
So, one has to ask: What were the worst things to lie about in 2020, and who among those who told those lies had the most responsibility to do better? The first part is easy. Lies about subjects of national importance, such as the election and COVID, rise, like pond scum, to the top. The second part of the question takes you to people who, at least in theory, have more power at their disposal than your run-of-the-mill Proud Boy-adjacent meme-maker.
Therefore, in the spirit of holiday cheer and the impending joy that will come in slamming the door shut on 2020, and to memorialize this remarkable age of outrageous, magical, and maniacal thinking, here are my offerings for the year’s worst takes from politicians and other political figures aside from Trump himself.
Let us pray we never do this again.
The Finalists
10. Before 2020, the tenure of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross would likely have been remembered for his tendency to fall asleep during meetings and even during Trump’s speeches, or for defending Trump’s steel tariffs by holding up a can of soup on television. But in January, Ross told Fox Business host and resident conspiracy theorist Maria Bartiromo that the coronavirus might help job creation. Although he cautioned he didn’t want to take a “victory lap,” something no one was suggesting, he stated, “It’s another risk factor that people need to take into account. So, I think it will help accelerate the return of jobs to North America, some to the U.S., probably some to Mexico as well.”
9. Maine Sen. Susan Collins expressed various degrees of concern about Donald Trump throughout his presidency—while somehow managing to support him with her votes every step of the way. In February, during the impeachment trial, Collins voted to acquit Trump, justifying her decision this way in an interview with CBS News: “I believe that the president has learned from this case” and that Trump “will be much more cautious in the future.” Which he, of course, did not and was not. When asked about Collins’s comments, Trump reiterated that he did nothing wrong and that the conversation with the Ukrainian president during which Trump solicited dirt on Joe Biden had been a “perfect call.”
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
8. Back in April, White House advisor and MBS-texting pal Jared Kusher beamed into Fox & Friends to tout his father-in-law’s response to COVID as a “great success story.” Kushner assured viewers, “I think you will see by June a lot of the country should be back to normal, and the hope is by July, the country is really rocking again.” Close, Jared. If only you were talking July 2021.
7. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was willing to give COVID more time than Kushner to disappear, attributing its existence not to medical reasons but to political ones. On July 22, he vowed:
If it ends up that Biden wins in November—I hope he doesn’t; I don’t think he will; but if he does—I guarantee you, the week after the election, suddenly all those Democratic governors, all those Democratic mayors, will say, “Everything’s magically better. Go back to work, go back to school.” Suddenly, the problems are solved; you won’t even have to wait for Biden to be sworn in. All they’ll need is election day, and suddenly their willingness to just destroy people’s lives and livelihoods, they will have accomplished their task. That’s wrong, it’s cynical, and we shouldn’t be a part of it.
“Cynical” huh? Yeah, that’s a word for it.
6. The next take technically occurred in 2018 but came back to bite South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham in the backside in 2020, so it counts. (Just ask the woman who made this list.) When Republicans were refusing to grant President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland a hearing because, according to them, it would be wrong to consider confirming a nominee in the run-up to a presidential election, Graham said:
I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say, “Lindsey Graham said, ‘Let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination.’” And you could use my words against me, and you’d be absolutely right.
Democrats indeed did get their chance to use Graham’s words against him in 2020, after Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away on September 18, leading to the quick nomination of Amy Coney Barrett. Graham, in his capacity as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, supported immediately proceeding to her confirmation.
When asked about his inconsistency, he cited Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s 2018 controversial confirmation hearings and said, “The rules have changed, as far as I’m concerned.” That’s right. If people are mean to you, there are automatic take-backsies on all political promises. Look it up.
5. Kayleigh McEnany—the Top Tribune of Trumpism, White House Press Secretary, Trump Campaign Advisor, and catch-all Surrogate of Whatever Gets Her on TV—unlocked new levels of toadyism while mouthing Trump’s lies about the election. Earlier this month, citing the same pseudoscientific nonsense used by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, McEnany proclaimed to the masses that the chances of Trump losing key swing states were “one in a quadrillion to the 4th power.” (Conundrum of the Trump era: Who is worse? The person who comes up with the ridiculous lie or the one who sprints to the camera to champion it? Hmm. A tree falling in the forest. Chicken, egg. Evil or stupid? We’ll never know.)
McEnany defended the insane computation to none other than Sean Hannity, beginning her argument by telling the audience how “eye-opening and truthful” it was. (Which, by the way, is definitely something somebody would say who would never, ever lie to get themselves a plum gig with Donald Trump.) McEnany elaborated: “For President Trump to be ahead as far as he was at 3 a.m. in these four states—Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia—and for the vote to swing by as much as it did, the probability of that in one state is 1 in 1 quadrillion. That’s one, comma, fifteen zeros. To happen in all four, it’s one, comma, fifteen zeros to the fourth power.”
