truthout--2020-12-05--Trump Has Pushed Ahead With Drone Strikes, Putting US Citizens in the Crosshairs

President Donald Trump is ( almost ) out of office .
Yet , there still needs to be reckoning with his record on drone strikes , assassination and militarism .
As Trump plans to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan , Iraq and Somalia , some may imagine Trump is a less militaristic president than his predecessors .
But the reality is that Trump continued the perpetual war machine , especially the targeted killing program created by George W. Bush and greatly expanded by Barack Obama .
Remember Anwar al-Awlaki , the U.S. citizen that the U.S. government , under Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assassinated with no due process in 2011 — killing his teenage son afterward ?
At that time , progressive and civil libertarian critics of Obama ’ s assassinations warned that this program would not remain in the hands of an ostensibly benevolent , liberal constitutional lawyer like Obama .
The war powers established by one president are transferred to their successor .
The “ kill list ” inevitably wound up in a Republicans ’ hands .
That list is now in Trump ’ s hands and U.S. citizens are still in its crosshairs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is reportedly on the U.S. government ’ s kill list .
This person is a freelance journalist named Bilal Abdul Kareem .
In late September 2019 , a federal judge , U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer of the District of Columbia , dismissed Abdul Kareem ’ s lawsuit challenging his alleged placement on a U.S. government kill list .
Abdul Kareem had already survived and escaped five U.S. airstrikes while he was working in Syria .
The year prior , in June 2018 , Judge Collyer actually refused to dismiss Abdul Kareem ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenge to move forward .
This is the complete opposite of her most recent judgment on Abdul Kareem ’ s case .
According to The Washington Post , Collyer ’ s ruling in 2018 allowed Abdul Kareem “ to seek answers and try to clear his name after what he claims were five near-misses by U.S. airstrikes in Syria after he was mistaken for a militant because of his frequent contact with al-Qaeda-linked militants.
” When government lawyers asked her to dismiss the lawsuit , Collyer argued that while Abdul Kareem could not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegal , he had “ birthright ” as a citizen to assert his constitutional right to due process .
The federal government did not confirm or deny that Abdul Kareem was designated a national security threat .
Justice Department attorneys “ argued that if Abdul Kareem ’ s near miss experiences were true as alleged , they were more likely due to his choice to work as a journalist amid Syria ’ s brutal , multisided civil war , or actions by other combatants , ” The Post reported .
In 2019 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kareem ’ s case .
Her switch was prompted by the U.S. government ’ s invoking of state secrets authority to protect its assassination program .
The Washington Post reported , “ [ A ] fter talks between Abdul Kareem ’ s lawyers and U.S. authorities broke down , the government tapped the rarely invoked state secrets authority , saying Abdul Kareem sought information revealing ‘ the existence and operational details of alleged military and intelligence activities directed at combating the terrorist threat to the United States.
’ ” The invocation of state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acquiesce to the U.S. government ’ s demands .
Government prosecutors claimed that disclosing whether Abdul Kareem is on the kill list would reveal or compromise intelligence sources and methods and allow him to escape any possible U.S. action , The Post reported .
Abdul Kareem and his lawyers are currently appealing this decision .
Abdul Kareem is a New York City native , former stand-up comic , and a Black Muslim who , for nearly a decade , has been a freelance reporter working in the opposition-held territory in Syria .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like CNN .
Because of his ability to move around Syria and directly speak to al-Qaeda-linked militant groups , U.S. intelligence agencies most likely pinged Abdul Kareem as an affiliate with al-Qaeda-linked militant groups — essentially , guilt by association .
In an interview with journalist CJ Werleman , Abdul Kareem says he is able to move freely among these openly anti-American militant groups because he has been able to establish “ mutual respect.
” War reporting often puts journalists in situations where they interview or come into contact with unsavory groups and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is similar to how the late British journalist Robert Fisk was able to interview Osama bin Laden three times .
When asked about the possibility that the U.S. government is pinging him as an al-Qaeda affiliate , Abdul Kareem said , “ I have no idea and never had any idea.
” He added , “ My point is this : I have no idea what the US Government saw or didn ’ t see , but now there is no legal recourse for me .
No true day in court .
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Abdul Kareem denies he has any link with or membership in al-Qaeda or similar group and rejects accusations of being an “ al-Qaeda apologist.
” Moreover , Abdul Kareem said he has not received any money from any U.S.-designated “ terrorist ” groups .
Last August , Abdul Kareem was arrested in Syria ’ s opposition-held Idlib Governorate by the Hay ’ at Tahrir al-Sham ( HTS ) militant group .
As of this writing , he is still being detained by HTS in an unknown location with unclear reasons for his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Has Dropped More Bombs and Killed More Civilians Within the first two years of his administration , Trump launched far more drone and lethal strikes than Obama .
According to a Daily Beast analysis , Trump launched 238 drone strikes in 2017 and 2018 .
During Obama ’ s first two years in office , in 2009 and 2010 , his administration launched 186 strikes .
As of this writing , according to Airwars , Trump has launched 205 declared strikes in Yemen and 196 in Somalia .
In fact , a recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ordered more attacks in Yemen than all previous U.S. presidents combined , with anywhere between 86 to 154 civilians killed .
Just as Trump entered office , he relinquished constraints on the U.S. military and CIA to conduct air and drone strikes and raids around the world as part of the “ war on terror.
” In March 2017 , the Trump administration gave the CIA new authority to launch drone strikes against suspected terrorists without permission from the Pentagon or the White House .
This departs from the Obama administration ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , when the CIA typically used drones to locate suspected terrorists and the U.S. military launched the actual strikes .
Before Trump , Pakistan was the one country where the CIA had a near monopoly to launch drone strikes .
Along with the CIA , the U.S. military has fewer constraints when it comes to doing damage around the world .
The United States has been conducting lethal strikes in Yemen and Somalia for the past decade .
However , the U.S. never officially declared war against either country .
They lie outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which the United States actually invaded and occupied .
In March 2017 , however , the Trump administration declared parts of Yemen and Somalia to be areas “ of active hostilities ” for at least 180 days .
This gave the military wider latitude to conduct offensive strikes in both countries and loosened protections for civilians .
Trump also removed the Obama-era rules that required a “ near certainty ” of no civilian deaths for drone strikes launched outside of official war zones .
On top of that , Trump recently removed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. government ’ s reporting on civilian deaths by drones .
Trump ’ s loosening of restrictions exacerbated a set of already-hawkish policies .
While Obama had some constraints , his administration still gave ample authority to the CIA and military to launch drone and other lethal strikes around the world .
What Obama did was further cement and institutionalize the war on terror framework established under President Bush after 9/11 .
For example , the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force ( AUMF , which allows the president to use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and “ associated forces , ” ( a phrase not included in the original text ) was added in subsequent interpretations and stretched by the Obama administration to include newer “ co-belligerents ” of al-Qaeda and the Taliban .
This gives the president power to launch attacks against terrorist groups , like al-Shabaab , that were founded after the 9/11 terrorist attacks .
In addition , Obama created a “ disposition matrix ” — a massive database of people suspected of terrorism ties that the U.S. government intends to capture or kill ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Essentially , the “ disposition matrix ” is a massive kill list that is now in Trump ’ s hands .
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee did write a draft authorization to replace the 2001 AUMF .
However , it does not restrict or eliminate the president ’ s perpetual war powers but , rather , reaffirms them .
The main update is that the authorization explicitly includes the groups the United States is already fighting against — the Taliban , al-Qaeda , ISIS and the catch-all phrase “ associated forces ” that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The constraints placed under Obama did little to rein in the war machine ’ s carnage .
During his two terms in office , Obama launched 563 lethal strikes , mostly by drones , in Pakistan , Yemen and Somalia , according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism , killing anywhere between 384 to 807 civilians .
Bush , on the other hand , launched 57 drone strikes during his two terms ; in comparison , Obama launched 10 times more drone strikes than Bush .
Since tracking civilian deaths is difficult and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the civilians it kills in drone strikes , those numbers are a conservative estimate .
As a result of these looser rules , the U.S. war machine under Trump has been dropping more bombs and killing more civilians .
The Pentagon estimated that 499 civilians were killed in U.S. military operations in 2017 , but that ’ s an undercount .
Within the first six months of Trump ’ s presidency , the U.S. killed more civilians than Obama in the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria .
