Homeland’s Kelly Lashes Out At “Treasonous” Intelligence Leakers

Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly told Meet the Press’ Chuck Todd on Sunday that high-level classified leaks, like those over the Manchester attack in the U.K., are “borderline treason.”

I don’t know where the leak came from. But I… immediately called my counterpart in the UK…. She immediately brought this topic up. And, if it came from the United States, it’s totally unacceptable. And I don’t know why people do these kind of things, but it’s borderline, if not over the line, of treason.

He added:

I believe when you leak the kind of information that seems to be routinely leaked — high, high level of classification — I think it’s darn close to treason.

 

Shortly after Kelly’s appearance on Meet The Press, President Trump took to Twitter once again, making it clear how he feels…

 

One wonders if this ‘excuse’ to really go after intel leakers will finally slow down the ‘sources’ (real or fake) behind so many WaPo, CNN, NYT stories?

via http://ift.tt/2qpla0E Tyler Durden

Chicago Population Shrinks Most Of Any City In US

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Illinoisans continue their exodus, with Chicago having the dubious distinction of the highest population loss in the nation.

High taxes are the number one reason people and businesses leave the state.

What follows is a guest post by Michael Lucci, Vice President of Policy, Illinois Policy Institute.

CHICAGO ONLY MAJOR U.S. CITY TO LOSE POPULATION FROM 2015 TO 2016

The majority of major cities in Illinois are shrinking as the Land of Lincoln depopulates due to massive out-migration to other states.

But while most of Illinois’ cities and towns are continuing to shrink, the majority of cities and towns in Illinois’ bordering states are growing, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
When Illinoisans are polled on why they are leaving, taxes are the No. 1 reason they cite. Yet Illinois politicians continue to raise taxes, showing that political leaders have not yet heard the message of the state’s residents.

Chicago shrank more than any other U.S. city, but Berwyn, Cicero and Peoria are shrinking faster on a per capita basis

Chicago’s population declined by 8,638 people from July 2015 to July 2016, a larger loss than any other major American city. Illinois has 29 cities with 50,000 people or more, and 21 of those cities also shrank in total size.

However, on a per capita basis, Decatur is shrinking more than any other city in Illinois. Decatur’s population shrank by 8.5 people per 1,000 residents from July 2015 to July 2016. That means that for every 1,000 people in Decatur in 2015, there were 8.5 fewer people in Decatur in 2016.

On a per capita basis, Decatur’s loss was followed by Berwyn, Cicero, Peoria and Oak Park, all of which shrank by more than seven people per 1,000 residents.

Eight of these larger Illinois cities had population growth year over year. Champaign is the only Illinois city that had more than 1 percent population growth, fueled almost entirely by the arrival of international students at the University of Illinois.

Most of these cities are shrinking because there are so many people leaving for other parts of the country. Those losses to other parts of the country outweigh the normal population gains experienced across the state from having more births than deaths, and having a small inflow of international immigrants.

Illinois’ Neighbors are Watching Most of their Biggest Cities Grow

The story is different in neighboring states, where most cities with more than 50,000 people are growing. Illinois’ border states have 58 cities with more than 50,000 people, and 38 of them are growing. That means that 65 percent of such cities in neighboring states are growing.

In Illinois, only eight of 29 cities with populations of 50,000 or more are growing, which is only 28 percent of Illinois cities with more than 50,000 people.

A large part of the reason Illinois’ border states have growing cities and Illinois has shrinking cities is because Illinois is losing the border wars with all of its neighbors. Illinoisans are flooding into bordering states faster than ever before. Over the last 10 years, Illinois has experienced large net migration losses to nearly all of its bordering states, and those losses have accelerated in recent years. (The exception to this 10-year trend is Michigan, which shares a lake border with Illinois and to which Illinois had net losses of residents over only the two most recent years of data.)

Higher Taxes Will Push More Residents Out of State

The Census Bureau released its out-migration data the same week the Illinois Senate passed a massive tax hike bill.