Commas, zeros, powers! Case closed! Someone ought to stop her before she throws out an elbow waving more papers around or she clocks dear ol’ Lesley Stahl with a binder full of something or other.
Dual dishonors go to Paxton and McEnany.
4. Sometimes it’s not what you say but how you say it that bumps you into the bad-take hall of fame. Admittedly, it’s hard to claim that official Donald Trump Jr. girlfriend-slash-Trump campaign advisor Kimberly Guilfoyle has any real power. Still, we all deserve to relive the most unintentionally hilarious political moment of 2020.
In August, MAGA’s favorite former Fox News leg-chair occupant delivered an unforgettable speech at the Republican National Convention that shall forever and always remain unmatched in its disturbingly unbridled enthusiasm for all things Trump. After some par-for-the-course mendacity, like referring to “Biden, Harris, and the rest of the Socialists,” she yelled, “President Trump believes in you! He emancipates and lifts you up to live your American Dream” and warned Republicans not to let the Democrats “kill future generations because they told you and brainwashed you and fed you lies that you weren’t good enough.” Then came her big finish that truly must be watched to appreciate all its mortifying grandeur.
Kim Guilfoyle full remarks at 2020 Republican National Convention
Watch this video on YouTube
3. Retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and former Florida congressman Allen West failed his way into becoming the chairman of the Republican Party of Texas. Earlier this month, upon learning of the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection of Texas Attorney General Paxton’s lawsuit to invalidate votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Georgia, West offered an epically bad take: He issued a statement on state party letterhead that suggested that secession was in order. “This decision will have far-reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic,” West said. “Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution [sic].”
2. Among the many efforts from flunkies attempting to depict Trump in a more dignified manner than he deserves, the op-ed published on November 7 in the Wall Street Journal by former OMB Director and White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney stands out for its monumental wrongness. The op-ed was titled, “If He Loses, Trump Will Concede Gracefully.” But shortly before the piece was rushed online, the Associated Press had called the election for Joe Biden. Which is to say, Mulvaney’s take had already passed its expiration date when it was published. Soon it had spoiled. Eventually it had gone quite rancid.
As of today, Trump still has not conceded gracefully. And no one who has truthfully observed him over the last four years would say that he ever will. But yeah, the WSJ will take submissions from anyone these days. See the next entry.
1. The number-one dishonor goes to Vice President Mike Pence. Given his political stature, the rank deception it contained, and his choice of placement for his carefully crafted horse excrement, this was an easy call. Pence’s June 16, 2020 Wall Street Journal op-ed titled “There Isn’t a Coronavairus Second Wave” admonished the big, bad media for its pandemic “panic” and said the administration’s actions were a “cause for celebration, not the media’s fear mongering.”
On the day of his op-ed’s publication, 769 Americans were reported to have died from COVID-19. Within a week, the rate of hospitalizations began rising again, and the daily national death toll was back up over 1,000. And of course now, as we near the end of the year, the death toll has risen to new highs, with some 3,000 Americans reported dead each day, and the total number felled by the virus now above 310,000.
So, who is celebrating this wonderful Trump-Pence achievement? No one outside of the White House superspreader Christmas parties? Ah. Sounds about right.
Happy New Year! 2021 can’t come soon enough.


thebulwark--2020-12-18--Has the European Central Bank Been Handing Out Illegal Bailouts?

The German framers of the Treaty of Lisbon , which governs the way the Euro area is supposed to operate , must be beside themselves as the European Central Bank ( ECB ) flagrantly flouts the spirit , if not the letter , of that treaty .
By so doing , the ECB is putting itself on a collision course with the German Constitutional Court .
Even before the ECB ’ s latest round of monetary policy largesse , the court expressed concerns that the bank had exceeded its legal remit , and there ’ s every reason to think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ following the ECB ’ s new round of monetary easing .
At the time of its drafting , largely to assuage German concerns , the Treaty of Lisbon included two articles aimed at precluding reckless budget behavior in the Eurozone , dissuading free riders from living beyond their means and expecting the more fiscally responsible governments to save them .
Article 123 precluded the ECB from direct government deficit financing .
Article 125 precluded the ECB from bailing out any individual member country .
Tim Alberta on the Fear That Binds Us On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alberta joins Charlie Sykes to discuss his recent item about the 2020 election , and how ... Over the past decade , despite the treaty ’ s strictures against ECB government financing , the hallmark of the ECB ’ s monetary policy has been its massive government bond buying programs .
Between 2009 and 2019 , the ECB increased its balance sheet by a staggering $ 2.5 trillion .
Then , in response to the COVID-19 pandemic , it doubled that amount in just the past nine months .
To avoid the charge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country ’ s budget deficit , the ECB has been careful to restrict its bond purchases to the secondary rather than the primary market—i.e .
from existing bondholders rather than directly from the governments .
Similarly , until recently , the ECB was careful to buy all of its member countries ’ bonds in direct proportion to their relative ECB capital contribution .