According to an Airwars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Syria killed around 2,200 civilians by July 2017 , or 360 civilian deaths per month .
In comparison , under Obama , from mid-2014 ( when the U.S.-led war against ISIS began ) to the end of 2016 , coalition strikes killed at least 2,300 , or 80 civilian deaths per month .
According to a United Nations report , U.S.-backed forces in Afghanistan killed more civilians in the first three months of 2019 than the Taliban and ISIS did .
From January 2019 to March 2019 , Afghan and a U.S.-led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civilians , while anti-government elements — such as the Taliban , the Afghanistan branch of ISIS and other militants — killed 227 .
The previous year saw the largest number of civilian deaths in the war in Afghanistan .
In 2018 , 3,804 civilian deaths occurred due to fighting between the Afghan government and U.S.-led coalition forces on one hand , and the Taliban and ISIS on the other , according to the UN .
More civilians were killed in 2018 than in previous years of the war and , during this decade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Afghanistan War .
Trump ’ s troop withdrawal plan has devils in its details .
While U.S. troops will be reduced in Afghanistan , Iraq and Somalia , according to The New York Times , “ The plan under discussion to pull out of Somalia is said to not apply to U.S. forces stationed in nearby Kenya and Djibouti , where American drones that carry out airstrikes in Somalia are based.
” In fact , under Trump , the U.S. military sought new authority to expand drone strike operations in Kenya @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still , allegedly , on the government ’ s kill list as Trump makes a not-so-smooth transition from White House and hands the keys of death to President-elect Joe Biden .
Where does that leave Biden and where does he stand ?
Biden has largely been silent about drone strikes .
Biden never publicly criticized Obama ’ s drone war legacy nor has Biden clarified his own stances on the policy of targeted killing .
On his campaign site , Biden makes no mention of targeted killing and drone strikes .
He does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Afghanistan and the Middle East , ” but adds he will “ narrowly focus our mission on Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
” He does not spell out what “ narrowly focus ” actually looks like on his site .
However , during the campaign , Biden and one of his advisers admitted that he plans to keep special operations forces — who , along with drones , have carried about targeted killing operations in secretive overseas counterterrorism missions — in the Middle East and Afghanistan .
If Biden plans to keep special operations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is very unlikely he will scale back drone strikes .
This indicates that Biden will pick up where Bush , Obama and Trump left off — continuing a sophisticated program of global targeted killing under the guise of “ fighting terrorism.
” He will “ end ” the forever wars without truly ending them .

President Donald Trump is (almost) out of office. Yet, there still needs to be reckoning with his record on drone strikes, assassination and militarism. As Trump plans to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia, some may imagine Trump is a less militaristic president than his predecessors. But the reality is that Trump continued the perpetual war machine, especially the targeted killing program created by George W. Bush and greatly expanded by Barack Obama.
Remember Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S. citizen that the U.S. government, under Obama, accused of being a terrorist and assassinated with no due process in 2011 — killing his teenage son afterward? At that time, progressive and civil libertarian critics of Obama’s assassinations warned that this program would not remain in the hands of an ostensibly benevolent, liberal constitutional lawyer like Obama. The war powers established by one president are transferred to their successor. The “kill list” inevitably wound up in a Republicans’ hands. That list is now in Trump’s hands and U.S. citizens are still in its crosshairs.
In fact, another U.S. citizen is reportedly on the U.S. government’s kill list. This person is a freelance journalist named Bilal Abdul Kareem. In late September 2019, a federal judge, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer of the District of Columbia, dismissed Abdul Kareem’s lawsuit challenging his alleged placement on a U.S. government kill list. Abdul Kareem had already survived and escaped five U.S. airstrikes while he was working in Syria.
The year prior, in June 2018, Judge Collyer actually refused to dismiss Abdul Kareem’s lawsuit, which allowed his legal challenge to move forward. This is the complete opposite of her most recent judgment on Abdul Kareem’s case. According to The Washington Post, Collyer’s ruling in 2018 allowed Abdul Kareem “to seek answers and try to clear his name after what he claims were five near-misses by U.S. airstrikes in Syria after he was mistaken for a militant because of his frequent contact with al-Qaeda-linked militants.” When government lawyers asked her to dismiss the lawsuit, Collyer argued that while Abdul Kareem could not challenge the assassination program as arbitrary or illegal, he had “birthright” as a citizen to assert his constitutional right to due process.
The federal government did not confirm or deny that Abdul Kareem was designated a national security threat. Justice Department attorneys “argued that if Abdul Kareem’s near miss experiences were true as alleged, they were more likely due to his choice to work as a journalist amid Syria’s brutal, multisided civil war, or actions by other combatants,” The Post reported.
In 2019, Collyer changed her mind and dismissed Abdul Kareem’s case. Her switch was prompted by the U.S. government’s invoking of state secrets authority to protect its assassination program. The Washington Post reported, “[A]fter talks between Abdul Kareem’s lawyers and U.S. authorities broke down, the government tapped the rarely invoked state secrets authority, saying Abdul Kareem sought information revealing ‘the existence and operational details of alleged military and intelligence activities directed at combating the terrorist threat to the United States.’” The invocation of state secrets authority was enough to make Collyer acquiesce to the U.S. government’s demands.
Government prosecutors claimed that disclosing whether Abdul Kareem is on the kill list would reveal or compromise intelligence sources and methods and allow him to escape any possible U.S. action, The Post reported. Abdul Kareem and his lawyers are currently appealing this decision.
Abdul Kareem is a New York City native, former stand-up comic, and a Black Muslim who, for nearly a decade, has been a freelance reporter working in the opposition-held territory in Syria. He has provided on-the-ground commentary for major networks like CNN. Because of his ability to move around Syria and directly speak to al-Qaeda-linked militant groups, U.S. intelligence agencies most likely pinged Abdul Kareem as an affiliate with al-Qaeda-linked militant groups — essentially, guilt by association.
In an interview with journalist CJ Werleman, Abdul Kareem says he is able to move freely among these openly anti-American militant groups because he has been able to establish “mutual respect.” War reporting often puts journalists in situations where they interview or come into contact with unsavory groups and individuals to get their stories. This is similar to how the late British journalist Robert Fisk was able to interview Osama bin Laden three times.
When asked about the possibility that the U.S. government is pinging him as an al-Qaeda affiliate, Abdul Kareem said, “I have no idea and never had any idea.” He added, “My point is this: I have no idea what the US Government saw or didn’t see, but now there is no legal recourse for me. No true day in court. No opportunity to show the people the reality.”
Abdul Kareem denies he has any link with or membership in al-Qaeda or similar group and rejects accusations of being an “al-Qaeda apologist.” Moreover, Abdul Kareem said he has not received any money from any U.S.-designated “terrorist” groups.
Last August, Abdul Kareem was arrested in Syria’s opposition-held Idlib Governorate by the Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) militant group. As of this writing, he is still being detained by HTS in an unknown location with unclear reasons for his detention.
Trump’s War Machine Has Dropped More Bombs and Killed More Civilians
Within the first two years of his administration, Trump launched far more drone and lethal strikes than Obama. According to a Daily Beast analysis, Trump launched 238 drone strikes in 2017 and 2018. During Obama’s first two years in office, in 2009 and 2010, his administration launched 186 strikes. As of this writing, according to Airwars, Trump has launched 205 declared strikes in Yemen and 196 in Somalia. In fact, a recent Airwars report suggests that Trump may have ordered more attacks in Yemen than all previous U.S. presidents combined, with anywhere between 86 to 154 civilians killed.
As Trump entered office, he relinquished constraints on the U.S. military and CIA to conduct air and drone strikes and raids around the world.
Just as Trump entered office, he relinquished constraints on the U.S. military and CIA to conduct air and drone strikes and raids around the world as part of the “war on terror.” In March 2017, the Trump administration gave the CIA new authority to launch drone strikes against suspected terrorists without permission from the Pentagon or the White House. This departs from the Obama administration’s approach, particularly in the later years, when the CIA typically used drones to locate suspected terrorists and the U.S. military launched the actual strikes. Before Trump, Pakistan was the one country where the CIA had a near monopoly to launch drone strikes.
Along with the CIA, the U.S. military has fewer constraints when it comes to doing damage around the world. The United States has been conducting lethal strikes in Yemen and Somalia for the past decade. However, the U.S. never officially declared war against either country. They lie outside the conventional battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, which the United States actually invaded and occupied.
