Mar 19, 2023

20 Years Ago

Dick Cheney
Don Rumsfeld
GW Bush
Michael Ladeen
Bill Kristol
Richard Perle
maybe Colin Powell too - but he's kinda on the bubble.
And a shit load more.

Some these guys are already dead. But the ones who're still around - why aren't these assholes in prison?



In U.S.-Led Iraq War, Iran Was the Big Winner

In the 20 years since the United States invaded Iraq, Iran has built up loyal militias inside Iraq, gained deep political influence in the country and reaped economic benefits. For Washington, these were unintended consequences.

If visitors to Baghdad knew nothing of Iraqi politics, they could be forgiven for thinking that the trim-bearded, green-uniformed man whose larger-than-life photo is everywhere in the Iraqi capital was Iraq’s president.

Along the boulevard that tracks the Tigris River and inside the Green Zone, the seat of Iraq’s government, the likeness of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani towers above roundabouts and stands astride medians. The last person to be so glorified was Saddam Hussein, the dictator deposed and killed in the American-led invasion of Iraq that began almost exactly 20 years ago.


But Mr. Suleimani was Iranian, not Iraqi.

The commander of the Quds Force, the external arm of Iran’s powerful Revolutionary Guards Corps, he achieved near-mythic status in Iraq as an influential force who helped bind Iraq and Iran after the invasion. It was thanks in large part to Mr. Suleimani, whom the United States assassinated in Iraq in 2020, that Iran came to extend its influence into almost every aspect of Iraqi security and politics.

That, in turn, gave Iran outsize influence over the region and beyond. Tehran’s rise exposed the unintended consequences of Washington’s strategy in Iraq, analysts and former U.S. officials say, and damaged the United States’ relationship with its regional allies.

The invasion “was the original sin,” said Emile Hokayem, a senior fellow for Middle East security at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, a British think tank. “It helped Iran bolster its position by being a predator in Iraq. It’s where Iran perfected the use of violence and militias to obtain its goals. It eroded the U.S.’s image. It led to fragmentation in the region.”

The U.S. State Department declined to comment on the impact of the war in Iraq.

“On Iraq specifically, our focus is on the 20 years ahead; less about looking backward,” the department said in an email response to questions. “Our partnership today has evolved far beyond security, to a 360-degree relationship that delivers results for the Iraqi people.”

All of that was enabled by the political changes that the American invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003, set in motion. Later on, the 2014 takeover of a large area of northern Iraq by the Islamic State terrorist group prompted Iraq to turn to Iran as well as the United States for help, cementing Iran’s grip.

As destabilizing as the Iranian involvement has been for many Iraqis, it has been at least as unsettling for much of the rest of the region.

Iraq and Iran are the two largest Middle Eastern countries with a Shiite Muslim majority, and Shiites emerged from the Iraq war empowered across the region — often unnerving their ancient sectarian rivals, the Sunni Muslims, who dominate most other Arab countries.

Under the Iraqi dictatorship, the Sunni minority had formed the base of Mr. Hussein’s power; once he was killed, Iran set up loyal militias inside Iraq. It also went on to dismay Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf monarchies and Israel by supporting proxies and partners, such as the Houthi militia in Yemen, that brought violence right to their doorsteps.

Before 2003, it would have been hard to imagine Saudi Arabia, a pillar of the United States’ Middle East policy for decades and a leading Sunni power, showing open anger toward American leaders over their conduct in the region. But the Saudi king at the time did just that in a January 2006 meeting with the American ambassador to Iraq, telling him that the way Washington saw things going in Baghdad reflected “wishful thinking,” according to a State Department cable released by WikiLeaks in 2010.

By the time of that meeting, Iraqis had approved a new Constitution and held parliamentary elections that swept Shiite parties to power, and Sunni-Shiite sectarian tensions had escalated.

Saudi King Abdullah told the ambassador that before Mr. Hussein’s ouster, his kingdom — Iran’s longtime rival for influence in the Middle East — could count on Iraq as another Sunni power keeping Iran in check.

Now, he said, Iraq had been handed to Iran like “a gift on a golden platter.”

The United States, whose military muscle guided its policies, often with little sensitivity for Iraq’s religious and political dynamics, according to analysts, was not the country best placed to make lasting inroads in Iraq.

Iran, by contrast, could build the bonds created by the Shiite faith it shared with many in Iraq’s population.

Iranian and Iraqi clerics, along with millions of pilgrims, frequented Shiite shrines in both countries each year and enjoyed a mutual understanding of each other’s culture. Tribes and families span their nearly 1,000-mile-long border. And the father of Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, spent 13 years in Iraq’s Shiite pilgrimage city of Najaf, while Iraq’s top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, was born in one Iranian holy city and educated in another.

