alternet--2020-11-29--Here's the real reason Trump allies are floating a Fox News competitor

The notion of Donald Trump `` creating '' a new `` news network , '' as his allies keep vaguely threatening , is a pipe dream .
It 's not going to happen .
It would require enormous amounts of money he does n't have , and it would require work .
If the so-called Trump administration has taught us anything , it is that Donald Trump can not stand doing work .
He likes people praising him , and he likes golf .
Time spent reading , or planning , or attending meetings is time not being spent polishing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and does not happen .
Trump has shown obsessive interest in exactly one subject outside of himself , and that is interior decorating .
The man has opinions on drapes and what color they should be ; if he were to head up a network on anything , it would be a network featuring Donald Trump 's Home Decorating Tips .
And given that every episode of every show would consist solely of Donald telling someone to paint something gold , the viewership might be a bit ... limited .
That said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wealthy Trump-adjacent conservatives are scoping out the creation of a new conservative news network to challenge Fox .
The stories are always the same : Donald Trump 's enablers and supporters are outraged , positively outraged , by Fox News slip-ups in which cold , hard reality manages to make it to airwaves .
They did n't become Donald Trump supporters to hear about the effectiveness of masks , or come face-to-face with Electoral College numbers that suggest Dear Leader is not , in fact , going to be able to continue Dear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Journal brings us the latest entry in the saga , a piece reporting that a Trump-supporting actual rich dude 's private equity firm had been probing whether to acquire pro-Trump outfit `` Newsmax TV , '' the video version of one of the more notorious conspiracy websites on the conservative internets .
This comes after Rich Dude Company had previously set its sights on the absolutely batshit insane conspiracy network OANN , a QAnon-level den of crackpottism that has seen heavy promotion by Trump during the periods when Trump is angriest at Fox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does n't have anything in particular to do with Trump , mind you .
This is a conservative project that just happens to be spearheaded by the sort of people that admire Donald Trump and Donald Trump 's own devotion to propaganda , and they want themselves a taste .
Again : A Donald Trump news network ?
Not going to happen .
An archconservative conspiracy network that Donald Trump licenses his name to , as if the news were a mail-order steak ?
Mayb—yeah , no .
He would demand a fortune @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compete with Fox News is not going to be so well-funded as to be able to afford Donald 's special brand of cash-siphoning .
What the continued murmurs around a new `` conservative '' Fox competitor suggests , though , is that wealthy conservatives have learned at least one big lesson from the Trump era , and they are very eager to capitalize on it .
Donald Trump 's campaign , administration , reelection bid and subsequent whine-fest have proven , conclusively , that there is a massive American market for straight-up propaganda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now angry enough at the normal , everyday wounds inflicted by life and the news cycle that they are all but demanding to be given hoaxes instead .
This is n't the bending of reality that Fox News hosts eased audiences into over two decades , with its inside language and large classroom-borrowed chalkboards describing tenuous-to-imaginary links between designated enemies ; what Trump , his parade of press secretaries , spokescreatures , Cabinet members and hangers-on proved was that even government figures could lie , brazenly and outright , and allied conservatives would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
It is now something akin to a cult , in which all involved likely know the difference between truth and fiction , but insist on adhering to the fictional versions out of sheer spite .
To you and I , this sounds like a problem .
To a wealthy media conservative , this is the stuff that makes eyeballs turn to dollar signs .
The Americans who gathered themselves around Trump , as movement , are self-selected to be the most gullible—willingly gullible !
—people in the nation .
These are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Glenn Beck , Alex Jones , and other conservative linchpins have turned into steady paychecks , and who still come back for more .
These people are not poor .
These people are obsessively sectarian , and make decisions not just over products , but over which dimension they choose to inhabit , based on who waves the proper flag and how shamelessly they do it .
These conservatives are an advertiser 's dream audience , and absolutely everybody in conservative media wants a piece of them .
One of the more defining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the advertising that is invariably attached to it .
Reading a far-conservative website or listening to a far-right host inevitably means being exposed to a barrage of specifically conspiracy-minded products sold with the language of a hundred doomsdays to come .
Buy gold , yes , but also this survival food or this protein shake concoction .
Purchase `` tactical '' flashlights , or an array of other products all themed around something-something-guns .
It all inevitably decays into being added to mailing lists in which the names of top conservative hosts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ products one can imagine .
Short version : Conservatism has carefully bred itself into a movement that will believe anything and everything , and while that may be a disaster for the country , to conservative advertisers this is truly a new golden age .
You can do anything and these people will still latch on to you .
Forget the controversy about wearing masks or not wearing masks during a deadly nationwide pandemic .
The reason wealthy conservatives are rushing to create a new , even farther-right version of Fox News is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who would eagerly let you harvest their kidneys if you told them it was to defeat `` antifa . ''
American flags ?
We 've sold the hell out of American flags , everyone now has six of them .
But now there 's a new American flag , and it 's blue , or it 's yellow , or it has Trump 's orange mug painted onto it .
You 're not a real conservative unless you buy twelve of those too .
For certain , there is an obsession in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But it 's not about patriotism .
It 's not even about conservatism .
It 's about good old-fashioned profit .
It 's about finding the motherlode of American gullibles , people who will buy anything , and selling it to them .
That 's why Rich Guy Equity Group has been combing the land looking for entry points into the land of Conservative Conspiracy Television .
It 's not because the man or like-minded allies are just that devoted to Donald Trump .
Donald could be eaten by a Florida gator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the `` movement '' would no more tap the brakes than they did when famous Important Conservative Herman Cain died of the pandemic illness he and his band of merry grifters had insisted was little more than a conspiracy against them .
In this new version , conservative media is not about ideology .
It ca n't be—not when the ideology shifts from week to week in accordance with whatever new thing must now be held up as enemy .
What Newsmax TV or OANN offers is a news `` casino '' promising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to empty their pockets .
The new conservative media is about selling a screaming adrenaline rush so cathartic that you need a special pillow afterward to sleep right .
It 's an expensive pillow , by God , but it 's the only one left not infested with `` antifa . ''
You ca n't put a price on that .