In March 2017, however, the Trump administration declared parts of Yemen and Somalia to be areas “of active hostilities” for at least 180 days. This gave the military wider latitude to conduct offensive strikes in both countries and loosened protections for civilians.
Trump also removed the Obama-era rules that required a “near certainty” of no civilian deaths for drone strikes launched outside of official war zones. On top of that, Trump recently removed, via executive order in 2019, the U.S. government’s reporting on civilian deaths by drones.
Trump’s loosening of restrictions exacerbated a set of already-hawkish policies. While Obama had some constraints, his administration still gave ample authority to the CIA and military to launch drone and other lethal strikes around the world.
Trump removed the Obama-era rules that required a “near certainty” of no civilian deaths for drone strikes launched outside of official war zones.
What Obama did was further cement and institutionalize the war on terror framework established under President Bush after 9/11. For example, the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF ) , which allows the president to use force against suspected terrorists around the world and “associated forces,” (a phrase not included in the original text) was added in subsequent interpretations and stretched by the Obama administration to include newer “co-belligerents” of al-Qaeda and the Taliban. This gives the president power to launch attacks against terrorist groups, like al-Shabaab, that were founded after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
In addition, Obama created a “disposition matrix” — a massive database of people suspected of terrorism ties that the U.S. government intends to capture or kill (in most cases, kill). Essentially, the “disposition matrix” is a massive kill list that is now in Trump’s hands.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee did write a draft authorization to replace the 2001 AUMF. However, it does not restrict or eliminate the president’s perpetual war powers but, rather, reaffirms them. The main update is that the authorization explicitly includes the groups the United States is already fighting against — the Taliban, al-Qaeda, ISIS and the catch-all phrase “associated forces” that includes terrorist groups fighting alongside al-Qaeda.
The constraints placed under Obama did little to rein in the war machine’s carnage. During his two terms in office, Obama launched 563 lethal strikes, mostly by drones, in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, killing anywhere between 384 to 807 civilians. Bush, on the other hand, launched 57 drone strikes during his two terms; in comparison, Obama launched 10 times more drone strikes than Bush. Since tracking civilian deaths is difficult and the U.S. government is not transparent about the civilians it kills in drone strikes, those numbers are a conservative estimate.
Within the first six months of Trump’s presidency, the U.S. killed more civilians than Obama in the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.
As a result of these looser rules, the U.S. war machine under Trump has been dropping more bombs and killing more civilians. The Pentagon estimated that 499 civilians were killed in U.S. military operations in 2017, but that’s an undercount. Within the first six months of Trump’s presidency, the U.S. killed more civilians than Obama in the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. According to an Airwars investigation, U.S.-led coalition strikes in Iraq and Syria killed around 2,200 civilians by July 2017, or 360 civilian deaths per month. In comparison, under Obama, from mid-2014 (when the U.S.-led war against ISIS began) to the end of 2016, coalition strikes killed at least 2,300, or 80 civilian deaths per month.
According to a United Nations report, U.S.-backed forces in Afghanistan killed more civilians in the first three months of 2019 than the Taliban and ISIS did. From January 2019 to March 2019, Afghan and a U.S.-led coalition of Western military forces killed 305 civilians, while anti-government elements — such as the Taliban, the Afghanistan branch of ISIS and other militants — killed 227. The previous year saw the largest number of civilian deaths in the war in Afghanistan. In 2018, 3,804 civilian deaths occurred due to fighting between the Afghan government and U.S.-led coalition forces on one hand, and the Taliban and ISIS on the other, according to the UN. More civilians were killed in 2018 than in previous years of the war and, during this decade, over 32,000 civilians have been killed in the Afghanistan War.
U.S.-backed forces in Afghanistan killed more civilians in the first three months of 2019 than the Taliban and ISIS did.
Trump’s troop withdrawal plan has devils in its details. While U.S. troops will be reduced in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia, according to The New York Times, “The plan under discussion to pull out of Somalia is said to not apply to U.S. forces stationed in nearby Kenya and Djibouti, where American drones that carry out airstrikes in Somalia are based.” In fact, under Trump, the U.S. military sought new authority to expand drone strike operations in Kenya.
Meanwhile, a U.S. citizen is still, allegedly, on the government’s kill list as Trump makes a not-so-smooth transition from White House and hands the keys of death to President-elect Joe Biden.
Where does that leave Biden and where does he stand? Biden has largely been silent about drone strikes. Biden never publicly criticized Obama’s drone war legacy nor has Biden clarified his own stances on the policy of targeted killing. On his campaign site, Biden makes no mention of targeted killing and drone strikes. He does promise to “end the forever wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East,” but adds he will “narrowly focus our mission on Al-Qaeda and ISIS.” He does not spell out what “narrowly focus” actually looks like on his site.
However, during the campaign, Biden and one of his advisers admitted that he plans to keep special operations forces — who, along with drones, have carried about targeted killing operations in secretive overseas counterterrorism missions — in the Middle East and Afghanistan. If Biden plans to keep special operations forces on the ground, then it is very unlikely he will scale back drone strikes. This indicates that Biden will pick up where Bush, Obama and Trump left off — continuing a sophisticated program of global targeted killing under the guise of “fighting terrorism.” He will “end” the forever wars without truly ending them.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-05--As Biden Considers Climate Nominations, He Must Go Beyond an Obama-Era Reboot

The Biden campaign won on a slogan to “ build back better.
” But when it comes to tackling the climate crisis , the next administration seems to think “ better ” simply means hitting rewind .
The world needs more than an Obama era reboot to be saved from climate chaos .
So far , a bevy of the leading contenders for key climate and energy nominees are holdovers from the Obama administration .
The fact that former Secretary of State John Kerry has already been tapped for a key international post — the newly created role of special @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hope that the climate crisis will , at the very least , be granted serious attention .
But Kerry has been an apologist for fracking and a promoter of false climate solutions like market-based carbon-trading schemes .
The times demand aggressive action , and there are serious doubts among climate activists that these leaders are the ones to deliver it .
Ernest Moniz , who served as Obama ’ s energy secretary in his second term and is reportedly being considered for the same position now , has drawn the most serious pushback @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the disastrous oil and gas fracking “ boom , ” Moniz gave the policy a veneer of scientific credibility : His MIT Energy Initiative produced an influential 2010 study touting fracking as a “ bridge ” to clean energy , while downplaying the substantial environmental and climate impacts of the extreme fossil fuel extraction method .
That tragically misguided analysis informed Obama ’ s “ all of the above ” policy approach , which prioritized expanding dirty fossil fuel production while giving lip service to building out renewable capacity .
The fracking boom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and greenhouse gas emissions continued to mount .
And at the same time , the Obama administration — with Kerry at the helm of the State Department — viewed exporting fracked gas from the United States as a powerful foreign policy tool that would undercut adversaries , strikingly similar to Trump ’ s “ freedom gas ” campaign a few years later .
When he exited government in 2017 , Moniz went back to working directly with corporations , at his own strategic energy venture called EJM Associates — which has ties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the giant oil and gas utility Southern Company , while also founding an industry-friendly think tank called the Energy Futures Initiative .
Moniz ’ s public role has mostly been about thwarting ambitious policies ; while an international climate movement propelled the Green New Deal to the forefront , Moniz was peddling a “ Green Real Deal ” in a meager effort to undercut bold action .
While the plan acknowledges that climate change is real , it sees an essential role for natural gas and does not set emission reduction targets .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a similar career path .
After advising on John Kerry ’ s presidential campaign , Heather Zichal served the Obama administration in a role one publication called the “ chief ambassador to oil and gas companies.
” Zichal left public service and went to work for the industry , joining the board of Cheniere Energy , a company heavily invested in the fracked gas exports business .
Zichal has long preached a “ middle ground ” approach to climate policy ; indeed , in 2019 , she drew the ire of climate activists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ middle ground plan that , instead of moving away from fossil fuels , would embrace natural gas , nuclear energy and technology to reduce carbon emissions .
Another name that has been circulating is Jason Bordoff , a former Obama climate adviser who has been highly visible in the press talking about Biden ’ s policy options in the months ahead .
After leaving the Obama administration , Bordoff founded the Center on Global Energy Policy , an institution funded by the oil and gas industry that coincidentally churns out material advancing corporate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to lifting the U.S. ban on oil exports .