In 1980, when Iraq invaded Iran, the United States and other Western countries quietly supported Iraq in the ensuing war.

The eight-year conflict was so devastating that some analysts say it shaped the mentality of an entire generation of Iranian leaders, making them determined to never again allow Iraq to grow strong enough to attack them. That could explain why, under Mr. Hussein’s repressive rule, which empowered Iraq’s Sunni minority over its Shiite majority, Iran gave shelter and support to both Shiites and Kurds in the Iraqi opposition.

When the United States toppled Mr. Hussein, it neutralized Iran’s foremost enemy without Tehran’s having to lift a finger. Afterward, the Americans diminished Sunni power in Iraq by dismantling the country’s army and purging the Sunni-dominated governing elite.

Iran saw opportunity.

“What they were looking for and have been looking for isn’t Iranian control,” Ryan Crocker, a former United States ambassador to Iraq, said of Iran. “It’s Iraqi instability.”

After the 2003 invasion, Iranians streamed into Baghdad and Iraq’s Shiite-dominated south: construction engineers to rebuild Iraqi cities, political consultants to train Shiite activists before the Iraqi elections, media professionals to establish Shiite-owned television channels.

Iranian pilgrims who had been barred in the Saddam Hussein era from visiting Iraq’s Shiite shrines now hurried across the border to the Shiite holy cities of Karbala and Najaf, where Iranian companies invested in acres of hotels and restaurants for the millions of worshipers, many of them Iranian, who visit the shrines each year.

A good number of the Iraqi leaders who emerged after 2003 also had ties to Iran. The Shiite and Kurdish opposition politicians who had taken refuge there years before returned to Iraq after the invasion. Some of Iraq’s largest Shiite parties had backing and technical support from Iran, putting politicians from those parties in Iran’s debt when they won seats.

The Americans “somehow didn’t make the connection with Iran explicitly and understand that it’s not the Shiites you are giving the upper hand to, it’s the Shiites backed by Iran,” Marwan Muasher, who was then Jordan’s foreign minister, said last week.

Across Iraq’s southern border, Saudi Arabia and its gulf allies watched with growing frustration.

Gulf wariness of Iran dated back centuries. Less than 150 miles of Persian Gulf waters separate Iran from the Arabian Peninsula, a dynamic that has long fueled trade rivalries and territorial disputes. After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Sunni gulf monarchies feared that Iran would export its brand of Shiite theocracy across a region traditionally ruled by Sunnis.

Before 2003, the gulf worried about the Iraqi dictator, too. But Western-led sanctions had weakened Iraq, and the Gulf States and the Iraqis shared a common enemy in Iran.

The toppling of Mr. Hussein unleashed what the gulf saw as Iran’s destructive power: Now, Iran was increasing its influence over a major Arab country with enormous oil reserves on Saudi Arabia’s northern border, just as evidence was growing that Iran was developing a nuclear program.

These days, no Iraqi prime minister can take office without at least the tacit approval of both the United States and Iran, an arrangement that often produces prime ministers torn between Washington and Tehran. Iraqis with connections to Iran hold posts throughout the government.

The cost of Iranian influence to Iraqi development and stability has been high.

Cut off from the world economy by sanctions, Iran has found an economic lifeline in Iraq, which buys about at least $7 billion in Iranian exports a year while selling only about $250 million of goods in return. The fine print on many medicines shows that they are Iranian made, and large quantities of Iranian construction materials come stacked on truck convoys across the border every day.

Many Iraqi farmers and businesspeople complain that Iran has suffocated Iraqi manufacturing and farming by dumping large quantities of produce and cheap goods in Iraq.

Although Shiites in Iraq’s political elite tolerated Iran’s activities and respected General Suleimani, resentment of Iran among other Iraqis helped set off mass antigovernment demonstrations in 2019 in which protesters demanded an end to Iran’s interference in Iraqi affairs.

Beyond Iraq, Iran has used every conflict in the region to extend its reach.

It inserted fighters into Syria after the 2011 Arab Spring revolt, aiming to prop up the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad. It supported the Houthis in Yemen’s civil war against a Saudi-led coalition, establishing Iranian influence on the southern Saudi border. And it further cemented its position in Iraq and Syria by recruiting and training Shiite fighters against the Islamic State.

“Every opportunity that there was in the region, the dominoes fell in Iran’s favor,” said Vali Nasr, a professor of international affairs and Middle East studies at Johns Hopkins University. Exploiting Iraq’s weakness, he added, gradually turned into “a powerful foreign policy tool for Iran on the regional level.”

Particularly worrisome to its Sunni Arab neighbors was Tehran’s consolidation of influence across a so-called Shiite Crescent stretching from Iran through Iraq and into Syria and Lebanon. Some Sunni governments, chief among them Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, blamed the United States — the country they had long depended on to have their backs — for failing to stop Iran from moving goods, weapons and personnel freely across the region, analysts say.