This is a significant development in a state where residents are fed up with the high tax burden, and this frustration is pushing more and more people to leave. According to a Paul Simon Public Policy Institute poll released in October 2016, 47 percent of Illinoisans surveyed said they want to leave the state. And taxes were the most commonly cited reason people gave for their desire to move.

And according to a recent poll commissioned by the Illinois Policy Institute, fewer than 1 in 3 likely Illinois voters support raising taxes to balance the state’s books. Yet the General Assembly continues to insist on tax hikes as the way to close the budget deficit.

Illinoisans are taxed enough already, and the state will continue to lose residents until it reins in taxes and adopts policies to support more jobs growth.

The General Assembly has run a losing strategy for years: raising taxes and failing to reform spending drivers. This has not brought prosperity or opportunity to the state, and will not do so over the longer term, either.
Illinois will not become sustainable again until the state implements reforms so that the government, its bureaucracies and special interests serve the people rather than the other way around.

Until Illinois is fixed, Illinoisans will continue to vote with their feet against staying in the Land of Lincoln.

Michael Lucci
Vice President of Policy

* *  *

Those who leave are generally better educated and have higher wages than those who stay. Those who cannot find another job elsewhere have no choice but to stay.

Five Desperately Needed Reforms

  1. Municipal bankruptcy legislation
  2. Pension reform
  3. Right-to-Work legislation
  4. End of prevailing wage laws
  5. Workers’ compensation reform

Number one on my list of Illinois reforms is bankruptcy legislation. It is the only hope for numerous Illinois cities whose hands are also tied by union-sponsored prevailing wage laws.

For further discussion, including pension analysis,  please see Puerto Rico Placed in Bankruptcy Protection: Illinois Needs Similar Deal.

via http://ift.tt/2s3ZRie Tyler Durden

Spain is Holding Catalonia Hostage

Via The Daily Bell

Imagine you are in a book club. For a few years, it was great, you liked the books and the discussion with members. But then, the club started reading steamy romance novels that you just weren’t into and would not entertain your opinions for other material. Finally, when you can’t relate to the discussion on the texts anymore, you decide to leave the club.

But then, the book club President locks the door and tells you to sit down. You will remain in the club, the other members tell you, whether you like it or not. You will read the romance novels which don’t interest you, and you will contribute your monthly dues, by force if necessary.

As ridiculous as that would be, that is the attitude of Spain, and many other countries, when it comes to regions wishing to secede and form their own country. Why should regions be kept in the larger “club” against their will?

Catalonia is a region in Spain bordering France and the Mediterranean Sea, that has been independent at times in history. The modern movement for independence began almost 100 years ago, but the region settled for autonomy instead of full-fledged independence.

In 2006, Catalonia drafted a revised Statute of Autonomy, many parts of which were ruled unconstitutional by the Spanish high court. This sparked calls for Catalonia to entirely secede from Spain, instead of settling for “autonomy.”

Spain however, doesn’t even want the people of Catalonia to talk about or think about secession. The former President of Catalonia defied the Spanish government when he held a referendum to form a new country of Catalonia. 35% of eligible voters turned out in the region with a population of 7.5 million.

The informal vote was opposed by Mariano Rajoy’s government in Madrid and was held in defiance of Constitutional Court ruling five days ahead of the poll that the referendum was illegal. Around 2.3 million people in Catalonia cast a ballot in the plebiscite with 80.7 percent voting for independence.

The non-binding referendum was held in 2014, and because of it, earlier this year Spain barred former Catalan President Artur Mas from holding public office for two years and fined him €36,500.

Prime Minister of Spain Mariano Rajoy has called Catalonia’s efforts to break away “an unacceptable attempt to blackmail the state.” Spain’s constitution makes it illegal for regions to seek independence.

Yet the government of Catalonia remains defiant, promising the people a binding referendum for September of this year in which voters can decide if Catalonia will break away from Spain.

Spain will attempt to prevent that referendum from being held, even though polls consistently indicate 80% of Catalonians want to be allowed to vote on the issue.

Just in case Spain is successful in obstructing the people from voicing their will, the Catalan government has drafted a bill that would declare its independence from Spain, officially making Catalonia its own country.