The notion of Donald Trump "creating" a new "news network," as his allies keep vaguely threatening, is a pipe dream. It's not going to happen. It would require enormous amounts of money he doesn't have, and it would require work. If the so-called Trump administration has taught us anything, it is that Donald Trump cannot stand doing work. He likes people praising him, and he likes golf. Time spent reading, or planning, or attending meetings is time not being spent polishing his boots or his golf clubs, and does not happen. Trump has shown obsessive interest in exactly one subject outside of himself, and that is interior decorating. The man has opinions on drapes and what color they should be; if he were to head up a network on anything, it would be a network featuring Donald Trump's Home Decorating Tips.
And given that every episode of every show would consist solely of Donald telling someone to paint something gold, the viewership might be a bit ... limited.
That said, it does seem to be true that wealthy Trump-adjacent conservatives are scoping out the creation of a new conservative news network to challenge Fox. The stories are always the same: Donald Trump's enablers and supporters are outraged, positively outraged, by Fox News slip-ups in which cold, hard reality manages to make it to airwaves. They didn't become Donald Trump supporters to hear about the effectiveness of masks, or come face-to-face with Electoral College numbers that suggest Dear Leader is not, in fact, going to be able to continue Dear Leadering much longer.
The Wall Street Journalbrings us the latest entry in the saga, a piece reporting that a Trump-supporting actual rich dude's private equity firm had been probing whether to acquire pro-Trump outfit "Newsmax TV," the video version of one of the more notorious conspiracy websites on the conservative internets. This comes after Rich Dude Company had previously set its sights on the absolutely batshit insane conspiracy network OANN, a QAnon-level den of crackpottism that has seen heavy promotion by Trump during the periods when Trump is angriest at Fox News for the aforementioned slip-ups.
This doesn't have anything in particular to do with Trump, mind you. This is a conservative project that just happens to be spearheaded by the sort of people that admire Donald Trump and Donald Trump's own devotion to propaganda, and they want themselves a taste.
Again: A Donald Trump news network? Not going to happen. An archconservative conspiracy network that Donald Trump licenses his name to, as if the news were a mail-order steak? Mayb—yeah, no. He would demand a fortune, and any new startup looking to compete with Fox News is not going to be so well-funded as to be able to afford Donald's special brand of cash-siphoning.
What the continued murmurs around a new "conservative" Fox competitor suggests, though, is that wealthy conservatives have learned at least one big lesson from the Trump era, and they are very eager to capitalize on it. Donald Trump's campaign, administration, reelection bid and subsequent whine-fest have proven, conclusively, that there is a massive American market for straight-up propaganda. Literal fake news.
Conservatives are now angry enough at the normal, everyday wounds inflicted by life and the news cycle that they are all but demanding to be given hoaxes instead. This isn't the bending of reality that Fox News hosts eased audiences into over two decades, with its inside language and large classroom-borrowed chalkboards describing tenuous-to-imaginary links between designated enemies; what Trump, his parade of press secretaries, spokescreatures, Cabinet members and hangers-on proved was that even government figures could lie, brazenly and outright, and allied conservatives would not just accept it but eagerly celebrate it. It is now something akin to a cult, in which all involved likely know the difference between truth and fiction, but insist on adhering to the fictional versions out of sheer spite.
To you and I, this sounds like a problem. To a wealthy media conservative, this is the stuff that makes eyeballs turn to dollar signs. The Americans who gathered themselves around Trump, as movement, are self-selected to be the most gullible—willingly gullible!—people in the nation. These are the people Breitbart, Tucker Carlson, Glenn Beck, Alex Jones, and other conservative linchpins have turned into steady paychecks, and who still come back for more.
These people are not poor. These people are obsessively sectarian, and make decisions not just over products, but over which dimension they choose to inhabit, based on who waves the proper flag and how shamelessly they do it.
These conservatives are an advertiser's dream audience, and absolutely everybody in conservative media wants a piece of them.
One of the more defining features of conservative media is, ahem, the advertising that is invariably attached to it. Reading a far-conservative website or listening to a far-right host inevitably means being exposed to a barrage of specifically conspiracy-minded products sold with the language of a hundred doomsdays to come. Buy gold, yes, but also this survival food or this protein shake concoction. Purchase "tactical" flashlights, or an array of other products all themed around something-something-guns. It all inevitably decays into being added to mailing lists in which the names of top conservative hosts are attached to the seediest, scummiest-seeming products one can imagine.
Short version: Conservatism has carefully bred itself into a movement that will believe anything and everything, and while that may be a disaster for the country, to conservative advertisers this is truly a new golden age. You can do anything and these people will still latch on to you.
Forget the controversy about wearing masks or not wearing masks during a deadly nationwide pandemic. The reason wealthy conservatives are rushing to create a new, even farther-right version of Fox News is because Trump discovered an audience of Americans who would eagerly let you harvest their kidneys if you told them it was to defeat "antifa."
American flags? We've sold the hell out of American flags, everyone now has six of them. But now there's a new American flag, and it's blue, or it's yellow, or it has Trump's orange mug painted onto it. You're not a real conservative unless you buy twelve of those too.
For certain, there is an obsession in the far-right with creating the next Fox News. But it's not about patriotism. It's not even about conservatism. It's about good old-fashioned profit. It's about finding the motherlode of American gullibles, people who will buy anything, and selling it to them.
Bleeding. Them. Dry.
That's why Rich Guy Equity Group has been combing the land looking for entry points into the land of Conservative Conspiracy Television. It's not because the man or like-minded allies are just that devoted to Donald Trump. Donald could be eaten by a Florida gator on the back nine next week and the "movement" would no more tap the brakes than they did when famous Important Conservative Herman Cain died of the pandemic illness he and his band of merry grifters had insisted was little more than a conspiracy against them.
In this new version, conservative media is not about ideology. It can't be—not when the ideology shifts from week to week in accordance with whatever new thing must now be held up as enemy. What Newsmax TV or OANN offers is a news "casino" promising mega-jackpots that never appear to audiences primed to empty their pockets.
The new conservative media is about selling a screaming adrenaline rush so cathartic that you need a special pillow afterward to sleep right. It's an expensive pillow, by God, but it's the only one left not infested with "antifa."
You can't put a price on that.


alternet--2020-11-29--Donald Trump spent $3 million on Wisconsin recount — only for Joe Biden to gain 132 more votes

The re-election campaign of soon-to-be-former President Donald Trump spent $ 3 million for a recount of votes in Wisconsin in the hopes of throwing out tens of thousands of absentee and early ballots cast in support of President-elect Joe Biden .
But Trump 's $ 3 million dollar gambit has n't paid off .
In fact , it actually increased Biden 's lead over him by 132 votes .
As Slate explains , Trump was specifically asking for recounts in Dane and Milwaukee Counties , two Democratic strongholds where Biden beat Trump by over 360,000 votes total .
`` By @ @ @ @ @ @ @ County , Biden 's total had increased by 257 votes , from 317,270 to 317,527 .
Trump also saw an increase in votes , boosting his total by 125 votes to 134,482 , '' Slate wrote , showing how Biden ended up even further ahead .
The new votes were originally excluded from the county 's total due to `` human error . ''
`` In Dane County , Trump has gained 68 votes over Biden but the recount there is n't expected to finish until Sunday , '' Slate continued .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results on Tuesday , December 1 .
On Tuesday , Republicans filed a lawsuit not only asking the Wisconsin Supreme Court to stop the certification of the presidential election results , but also aiming to grant the power to name presidential electors to the state 's Republican-controlled Legislature , the Associated Press reported .
But if Trump 's over 30 failed lawsuits seeking to overturn the election are any indication , this one wo n't be any more successful .
The lawsuit was filed by Erick Kaardal , an attorney and former Minnesota @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a representative of a conservative group called the Wisconsin Voters Alliance .
He filed the suit on behalf of the organization and several Republican voters .
He also led an unsuccessful lawsuit before the election to get rapper Kanye West on the ballot .

The re-election campaign of soon-to-be-former President Donald Trump spent $3 million for a recount of votes in Wisconsin in the hopes of throwing out tens of thousands of absentee and early ballots cast in support of President-elect Joe Biden.
But Trump's $3 million dollar gambit hasn't paid off. In fact, it actually increased Biden's lead over him by 132 votes. As Slate explains, Trump was specifically asking for recounts in Dane and Milwaukee Counties, two Democratic strongholds where Biden beat Trump by over 360,000 votes total.
"By the end of the recount in Milwaukee County, Biden's total had increased by 257 votes, from 317,270 to 317,527. Trump also saw an increase in votes, boosting his total by 125 votes to 134,482," Slate wrote, showing how Biden ended up even further ahead. The new votes were originally excluded from the county's total due to "human error."
"In Dane County, Trump has gained 68 votes over Biden but the recount there isn't expected to finish until Sunday," Slate continued. The state is expected to certify its election results on Tuesday, December 1.
On Tuesday, Republicans filed a lawsuit not only asking the Wisconsin Supreme Court to stop the certification of the presidential election results, but also aiming to grant the power to name presidential electors to the state's Republican-controlled Legislature, the Associated Press reported. But if Trump's over 30 failed lawsuits seeking to overturn the election are any indication, this one won't be any more successful.
The lawsuit was filed by Erick Kaardal, an attorney and former Minnesota Republican Party official, who filed as a representative of a conservative group called the Wisconsin Voters Alliance. He filed the suit on behalf of the organization and several Republican voters. He also led an unsuccessful lawsuit before the election to get rapper Kanye West on the ballot.


alternet--2020-11-29--Ralph Nader: Biden must not let the Trumpster outlaws escape and become immune fugitives from justic

Ralph Nader: Biden must not let the Trumpster outlaws escape and become immune fugitives from justice