The Obama administration ’ s “ all of the above ” climate legacy was perhaps best summed up by a comment the former president made two years ago , when he bragged about the United States becoming the biggest oil and gas producer in the world : “ That was me , people.
” What the country needs right now is a “ none of the above ” approach to fossil fuels .
“ Back to the Future ” is not a viable climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must acknowledge that the mistakes of the past will not be repeated in the present .

The Biden campaign won on a slogan to “build back better.” But when it comes to tackling the climate crisis, the next administration seems to think “better” simply means hitting rewind. The world needs more than an Obama era reboot to be saved from climate chaos.
So far, a bevy of the leading contenders for key climate and energy nominees are holdovers from the Obama administration. The fact that former Secretary of State John Kerry has already been tapped for a key international post — the newly created role of special presidential envoy for climate — gave some hope that the climate crisis will, at the very least, be granted serious attention. But Kerry has been an apologist for fracking and a promoter of false climate solutions like market-based carbon-trading schemes. The times demand aggressive action, and there are serious doubts among climate activists that these leaders are the ones to deliver it.
Ernest Moniz, who served as Obama’s energy secretary in his second term and is reportedly being considered for the same position now, has drawn the most serious pushback. While the Obama administration was nurturing the disastrous oil and gas fracking “boom,” Moniz gave the policy a veneer of scientific credibility: His MIT Energy Initiative produced an influential 2010 study touting fracking as a “bridge” to clean energy, while downplaying the substantial environmental and climate impacts of the extreme fossil fuel extraction method.
That tragically misguided analysis informed Obama’s “all of the above” policy approach, which prioritized expanding dirty fossil fuel production while giving lip service to building out renewable capacity. The fracking boom polluted frontline communities and fouled drinking water, and greenhouse gas emissions continued to mount. And at the same time, the Obama administration — with Kerry at the helm of the State Department — viewed exporting fracked gas from the United States as a powerful foreign policy tool that would undercut adversaries, strikingly similar to Trump’s “freedom gas” campaign a few years later.
When he exited government in 2017, Moniz went back to working directly with corporations, at his own strategic energy venture called EJM Associates — which has ties with fossil fuel interests — and at the giant oil and gas utility Southern Company, while also founding an industry-friendly think tank called the Energy Futures Initiative. Moniz’s public role has mostly been about thwarting ambitious policies; while an international climate movement propelled the Green New Deal to the forefront, Moniz was peddling a “Green Real Deal” in a meager effort to undercut bold action. While the plan acknowledges that climate change is real, it sees an essential role for natural gas and does not set emission reduction targets.
Several other possible Biden appointments have followed a similar career path. After advising on John Kerry’s presidential campaign, Heather Zichal served the Obama administration in a role one publication called the “chief ambassador to oil and gas companies.” Zichal left public service and went to work for the industry, joining the board of Cheniere Energy, a company heavily invested in the fracked gas exports business. Zichal has long preached a “middle ground” approach to climate policy; indeed, in 2019, she drew the ire of climate activists for suggesting Biden had to adopt a middle ground plan that, instead of moving away from fossil fuels, would embrace natural gas, nuclear energy and technology to reduce carbon emissions.
Another name that has been circulating is Jason Bordoff, a former Obama climate adviser who has been highly visible in the press talking about Biden’s policy options in the months ahead. After leaving the Obama administration, Bordoff founded the Center on Global Energy Policy, an institution funded by the oil and gas industry that coincidentally churns out material advancing corporate interests on issues ranging from energy privatization to lifting the U.S. ban on oil exports.
The Obama administration’s “all of the above” climate legacy was perhaps best summed up by a comment the former president made two years ago, when he bragged about the United States becoming the biggest oil and gas producer in the world: “That was me, people.” What the country needs right now is a “none of the above” approach to fossil fuels. “Back to the Future” is not a viable climate policy, and Biden’s appointments must acknowledge that the mistakes of the past will not be repeated in the present.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-06--Trump Slams Georgia GOP Governor for Refusing to Overturn State Election Results

President Donald Trump on Saturday morning called Georgia ’ s Republican Gov .
Brian Kemp to pressure him to overturn President-elect Joe Biden ’ s victory in the state , and hours later at a rally in support of GOP lawmakers Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue — who are campaigning ahead of January 5 runoffs that will decide which party controls the U.S. Senate — slammed Kemp for refusing to support his authoritarian scheme to retain power .
Two unnamed sources familiar with the conversation told the Washington Post that Trump urged Kemp “ to call a special session of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the results and appoint electors who would back the president at the Electoral College.
” “ Trump also asked the governor to demand an audit of signatures on mail ballots , something Kemp has previously noted he has no power to do , ” the Post reported .
“ Kemp declined the president ’ s entreaty.
” Also on Saturday , Mike Lindell , the right-wing CEO of My Pillow who helped bail out Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse , “ brazenly [ laid ] out Trump ’ s last-ditch plan to steal the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rupar .
In response to the news that Trump asked Kemp to persuade the state legislature to reverse the results of the 2020 election , journalist Seth Abramson asked for “ lawyers who specialize in little-used federal criminal statutes like Sedition to explain to me why a federal official openly seeking to conspire with another federal official to overthrow a democratically elected government isn ’ t a crime.
” Kathleen Clark , a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis , told the Post that “ if Trump invoked his federal authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or made the call from the Oval Office , he could have violated criminal provisions of the Hatch Act , which prohibits government officials from political activity in their official roles.
” During Saturday night ’ s rally , the crowd applauded when Trump said , “ Your governor should be ashamed of himself , ” in an attempt to malign Kemp for not going along with his coup attempt .
The Post reported that “ as the large crowd chanted ‘ Stop the Steal ’ —what ’ s become a rallying cry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden ’ s victory in last month ’ s presidential election—Trump responded that ‘ Your governor could stop it very easily if he knew what the hell he was doing . '
” Post reporter Amber Phillips argued that some of Trump ’ s rhetoric about being the victim of a rigged election could paradoxically dampen GOP participation in Georgia ’ s upcoming runoff races , the outcomes of which will have significant implications for the future of U.S. politics .
“ Trump ’ s voter-fraud claims , ” she said , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican voters ” who may feel less inclined to go to the polls if they believe the results are predetermined .
The Post ’ s Dave Weigel shared on social media an image from the lie-filled rally , during which the GOP screened “ a compilation of OAN and Newsmax videos making election fraud claims.
” Trump still implored the audience to vote next month , however , saying it is possible to be upset about and challenge the results of the presidential election while supporting Loeffler and Perdue at the same time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is control of the U.S. Senate , and that really means control of this country , ” Trump said .
Weigel , who is on-the-ground in Georgia this weekend , noted on Twitter that he and “ every reporter [ he ] talked to has found ” that most Trump voters believe not only that the president won but that “ he ’ ll still win the challenges and get a second term.
” Moreover , according to Weigel , “ none of these voters plan to skip the Jan. 5 runoff .
@

President Donald Trump on Saturday morning called Georgia’s Republican Gov. Brian Kemp to pressure him to overturn President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the state, and hours later at a rally in support of GOP lawmakers Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue — who are campaigning ahead of January 5 runoffs that will decide which party controls the U.S. Senate — slammed Kemp for refusing to support his authoritarian scheme to retain power.
Two unnamed sources familiar with the conversation told the Washington Post that Trump urged Kemp “to call a special session of the state legislature for lawmakers to override the results and appoint electors who would back the president at the Electoral College.”
“Trump also asked the governor to demand an audit of signatures on mail ballots, something Kemp has previously noted he has no power to do,” the Post reported. “Kemp declined the president’s entreaty.”
Also on Saturday, Mike Lindell, the right-wing CEO of My Pillow who helped bail out Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse, “brazenly [laid] out Trump’s last-ditch plan to steal the election,” as relayed by Aaron Rupar.
In response to the news that Trump asked Kemp to persuade the state legislature to reverse the results of the 2020 election, journalist Seth Abramson asked for “lawyers who specialize in little-used federal criminal statutes like Sedition to explain to me why a federal official openly seeking to conspire with another federal official to overthrow a democratically elected government isn’t a crime.”