That way the letter , if not the spirit , of the Lisbon Treaty was respected , and no individual member state got special treatment .
In response to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steps that seem to violate both the spirit and the letter of the treaty .
Not only has the ECB dramatically expanded the size of its government bond buying program , but it also now feels free to buy whatever quantity of an individual country ’ s bonds are needed to keep that country ’ s borrowing costs low regardless of that country ’ s ECB capital contribution .
The ECB ’ s support of the Italian economy offers the most striking illustration of its disregard for the Lisbon Treaty .
As a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s public finances are on an unsustainable path .
Its budget deficit has ballooned to around 12 percent of GDP while its public-debt-to-GDP ratio has skyrocketed to 160 percent , its highest level in the past 150 years .
Even more worryingly , this ratio is bound to increase further since Italy will have great difficulty in reducing its budget deficit while stuck in the Euro .
Contrary to the Lisbon Treaty ’ s spirit and despite the dismal state of Italy ’ s public finances , the ECB has been effectively bailing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Italian bonds in the secondary market , which in some months have been equal to the Italian government ’ s gross borrowing needs .
It has also been sending the market the implicit message that the ECB stands ready to buy as many Italian bonds as are needed to keep Italian interest rate spreads low .
This has led to a remarkable situation : Italian public finances are patently unsustainable , yet the government can now at a zero interest rate .
In December 2018 , the German Constitutional Court sent shivers through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ view that the ECB had been exceeding its mandate and that the German Bundesbank might have been violating German law by participating in the ECB ’ s bond buying program .
But the ECB has continued its monetary policy activism undeterred .
It ’ s likely only a matter of time before the court once again challenges the legality of the ECB ’ s and the Bundesbank ’ s activities .
If the court had problems with the ECB ’ s bond buying program in 2018 , how could it look more favorably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
And if the ECB ’ s bond buying program can ’ t bail out Italy because the Bundesbank can ’ t participate , who will ?

The German framers of the Treaty of Lisbon, which governs the way the Euro area is supposed to operate, must be beside themselves as the European Central Bank (ECB) flagrantly flouts the spirit, if not the letter, of that treaty.
By so doing, the ECB is putting itself on a collision course with the German Constitutional Court. Even before the ECB’s latest round of monetary policy largesse, the court expressed concerns that the bank had exceeded its legal remit, and there’s every reason to think that it has become even more uncomfortable following the ECB’s new round of monetary easing.
At the time of its drafting, largely to assuage German concerns, the Treaty of Lisbon included two articles aimed at precluding reckless budget behavior in the Eurozone, dissuading free riders from living beyond their means and expecting the more fiscally responsible governments to save them. Article 123 precluded the ECB from direct government deficit financing. Article 125 precluded the ECB from bailing out any individual member country. Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
Over the past decade, despite the treaty’s strictures against ECB government financing, the hallmark of the ECB’s monetary policy has been its massive government bond buying programs. Between 2009 and 2019, the ECB increased its balance sheet by a staggering $2.5 trillion. Then, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, it doubled that amount in just the past nine months.
To avoid the charge that it was directly financing a member country’s budget deficit, the ECB has been careful to restrict its bond purchases to the secondary rather than the primary market—i.e. from existing bondholders rather than directly from the governments. Similarly, until recently, the ECB was careful to buy all of its member countries’ bonds in direct proportion to their relative ECB capital contribution. That way the letter, if not the spirit, of the Lisbon Treaty was respected, and no individual member state got special treatment.
In response to the pandemic, the ECB has taken further steps that seem to violate both the spirit and the letter of the treaty. Not only has the ECB dramatically expanded the size of its government bond buying program, but it also now feels free to buy whatever quantity of an individual country’s bonds are needed to keep that country’s borrowing costs low regardless of that country’s ECB capital contribution.
The ECB’s support of the Italian economy offers the most striking illustration of its disregard for the Lisbon Treaty. As a result of the pandemic, Italy’s public finances are on an unsustainable path. Its budget deficit has ballooned to around 12 percent of GDP while its public-debt-to-GDP ratio has skyrocketed to 160 percent, its highest level in the past 150 years. Even more worryingly, this ratio is bound to increase further since Italy will have great difficulty in reducing its budget deficit while stuck in the Euro.
Contrary to the Lisbon Treaty’s spirit and despite the dismal state of Italy’s public finances, the ECB has been effectively bailing Italy out by buying huge quantities of Italian bonds in the secondary market, which in some months have been equal to the Italian government’s gross borrowing needs. It has also been sending the market the implicit message that the ECB stands ready to buy as many Italian bonds as are needed to keep Italian interest rate spreads low. This has led to a remarkable situation: Italian public finances are patently unsustainable, yet the government can now at a zero interest rate.
In December 2018, the German Constitutional Court sent shivers through international financial markets when it expressed the view that the ECB had been exceeding its mandate and that the German Bundesbank might have been violating German law by participating in the ECB’s bond buying program.