The bill would appropriate Catalonia-related cases from the national courts to the newly formed Catalan courts, which would dismiss all pending cases against people charged with independence-related illegal activities.

Catalonia has a functioning government and has a plan to implement their own courts upon becoming independent. The people at least want the freedom to choose independence, and many polls and former referendums indicate a majority would vote in favor of forming a new country that better aligns with their unique culture and interests.

The population of 7.5 million would place the newly formed country right in the middle of worldwide countries by population, larger than Denmark and Ireland, slightly smaller than Israel and Switzerland.

But the Spanish government is holding on tooth and nail, determined to preserve their power.

Why Is Spain So Adamant that Catalonia Stays?

Federal governments are always weary of their power being challenged, and historically countries seek to gain territory, not lose it.

Even amidst the Catalan movement towards independence, Spain is attempting to bring Gibraltar under the rule of their economically weak country, even though Gibraltar has not been part of Spain since 1713. Gibraltar, technically a British Territory, considers Spain a hostile and threatening neighbor. Spain cannot even keep its own house in order, yet seeks to assert sovereignty over more independent regions.

One main reason that Spain does not want to lose Catalonia is that it is a wealthy region, that forms a solid tax base for the Spanish government to slurp up.

Catalan independence would mean the loss of up to 30 per cent of Spain’s gross domestic product and Minister of the Economy Luis de Guindos insisted that is something the government “will never let happen”.

It is a tax farm, and Spain simply wishes to remain in control over the appropriated resources of the Catalans, instead of allowing their wealth to remain in the region, and be spent how they choose through a smaller more responsive government.

The defense minister has called the Catalan government’s attempts at secession “a grave threat to coexistence and constitutional order.”

But this is silly. Coexistence is exactly what Catalonia is after, as well as their own constitutional order which has been prevented by the government in Spain. Coexistence means letting people go their own ways if they wish. Coexistence means you leave people alone who wish to be left alone.

And by constitutional order, what he really means is dictatorial order, as the Spanish government is fighting as hard as possible from allowing Catalans to follow their own constitution, run their own affairs, and be free to choose their own system.

And with Spain’s attempt to silence any dissent, even charging those in favor of independence with crimes, it is no wonder why people would want to separate from a regime so hostile to free speech, and freedom of expression.

It is unjust and an affront to freedom to keep people in an organization against their will. Allowing secession supports the idea that when the larger group no longer represents your will, you have the right to peacefully remove yourself from their ranks.

Decentralizing government is a good thing, as it gives people more control over their lives, their communities, and their futures. Let’s hope we are only seeing the very beginning of this secessionist movement to give people more control over their government and experiment with better political systems.

via http://ift.tt/2qsnrny TDB

Cleveland Will Be Paying for Renovations to King James’ Castle Until 2034

Led by one of the game’s all-time greatest players and just four wins away from back-to-back league championships, there’s no doubt that the Cleveland Cavaliers are basketball royalty.

Taxpayers in northern Ohio—thrilled though they might be about the team’s on-court exploits—might find themselves feeling more like peasants, the kind who get yoked into service for a $140 million renovation of “King” (Lebron) James‘ castle. After the Cavs broke a 52-year championship drought by rallying to defeat the Golden State Warriors in last year’s National Basketball Association championship series (a rematch of which begins this week), team owner Dan Gilbert wasted little time in turning that goodwill into political capital, locking taxpayers into a stadium deal that they will be paying off long after James’ career and the 2016 championship team are a hazy memory.

Last month, Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson signed off on the city’s deal to renovate Quicken Loans Arena, where the Cavaliers play. Though the project carries a $140 million price tag that supposedly is split evenly between the team and the taxpayers, the final cost will end up being almost twice that total.

As Cleveland.com explains, Cuyahoga County will borrow the $140 million upfront by issuing bonds, but paying off those loans will take until 2034 and will end up costing an estimated $244 million. The city is piggybacking an extra $38.5 million into the bonds to pay for future sports stadium projects, bringing the final total to more than $282 million, paid over 17 years.