Later quarrels in the relationship arose over what the gulf saw as the U.S. failure to intervene in Syria or to protect the gulf from Iranian-linked attacks on Saudi Arabia and the Emirates.

The State Department said the United States values its relationship with the gulf and is committed to “to strengthen cooperation, coordination, and consultation with our gulf partners in all fields, including security, counterterrorism, and economic partnership.”

The gulf remains deeply connected to the United States, but since the 2003 invasion it has looked to broaden and deepen its ties to China and Russia as alternative partners. When Saudi Arabia agreed to restore diplomatic relations with Iran last week, for example, it did so in Beijing.

That agreement was the latest sign that Saudi Arabia has decided to try engaging with its adversaries rather than holding them at arm’s length as the gulf monarchies did for years in Iraq.

Despite Iraq and its gulf neighbors’ shared Arab identity, they all but forfeited the competition for influence to Iran: Whereas Iran was the first to establish an embassy in Baghdad after the United States invasion, a Saudi ambassador to Iraq arrived in Baghdad only last week.

Likewise, the Saudis did not open their deep pockets to Iraq until a few years ago, when they began a tentative effort to invest in infrastructure.

“The only thing we can do is to give the Iraqis another choice that isn’t only Iran,” said Hesham Alghannam, a Saudi political scientist. “We can’t corner them and then blame them for going with the Iranians.”

Mar 18, 2023

Storm Clouds

I really like it when "we're living a truly historic moment" is:
"Apollo 11 has landed safely on the moon"
- or -
"Nixon resigns"
- or -
"Obama is elected POTUS".

But I guess it has to be tempered with:
"American GIs murder civilians at My Lai"
- and -
"Almost 3,000 dead at WTC"
- and -
"COVID deaths top 1 million"

I wonder where this one's gonna end up.


The guy's a fraud and a slicker and a liar and a thief.

And he knows what rouses the rabble.

The question now is whether or not he's still got the chops to call people to commit violent seditious acts in numbers large enough to be any kind of existential threat to us.

I'm betting he doesn't. And I'm betting the good government people are ready for whatever his little flock of shitbirds try to pull.





Trump Claims His Arrest Is Imminent and Calls for Protests, Echoing Jan6

His indictment by a Manhattan grand jury is expected, but its timing is unclear.

With former President Donald J. Trump facing indictment by a Manhattan grand jury but the timing of the charges uncertain, he declared on his social media site that he would be arrested on Tuesday and demanded that his supporters protest on his behalf.

Mr. Trump made the declaration on his site, Truth Social, at 7:26 a.m. on Saturday in a post that ended with, “THE FAR & AWAY LEADING REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE AND FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WILL BE ARRESTED ON TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!”

Two hours later, a spokesman issued a statement clarifying that Mr. Trump had not written his post with direct knowledge of the timing of any arrest.

“President Trump is rightfully highlighting his innocence and the weaponization of our injustice system,” the statement said.

A lawyer for Mr. Trump, Susan R. Necheles, said that his post had been based on news reports, and accused the Manhattan district attorney’s office of conducting a “political prosecution.”

A spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney’s office declined to comment.

Prosecutors working for the district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, have signaled that an indictment of Mr. Trump could be imminent. But they have not told Mr. Trump’s lawyers when the charges — expected to stem from a 2016 hush money payment to a porn star — would be sought or when an arrest would be made, people with knowledge of the matter said. At least one more witness is expected to testify in front of the grand jury, which could delay an indictment, the people said.

One of the people said that even if the grand jury were to vote to indict the former president on Monday, a Tuesday surrender was unlikely given the need to arrange timing, travel and other logistics.

The statement from Mr. Trump’s spokesman did not explain how he landed on Tuesday as an arrest date. One person with knowledge of the matter said that Mr. Trump’s advisers had guessed that it could happen around then, and that someone might have relayed that to the former president.

Mr. Trump, who declared his third presidential campaign in November and is leading his Republican opponents in most polls, faced his first criminal investigation in the late 1970s. He has been deeply anxious about the prospect of arrest, which is expected to include being fingerprinted, one of the people said.

When the Trump Organization’s former chief financial officer, Allen H. Weisselberg, was arrested in 2021, Mr. Trump watched in horror as television news showed Mr. Weisselberg flanked by officers in the courthouse and the former president said he couldn’t believe what was happening.

Mr. Trump’s post urging his supporters to protest and reclaim the nation carried unmistakable echoes of the incendiary messages he posted online in the weeks before the attack on the U.S. Capitol. In the most notorious of those messages, he announced on Twitter that he would hold a rally in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021. “Be there,” he told his millions of followers. “Will be wild.”