The Biden Transition team is about to connect with the Trumpsters running federal departments and agencies into the ground .
The Biden staff should prepare for serial shocks .
Biden 's people will be observing the first glimpses of staggering wreckage and corruption .
They need to tell the American people what they find .
The Trump regime gave itself lawless license to do whatever it wanted .
Trump operatives dismantled or disabled humane program after humane program , health and safety regulations , and economic protections designed to protect working people , children , the elderly , and people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Trumpsters got the green light from their boss Donald , who when not playing golf , tweeting tantrums , and watching Fox News , believed that `` I have an Article II , where I have the right to do whatever I want as president . ''
When the Bidenites take over on January 21 , they will find hollowed-out government law enforcement and shelved research projects .
They 'll see offices empty after government scientists and other civil servants were forced out .
Other public servants will be sitting in what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' ordered to stop working on vital matters ranging from limiting climate disruption to stopping Wall Street rip-offs .
The Trump administration turned important government jobs into do-nothing positions .
Heavily censored federal CDC workers , benumbed from prohibitions on what they can say , and who were ordered not to speak the words `` climate change '' will receive their rescuers with deep relief .
EPA workers who were ordered to repeal or weaken over 100 environmental safeguards – unleashing deadly toxins into people 's air and water – will feel the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science .
Specialists who were told to weaken or eliminate about 50 occupational health and safety standards and literally shut down enforcement at OSHA will also start to see the early dawn .
Biden 's team will discover destruction or theft of public records , spectacles of looting and plunder of public trust and public property .
They will hear stories of corporate lobbyists coming in and out of the agencies as if they owned the government because they did .
Trump turned over the federal government to Big Business , as has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and endlessly .
His nominee to run the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) into nothingness , marauding Mick Mulvaney , openly said the agency 's mission was to protect Wall Street Big Banks and unscrupulous payday lenders !
!
Mulvaney abandoned tens of millions of defrauded Americans .
Sen. Sherrod Brown ( D-Ohio ) said Mulvaney proved `` he would rather cozy up with payday lenders and industry insiders than listen to consumer advocates who want to make sure hard-working Americans are not cheated by financial scams . ''
Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mick Mulvaney had `` no intention of putting consumers above financial firms that cheat them . ''
Much of the Trump Administration corruption started at the despoiled White House , which Trump turned into a family business incubator to enhance his Brand .
Trump 's crime spree was aided and abetted by his `` personal lawyer , '' Attorney General , William Barr who twisted government lawyers into ignoring or overturning the rule of law under orders from the political bosses .
Shoveling out corrupt , crony contracts , grants , subsidies , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of taxpayer torture will occupy many officials in the new Administration as they attempt to unravel , expose , and if possible , claw back ill-gotten gains .
Unlike the entering Obama Administration back in 2009 , the Biden Administration must come in with a determined mindset as they begin restoring the rule of law and reversing Trump 's cruel and crazy policies .
Biden 's team will also need to start restoring past services and initiating new services for the citizenry .
They must not let the Trumpster outlaws escape and become @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's wrecking crew escapes the arm of the law , for sure they and their base will return with a vengeance in two and four years .
For Joe Biden , healing America is not incompatible with bringing these self-dealing , law-breaking , constitution-violating , anti-American crooks to justice .
In truth , both tasks are complementary with the basic belief that `` nobody is above the law , '' which escapee Trump has long treated as a laughable cliché .
The way to start this redeeming process is to draw a clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and what they intend to change .
They must give cogent reports to the people about Trump 's crumbled and wasted agencies so that Trump 's record of destruction and pillage will not be forgotten because of short public memories .
Otherwise , Trump 's mass media will let him leave the public with the truth-denying Orwellian impression that he left the Democrats `` a great '' federal legacy .

The Biden Transition team is about to connect with the Trumpsters running federal departments and agencies into the ground. The Biden staff should prepare for serial shocks. Biden's people will be observing the first glimpses of staggering wreckage and corruption. They need to tell the American people what they find.
The Trump regime gave itself lawless license to do whatever it wanted. Trump operatives dismantled or disabled humane program after humane program, health and safety regulations, and economic protections designed to protect working people, children, the elderly, and people living in poverty.
After all, the Trumpsters got the green light from their boss Donald, who when not playing golf, tweeting tantrums, and watching Fox News, believed that "I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president."
When the Bidenites take over on January 21, they will find hollowed-out government law enforcement and shelved research projects. They'll see offices empty after government scientists and other civil servants were forced out. Other public servants will be sitting in what the Japanese call "window jobs," ordered to stop working on vital matters ranging from limiting climate disruption to stopping Wall Street rip-offs. The Trump administration turned important government jobs into do-nothing positions.
Heavily censored federal CDC workers, benumbed from prohibitions on what they can say, and who were ordered not to speak the words "climate change" will receive their rescuers with deep relief. EPA workers who were ordered to repeal or weaken over 100 environmental safeguards – unleashing deadly toxins into people's air and water – will feel the breaking of the restraints imposed on sound science.
Specialists who were told to weaken or eliminate about 50 occupational health and safety standards and literally shut down enforcement at OSHA will also start to see the early dawn.
Biden's team will discover destruction or theft of public records, spectacles of looting and plunder of public trust and public property.
They will hear stories of corporate lobbyists coming in and out of the agencies as if they owned the government because they did. Trump turned over the federal government to Big Business, as has never before happened, brazenly, openly, and endlessly. His nominee to run the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) into nothingness, marauding Mick Mulvaney, openly said the agency's mission was to protect Wall Street Big Banks and unscrupulous payday lenders!! Mulvaney abandoned tens of millions of defrauded Americans. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said Mulvaney proved "he would rather cozy up with payday lenders and industry insiders than listen to consumer advocates who want to make sure hard-working Americans are not cheated by financial scams." Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said Mick Mulvaney had "no intention of putting consumers above financial firms that cheat them."
Much of the Trump Administration corruption started at the despoiled White House, which Trump turned into a family business incubator to enhance his Brand. Trump's crime spree was aided and abetted by his "personal lawyer," Attorney General, William Barr who twisted government lawyers into ignoring or overturning the rule of law under orders from the political bosses.
Shoveling out corrupt, crony contracts, grants, subsidies, giveaways, and bailouts in a frenzy of taxpayer torture will occupy many officials in the new Administration as they attempt to unravel, expose, and if possible, claw back ill-gotten gains.
Unlike the entering Obama Administration back in 2009, the Biden Administration must come in with a determined mindset as they begin restoring the rule of law and reversing Trump's cruel and crazy policies. Biden's team will also need to start restoring past services and initiating new services for the citizenry.
They must not let the Trumpster outlaws escape and become immune fugitives from justice. If Trump's wrecking crew escapes the arm of the law, for sure they and their base will return with a vengeance in two and four years.
For Joe Biden, healing America is not incompatible with bringing these self-dealing, law-breaking, constitution-violating, anti-American crooks to justice. In truth, both tasks are complementary with the basic belief that "nobody is above the law," which escapee Trump has long treated as a laughable cliché.
The way to start this redeeming process is to draw a clear line between what Biden's appointees find and what they intend to change. They must give cogent reports to the people about Trump's crumbled and wasted agencies so that Trump's record of destruction and pillage will not be forgotten because of short public memories. Otherwise, Trump's mass media will let him leave the public with the truth-denying Orwellian impression that he left the Democrats "a great" federal legacy.
(See our new book, "Wrecking America: How Trump's Lawbreaking and Lies Betray All")


alternet--2020-11-29--Experts warn Trump is ‘utterly bonkers’ after bombshell WaPo deep-dive on president’s post-election

Experts warn Trump is ‘utterly bonkers’ after bombshell WaPo deep-dive on president’s post-election meltdown

Experts were shocked by the portrait of President Donald Trump in a bombshell new report .
Posted online by The Washington Post on Saturday night , the story was titled , `` 20 days of fantasy and failure : Inside Trump 's quest to overturn the election . ''
`` The facts were indisputable : President Trump had lost .
But Trump refused to see it that way , '' the newspaper reported .
`` The result was an election aftermath without precedent in U.S. history .
With his denial of the outcome , despite a string of courtroom defeats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threatened to undermine national security and public health , and duped millions of his supporters into believing , perhaps permanently , that Biden was elected illegitimately . ''
George Conway , husband of Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway , said it made Trump look `` utterly bonkers . ''
Constitutional law expert and Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe issued a warning for those reading it : Former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal focused on a quote from a `` close advisor '' likening Trump to Mad King George .
Conservative Washington Post columnist Max @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporters Philip Rucker , Ashley Parker , Josh Dawsey and Amy Gardner .
Lincoln Project Kurt Bardella suggested the article made a case for invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office .