While the Cavs will pay $122 million of the total, Cleveland will pay $132 million through a combination of higher taxes on tickets to events at the arena and hotel tax revenue. Another $16 million will come from the county, and the final $12 million comes from higher taxes on tickets to “future Cavs playoff games” and an increased sales tax on merchandise, food, and alcohol sold at the arena.

As stadium financing deals go, this is far from the worst one out there. Most of the new taxes will apply only to people who go to games and other events at Quicken Loans Arena, which is better than asking the general public to foot the bill. Sure, your ticket will cost most and your beer and popcorn will be marked up to an even more unbelievable level, but you will have opted in to paying those higher fees by going to the arena.

Still, it’s hard to understand why the city feels the need to lavish corporate welfare on a team that’s currently in the midst of an unparalleled run of success both on the court and in the board room. After winning the first championship in team history last year, the Cavs’ are estimated to be worth $1.3 billion, according to Forbes’ Magazine. That makes them the 11th most valuable team in the NBA, which is no small feat, considering the top 10 teams hail from much larger markets, like Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Houston.

Surely the Cavs—and Gilbert, the owner, who bought the team in 2005 for $375 million, about a quarter of what it’s worth today—could have afforded to pay a larger share of the renovations, had city and county officials pushed for that.

Celebrate now, Cleveland. Back-to-back-to-back trips to the NBA Finals don’t happen too often. Bask in the glory of James’ transcendent abilities as the game’s top superstar while you’ve got him. The bill will be coming due for years to come.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2saC7YV
via IFTTT

In “Watershed Moment” Merkel Says Germany Can No Longer Rely On America

One day after Donald Trump infuriated Angela Merkel and the rest of his G-7 peers, when the US president refused to endorse the Paris climate treaty, prompting the German chancellor to say  that “the whole discussion about climate has been difficult, or rather very unsatisfactory… here we have the situation that six members, or even seven if you want to add the EU, stand against one”, Germany’s prime minister made what many have dubbed, an “era-defining” statement.

Speaking at a CDU election rally in Munich, Merkel said that Europe must take its fate into its own hands” or as the AFP put it, “Merkel warns US, Britain no longer reliable partners.”

Faced with a western alliance divided by Brexit and Donald Trump’s presidency, Merkel said “die zeiten, in denen wir uns auf andere völlig verlassen konnten, sind ein Stück vorbei”, or loosely translated “the times in which we could completely depend on others are on the way out.” and added that “I’ve experienced that in the last few days.”

Merkel then said that while Germany and Europe would strive to remain on good terms with America and Britain, “we have to fight for our own destiny” and she also said that special emphasis was needed on warm relations between Berlin and newly-elected French President Emmanuel Macron.

Her comments came after Trump said during the G-7 meeting he needed more time to decide if the US would continue backing the Paris climate deal, which has frustrated European diplomats. A subseqent report by Axios, Trump privately told multiple people, including EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, that “he plans to leave the Paris agreement on climate change” which will likely further infurate his European allies.

During his trip, Trump also echoed his past criticism of NATO allies for failing to meet the defensive alliance’s military spending commitment of two percent of GDP.

Observers noted that he neglected to publicly endorse the pact’s Article Five, which guarantees that member countries will aid the others they are attacked. The omission was especially striking as he unveiled a memorial to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the US, the only time the mutual defense clause has been triggered.

On Friday, Trump also described German trade practices as “bad, very bad,” in Brussels talks last week, complaining that Europe’s largest economy sells too many cars to the US.

Reactions to Merkel’s striking comment came pouring in from the likes of Edward Snowden who called her speech an “era-defining moment”:

… the president of the Council on Foreign Relations. Richard Haass, who called it a “watershed moment”

… and many others:

via http://ift.tt/2qrNj3e Tyler Durden

Kim Jong-Un Watches As North Korea Tests New Anti-Aircraft Weapon

With Trump back from his trip, and speculation again emerging that Trump may “wag the dog” and launch an attack on the Kim regime to deflect from the domestic media onslaught a la Syria, especially after last night’s report that the US has deployed a third carrier group to the Western Pacific, on Sunday Korea’s state news agency, KCNA reported that after weeks of defiant ballistic missile tests Kim Jong Un supervised the test of a new anti-aircraft weapon system and ordered its mass production and deployment throughout the country.