At that rally, on the Ellipse near the White House, Mr. Trump told supporters to march to the Capitol, where the certification of the 2020 presidential election was taking place. He is under investigation by federal prosecutors for his activities before the attack.

Investigators later determined that far-right extremist groups as well as ordinary Trump supporters had read that tweet — posted on Dec. 19, 2020 — as a clear-cut invitation. They almost immediately sprang into action, acquiring protective gear, setting up encrypted communications channels and, in one case, preparing heavily armed “quick reaction forces” to be staged outside Washington for the event.

Leaders of groups like the Proud Boys and the Three Percenter militia movement also started to whip up members with bellicose language as their private messaging channels were increasingly filled with plans to rush to Mr. Trump’s aid.

On Friday evening, Mr. Trump’s campaign announced what could be his first rally after an indictment: an event in Waco, Texas, where deadly clashes between federal officials and an extremist religious sect occurred 30 years ago around this time.

New York officials have been discussing security arrangements at the Manhattan Criminal Court in case of an indictment, according to people with knowledge of the planning, which was first reported by NBC News. Mr. Trump is expected to be charged in connection with the hush money payment his former fixer and lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, made to the porn star Stormy Daniels, who claimed to have had an affair with Mr. Trump.

Mr. Cohen made the $130,000 payment to Ms. Daniels to bury her story of the affair.

The payment came in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, and Mr. Trump subsequently reimbursed Mr. Cohen. Prosecutors are expected to accuse Mr. Trump of overseeing the false recording of the reimbursements in his company’s internal records. The records falsely stated that the payments to Mr. Cohen were for “legal expenses.”

There have been several signals that charges may be imminent: The prosecutors gave Mr. Trump an opportunity to testify, a right afforded to people who will soon face indictment, and have questioned nearly every major player in the hush money saga in front of the grand jury.

Mr. Trump has denied all wrongdoing, as well as having had an affair with Ms. Daniels.

Any arrest and processing of Mr. Trump would probably combine the routine steps that every defendant experiences — fingerprinting, photographing — with the pomp accorded to a former president, whose every move is attended by the U.S. Secret Service.

It is unclear what kinds of accommodations Mr. Trump would receive. It is standard for defendants arrested on felony charges to be handcuffed, but an exception could be made. As he awaits his court appearance, it is possible that for security reasons, he will be detained in an interview room or another confined area, rather than in a holding cell. And after Mr. Trump is arraigned, he will almost certainly be released without spending any time behind bars, because the indictment is likely to contain only nonviolent felony charges.

Early Saturday morning, there was little evidence that Mr. Trump’s new demand for protests had been embraced by extremist groups.

But Ali Alexander, a prominent organizer of the “Stop the Steal” rallies following the 2020 election, reposted a message on his Telegram channel on Saturday suggesting that he supported a mass demonstration to protect Mr. Trump.

“Previously, I had said if Trump was arrested or under the threat of a perp walk, 100,000 patriots should shut down all routes to Mar-a-Lago,” Mr. Alexander wrote. “Now I’m retired. I’ll pray for him though!”

Without the platform provided by the White House or the machinery of a large political campaign, it is unclear how many people Mr. Trump is able to reach, let alone mobilize, via Truth Social.

And it remained unclear whether he would repeat his call for action or increase the stakes with more aggressive language. But his political allies made plain this week that they were preparing for a political war on Mr. Bragg.

For months Mr. Trump has been attacking Mr. Bragg, who is Black, as “racist.” Mr. Bragg won a conviction for tax fraud against the Trump Organization last year, though he did not charge Mr. Trump personally.

Some of Mr. Trump’s supporters responded of their own accord with violence after F.B.I. agents, acting on a search warrant, descended on Mar-a-Lago, his private club and residence in Florida, in August and carted away boxes of documents in an investigation into the former president’s handling of classified material.

Days after the search, an armed Ohio man who had posted online about his outrage over what happened at Mar-a-Lago tried to breach the F.B.I.’s field office outside Cincinnati. He was later killed in a standoff with local officers.

The unexpected Saturday morning salvo from the former president provided a preview of the kind of chaos that Mr. Bragg is likely to face if he proceeds with an indictment.

Mr. Bragg, a former federal prosecutor and deputy New York attorney general, has some history of prosecuting public officials. But he is unaccustomed to dealing with a figure as high-profile, erratic and pugilistic as the former president, and it is unclear how his office will deal with future outbursts from Mr. Trump.


Ukraine, Russia, China


Putin fucked up in various ways, aside from some pretty dumbass assumptions that the Ukrainians would just roll over and play dead.
  • He didn't bring enough guys
You need a 3:1 advantage in numbers of invaders-to-invadees
You need 1 Russian occupier for every 50 Ukrainian occupy-ees
  • He didn't think his own brand of corruption had taken hold in the Russian military almost top to bottom, side to side, and front to back
  • He didn't figure on his little excursion becoming a unifying force for NATO
  • As rich as he is, he hadn't stolen enough to survive what looks like it could be years of crippling economic sanctions
China is watching this clusterfuck closely, knowing it's practically a lead pipe cinch that Vlad will not survive it.