Experts were shocked by the portrait of President Donald Trump in a bombshell new report.
Posted online by The Washington Post on Saturday night, the story was titled, "20 days of fantasy and failure: Inside Trump's quest to overturn the election."
"The facts were indisputable: President Trump had lost. But Trump refused to see it that way," the newspaper reported. "The result was an election aftermath without precedent in U.S. history. With his denial of the outcome, despite a string of courtroom defeats, Trump endangered America's democracy, threatened to undermine national security and public health, and duped millions of his supporters into believing, perhaps permanently, that Biden was elected illegitimately."
The story generated a great deal of commentary online.
George Conway, husband of Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway, said it made Trump look "utterly bonkers."
Constitutional law expert and Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe issued a warning for those reading it:
Former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal focused on a quote from a "close advisor" likening Trump to Mad King George.
Conservative Washington Post columnist Max Boot highlighted one particularly well-written sentence from reporters Philip Rucker, Ashley Parker, Josh Dawsey and Amy Gardner.
Lincoln Project Kurt Bardella suggested the article made a case for invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office.


alternet--2020-11-29--Dr. Fauci warns of COVID 'surge upon a surge' after Thanksgiving

Appearing on ABC 's This Week on the Sunday morning after Thanksgiving , the nation 's top infectious disease expert and voice of reason amid the novel coronavirus pandemic dropped some harsh realities on viewers—but also reminded us that we can make better choices starting , well , today .
In speaking to host Martha Raddatz about our rising case numbers , Dr. Anthony Fauci said `` there almost certainly is going to be an uptick because of what has happened with the travel '' over Thanksgiving .
He also chatted with Raddatz about the COVID-19 vaccine , reopening schools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ holiday season : Christmas and New Year 's .
Given that we already know people planned to travel and gather for Thanksgiving , many of us are wondering—and worried—that people are planning to repeat the pattern just one month from now .
But as Fauci urged viewers , `` We 're going to have to make decisions as a nation , state , city and family , that we 're in a very difficult time and we 're going to have to do the kinds of restrictions of things we would like to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ season . ''
Basically , now is not the time to shrug our shoulders and admit defeat in the face of worsening numbers .
`` We may see a surge upon a surge , '' a few weeks down the line , Fauci said , stressing that `` we do n't want to frighten people , but that 's just the reality . ''
Fauci shared that as we enter a colder weather season , as well as a bigger holiday season with people traveling back and forth , he does n't foresee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to facing the virus .
Fauci also brought up hope for a vaccine in the near future , citing the end of December as a starting point for top priority individuals , and then progressively more people receiving vaccinations through March .
When asked about legal barriers in terms of pandemic restrictions , Fauci put it simply when he said there 's nothing he personally can do about it .
He stressed that no matter who you are , or where you are , if you have a congregate setting of people—especially if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are not wearing masks—that 's a `` considerable risk '' for getting or spreading the infection .
When asked how he would advise the Biden administration on getting a `` unified response '' in terms of COVID-19 closings , Fauci suggested to `` close the bars and keep the schools open . ''
He noted that there 's no one-size-fits-all solution , but getting students back in school should be a priority , and in order to do that safely , we need to get our community spread levels low .
Fauci @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for asymptomatic people , saying he hopes it 's `` sooner rather than later , '' especially when it comes to contact tracing and community spread tracking .
He mentioned hope for at-home rapid tests , perhaps even without a prescription , for at least some circumstances .
Fauci also stressed that the process for developing the vaccine has been `` scientifically sound . ''
According to Fauci , `` safety has not been compromised , scientific integrity has not been compromised and the process of determining whether it works , whether it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by independent bodies and transparent . ''

Appearing on ABC's This Week on the Sunday morning after Thanksgiving, the nation's top infectious disease expert and voice of reason amid the novel coronavirus pandemic dropped some harsh realities on viewers—but also reminded us that we can make better choices starting, well, today. In speaking to host Martha Raddatz about our rising case numbers, Dr. Anthony Fauci said "there almost certainly is going to be an uptick because of what has happened with the travel" over Thanksgiving. He also chatted with Raddatz about the COVID-19 vaccine, reopening schools, and the next stage of the holiday season: Christmas and New Year's.
Given that we already know people planned to travel and gather for Thanksgiving, many of us are wondering—and worried—that people are planning to repeat the pattern just one month from now. But as Fauci urged viewers, "We're going to have to make decisions as a nation, state, city and family, that we're in a very difficult time and we're going to have to do the kinds of restrictions of things we would like to have done, particularly in this holiday season." Basically, now is not the time to shrug our shoulders and admit defeat in the face of worsening numbers.
"We may see a surge upon a surge," a few weeks down the line, Fauci said, stressing that "we don't want to frighten people, but that's just the reality." Fauci shared that as we enter a colder weather season, as well as a bigger holiday season with people traveling back and forth, he doesn't foresee relaxed guidelines or restrictions when it comes to facing the virus.
Fauci also brought up hope for a vaccine in the near future, citing the end of December as a starting point for top priority individuals, and then progressively more people receiving vaccinations through March.
When asked about legal barriers in terms of pandemic restrictions, Fauci put it simply when he said there's nothing he personally can do about it. He stressed that no matter who you are, or where you are, if you have a congregate setting of people—especially if they are inside, and especially if they are not wearing masks—that's a "considerable risk" for getting or spreading the infection.
When asked how he would advise the Biden administration on getting a "unified response" in terms of COVID-19 closings, Fauci suggested to "close the bars and keep the schools open." He noted that there's no one-size-fits-all solution, but getting students back in school should be a priority, and in order to do that safely, we need to get our community spread levels low.
Fauci still wants to see more testing available for asymptomatic people, saying he hopes it's "sooner rather than later," especially when it comes to contact tracing and community spread tracking. He mentioned hope for at-home rapid tests, perhaps even without a prescription, for at least some circumstances.
Fauci also stressed that the process for developing the vaccine has been "scientifically sound." According to Fauci, "safety has not been compromised, scientific integrity has not been compromised and the process of determining whether it works, whether it's safe and effective has been independent by independent bodies and transparent."


alternet--2020-11-29--One in five countries at risk of ecosystems collapsing — here’s what that might look like

One in five countries at risk of ecosystems collapsing — here ’ s what that might look like

Understand the importance of honest news ?
So do we.
The past year has been the most arduous of our lives. The Covid-19 pandemic continues to be catastrophic not only to our health - mental and physical - but also to the stability of millions of people. For all of us independent news organizations, it’s no exception.
We’ve covered everything thrown at us this past year and will continue to do so with your support. We’ve always understood the importance of calling out corruption, regardless of political affiliation.
We need your support in this difficult time. Every reader contribution, no matter the amount, makes a difference in allowing our newsroom to bring you the stories that matter, at a time when being informed is more important than ever. Invest with us.
Make a one-time contribution to Alternet All Access, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you.
Click to donate by check.


alternet--2020-11-29--Congressional deadlock doesn't mean total paralysis. Here's how Biden can change US with executive a

Congressional deadlock doesn't mean total paralysis. Here's how Biden can change US with executive action