While KCNA did not report the exact nature of the weapon or the time of the test it said it was organized by the Academy of National Defence Science, a blacklisted agency that is believed to be developing missiles and nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, Kim – taking a page out of his father’s playbook – watched…

… delighted.

According to KCNA, “Kim Jong Un … watched the test of a new type of anti-aircraft guided weapon system organized by the Academy of National Defense Science.”

“This weapon system, whose operation capability has been thoroughly verified, should be mass-produced to deploy all over the country … so as to completely spoil the enemy’s wild dream to command the air, boasting of air supremacy and weapon almighty,” the press agency said.

As Reuters adds, the North has been pushing to develop a wide range of weapon systems since early last year at an unprecedented pace including a long-range missile capable of striking the mainland United States and has in recent weeks tested its intermediate-range ballistic missile, making some technical advances. The isolated state rejects U.N. and unilateral sanctions by other states against its weapons program as an infringement of its right to self defense and says the program is “necessary to counter U.S. aggression.”

We doubt it will succeed, especially with the US piling up aircraft in North Korea’s vicinity.

And while the military posturing is set to continue on both sides until some real conflict finally emerges, a potentially more relevant story is that despite assurances by Beijing that it is isolating Pyongyang, on Friday Yonhap reported that North Korea’s grain imports from China showed a more than fivefold surge last month from a year ago.

The North brought in 4,100 tons of grain from China in April, 5.4 times higher than 754 tons a year earlier, according to Kwon Tae-jin, head of South Korean agricultural think tank GS&J Institute’s North Korea and East Asia division. The North’s combined grain imports from China during the January-April period also marked a spike of 4.3 times to 10,619 tons from a year ago, with wheat flour at the top with 3,403 tons, the broadcaster said.

This has prompted the question whether China is promising Trump, and its Asian neighbors, one thing namely that it will pressure North Korea into halting its nuclear tests by limiting commerce with Kim, while in reality it is not only maintaining but expanding trade relations with its feisty neighbor.

via http://ift.tt/2s44GYU Tyler Durden

“It Wasn’t Innocent”: Macron Says Famous Trump Handshake “Was About Getting Respect”

Of all the sights during Trump’s first trip abroad, his handshake with France’s youngest ever president, Emanual Macron, was the most memorable as well as symbolic. At their first meeting ahead of a NATO summit in Brussels on Thursday, the two men locked hands for so long and hard, their knuckles turned white. When Trump tried to let go first, the French leader held the shake for a few seconds more. Both men’s jaws seemed to clench.

With the handshake prompting a flurry of interpretative media reports, and on Sunday Macron told France’s Le Journal du Dimanche, that his now famous white-knuckle handshake showdown with U.S. counterpart Donald Trump was “a moment of truth”, designed to show that he’s no pushover. Macron also said that “my handshake with him, it wasn’t innocentaccording to the AP.

Macron said that he wanted to “show he would not make small concessions, not even symbolic ones, but also not overdo things”.

Macron also told the French newspaper that his approach to the encounter had been about getting respect.

“Donald Trump, the Turkish president or the Russian president see things in terms of power relationships, which doesn’t bother me. I don’t believe in diplomacy through public criticism but in my bilateral dialogues I don’t let anything pass. That is how you get respect.”

Trump’s hand contact with foreign leaders has been closely scrutinized since he took power. Memorable episodes include nearly tearing out Japan PM Shinzo Abe’s arm during their first meeting in the White House which started with a bizarre 19 second handshake, refusing to shake Angela Merkel‘s hand in March, and a “clever neutralization” by Justin Trudeau during their first handshake encounter.

via http://ift.tt/2s3OvL6 Tyler Durden

Trump Returns, Unleashes Tweetstorm

On Friday evening, in previewing Trump’s upcoming “war room” effort in response to the escalating media reports about Russia, the WSJ reported that one of the contemplated changes was a drastic cut to Trump’s Twitter privileges, with lawyers allegedly tasked to comb through and preapprove the president’s social media outbursts, to wit:

One major change under consideration would vet the president’s social media posts through a team of lawyers, who would decide if any needed to be adjusted or curtailed. The idea, said one of Mr. Trump’s advisers, is to create a system so that tweets “don’t go from the president’s mind out to the universe.” Some of Mr. Trump’s tweets—from hinting that he may have taped conversations with Mr. Comey to suggesting without any evidence that former President Barack Obama wire-tapped Trump Tower—have opened him to criticism and at times confounded his communications team.