Xi would need at least 500,000 guys to invade (probably more because it's an amphibious landing), and he'd have to leave all of them on Taiwan for years as an occupying force.

Mike's Guess:
The need to reduce the number of occupation troops is what drives the inevitable slaughter of the occupied country's population, as well as the push to keep throwing more of your own people into the meat grinder. For the guy calling the shots, it becomes a fairly simple matter of "better them than me".



War has always been the stupidest fuckin' thing humans do. And it's even stupider now.


Grey Zone Tactics - Mar 2022

Question 1. How Does China View Competition in the Gray Zone?
Chinese analysts view gray zone actions as measures that powerful countries have employed both historically and in recent decades that are beyond normal diplomacy and other traditional approaches to statecraft but short of direct use of military force for escalation or a conflict. While Chinese scholars do not typically use the term gray zone to describe Chinese gray zone activities, the Chinese conceptualization of military operations other than war (MOOTW) is helpful for understanding how China may use its military for such activities. Chinese analysts characterize coercive or confrontational external-facing MOOTW as stability maintenance, rights protection, or security and guarding operations. China believes that MOOTW should also leverage nonmilitary actors and means.

Question 2. What Drives and Enables Chinese Use of Gray Zone Tactics?
Chinese activities in the gray zone support PRC leadership's overarching domestic, economic, foreign policy, and security objectives in the Indo-Pacific, which Beijing views as China's priority region. Gray zone activities balance China's pursuit of a more favorable external environment by altering the regional status quo in its favor with a desire to act below the threshold of a militarized response from the United States or China's neighbors. Recent developments have provided an increasingly varied toolkit for pressuring other countries across four key domains: geopolitical, economic, military, and cyber/IO. These developments are laws and regulations enabling Beijing to harness nongovernmental personnel and assets growing Chinese geopolitical, economic, and military power and influence vis-à-vis other countries increasing linkages between China's military development and economic growth the integration of military and paramilitary forces.

Question 3. How Does China Employ Gray Zone Tactics?
Overall, China tailors its gray zone activities to the target and has an increasing variety and number of more-coercive tools. Beijing layers the use of multiple gray zone tactics to pressure allies and partners, particularly on issues related to China's core interests. Combining multiple geopolitical, economic, military, and cyber/IO activities means that China no longer has to rely on significant escalation in any single domain and, if needed, can sequence actions to apply pressure in nonmilitary domains before resorting to use of military activity. China also appears to be more cautious and selective in using high-profile gray zone tactics against more-capable countries—for instance, employing a smaller variety of tactics against Japan and India than against Vietnam and the Philippines.

China has increasingly leveraged military tactics, and there is no evidence to suggest that China will use fewer military tactics as its overall military capabilities grow or that improved bilateral relations will discourage China from pressing its territorial claims. Likewise, there is little reason to believe that China will use fewer military gray zone tactics as its geopolitical or economic power increases. China has recently relied heavily on air- and maritime-domain tactics, for example.

China exercises caution in its use of high-profile, bilateral geopolitical and economic tactics and has become more active in wielding its influence in international institutions or via third-party actors. Since at least 2013, China has expanded its involvement on the ground in select regions, recruiting local proxies and engaging in various information efforts. In terms of nonmilitary tactics, China uses geopolitical and bilateral tactics most often.

Question 4. Which PRC Tactics Could the United States Prioritize Countering?
Given the wide range of PRC gray zone tactics and the diverse collection of allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region, the United States faces the difficult task of determining how to prioritize which PRC activities to counter. The U.S. government, experts, and academics do not currently agree on how to assess which PRC gray zone tactics are most problematic. Policymakers could consider aggregating across three different criteria: (1) the extent to which PRC tactics undermine U.S. objectives and interests in the Indo-Pacific region, (2) how difficult it is for allies and partners to respond to and counter tactics, and (3) how widely China uses specific tactics (against one or multiple allies and partners).

While there are many ways to combine the three indicators, the most balanced approach might be to weight U.S. objectives and interests equally with allied and partner concerns (40 percent each) and the prevalence of PRC tactics less (20 percent). Based on this aggregate method, ten of the 20 most-problematic PRC tactics are military activities that the People's Liberation Army or Chinese paramilitary actors engage in, with many of the tactics involving operations near or in disputed territories. Other military tactics include China engaging in highly publicized and large-scale, cross-service military exercises; establishing military bases or potential dual-use facilities in neighboring countries to threaten a target; and building up or acquiring PRC military capabilities against targets.