What I need is for lawyers who specialize in little-used federal criminal statutes like Sedition to explain to me why a federal official openly seeking to conspire with another federal official to overthrow a democratically elected government isn't a crime https://t.co/4x0jaSagvb — Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) December 5, 2020
Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, told the Post that “if Trump invoked his federal authority in his conversation Saturday with Kemp, or made the call from the Oval Office, he could have violated criminal provisions of the Hatch Act, which prohibits government officials from political activity in their official roles.”
During Saturday night’s rally, the crowd applauded when Trump said, “Your governor should be ashamed of himself,” in an attempt to malign Kemp for not going along with his coup attempt.
"Your governor should be ashamed of himself," Trump says in Georgia about Brian Kemp, to cheers pic.twitter.com/F8BbI9375Z — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 6, 2020
The Post reported that “as the large crowd chanted ‘Stop the Steal’—what’s become a rallying cry for Republicans unwilling to accept Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in last month’s presidential election—Trump responded that ‘Your governor could stop it very easily if he knew what the hell he was doing.'”
Post reporter Amber Phillips argued that some of Trump’s rhetoric about being the victim of a rigged election could paradoxically dampen GOP participation in Georgia’s upcoming runoff races, the outcomes of which will have significant implications for the future of U.S. politics.
“Trump’s voter-fraud claims,” she said, “are threatening to depress turnout among some Republican voters” who may feel less inclined to go to the polls if they believe the results are predetermined.
The Post’s Dave Weigel shared on social media an image from the lie-filled rally, during which the GOP screened “a compilation of OAN and Newsmax videos making election fraud claims.”
The president of the United States watching a compilation of OAN and Newsmax videos making election fraud claims pic.twitter.com/ElpmhhMh55 — Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) December 6, 2020
Trump still implored the audience to vote next month, however, saying it is possible to be upset about and challenge the results of the presidential election while supporting Loeffler and Perdue at the same time. “At stake in this election is control of the U.S. Senate, and that really means control of this country,” Trump said.
Weigel, who is on-the-ground in Georgia this weekend, noted on Twitter that he and “every reporter [he] talked to has found” that most Trump voters believe not only that the president won but that “he’ll still win the challenges and get a second term.”
Moreover, according to Weigel, “none of these voters plan to skip the Jan. 5 runoff.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-12-06--Primary Care Practices Are Shutting Down Amid the COVID-Induced Economic Crisis

Cormay Caine misses a full day of work and drives more than 130 miles round trip to take five of her children to their pediatrician .
The Sartell , Minnesota , clinic where their doctor used to work closed in August .
Caine is one of several parents who followed Dr. Heather Decker to her new location on the outskirts of Minneapolis , an hour and a half away .
Many couldn ’ t get appointments for months with swamped nearby doctors .
“ I was kind of devastated that she was leaving because I don ’ t like switching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to her .
She ’ s just an awesome doctor , ” said Caine , a postal worker who recently piled the kids into her car for back-to-back appointments .
“ I just wish she didn ’ t have to go that far away.
” So does Decker , who had hoped to settle in the Sartell area .
She recently bought her four-bedroom “ dream home ” there .
The HealthPartners Central Minnesota Clinic where Decker worked is part of a wave of COVID-related closures starting to wash across America , reducing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on primary care doctors .
Although no one tracks medical closures , recent research suggests they number in the thousands .
A survey by the Physicians Foundation estimated that 8 % of all physician practices nationally — around 16,000 — have closed under the stress of the pandemic .
That survey didn ’ t break them down by type , but another from the Virginia-based Larry A .
Green Center and the Primary Care Collaborative found in late September that 7 % of primary care practices were unsure they could stay open past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more teeter on the economic brink , experts say .
“ The last few years have been difficult for primary care practices , especially independent ones , ” said Dr. Karen Joynt Maddox , co-director of the Center for Health Economics and Policy at Washington University in St. Louis .
“ Putting on top of that COVID , that ’ s in many cases the proverbial straw .
These practices are not operating with huge margins .
They ’ re just getting by.
” When offices close , experts said , the biggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preventive care or regular appointments that help keep chronic diseases such as diabetes under control .
“ This is especially poignant in the rural areas .
There aren ’ t any good choices .
What happens is people end up getting care in the emergency room , ” said Dr. Michael LeFevre , head of the family and community medicine department at the University of Missouri and a practicing physician in Columbia .
“ If anything , what this pandemic has done is put a big spotlight on what was already a big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Federal data shows that 82 million Americans live in primary care “ health professional shortage areas , ” and the nation needed more than 15,000 more primary care practitioners even before the pandemic began .
Once the coronavirus struck , some practices buckled when patients stayed away in droves for fear of catching it , said Dr. Gary Price , president of the Physicians Foundation , a nonprofit grant-making and research organization .
Its survey , based on 3,513 responses from emails to half a million doctors , found that 4 in 10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than a quarter .
On the West Coast , a survey released in October by the California Medical Association found that one-quarter of practices in that state saw revenues drop by at least half .
One respondent wrote : “ We are closing next month.
” Decker ’ s experience at HealthPartners is typical .
Before the pandemic , she saw about 18 patients a day .
That quickly dropped to six or eight , “ if that , ” she said .
“ There were no well checks , which is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement , officials at HealthPartners , which has more than 50 primary care clinics around the Twin Cities and western Wisconsin , said closing the one in Sartell “ was not an easy decision , ” but the pandemic caused an immediate , significant drop in revenue .
While continuing to provide dental care in Sartell , northwest of Minneapolis , the company encouraged employees to apply for open positions elsewhere in the organization .
Decker got one of them .
Officials also posted online information for patients on where more than 20 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s financial ripples rocked practices of all sizes , said LeFevre , the Missouri doctor .
Before the pandemic , he said , the 10 clinics in his group saw a total of 3,500 patients a week .
COVID-19 temporarily cut that number in half .
“ We had fiscal reserves to weather the storm .
Small practices don ’ t often have that .
But it ’ s not like we went unscathed , ” he said .
“ All staff had a one-week furlough without pay .
All providers took a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Federal figures show pediatricians earn an average of $ 184,400 a year , and doctors of general internal medicine $ 201,400 , making primary care doctors among the lowest-paid physicians .
As revenues dropped in medical practices , overhead costs stayed the same .
And practices faced new costs such as personal protective equipment , which grew more expensive as demand exceeded supply , especially for small practices without the bulk buying power of large ones .
Doctors also lost money in other ways , said Rebecca Etz , co-director of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she said , pediatricians paid for vaccines upfront , “ then when no one came in , they expired.
” Some doctors took out loans or applied for Provider Relief Fund money under the federal CARES Act .
Dr. Joseph Provenzano , who practices in Modesto , California , said his group of more than 300 physicians received $ 8.7 million in relief in the early days of the pandemic .
“ We were about ready to go under , ” he said .
“ That came in the nick of time.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ loads have largely bounced back , it still had to permanently close three of 11 clinics .
“ We ’ ve got to keep practice doors open so that we don ’ t lose access , especially now that people need it most , ” said Dr. Ada Stewart , president of the American Academy of Family Physicians .
Caine , the Minnesota mom , said her own health care has suffered because she also saw providers at the now-closed Sartell clinic .
While searching for new ones , she ’ s had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the emergency room .
“ I ’ m fortunate because I ’ m able to make it .
I ’ m able to improvise .
But what about the families that don ’ t have transportation ?
” she said .
“ Older people and the more sickly people really need these services , and they ’ ve been stripped away .
”

Patients are ultimately paying the price as care is reduced in areas already short on primary care doctors.
Cormay Caine misses a full day of work and drives more than 130 miles round trip to take five of her children to their pediatrician. The Sartell, Minnesota, clinic where their doctor used to work closed in August.
Caine is one of several parents who followed Dr. Heather Decker to her new location on the outskirts of Minneapolis, an hour and a half away. Many couldn’t get appointments for months with swamped nearby doctors.
“I was kind of devastated that she was leaving because I don’t like switching providers, and my kids were used to her. She’s just an awesome doctor,” said Caine, a postal worker who recently piled the kids into her car for back-to-back appointments. “I just wish she didn’t have to go that far away.”
So does Decker, who had hoped to settle in the Sartell area. She recently bought her four-bedroom “dream home” there.
The HealthPartners Central Minnesota Clinic where Decker worked is part of a wave of COVID-related closures starting to wash across America, reducing access to care in areas already short on primary care doctors.