As of Sunday morning, that has clearly not been implemented, because just a few hours after his return from his first international trip, Trump unleashed a 6-tweet (for now) tweetstorm, touching on everything from the “great success” of his first foreign trip, to the controversial special election in Montana, and finally going back to his favorite topic fake news in general, and “anonymous sources” in particular.

In a series of tweets, the president focused news reports that include the words “sources say”:

“It is my opinion that many of the leaks coming out of the White House are fabricated lies made up by the #FakeNews media,” the president tweeted.

Whenever you see the words ‘sources say’ in the fake news media, and they don’t mention names…it is very possible that those sources don’t exsist but are made up by fake news writers. #FakeNews is the enemy!”

Trump’s attack on “fake news” may have been spurred by a tweet from Matt Drudge, who late on Saturday took offense with a statement in a Washington Post article:

“‘Mainstream media organizations generally try to maintain editorial independence from their owners’  — funniest line ever in WASH POST!”

Separately, Trump touted his first foreign trip, saying it brought “big results.” “Just returned from Europe. Trip was a great success for America. Hard work but big results!”

There were four main highlights in Trump’s first trip: the $350 billion arms contract he signed with the world’s biggest importer of weapons, Saudi Arabia; the infamous handshake with new French president Emanuel Macron and the snubbing of NATO, calling for more funding by alliance member states, and finally Trump’s refusal to endorse the G-7 position on the Paris climate treaty, resulting in an infuriated German chancellor and even more diplomatic fallout.

Finally, in his tweets Trump also mentioned Thursday’s special election for Montana’s open House seat, which the president said wasn’t well covered after the Republican candidate came out victorious.

“Does anyone notice how the Montana Congressional race was such a big deal to Dems & Fake News until the Republican won?” Trump tweeted. “V was poorly covered.”

Republican Greg Gianforte won the special election last week for Montana’s House seat despite an altercation ahead of the election that led to an assault charge against him. After the victory, Trump praised Gianforte’s victory, calling it a “great win.” Gianforte apologized to the reporter involved in the confrontation during his victory speech Thursday night.

“Last night, I made a mistake and I took an action that I cant take back — and I’m not proud of what happened,” he said. “I should not have responded in the way that I did and for that I’m sorry.”

Moments later, Democrat Adam Schiff responded to Trump stating that the president should express some disapproval over the assault charge.

In any case, it appears that any radical change in behavior out of the White House following Trump’s return, and certainly a filtering of Trump’s access to twitter is, if only for the time being, fake news.

via http://ift.tt/2rbRoeW Tyler Durden

A Handy Guide to Camping on Forbidden Turf: New at Reason

In his column from Reason‘s July issue, J.D. Tuccille offers a handy guide to camping on forbidden turf:

Grand Canyon National Park is a common destination for stealth trips, since backpacking there requires permits that are restrictive as to time and location. Inspiration sometimes moves you at odd moments, especially when you’re already camping on the north rim of the canyon on relatively unregulated Forest Service land. Since you generally have to apply for permits months ahead of time, a sudden yen for an overnight trip into the canyon itself is hard to satisfy on the spur of the moment—if you do things by the book.

Which we don’t.