Geopolitical, economic, and cyber/IO tactics also ranked among the top 20. While the most-problematic PRC activities were international geopolitical and grassroots economic tactics, other PRC economic activities and grassroots cyber/IO activities in the targeted region were also problematic. Relative to the other tactics, grassroots geopolitical activities and bilateral cyber/IO activities have been less challenging. These findings suggest that the United States should devote significant effort to helping U.S. allies and partners counter PRC international geopolitical and economic tactics (particularly PRC economic activity in the target region or in disputed regions) and address grassroots cyber/IO activities.

Recommendations
  • The U.S. government should hold gray zone scenario discussions with key allies and partners to better understand their concerns, responses, and needs.
  • The National Security Council or the U.S. Department of State should identify a set of criteria to determine the most-problematic PRC gray zone tactics to counter via whole-of-government efforts.
  • The United States could prioritize countering Chinese activities in disputed territories and responding to PRC geopolitical international and economic tactics.
  • The U.S. Department of Defense should develop gray zone plans similar to existing operational plans but focused on responding to a range of more-escalatory PRC gray zone scenarios.
  • The U.S. Air Force should continue to build out intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance infrastructure in the Indo-Pacific and improve regional cyberdefense capabilities to increase domain awareness, identify and attribute PRC activities, and counter PRC cyber/IO tactics.
BETTER MEN THAN THESE
HAVE BEEN TRYING
TO CONQUER THE WORLD
FOR 2,000 GENERATIONS.
AND THE WORLD REMAINS UNDEFEATED

Mar 17, 2023

Today's Pix

click to embiggen
⬇︎







(Parody, BTW)












A Bold Move

They wouldn't do this lightly. There had to have been a lot of heated discussion, with a few main points, including:

Will it make Putin relent on some of his shittier policies?
- or -
Will it serve to push Putin's internal supporters to move against him?
- or -
Will it make Putin more of the dangerous cornered rat that he has characterized himself to as being?


International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant for Russian President Putin

Either It Is Or It Isn't


Plain old everyday common sense tells us two contradicting notions can't be true at the same time ... but hey - Quantum Politics, anyone?



Mike Lindell says he had to borrow $10 million last year to keep MyPillow afloat — and is running out of cash, too
  • MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell told Insider he had to borrow $10 million in 2022 to keep MyPillow afloat.
  • Lindell said he'd also sold a building for $2 million and borrowed a further $2 million for himself.
  • Lindell says he's burning through $1 million dollars every month on causes related to voter fraud.


MyPillow CEO Says Company Is Going Broke Defending Election Fraud Claims

MyPillow Founder and CEO Mike Lindell claims the company has had to borrow almost $10 million to keep the lights on. The MyPillow guy has been embroiled in a series of lawsuits brought by voting machine manufacturers who allege Lindell defamed them by spreading conspiracies regarding their role in the 2020 election.

“The machine companies continue to sue us for billions of dollars, and we had to borrow almost $10 million at MyPillow,” Lindell told far-right radio host and former Trump advisor Steve Bannon on Wednesday.

- and -


Mike Lindell Backtracks on Claims MyPillow Is Going Broke

MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell says his company is in great shape, just hours after telling Steve Bannon it was going broke due to political pressure.

“I invented MyPillow2.0 and it is doing great!” Lindell told The Daily Beast on Wednesday night.

Despite trying to claim that his business was the victim of a political vendetta earlier on Wednesday, Lindell was quickly peddling a different story.

“Over 1/2 the loans are already paid back! MyPillow2.0 is manufactured 100% by MyPillow in Minnesota! You must have seen the ads in all TV stations across the country,” he said, referencing his collaboration with QAnon podcasts and web shows that are selling MyPillow products in a significant profit-sharing deal.

Lindell has been entangled in a number of lawsuits brought about by voting machine manufacturers after he spread unfounded conspiracy theories based on the “stolen” 2020 election. Lindell is a diehard Trump supporter.

The full scope of financial crisis is unclear, however, in January, he told WCCO that MyPillow had lost $100 million in retailers and that “we are not up 30-40%—we are down. We are down. I had to borrow money.”

Lindell told former Trump adviser Steve Bannon on Wednesday: “The machine companies continue to sue us for billions of dollars, and we had to borrow almost $10 million at MyPillow.”

Lindell declined to say whether MyPillow is currently losing money, instead telling The Daily Beast that “MyPillow had to spend millions on lawsuits and the last 2 years lost 30 box stores and shopping channels.

- more -

Oy


We know GOP Rat-Fuckers stole Ashley Biden's personal diary.

There's no reason right now for me to believe they didn't pull the same shit with Hunter Biden's laptop.

What we don't know of course, is whether or not this lawsuit is the right move. We'll probably have to wait for quite a while, but it can't have been cooking without some involvement of Joe Biden's team. So, maybe good and maybe not - we'll see.