Ever since Joe Biden was declared president-elect , a new subgenre of stories has appeared about his forthcoming use of executive actions , in the New York Times , the Washington Post , NBC , CNN , NPR , The Hill , Mother Jones , Vox , etc .
Some of these stories are standard issue — executive action is part of any new administration making its mark on the world , and prominent issues tend to draw special attention .
But this year , the stories are more complicated , given the combination of Donald Trump 's legacy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the gridlocked , uncertain state of government .
Yet most , though not all , of these accounts tend to miss one crucial point : Biden has enormous power to shape a governing agenda , regardless of anything Congress might do — not just in one or two areas , but across the entirety of government .
This point was first forcefully made 14 months ago , when the American Prospect rolled out what executive editor David Dayen dubbed `` The Day One Agenda . ''
This power does not reside primarily in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so fond of signing , but rather in the matter-of-fact texts of laws passed by Congress over the long course of American history — specific grants of authority that are just sitting there , waiting to be exercised .
Not only is there tremendous agenda-setting power at the president 's disposal , but a more recent Day One Agenda article , `` Joe Biden 's Four-Year Plan , '' underscored how such actions could help create a new governing coalition of engaged voters , much as Social Security and Medicare did in previous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about executive action recently , Dylan Matthews ' `` 10 enormously consequential things Biden can do without the Senate '' in Vox stands out for grasping the breadth of possibilities , and explicitly drawing on the Day One Agenda .
But it retains a typical Vox `` here 's some stuff '' tone — it 's absorbed in policy details , and divorced from the practical political considerations that have motivated the Day One Agenda all along .
Dayen told me in a recent interview that the idea started with `` understanding the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued , `` You go to Article II [ of the Constitution ] , and you read what the job description of the president is , and other than being able to make treaties and being the commander in chief of the military , the main thing is that that they take care that the laws are faithfully executed .
It 's not that they have a legislative agenda or that they work to pass policy , '' he explained .
`` The idea is that Congress writes the laws and the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last 240-odd years , we 've had a lot of laws written , and there 's a rich tapestry within that set of laws that allows a president to put together an agenda that can make progress for people in really significant ways . ''
Not only is that what the Constitution clearly says , it 's how things generally worked until the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 — an issue we 'll return to below .
That 's certainly not how the political establishment sees things today .
In campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 'What are you going to do as president in terms of getting a legislative agenda passed ? '
and so seldom are the questions , 'What are you going to do to implement the laws that are already on the books ? '
'' Dayen said .
At the time , `` Progressives were thinking in terms of a little bit of despair , because even if a progressive president were elected , Mitch McConnell would still either hold the Senate or have enough votes to frustrate any kind of a major bold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` My whole goal was to counteract that and say , 'Look , here is an entire agenda , just sort of sitting there within the statutes waiting to be implemented . '
'' What Dayen 's publication found was a set of 30 meaningful executive actions with staggering potential , as he wrote at the time : Along with his overview , the American Prospect published detailed articles on specific policies , which included feedback from the leading Democratic primary candidates .
After the primary was over , the Prospect examined the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommendations and found 277 policies that Biden could implement without congressional action .
`` On their own , none of these 277 policies will fully solve any of the interlinked crises we now face , '' wrote Max Moran .
`` But they can go a significant way toward immediate harm reduction .
Some can even solve long-standing problems , simply by enforcing or fully implementing laws already on the books .
Perhaps most important , all of these policies are ideas that leaders in the moderate and progressive wings of the party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should have no excuse not to enact , save for his own policy preferences .
There is no hiding behind Congress on these topics . ''
I asked Dayen about the relationship between the two lists , and he said the first represented `` the most impactful ones , '' `` the real high notes , '' that could be found in existing law , while the second culled everything that has been specifically agreed to .
One important aspect here was to underscore the distinction between executive orders and executive action .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ orders '' most of which `` sounded good but they did n't really do anything , '' Dayen said .
But he did wield real power through executive action , for example , giving farmers billions of dollars to compensate for losses from his ill-conceived trade war , when `` he used a law from the New Deal called the Commodity Credit Corporation . ''
Trump 's use of New Deal legislation is ironic on multiple levels .
As noted before , Dayen 's account of presidential and congressional power describes how things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1932 , in the midst of the Great Recession — a cataclysmic catastrophe for which existing laws were clearly insufficient , and which Congress was clearly unable to deal with through its accustomed means .
Roosevelt 's famous `` 100 days '' fundamentally altered how we saw presidential leadership — and extending well beyond the first 100 days .
We came to expect presidents to initiate legislation , rather than simply sign or veto it .
And the Constitution allowed for that to happen , simply because it was n't forbidden .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , complained that it had resulted in a `` Constitution in exile , '' but when they finally elected one of their own — Ronald Reagan — half a century later , they cheered him on for doing the exact same sort of thing .
In truth , they just did n't like content of the New Deal , which tended to help out the wrong sorts of people , from their point of view .
It was Trump , ironically enough , who has much more fundamentally upended Roosevelt 's constitutional order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some version of which any Republican president would have proposed — he has n't passed any major legislation at all .
He has been a model `` constitutional , '' pre-New Deal president .
Even his `` destruction of the administrative state , '' to use Steve Bannon 's phrase , is perfectly in line with what Reagan claimed to promise when he declared that government itself was the problem .
This does not suggest that conservatives were right and the New Deal was all a tragic , unconstitutional mistake .
Quite the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to the crisis we faced at the time .
We face a similar state of crisis today , although it has multiple different dimensions : the COVID pandemic , climate change , the racial justice struggle and worsening economic inequality , just to name a few .
What we need is some way out of the polarization and gridlock we 've drifted into over the course of the last several decades .
The prospect of compromise-legislating our way out of this crisis is dim , to say the least .
Just look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last COVID relief bill was passed .
We need to start where we are — with executive power that depends on nothing else .
This is the thread picked up in the aforementioned article , `` Joe Biden 's Four-Year Plan , '' by Jeff Spross .
His argument there is simple : Trump is gone for now , `` but the shadow of the 2024 election already looms , '' with a Trump-shaped Republican Party that `` will eventually win power again , '' probably with a more competent authoritarian candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that fate is for Democrats to use this time to win domination over government for an extended period , forcing the GOP to fundamentally change its political course and character to maintain its own national viability , '' Spross argues , just as it was forced to moderate in the wake of the New Deal .
Dayen and Spross see things similarly .
`` My feeling on the election , '' Dayen told me , `` is that enough people thought Donald Trump was ridiculous enough to throw him out of office , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to give them the keys to the car .
The only way that you 're going to earn that trust is by making progress with people .
Now , that sounds kind of silly , because some people say , 'You ca n't really make progress unless you get the keys to the car , right ? '
But we 've identified some ways we could make progress , in fact , and then build on that and build a coalition . ''
Spross speaks in generally similar terms .
`` You need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concrete effect on people 's lives that they can notice quickly and that will have this effect for as broad a swath of the population as possible , '' he told me .
`` I talk about Social Security and Medicare as two premier examples of this .
Social Security is literally a check you get from the government on a regular basis .
You know it comes from the government .
You know it 's because the government wants to take care of you , to make sure you have a decent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ significant sum of money , and makes a big difference .
So it 's transparent .
It 's a meaningful contribution to a person 's well-being , and at this point it 's something like 60 to 70 million recipients . ''
The political effect of that huge benefit is also huge , Spross observed , citing Andrea Campbell 's book `` How Policies Make Citizens , '' which showed `` how Social Security changed the political engagement of seniors , '' who had n't previously been a significant political force .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give people a benefit , a base level , they will be grateful for it , '' Spross said .
`` That will be a sign to them that government cares about them , that it 's engaged with them , that it is concerned about their well-being .
They in turn will be engaged with government : They will want to protect that benefit , they will want to expand it .
And beyond that , the fact they have more income means more resources , which means more free time .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ engage with politics . ''
So the trick is how to do something similar , using the tools at hand — in other words , with laws already on the books .
Spross does consider the possibility of legislation passed through reconciliation — which would avoid the filibuster — should Democrats win the Georgia Senate runoffs and hold a bare majority .
One example he cited in conversation was a universal child allowance , `` something like Social Security for children , '' which could obviously have a tremendous impact .
But he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the article , he argues that Biden must pick his spots : `` Not just any executive action will do , however .
The Biden White House would need to focus on those changes that , again , could deliver broad , meaningful , and recognizable benefits as quickly as possible . ''
As examples from the Day One Agenda , Spross cites canceling student debt , lowering prescription drug prices ( two different laws allow for this ) , and initiating postal banking services ( full-fledged universal services would require @ @ @ @ @ @ @ projects would n't ) .
He also cites removing marijuana from the schedule of controlled substances , helping hundreds of thousands of workers unionize , beefing up enforcement of worker safety laws , and possibly raising the federal poverty line , `` which would automatically expand existing welfare benefits to many more American families . ''
There are lots of other things that need to be done — particularly when it comes to the climate crisis , an existential threat to all of us .
They do n't necessarily have the kind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on .
That does n't mean they should be ignored — that would be profoundly irresponsible .
Rather , it means that those most concerned about those major issues should recognize that these constituency-building policies are pragmatically crucial to their work as well .
The more one delves into the Day One Agenda , the more one comes to see political possibilities in a new light .
That light , in turn , can help illuminate a way out of our current political deadlock , and all the crises that have stemmed from @ @