The key to getting away with stealth camping, especially when rangers are on the lookout for the likes of you, is keeping a low profile. When possible, my hiking partners and I limit ourselves to daypacks and what we can fit in them. That means little more than water, some cold food, and a very compact sleeping bag. It’s actually excellent practice for shedding unnecessary junk and keeping the load light. And we’re good at it: We’ve never gotten caught, and as far as I know none of our friends have either.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2rLlCGk
via IFTTT

Believing The Russian “Hacking” Claim

Authored by David Swanson via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

Government lies are common when seducing a population to support a war, but the Russian “hacking” claims are unusual in that U.S. officials supply no evidence while the “fact” is just assumed,

When the U.S. public was told that Spain had blown up the Maine, or Vietnam had returned fire, or Iraq had stockpiled weapons, or Libya was planning a massacre, the claims were straightforward and disprovable.

CIA Director John Brennan addresses officials at the Agency’s headquarters in Langley, Virginia. (Photo credit: CIA)

Before people began referring to the Gulf of Tonkin incident, somebody had to lie that it had happened, and there had to be an understanding of what had supposedly happened. No investigation into whether anything had happened could have taken as its starting point the certainty that a Vietnamese attack or attacks had happened. And no investigation into whether a Vietnamese attack had happened could have focused its efforts on unrelated matters, such as whether anyone in Vietnam had ever done business with any relatives or colleagues of Robert McNamara.

All of this is otherwise with the idea that the Russian government determined the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. U.S. corporate media reports often claim that Russia did decide the election or tried to do that or wanted to try to do that. But they also often admit to not knowing whether any such thing is the case.

There is no established account, with or without evidence to support it, of exactly what Russia supposedly did. And yet there are countless articles casually referring, as if to established fact to the…

“Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election” (Yahoo).

 

“Russian attempts to disrupt the election” (New York Times).

 

“Russian… interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election” (ABC).

 

“Russian influence over the 2016 presidential election” (The Intercept).

 

“a multi-pronged investigation to uncover the full extent of Russia’s election-meddling” (Time).

 

“Russian interference in the US election” (CNN).

 

“Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election” (American Constitution Society).

 

“Russian hacking in US Election” (Business Standard).”

“Obama Strikes Back at Russia for Election Hacking” we’re told by the New York Times, but what is “election hacking”? Its definition seems to vary widely. And what evidence is there of Russia having done it?

The “Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections” even exists as a factual event in Wikipedia, not as an allegation or a theory. But the factual nature of it is not so much asserted as brushed aside.

Former CIA Director John Brennan, in the same Congressional testimony in which he took the principled stand “I don’t do evidence,” testified that “the fact that the Russians tried to influence resources and authority and power, and the fact that the Russians tried to influence that election so that the will of the American people was not going to be realized by that election, I find outrageous and something that we need to, with every last ounce of devotion to this country, resist and try to act to prevent further instances of that.” He provided no evidence.

Activists have even planned “demonstrations to call for urgent investigations into Russian interference in the US election.” They declare that “every day we learn more about the role Russian state-led hacking and information warfare played in the 2016 election.” (March for Truth.)

Belief that Russia helped put Trump in the White House is steadily rising in the U.S. public. Anything commonly referred to as fact will gain credibility. People will assume that at some point someone actually established that it was a fact.

Keeping the story in the news without evidence are articles about polling, about the opinions of celebrities, and about all kinds of tangentially related scandals, their investigations, and obstruction thereof. Most of the substance of most of the articles that lead off with reference to the “Russian influence on the election” is about White House officials having some sort of connections to the Russian government, or Russian businesses, or just Russians. It’s as if an investigation of Iraqi WMD claims focused on Blackwater murders or whether Scooter Libby had taken lessons in Arabic, or whether the photo of Saddam Hussein and Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands was taken by an Iraqi.

A general trend away from empirical evidence has been extensively noted and discussed. There is no more public evidence that Seth Rich (a Democratic National Committee staffer who was murdered last year) leaked Democratic emails than there is that the Russian government stole them. Yet both claims have passionate believers.

Still, the claims about Russia are unique in their wide proliferation, broad acceptance, and status as something to be constantly referred to as though already established, constantly augmented by other Russia-related stories that add nothing to the central claim. This phenomenon, in my view, is as dangerous as any lies and fabrications coming out of the racist right.

via http://ift.tt/2qqPyUd Tyler Durden