Although no one tracks medical closures, recent research suggests they number in the thousands. A survey by the Physicians Foundation estimated that 8% of all physician practices nationally — around 16,000 — have closed under the stress of the pandemic. That survey didn’t break them down by type, but another from the Virginia-based Larry A. Green Center and the Primary Care Collaborative found in late September that 7% of primary care practices were unsure they could stay open past December without financial assistance.
And many more teeter on the economic brink, experts say.
“The last few years have been difficult for primary care practices, especially independent ones,” said Dr. Karen Joynt Maddox, co-director of the Center for Health Economics and Policy at Washington University in St. Louis. “Putting on top of that COVID, that’s in many cases the proverbial straw. These practices are not operating with huge margins. They’re just getting by.”
When offices close, experts said, the biggest losers are patients, who may skip preventive care or regular appointments that help keep chronic diseases such as diabetes under control.
“This is especially poignant in the rural areas. There aren’t any good choices. What happens is people end up getting care in the emergency room,” said Dr. Michael LeFevre, head of the family and community medicine department at the University of Missouri and a practicing physician in Columbia. “If anything, what this pandemic has done is put a big spotlight on what was already a big crack in our health care system.”
Federal data shows that 82 million Americans live in primary care “health professional shortage areas,” and the nation needed more than 15,000 more primary care practitioners even before the pandemic began.
Once the coronavirus struck, some practices buckled when patients stayed away in droves for fear of catching it, said Dr. Gary Price, president of the Physicians Foundation, a nonprofit grant-making and research organization. Its survey, based on 3,513 responses from emails to half a million doctors, found that 4 in 10 practices saw patient volumes drop by more than a quarter.
On the West Coast, a survey released in October by the California Medical Association found that one-quarter of practices in that state saw revenues drop by at least half. One respondent wrote: “We are closing next month.”
Decker’s experience at HealthPartners is typical. Before the pandemic, she saw about 18 patients a day. That quickly dropped to six or eight, “if that,” she said. “There were no well checks, which is the bread-and-butter of pediatrics.”
In an emailed statement, officials at HealthPartners, which has more than 50 primary care clinics around the Twin Cities and western Wisconsin, said closing the one in Sartell “was not an easy decision,” but the pandemic caused an immediate, significant drop in revenue. While continuing to provide dental care in Sartell, northwest of Minneapolis, the company encouraged employees to apply for open positions elsewhere in the organization. Decker got one of them. Officials also posted online information for patients on where more than 20 clinicians were moving.
The pandemic’s financial ripples rocked practices of all sizes, said LeFevre, the Missouri doctor. Before the pandemic, he said, the 10 clinics in his group saw a total of 3,500 patients a week. COVID-19 temporarily cut that number in half.
“We had fiscal reserves to weather the storm. Small practices don’t often have that. But it’s not like we went unscathed,” he said. “All staff had a one-week furlough without pay. All providers took a 10% pay cut for three months.”
Federal figures show pediatricians earn an average of $184,400 a year, and doctors of general internal medicine $201,400, making primary care doctors among the lowest-paid physicians.
As revenues dropped in medical practices, overhead costs stayed the same. And practices faced new costs such as personal protective equipment, which grew more expensive as demand exceeded supply, especially for small practices without the bulk buying power of large ones.
Doctors also lost money in other ways, said Rebecca Etz, co-director of the Green Center research group. For example, she said, pediatricians paid for vaccines upfront, “then when no one came in, they expired.”
Some doctors took out loans or applied for Provider Relief Fund money under the federal CARES Act. Dr. Joseph Provenzano, who practices in Modesto, California, said his group of more than 300 physicians received $8.7 million in relief in the early days of the pandemic.
“We were about ready to go under,” he said. “That came in the nick of time.”
While the group’s patient loads have largely bounced back, it still had to permanently close three of 11 clinics.
“We’ve got to keep practice doors open so that we don’t lose access, especially now that people need it most,” said Dr. Ada Stewart, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians.
Caine, the Minnesota mom, said her own health care has suffered because she also saw providers at the now-closed Sartell clinic. While searching for new ones, she’s had to seek treatment in urgent care offices and the emergency room.
“I’m fortunate because I’m able to make it. I’m able to improvise. But what about the families that don’t have transportation?” she said. “Older people and the more sickly people really need these services, and they’ve been stripped away.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-12-06--Super PACS Run by Former McConnell Aides Are Pouring Money Into Georgia Runoffs

Super PACs linked to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) are outspending Democratic groups in the Georgia Senate runoffs as Republicans attempt to hold the upper chamber .
The Senate Leadership Fund and American Crossroads , closely affiliated GOP super PACs run by former McConnell aides , have together spent $ 20.6 million on ads attacking Democratic candidates Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock .
As of Monday , their combined spending accounted for 45 percent of all outside spending in the Georgia runoffs .
Those deep-pocketed super PACs have helped conservative groups outspend their liberal counterparts 2-to-1 thus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will decide control of the Senate when votes are tallied in early January .
The Senate Leadership Fund is running ads tying Ossoff to Democratic leaders and telling viewers , “ If Ossoff wins , they control everything.
” The super PAC has spent $ 252 million to influence 2020 races , the most any outside group has ever spent in a single election cycle .
It received more in “ dark money ” donations than any other group , even though Democratic groups got greater backing overall from undisclosed funds .
American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funding from the Senate Leadership Fund , is labeling Warnock as an “ anti-police extremist ” in its ads .
Democrats have so far spent less on super PAC ads .
Georgia Honor and The Georgia Way , newly formed groups linked to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) , spent a combined $ 10.8 million through Monday to attack Sens .
David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler .
Their ads attack Perdue and Loeffler over their response to the COVID-19 pandemic that has killed a quarter-million Americans .
Georgia ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the general election , but Democrats hope high turnout will help them flip Georgia as President-elect Joe Biden narrowly did earlier this month .
The party is targeting thousands of young Georgians who were not eligible to vote in the general election but can vote in the runoffs .
Those efforts are bolstered by former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams , whose group Fair Fight Action is credited with registering hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters .
Republicans are concerned that President Donald Trump ’ s baseless accusations of voter fraud in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state ’ s GOP officials — could cause reliably Republican voters to stay home .
In an attempt to quell those concerns , Donald Trump Jr. will appear in an ad from a new super PAC urging Republicans to turn out , Politico reported .
President Trump has said he will travel to Georgia to support Perdue and Loeffler .
Republicans so far have spending on their side .
In addition to McConnell-linked super PACs , other conservative groups including Americans for Prosperity Action , National Victory Action Fund and the National Rifle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ influence the runoffs .
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also announced a $ 2 million ad buy in support of the Republican senators .
The Georgia Senate runoffs are extending an election cycle that was already on track to smash spending records with roughly $ 14 billion spent .
In most races , Democrats raised and spent far more money than Republicans .
Ad spending and ad reservations in the Georgia runoffs by candidates and outside groups total $ 296 million , with Republicans accounting for $ 175 million of that total , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race between Perdue and Ossoff is on pace to shatter spending records .
It ’ s already the sixth-most expensive race of the 2020 cycle that hosted the three most expensive congressional races ever .

The combined spending of groups linked to the Senate Majority Leader totals about 45 percent of all outside spending.
Super PACs linked to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) are outspending Democratic groups in the Georgia Senate runoffs as Republicans attempt to hold the upper chamber.
The Senate Leadership Fund and American Crossroads, closely affiliated GOP super PACs run by former McConnell aides, have together spent $20.6 million on ads attacking Democratic candidates Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. As of Monday, their combined spending accounted for 45 percent of all outside spending in the Georgia runoffs.
Those deep-pocketed super PACs have helped conservative groups outspend their liberal counterparts 2-to-1 thus far in the Georgia runoffs, which will decide control of the Senate when votes are tallied in early January.
The Senate Leadership Fund is running ads tying Ossoff to Democratic leaders and telling viewers, “If Ossoff wins, they control everything.” The super PAC has spent $252 million to influence 2020 races, the most any outside group has ever spent in a single election cycle. It received more in “dark money” donations than any other group, even though Democratic groups got greater backing overall from undisclosed funds. American Crossroads, which received most of its funding from the Senate Leadership Fund, is labeling Warnock as an “anti-police extremist” in its ads.