Ever since Joe Biden was declared president-elect, a new subgenre of stories has appeared about his forthcoming use of executive actions, in the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC, CNN, NPR, The Hill, Mother Jones, Vox, etc. Some of these stories are standard issue — executive action is part of any new administration making its mark on the world, and prominent issues tend to draw special attention. But this year, the stories are more complicated, given the combination of Donald Trump's legacy, the sheer number of outstanding crises and the gridlocked, uncertain state of government.
Yet most, though not all, of these accounts tend to miss one crucial point: Biden has enormous power to shape a governing agenda, regardless of anything Congress might do — not just in one or two areas, but across the entirety of government. This point was first forcefully made 14 months ago, when the American Prospect rolled out what executive editor David Dayen dubbed "The Day One Agenda." This power does not reside primarily in the showy executive orders that Trump is so fond of signing, but rather in the matter-of-fact texts of laws passed by Congress over the long course of American history — specific grants of authority that are just sitting there, waiting to be exercised.
Not only is there tremendous agenda-setting power at the president's disposal, but a more recent Day One Agenda article, "Joe Biden's Four-Year Plan," underscored how such actions could help create a new governing coalition of engaged voters, much as Social Security and Medicare did in previous generations. Of all the articles published about executive action recently, Dylan Matthews' "10 enormously consequential things Biden can do without the Senate" in Vox stands out for grasping the breadth of possibilities, and explicitly drawing on the Day One Agenda. But it retains a typical Vox "here's some stuff" tone — it's absorbed in policy details, and divorced from the practical political considerations that have motivated the Day One Agenda all along.
Dayen told me in a recent interview that the idea started with "understanding the function of a president." He continued, "You go to Article II [of the Constitution], and you read what the job description of the president is, and other than being able to make treaties and being the commander in chief of the military, the main thing is that that they take care that the laws are faithfully executed. It's not that they have a legislative agenda or that they work to pass policy," he explained. "The idea is that Congress writes the laws and the president then implements the laws. Over the last 240-odd years, we've had a lot of laws written, and there's a rich tapestry within that set of laws that allows a president to put together an agenda that can make progress for people in really significant ways."
Not only is that what the Constitution clearly says, it's how things generally worked until the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 — an issue we'll return to below. That's certainly not how the political establishment sees things today. In campaign debates, "The questions are all 'What are you going to do as president in terms of getting a legislative agenda passed?' and so seldom are the questions, 'What are you going to do to implement the laws that are already on the books?'" Dayen said. At the time, "Progressives were thinking in terms of a little bit of despair, because even if a progressive president were elected, Mitch McConnell would still either hold the Senate or have enough votes to frustrate any kind of a major bold policy shift," he said. "My whole goal was to counteract that and say, 'Look, here is an entire agenda, just sort of sitting there within the statutes waiting to be implemented.'"
What Dayen's publication found was a set of 30 meaningful executive actions with staggering potential, as he wrote at the time:
Without signing a single new law, the next president can lower prescription drug prices, cancel student debt, break up the big banks, give everybody who wants one a bank account, counteract the dominance of monopoly power, protect farmers from price discrimination and unfair dealing, force divestment from fossil fuel projects, close a slew of tax loopholes, hold crooked CEOs accountable, mandate reductions of greenhouse gas emissions, allow the effective legalization of marijuana, make it easier for 800,000 workers to join a union, and much, much more.
Along with his overview, the American Prospect published detailed articles on specific policies, which included feedback from the leading Democratic primary candidates. After the primary was over, the Prospect examined the Biden-Sanders unity task force document of policy recommendations and found 277 policies that Biden could implement without congressional action.
"On their own, none of these 277 policies will fully solve any of the interlinked crises we now face," wrote Max Moran. "But they can go a significant way toward immediate harm reduction. Some can even solve long-standing problems, simply by enforcing or fully implementing laws already on the books. Perhaps most important, all of these policies are ideas that leaders in the moderate and progressive wings of the party broadly agree on, and that Biden should have no excuse not to enact, save for his own policy preferences. There is no hiding behind Congress on these topics."
I asked Dayen about the relationship between the two lists, and he said the first represented "the most impactful ones," "the real high notes," that could be found in existing law, while the second culled everything that has been specifically agreed to. One important aspect here was to underscore the distinction between executive orders and executive action. Trump issued "a ton of executive orders" most of which "sounded good but they didn't really do anything," Dayen said. But he did wield real power through executive action, for example, giving farmers billions of dollars to compensate for losses from his ill-conceived trade war, when "he used a law from the New Deal called the Commodity Credit Corporation."
Trump's use of New Deal legislation is ironic on multiple levels. As noted before, Dayen's account of presidential and congressional power describes how things generally worked until the election of FDR in 1932, in the midst of the Great Recession — a cataclysmic catastrophe for which existing laws were clearly insufficient, and which Congress was clearly unable to deal with through its accustomed means. Roosevelt's famous "100 days" fundamentally altered how we saw presidential leadership — and extending well beyond the first 100 days. We came to expect presidents to initiate legislation, rather than simply sign or veto it. And the Constitution allowed for that to happen, simply because it wasn't forbidden.
Many conservatives objected to the New Deal, complained that it had resulted in a "Constitution in exile," but when they finally elected one of their own — Ronald Reagan — half a century later, they cheered him on for doing the exact same sort of thing. In truth, they just didn't like content of the New Deal, which tended to help out the wrong sorts of people, from their point of view. It was Trump, ironically enough, who has much more fundamentally upended Roosevelt's constitutional order. Aside from his tax-cut bill — some version of which any Republican president would have proposed — he hasn't passed any major legislation at all. He has been a model "constitutional," pre-New Deal president. Even his "destruction of the administrative state," to use Steve Bannon's phrase, is perfectly in line with what Reagan claimed to promise when he declared that government itself was the problem.
This does not suggest that conservatives were right and the New Deal was all a tragic, unconstitutional mistake. Quite the opposite: It was an absolutely necessary response to the crisis we faced at the time. We face a similar state of crisis today, although it has multiple different dimensions: the COVID pandemic, climate change, the racial justice struggle and worsening economic inequality, just to name a few. What we need is some way out of the polarization and gridlock we've drifted into over the course of the last several decades. The prospect of compromise-legislating our way out of this crisis is dim, to say the least. Just look at how long it's been since the last COVID relief bill was passed. We need to start where we are — with executive power that depends on nothing else.
This is the thread picked up in the aforementioned article, "Joe Biden's Four-Year Plan," by Jeff Spross. His argument there is simple: Trump is gone for now, "but the shadow of the 2024 election already looms," with a Trump-shaped Republican Party that "will eventually win power again," probably with a more competent authoritarian candidate. "The only way to avoid that fate is for Democrats to use this time to win domination over government for an extended period, forcing the GOP to fundamentally change its political course and character to maintain its own national viability," Spross argues, just as it was forced to moderate in the wake of the New Deal.
Dayen and Spross see things similarly. "My feeling on the election," Dayen told me, "is that enough people thought Donald Trump was ridiculous enough to throw him out of office, but they didn't necessarily trust Democrats to give them the keys to the car. The only way that you're going to earn that trust is by making progress with people. Now, that sounds kind of silly, because some people say, 'You can't really make progress unless you get the keys to the car, right?' But we've identified some ways we could make progress, in fact, and then build on that and build a coalition."
Spross speaks in generally similar terms. "You need to pass policies that have a very concrete effect on people's lives that they can notice quickly and that will have this effect for as broad a swath of the population as possible," he told me. "I talk about Social Security and Medicare as two premier examples of this. Social Security is literally a check you get from the government on a regular basis. You know it comes from the government. You know it's because the government wants to take care of you, to make sure you have a decent income in retirement. It's a significant sum of money, and makes a big difference. So it's transparent. It's a meaningful contribution to a person's well-being, and at this point it's something like 60 to 70 million recipients."
The political effect of that huge benefit is also huge, Spross observed, citing Andrea Campbell's book "How Policies Make Citizens," which showed "how Social Security changed the political engagement of seniors," who hadn't previously been a significant political force.
"The argument is basically, if you give people a benefit, a base level, they will be grateful for it," Spross said. "That will be a sign to them that government cares about them, that it's engaged with them, that it is concerned about their well-being. They in turn will be engaged with government: They will want to protect that benefit, they will want to expand it. And beyond that, the fact they have more income means more resources, which means more free time. That all equates to more opportunity to engage with politics."
So the trick is how to do something similar, using the tools at hand — in other words, with laws already on the books. Spross does consider the possibility of legislation passed through reconciliation — which would avoid the filibuster — should Democrats win the Georgia Senate runoffs and hold a bare majority. One example he cited in conversation was a universal child allowance, "something like Social Security for children," which could obviously have a tremendous impact. But he doesn't depend on passing new legislation. In the article, he argues that Biden must pick his spots: "Not just any executive action will do, however. The Biden White House would need to focus on those changes that, again, could deliver broad, meaningful, and recognizable benefits as quickly as possible."
As examples from the Day One Agenda, Spross cites canceling student debt, lowering prescription drug prices (two different laws allow for this), and initiating postal banking services (full-fledged universal services would require legislation, but targeted services and pilot projects wouldn't). He also cites removing marijuana from the schedule of controlled substances, helping hundreds of thousands of workers unionize, beefing up enforcement of worker safety laws, and possibly raising the federal poverty line, "which would automatically expand existing welfare benefits to many more American families."
There are lots of other things that need to be done — particularly when it comes to the climate crisis, an existential threat to all of us. They don't necessarily have the kind of quick constituency-building potential that Spross has focused on. That doesn't mean they should be ignored — that would be profoundly irresponsible. Rather, it means that those most concerned about those major issues should recognize that these constituency-building policies are pragmatically crucial to their work as well. The more one delves into the Day One Agenda, the more one comes to see political possibilities in a new light. That light, in turn, can help illuminate a way out of our current political deadlock, and all the crises that have stemmed from that.