Hunter Biden sues laptop repair shop owner, citing invasion of privacy

The lawsuit, a countermove against John Paul Mac Isaac, escalates the legal battle surrounding the president’s son at a sensitive moment


Hunter Biden has filed a sweeping countersuit against the computer repair shop owner who said that Biden dropped his laptop off and never claimed it, a legal action that escalates the battle over how provocative data and images of the president’s son were obtained nearly five years ago.

In the counterclaim, filed on Friday morning in U.S. District Court in Delaware, Biden and his attorneys say that John Paul Mac Isaac had no legal right to copy and distribute private information. They accuse him and others of six counts of invasion of privacy, including conspiracy to obtain and distribute the data.

The 42-page filing goes into significant detail on the ways Hunter Biden’s data became public, a development that propelled it into the maelstrom of the last presidential campaign and, since January, to the center of a Republican-led congressional investigation of the president’s son.

The lawsuit could draw further attention to a sordid chapter in Hunter Biden’s life, one involving nude photos, sensitive audio and a trove of personal texts and emails. The countersuit is in part an attempt by Hunter Biden and his lawyers to reframe the story, focusing it on a private citizen whose privacy was allegedly invaded rather than a man who critics say traded on his father’s name and benefited from his political connections.

“As a result of Mac Isaac’s unlawful agreement and his conspiracy with others, Mr. Biden’s personal data was made available to third parties and then ultimately to the public at large, which is highly offensive, causing harm to Mr. Biden and his reputation,” the suit states. “The object of invading Mr. Biden’s privacy and disseminating his data was not for any legitimate purpose but to cause harm and embarrassment to Mr. Biden.”

The move is a response to a suit filed by Mac Isaac himself last year and amended several times since, alleging that Hunter Biden defamed him by saying he had illegally accessed the data — when in fact, Mac Isaac contends, the laptop became his property when it was abandoned in his shop. The repairman’s suit also targeted CNN, Politico, the Biden campaign and Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.).

Hunter Biden’s decision to respond with an aggressive legal challenge of his own intensifies the battle with his critics, just as Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, prepares a high-profile investigation into the president’s son. The dynamic could become an awkward distraction for President Biden, who is expected to launch his reelection bid within weeks.

Hunter Biden is seeking a jury trial to determine any compensatory and punitive damages. The suit also asks the court to require Mac Isaac and others to return any copies, or partial copies, of any data belonging to the president’s son.

It marks the first legal filing from Hunter Biden and his attorneys since his laptop emerged as a point of intense interest for the president’s political adversaries, and it reflects a newly aggressive approach by a legal team that Hunter Biden put in place in recent months. That team had previously sent criminal referrals and cease-and-desist missives to various people, but this is the first time the attorneys have formally gone into court.

Still, the legal move required delicate positioning by the president’s son, who has never explicitly confirmed that the laptop was his.

Hunter Biden does not concede in his lawsuit that he dropped off the laptop, received an invoice or neglected to pick it up. In response to such claims by Mac Isaac, the filing states, “Mr. Biden is without knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations.”

But he does acknowledge that some of the data that has been released publicly belongs to him, and concedes that Mac Isaac could have obtained it in April 2019.

“This is not an admission by Mr. Biden that Mac Isaac (or others) in fact possessed any particular laptop containing electronically stored data belonging to Mr. Biden,” the filing says. “Rather, Mr. Biden simply acknowledges that at some point, Mac Isaac obtained electronically stored data, some of which belonged to Mr. Biden.”

Hunter Biden argues that if even Mac Isaac did have his unclaimed laptop, Delaware law would have restricted his ability to access or distribute the data on it.

Mac Isaac and his allies have often pointed to a signed receipt saying that any property not retrieved after 90 days would be forfeited. But Biden’s attorneys say that agreement had flaws.

The boilerplate terms, they say, were contained in small print at the bottom of the page, well below the signature line. Delaware law says that personal property is only deemed abandoned after one year, and that certain steps have to be taken, such as posting public notices asking that the owner retrieve the property.

“And contrary to Mac Isaac’s claim that property left in his shop is abandoned property after 90 days, he admits in his recently published book and in other media appearances that he actually began accessing what he claims he had in his possession as Mr. Biden’s data long before 90 days had expired from when he claims any property or data was left in his shop,” the suit states.

The counterclaim also argues that even if the laptop had been abandoned, that would only give Mac Isaac the right to the equipment, not the data stored on it.

“In fact, the Repair Authorization form states that the Mac Shop will make every effort to ‘secure your data,’” the suit states. “Reputable computer companies and repair people routinely delete personal data contained on devices that are exchanged, left behind, or abandoned. They do not open, copy, and then provide that data to others, as Mac Isaac did here.”