Democrats have so far spent less on super PAC ads. Georgia Honor and The Georgia Way, newly formed groups linked to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), spent a combined $10.8 million through Monday to attack Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler. Their ads attack Perdue and Loeffler over their response to the COVID-19 pandemic that has killed a quarter-million Americans.
Georgia’s Republican incumbents received the highest vote share during the general election, but Democrats hope high turnout will help them flip Georgia as President-elect Joe Biden narrowly did earlier this month. The party is targeting thousands of young Georgians who were not eligible to vote in the general election but can vote in the runoffs. Those efforts are bolstered by former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, whose group Fair Fight Action is credited with registering hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters.
Republicans are concerned that President Donald Trump’s baseless accusations of voter fraud in Georgia — and his attacks on the state’s GOP officials — could cause reliably Republican voters to stay home. In an attempt to quell those concerns, Donald Trump Jr. will appear in an ad from a new super PAC urging Republicans to turn out, Politico reported. President Trump has said he will travel to Georgia to support Perdue and Loeffler.
Republicans so far have spending on their side. In addition to McConnell-linked super PACs, other conservative groups including Americans for Prosperity Action, National Victory Action Fund and the National Rifle Association have each spent seven figures to influence the runoffs. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also announced a $2 million ad buy in support of the Republican senators.
The Georgia Senate runoffs are extending an election cycle that was already on track to smash spending records with roughly $14 billion spent. In most races, Democrats raised and spent far more money than Republicans.
Ad spending and ad reservations in the Georgia runoffs by candidates and outside groups total $296 million, with Republicans accounting for $175 million of that total, according to figures from CNN. The race between Perdue and Ossoff is on pace to shatter spending records. It’s already the sixth-most expensive race of the 2020 cycle that hosted the three most expensive congressional races ever.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-12-06--Trump Hasn’t Held Back US Military Power — He Has Enabled and Escalated It

Janine Jackson : Corporate media never want reality to complicate a good storyline : Trump is still about the “ disgruntled white working class ” for elite reporters , even though he only gets majority favorable ratings among households making upwards of $ 100,000 a year .
Likewise , Trump is “ anti-interventionist , ” even as he directs violent interventions on multiple fronts .
Faulting no one for being concerned about possible saber-rattlers in a Biden administration , a history in which Donald Trump is allowed to be labeled an exception to belligerent US foreign policy will be deeply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next guest encourages a shake-up of that characterization , and its erasure of the horrors the Trump administration has brought to , for one , Yemen .
Murtaza Hussain is a journalist at the Intercept .
He joins us now by phone from Brooklyn .
Welcome back to CounterSpin , Murtaza Hussain .
Murtaza Hussain : Thank you for having me .
Your piece began , as did the Trump presidency , with what the White House called a “ highly successful ” “ intelligence-gathering ” raid on a Yemeni village , al-Ghayil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us , ” but for many of us , it may be the first time hearing : What happened , and what did it herald about Trump and Yemen ?
In the early months of the Trump presidency , right at the beginning of the Trump presidency , or the initial phase of it , there was a raid authorized on a Yemeni village , that had been planned and previously mooted during the Obama era , had not been carried forward .
But when Trump came into office , it was perceived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And , essentially , special forces were deployed to the Yemini village .
And it turned out to be a massacre , and several dozen civilians were killed .
One US service member was also killed .
And among the civilian victims were several children , more than 10 children , including a young girl who was an American citizen , a Yemeni-American citizen , and who was the daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki , the former preacher in the United States , a Muslim preacher who was killed under the Obama administration .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ signified very early was the fact that the worst of the Obama-era counterterrorism practices would carry on into the Trump administration .
And , indeed , we have seen that over the past four years .
So while Trump likes to characterize himself symbolically as being against the wars of the preceding Washington establishment , in practice , he ’ s carried on those wars , and even escalated and intensified them , as we ’ ve seen in Yemen .
The Intercept ’ s Iona Craig said — I saw her on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subsequently heard from villagers from that village that was raided , and they were repeatedly targeted ; it wasn ’ t a matter of a single day .
Months later , she said , many were living in tents on the mountainside , because they were afraid to go back to their homes .
But just to be clear : Trump didn ’ t just not get out of something that he inherited , he actually made it worse .
And that ’ s what this Airwars report illustrates .
Exactly right ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worse .
And to the extent that he has been “ noninterventionist , ” it ’ s mostly that he has not intervened with the CIA , or the Department of Defense , doing what it wants to do .
He has not pushed back politically , or stood on any principles .
And it ’ s very interesting ; he ’ s developed this reputation by just constantly portraying himself as somebody who ’ s anti-war , and some small number of people have found it compelling .
The reality has not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not been anti-war .
He has let the military establishment , the intelligence establishment , do everything it wants to do .
It just so happens that the US was so spent at the moment that there was not going to be a major war in this period of time , because their resources were exhausted .
But anything they wanted to do , they got ; Trump has been no impediment to that at all .
And even with regard to Yemen , there ’ s been some pushback , some calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coalition , but Trump , in fact , very proactively vetoed that congressional measure .
Absolutely , because his political supporters did not want such a measure , and he is never one to do what ’ s politically unpopular or politically difficult .
He does the easiest thing at any given time , and then he goes and gives a speech and tweets about what an iconoclast he is ; and that ’ s what he ’ s been living off of .
And unfortunately , even in this election , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people found this narrative compelling .
But the simple reality is it bears no connection to how he ’ s actually governed .
One thing that is extremely Trumpian , that you would have thought would have been picked up on in a big way , is the fact that , when asked about civilian casualties , Trump claimed that in strikes on Yemen , there had been zero , zero civilian casualties .
It ’ s just a disregard and not caring about reality , actually , which has been a hallmark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broadly : Yeah , America is greater than ever ; there ’ s no casualties ; the economy is X , Y and Z .
Unfortunately , it ’ s not true , and it covers up the great tragedy in this case that there have been horrible casualties in these operations .
Part of the confusion , it seems like , is some slipperiness around what constitutes war .
I mean , are airstrikes ?
Or drone strikes ?
Or what if you just bomb the harbor where food and medicine get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a way to avoid war , but they kill people just as dead .
Do you think part of it is that we just don ’ t have clear ways to talk about US actions causing death and suffering if it doesn ’ t have this label of “ war ” put on it ?
Precisely .
Sanctions are one thing you brought up .
Under Trump , it ’ s unprecedented sanctions targeting Iran , even during the Covid-19 pandemic .
And Iran was going to have a hard time dealing with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US or any other country ; Iran is far less wealthy than the US .
And what they ’ ve done is , they ’ ve made it almost impossible to deal effectively with the pandemic , by very mercilessly sanctioning and ramping up sanctions during this period , and it ’ s killing people .
And historically , siege was considered an act of war ; to undertake a siege against a foreign population was considered an act of war .
And these sanctions are basically a form of siege against a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of political goal from their leadership .
And I feel like their goal is to cause the collapse of the Iranian government , which , as we ’ ve seen , can just lead to total chaos and horror for the people who live in the country , even if they don ’ t like the government themselves , either .
So they ’ re killing people in huge numbers .
Trump has not said a single word about any of this ; he ’ s been the enabler of it and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And it ’ s just a bad parody that he characterizes himself as the anti-war president ; it ’ s simply not the case in any sense .
Well , Joe Biden suggested that he opposed the assault on Yemen , and even that he opposed weapon sales to the UAE and to Saudi Arabia .
Michèle Flournoy , who today we hear is likely going to be Biden ’ s choice for secretary of Defense , has said she supports weapons sales , but maybe they could be conditional , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s quite unclear .
And this is all before Biden starts to get pressure about being tough on Iran via Yemen .
I just wonder , finally , do you have any sense of how , or if , things might change with regard to the US and Yemen when the administration changes ?
There was a lot of momentum during this campaign from progressives , specifically , to put pressure on foreign policy issues on the Democratic establishment .
Because of the Bernie Sanders campaign , I think they were forced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now , of course , that leverage is sort of gone .
And if you ’ ve seen some of the announcements of Biden ’ s personnel , he ’ s really drawn from the establishment of the establishment for who he wants to advise him on foreign policy .
So I think that it ’ s really important that the pressure continues on this .
I understand the sentiment that a lot of people express , but I think that there is still some opportunity to change course on this .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden and the Trump administration , because we had four years of Trump , and we know that he ’ s completely insensible to any form of pressure , and he does not even pretend to care .