alternet--2020-11-29--Expert breaks down the ultimate goal of Trump’s ‘classic Russian-style disinformation campaign’

Jonathan Rauch , a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute , spoke with CNN 's Brian Stelter on Sunday to explain the ultimate goal of President Donald Trump 's false accusations of a rigged and stolen election .
Rauch was asked by Stelter if the issue is Trump is simply trapped in the delusion that he actually beat President-elect Joe Biden in the 2020 election .
`` Is delusion a fair word for these election lies ? ''
Stelter wondered .
`` No , actually , I do n't think it is , '' Rauch replied .
`` It 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the mind of the president , but you do n't really need to .
What you need to know is that what he is running right now is a classic Russian-style disinformation campaign of a type known as the firehose of falsehood .
That 's when you utilize every channel , not just media , but also the bully pulpit , even litigation to push out as many different stories and conspiracy theories and lies and half-truths as you possibly can in order to flood the zone if with disinformation . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , and he is doing very well at that , '' Rauch continued .
`` This is classic propaganda tactic .
he is very good at it .
does n't matter what 's going on in his head .
what matters is what he is doing .
Rauch described Trump 's tactic as `` information warfare , '' arguing he 's `` manipulating and organizing the social environment and the media environment to confuse and discombobulate [ his ] enemies , to isolate them , to demoralize them so they do n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they get very frustrated . ''
Stelter then asked if the issue is that Trump is engaging in a `` massive conspiracy theory '' which in turn creates a `` collective identity '' among his supporters .
Rauch disagreed with that suggestion .
`` There actually is no theory here , '' Rauch replied .
`` In a fire hose falsehood campaign , it 's not about having one idea and pumping it out consistently .
It 's about throwing spaghetti against the wall .
It 's anything and everything .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ random .
It 's to create confusion and epistemic chaos .
That 's what we are seeing .
That 's very hard for democracies to deal with it . ''
Watch the interview below , via CNN :

Jonathan Rauch, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, spoke with CNN's Brian Stelter on Sunday to explain the ultimate goal of President Donald Trump's false accusations of a rigged and stolen election.
Rauch was asked by Stelter if the issue is Trump is simply trapped in the delusion that he actually beat President-elect Joe Biden in the 2020 election.
"Is delusion a fair word for these election lies?" Stelter wondered.
"No, actually, I don't think it is," Rauch replied. "It's hard to know what's going on in the mind of the president, but you don't really need to. What you need to know is that what he is running right now is a classic Russian-style disinformation campaign of a type known as the firehose of falsehood. That's when you utilize every channel, not just media, but also the bully pulpit, even litigation to push out as many different stories and conspiracy theories and lies and half-truths as you possibly can in order to flood the zone if with disinformation."
"The goal here is to confuse people, and he is doing very well at that," Rauch continued. "This is classic propaganda tactic. he is very good at it. doesn't matter what's going on in his head. what matters is what he is doing.
Rauch described Trump's tactic as "information warfare," arguing he's "manipulating and organizing the social environment and the media environment to confuse and discombobulate [his] enemies, to isolate them, to demoralize them so they don't know what's true or false anymore, they get very frustrated."
Stelter then asked if the issue is that Trump is engaging in a "massive conspiracy theory" which in turn creates a "collective identity" among his supporters. Rauch disagreed with that suggestion.
"There actually is no theory here," Rauch replied. "In a fire hose falsehood campaign, it's not about having one idea and pumping it out consistently. It's about throwing spaghetti against the wall. It's anything and everything. It can be wild. iI can be random. It's to create confusion and epistemic chaos. That's what we are seeing. That's very hard for democracies to deal with it."
Watch the interview below, via CNN:


alternet--2020-11-29--CNN host cuts off GOP senator to fact-check him on Trump lawyers’ voter fraud claims

During a long interview with Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt , CNN host Dana Bash was forced to cut off the Republican when he cast doubt on the 2020 election results to point out there are no credible reports of massive election fraud .
Discussing Donald Trump 's lawyer 's attempts to get thrown out , the topic turned to Georgia and the vote recount that still showed former Vice President Joe Biden pulled off an upset in the state .
`` Do you , Roy Blunt , as not just the former secretary of state of Missouri , as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a bird 's eye oversight view of the elections , do you think it was rigged ?
Yes or no ? ''
the State of the Union host pressed .
`` I do n't think it was rigged but I do think there was some things that were done that should n't have been done and I think there was some element of voter fraud as there is in every election but I do n't have any reason to believe that the numbers are there that would have made that difference , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wish in Pennsylvania — when they were opening all of those ballots , they would have let people see that they were checking the signatures .
When you send ballots out to people that you do n't know if they are still there or not and they come back and you do n't check the signatures that is a huge problem but I do n't think we have demonstrated it 's a size of a problem that would change the result , `` he added as Bash attempted to speak over him and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , senator , just to put a button on that , there is no evidence that people did n't see signatures , '' Bash lectured .
`` In fact , the state supreme court and now federal court have both thrown out the notion — that that did n't happen . ''

During a long interview with Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt, CNN host Dana Bash was forced to cut off the Republican when he cast doubt on the 2020 election results to point out there are no credible reports of massive election fraud.
Discussing Donald Trump's lawyer's attempts to get thrown out, the topic turned to Georgia and the vote recount that still showed former Vice President Joe Biden pulled off an upset in the state.
"Do you, Roy Blunt, as not just the former secretary of state of Missouri, as the [Senate] Rules chairman, you have a bird's eye oversight view of the elections, do you think it was rigged? Yes or no?" the State of the Union host pressed.
"I don't think it was rigged but I do think there was some things that were done that shouldn't have been done and I think there was some element of voter fraud as there is in every election but I don't have any reason to believe that the numbers are there that would have made that difference," he replied.
"I do wish in Pennsylvania — when they were opening all of those ballots, they would have let people see that they were checking the signatures. When you send ballots out to people that you don't know if they are still there or not and they come back and you don't check the signatures that is a huge problem but I don't think we have demonstrated it's a size of a problem that would change the result, " he added as Bash attempted to speak over him and then cut him off.
"Okay, senator, just to put a button on that, there is no evidence that people didn't see signatures," Bash lectured. "In fact, the state supreme court and now federal court have both thrown out the notion — that that didn't happen."
Watch below:


alternet--2020-11-29--Scientists explain how to fight back against anti-maskers, climate deniers and anti-vaxxers

“ If we can not talk about sex , then we can not talk about good sex , '' proclaimed gynecologist Jennifer Gunter on a trailer for Jensplaining , her show on female reproductive health .
Gunter is an example of a scientist using non-traditional platforms to communicate research .
The shift to online science communication from conventional news platforms has been going on for a while .
There is a need for credible and accurate science reporting because the miscommunication of science in the media is causing lasting damage to the public 's understanding of science .
Misinformation has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 pandemic .
Ignoring public health advice to wear masks and physically distance has cost thousands of lives and livelihoods in countries such as the United States , Brazil and Russia .
Yet , resources in science journalism are dwindling .
Budget cuts have slashed the number of journalists in conventional news outlets ; this often affects specialized reporters like science journalists .
We need to equip scientists with science journalism skills .
At Concordia University , the Projected Futures science journalism summer school is training graduate science students on journalism in various @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In fall 2021 , a minor in science journalism will be an option for science undergrads .
The Concordia School of Graduate Studies has also initiated a Public Scholars program , where a cohort of 10 Concordia doctoral candidates each year is trained to communicate their research to the public .
This withdrawal of conventional news outlets from conducting science journalism and the increasing role of universities and scientists doing so introduce new challenges .
Through Projected Futures , we conducted interviews and research to examine the future of science communication .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ conventional news outlets , the public is less able to access the scientific information they need to make informed decisions .
This is further exacerbated by the flaws of the existing academic publishing model .
Currently , scientists communicate their research via private publishing groups .
Due to paywalls , this research is very hard to access by the taxpayers who fund that research .
Meanwhile , research funded by industry is freely accessible to the public via the publication of patents Open access is often discussed as a way to ease public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some publishing groups lobby against possible open access government regulation .
But scientists are fighting back .
Psychologist Tal Yarkoni , who has been an outspoken critic of the academic publishing model , and other researchers are boycotting journals that engage in this lobbying .
In January 2019 , the entire editorial board at Elsevier 's Journal of Infometrics resigned in protest of commercial control of scholarly work .
Academic institutions are joining the resistance against for-profit publishing models .
In June 2020 , the libraries of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology ended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a result of a new policy making MIT 's research publicly accessible .
When it comes to communicating research , there is an inherent conflict of interest between scientists and the universities that employ them .
That 's not to say that universities have sinister intentions .
Universities are heavily invested in enhancing their reputations , which is closely tied to their success in raising funds through student recruitment , government grants and philanthropic endowments .
Universities view science communication as a fundraising activity , directed at funding sources , rather than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ university communication engages in knowledge translation with the intention of informing public debate , instead of viewing scientific communication as a potential fundraising tool .
Universities should equip scientists with the knowledge-translation skills necessary to communicate their own science critically and credibly .
And an emphasis on science journalism skills and training can help academic communicators apply a critical eye to their work .
This builds credibility and engages the public audience , moving away from the cycle of hyped scientific findings .
Science communication is as important as the science itself .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ engage students in scientific communication .
For example , there should be funding for internships for communications students , where those hired can manage Twitter accounts and blogs for research labs , update websites and write research publications in a more compelling , accessible and critical way .
Such internships would be a way to apply what these students learn in their science journalism training without further burdening already overworked scientists .
The importance of credible science journalism goes well beyond addressing the immediate COVID-19 crisis .
Credible science journalism remains critical to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis with evidence-based urgent action .
Universities and scientists must recognize the necessity of equipping the next generation with science journalism skills , and adapt their training and professional development accordingly .
Keroles Riad , PhD student in the individualized program , Concordia University ; Cristina Sanza , Digital Journalism Instructor , Concordia Science Journalism Project Team Manager , Concordia University , Concordia University , and Nancy Hamdy , MSc candidate studying Physiology and Neuroscience , University of Toronto This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read @ @ @ @

Keroles Riad, Concordia University; Cristina Sanza, Concordia University, and Nancy Hamdy, University of Toronto
“If we cannot talk about sex, then we cannot talk about good sex," proclaimed gynecologist Jennifer Gunter on a trailer for Jensplaining, her show on female reproductive health. Gunter is an example of a scientist using non-traditional platforms to communicate research.
The shift to online science communication from conventional news platforms has been going on for a while. There is a need for credible and accurate science reporting because the miscommunication of science in the media is causing lasting damage to the public's understanding of science.
Misinformation has consequences, as seen during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Ignoring public health advice to wear masks and physically distance has cost thousands of lives and livelihoods in countries such as the United States, Brazil and Russia. Yet, resources in science journalism are dwindling. Budget cuts have slashed the number of journalists in conventional news outlets; this often affects specialized reporters like science journalists.
We need to equip scientists with science journalism skills. At Concordia University, the Projected Futures science journalism summer school is training graduate science students on journalism in various media such print, TV and radio. In fall 2021, a minor in science journalism will be an option for science undergrads. The Concordia School of Graduate Studies has also initiated a Public Scholars program, where a cohort of 10 Concordia doctoral candidates each year is trained to communicate their research to the public.
This withdrawal of conventional news outlets from conducting science journalism and the increasing role of universities and scientists doing so introduce new challenges. Through Projected Futures, we conducted interviews and research to examine the future of science communication.
Academic publishing is flawed
Because there are fewer science journalists in conventional news outlets, the public is less able to access the scientific information they need to make informed decisions. This is further exacerbated by the flaws of the existing academic publishing model.
Currently, scientists communicate their research via private publishing groups. Due to paywalls, this research is very hard to access by the taxpayers who fund that research. Meanwhile, research funded by industry is freely accessible to the public via the publication of patents
Open access is often discussed as a way to ease public access to scientific findings. However, some publishing groups lobby against possible open access government regulation.
But scientists are fighting back. Psychologist Tal Yarkoni, who has been an outspoken critic of the academic publishing model, and other researchers are boycotting journals that engage in this lobbying. In January 2019, the entire editorial board at Elsevier's Journal of Infometricsresigned in protest of commercial control of scholarly work.
Academic institutions are joining the resistance against for-profit publishing models. In June 2020, the libraries of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology ended negotiations with the Elsevier publishing group as a result of a new policy making MIT's research publicly accessible.
Challenges of communicating science
When it comes to communicating research, there is an inherent conflict of interest between scientists and the universities that employ them.
That's not to say that universities have sinister intentions. Universities are heavily invested in enhancing their reputations, which is closely tied to their success in raising funds through student recruitment, government grants and philanthropic endowments.
Universities view science communication as a fundraising activity, directed at funding sources, rather than the general public. It's important that university communication engages in knowledge translation with the intention of informing public debate, instead of viewing scientific communication as a potential fundraising tool.
Futures of storytelling
Universities should equip scientists with the knowledge-translation skills necessary to communicate their own science critically and credibly. And an emphasis on science journalism skills and training can help academic communicators apply a critical eye to their work. This builds credibility and engages the public audience, moving away from the cycle of hyped scientific findings.
Science communication is as important as the science itself.
Universities should also find a way to engage students in scientific communication. For example, there should be funding for internships for communications students, where those hired can manage Twitter accounts and blogs for research labs, update websites and write research publications in a more compelling, accessible and critical way. Such internships would be a way to apply what these students learn in their science journalism training without further burdening already overworked scientists.
The importance of credible science journalism goes well beyond addressing the immediate COVID-19 crisis. Credible science journalism remains critical to fight the anti-vaccine movement and the climate crisis with evidence-based urgent action.
Universities and scientists must recognize the necessity of equipping the next generation with science journalism skills, and adapt their training and professional development accordingly.
Keroles Riad, PhD student in the individualized program, Concordia University; Cristina Sanza, Digital Journalism Instructor, Concordia Science Journalism Project Team Manager, Concordia University, Concordia University, and Nancy Hamdy, MSc candidate studying Physiology and Neuroscience, University of Toronto
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.