Whereas with Biden , they can ’ t completely pretend not to care , and they can ’ t give an image of being insensible to any progressive pressure at all , because they need progressives to assemble the coalition .
So I think this is an opportunity to push them on this .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , these are people who have wavered a bit , but they have not been completely ironclad in the commitment to this policy push on Yemen , and there ’ s opportunity there , perhaps , to push people as hard as you can to take the most equitable positions on Yemen , and other subjects .
We ’ ve been speaking with journalist Murtaza Hussain .
You can find his work , including “ Trump , the War President , Leaves a Trail of Civilians Dead in Yemen , ” at TheIntercept.com @ @ @ @ @ @ @ joining us this week on CounterSpin .
Oh , thank you , my pleasure .

President Donald Trump give a thumbs up after speaking to the media as he departs for Walter Reed National Military Medical Center from the White House on July 11, 2020, in Washington, D.C. Joshua Roberts / Getty Images
Janine Jackson: Corporate media never want reality to complicate a good storyline: Trump is still about the “disgruntled white working class” for elite reporters, even though he only gets majority favorable ratings among households making upwards of $100,000 a year. Likewise, Trump is “anti-interventionist,” even as he directs violent interventions on multiple fronts.
Faulting no one for being concerned about possible saber-rattlers in a Biden administration, a history in which Donald Trump is allowed to be labeled an exception to belligerent US foreign policy will be deeply flawed.
A recent piece by our next guest encourages a shake-up of that characterization, and its erasure of the horrors the Trump administration has brought to, for one, Yemen. Murtaza Hussain is a journalist at the Intercept. He joins us now by phone from Brooklyn. Welcome back to CounterSpin, Murtaza Hussain.
Murtaza Hussain: Thank you for having me.
Your piece began, as did the Trump presidency, with what the White House called a “highly successful” “intelligence-gathering” raid on a Yemeni village, al-Ghayil. I’d say “remind us,” but for many of us, it may be the first time hearing: What happened, and what did it herald about Trump and Yemen?
In the early months of the Trump presidency, right at the beginning of the Trump presidency, or the initial phase of it, there was a raid authorized on a Yemeni village, that had been planned and previously mooted during the Obama era, had not been carried forward. But when Trump came into office, it was perceived as the time to execute it.
And, essentially, special forces were deployed to the Yemini village. And it turned out to be a massacre, and several dozen civilians were killed. One US service member was also killed. And among the civilian victims were several children, more than 10 children, including a young girl who was an American citizen, a Yemeni-American citizen, and who was the daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki, the former preacher in the United States, a Muslim preacher who was killed under the Obama administration.
So I think that what that raid signified very early was the fact that the worst of the Obama-era counterterrorism practices would carry on into the Trump administration. And, indeed, we have seen that over the past four years. So while Trump likes to characterize himself symbolically as being against the wars of the preceding Washington establishment, in practice, he’s carried on those wars, and even escalated and intensified them, as we’ve seen in Yemen.
The Intercept’s Iona Craig said — I saw her on Democracy Now! — that she had subsequently heard from villagers from that village that was raided, and they were repeatedly targeted; it wasn’t a matter of a single day. Months later, she said, many were living in tents on the mountainside, because they were afraid to go back to their homes. But just to be clear: Trump didn’t just not get out of something that he inherited, he actually made it worse. And that’s what this Airwars report illustrates.
Exactly right; he has made all of these conflicts worse. And to the extent that he has been “noninterventionist,” it’s mostly that he has not intervened with the CIA, or the Department of Defense, doing what it wants to do. He has not pushed back politically, or stood on any principles.
And it’s very interesting; he’s developed this reputation by just constantly portraying himself as somebody who’s anti-war, and some small number of people have found it compelling. The reality has not been the case; he’s not been anti-war. He has let the military establishment, the intelligence establishment, do everything it wants to do.
It just so happens that the US was so spent at the moment that there was not going to be a major war in this period of time, because their resources were exhausted. But anything they wanted to do, they got; Trump has been no impediment to that at all.
And even with regard to Yemen, there’s been some pushback, some calls to pull US support from that Saudi coalition, but Trump, in fact, very proactively vetoed that congressional measure.
Absolutely, because his political supporters did not want such a measure, and he is never one to do what’s politically unpopular or politically difficult. He does the easiest thing at any given time, and then he goes and gives a speech and tweets about what an iconoclast he is; and that’s what he’s been living off of. And unfortunately, even in this election, which he lost, tens of millions of people found this narrative compelling. But the simple reality is it bears no connection to how he’s actually governed.
One thing that is extremely Trumpian, that you would have thought would have been picked up on in a big way, is the fact that, when asked about civilian casualties, Trump claimed that in strikes on Yemen, there had been zero, zero civilian casualties.
It’s just a disregard and not caring about reality, actually, which has been a hallmark of how he’s governed more broadly: Yeah, America is greater than ever; there’s no casualties; the economy is X, Y and Z. Unfortunately, it’s not true, and it covers up the great tragedy in this case that there have been horrible casualties in these operations.
Part of the confusion, it seems like, is some slipperiness around what constitutes war. I mean, are airstrikes? Or drone strikes? Or what if you just bomb the harbor where food and medicine get in? We read about sanctions as a way to avoid war, but they kill people just as dead. Do you think part of it is that we just don’t have clear ways to talk about US actions causing death and suffering if it doesn’t have this label of “war” put on it?
Precisely. Sanctions are one thing you brought up. Under Trump, it’s unprecedented sanctions targeting Iran, even during the Covid-19 pandemic. And Iran was going to have a hard time dealing with the pandemic anyway, just like the US or any other country; Iran is far less wealthy than the US. And what they’ve done is, they’ve made it almost impossible to deal effectively with the pandemic, by very mercilessly sanctioning and ramping up sanctions during this period, and it’s killing people.
And historically, siege was considered an act of war; to undertake a siege against a foreign population was considered an act of war. And these sanctions are basically a form of siege against a civilian population, to extort some sort of political goal from their leadership. And I feel like their goal is to cause the collapse of the Iranian government, which, as we’ve seen, can just lead to total chaos and horror for the people who live in the country, even if they don’t like the government themselves, either.
So they’re killing people in huge numbers. Trump has not said a single word about any of this; he’s been the enabler of it and the supporter of it, more than anything. And it’s just a bad parody that he characterizes himself as the anti-war president; it’s simply not the case in any sense.
Well, Joe Biden suggested that he opposed the assault on Yemen, and even that he opposed weapon sales to the UAE and to Saudi Arabia. Michèle Flournoy, who today we hear is likely going to be Biden’s choice for secretary of Defense, has said she supports weapons sales, but maybe they could be conditional, and not be used in Yemen; it’s quite unclear. And this is all before Biden starts to get pressure about being tough on Iran via Yemen. I just wonder, finally, do you have any sense of how, or if, things might change with regard to the US and Yemen when the administration changes?
There was a lot of momentum during this campaign from progressives, specifically, to put pressure on foreign policy issues on the Democratic establishment. Because of the Bernie Sanders campaign, I think they were forced to listen a bit more, but now, of course, that leverage is sort of gone. And if you’ve seen some of the announcements of Biden’s personnel, he’s really drawn from the establishment of the establishment for who he wants to advise him on foreign policy.
So I think that it’s really important that the pressure continues on this. I understand the sentiment that a lot of people express, but I think that there is still some opportunity to change course on this. I think there is a difference between the Biden and the Trump administration, because we had four years of Trump, and we know that he’s completely insensible to any form of pressure, and he does not even pretend to care. Whereas with Biden, they can’t completely pretend not to care, and they can’t give an image of being insensible to any progressive pressure at all, because they need progressives to assemble the coalition. So I think this is an opportunity to push them on this.
And Michèle Flournoy, as somebody you mentioned, these are people who have wavered a bit, but they have not been completely ironclad in the commitment to this policy push on Yemen, and there’s opportunity there, perhaps, to push people as hard as you can to take the most equitable positions on Yemen, and other subjects.
We’ve been speaking with journalist Murtaza Hussain. You can find his work, including “Trump, the War President, Leaves a Trail of Civilians Dead in Yemen,” at TheIntercept.com. Murtaza Hussain, thank you for joining us this week on CounterSpin.
Oh, thank you, my pleasure.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.