The countersuit also cites Mac Isaac’s statements that he made copies of Biden’s hard drive and distributed them to a number of people, including his father Richard Mac Isaac, his uncle Ronald J. Scott Jr., and Robert Costello, an attorney for former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani. “Mr. Biden gave none of the individuals identified in this counterclaim permission to access, copy, disseminate, post or otherwise distribute any of his data, however they came into possession of it,” the filing states.

“Mr. Biden had more than a reasonable expectation of privacy that any data that he created or maintained, and especially that which was the most personal such as photographs, videos, interactions with other adults, and communications with his family, would not be accessed, copied, disseminated, or posted on the Internet for others to use against him or his family or for the public to view.”

An attorney for Mac Isaac did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The data alleged to have come from the laptop has been the subject of intense scrutiny dating from stories that the New York Post published just before the 2020 election. At the time, The Washington Post repeatedly asked Giuliani and Trump ally Stephen K. Bannon for a copy of the data to review, but the requests were rebuffed or ignored.

In June 2021, Jack Maxey, who previously worked as a researcher for Bannon’s “War Room” podcast, delivered to The Post a portable hard drive that he said contained the data. He said he had obtained it from Giuliani.

The Post asked two security experts to examine 217 gigabytes of data on the drive, and they found nearly 22,000 emails carrying cryptographic signatures that could be verified using technology that would be difficult for even the most sophisticated hackers to fake. The vast majority of the data — and most of the nearly 129,000 emails it contained — could not be verified, the security experts said.

Hunter Biden has said previously that he is unsure if the laptop is his and he does not remember dropping it off, but he has conceded that his memory in the depths of what he has admitted was a serious drug addiction was not reliable. His allies also suggest that materials later made public may be a mix of materials obtained in various ways.

The new filing on Friday is the latest evidence that Hunter Biden has adopted a new legal strategy after years of largely keeping quiet about the laptop and the contents it purportedly contained. A few months ago he hired Abbe Lowell, a lawyer known for hard-nosed tactics, and earlier this year Lowell sent a series of blistering letters to state and federal prosecutors urging criminal investigations into those who accessed and disseminated his personal data. His team also sent a separate letter threatening Fox News host Tucker Carlson with a defamation lawsuit.

The higher-profile strategy has not been endorsed by all of those in Hunter Biden’s orbit. Those close to President Biden and the White House, in particular, have made it clear they would prefer a more conservative, quieter approach.

In a separate letter on Friday, Lowell notified the judge that Hunter Biden’s lawyers wanted to meet as soon as possible to discuss a discovery phase in the lawsuit, during which they would seek documents. Lowell said Hunter Biden’s team would be requesting a deposition from Mac Isaac “as soon as feasible” and that he also planned to seek testimony from a range of others involved in the matter.

They include Bannon, Giuliani and Maxey. The attorneys are also seeking testimony from conservative activist Garrett M. Ziegler, who has uploaded some of the data in his possession, and Keith Ablow, a psychiatrist from whom Hunter Biden sought treatment.

Ablow, who has been close to Republican activist Roger Stone, had one of Hunter Biden’s laptops at his Massachusetts-based office. That laptop was seized by agents who raided Ablow’s office in February 2020, and it was eventually returned to Biden. Some of Hunter Biden’s close associates have theorized that that laptop may have been the basis of the hard drives that were later distributed by Trump allies.

Opinion


It seems pretty important that at least some of the Press Poodles are behaving more like the Newsy Bulldogs we need them to be by speaking very openly and explicitly about the prospects of MAGA fucking things up on purpose, and with malice of forethought.

MAGA partisans grasp these stakes with perfect clarity. One well-known Trumpist operative has been frantically warning that a liberal majority on the Wisconsin state Supreme Court would spell doom for “election integrity.” That’s MAGA code for saying it would complicate efforts to illicitly subvert a MAGA loss in 2024. And it’s true: If liberals control the court, that will be largely out of reach.

Greg Sargent isn't exactly the epitome of a leftie looney, although he fits the wingnuts' description pretty well.

What catches my eye is not so much his willingness to call the MAGA shit for what it is - and not equivocate on it - but the fact that something this straightforward made it past the editors at a news outlet that has a 40-year tradition of being a very Both-Sides-y kinda joint.

Maybe I'm overstating it, but this is not normal, and it carries a measure of hope that doesn't come along all that often in USAmerica's Commercial Establishment Press.


Opinion
This sleeper race could wreck MAGA’s 2024 dreams


Wisconsin looms large in the MAGA transformation of American politics. Of the three “blue wall” states that Donald Trump flipped in 2016, Wisconsin was the toughest for Democrats to take back in 2020. Winning there — more than Michigan or Pennsylvania — is the most likely starting point for Trump or another MAGA presidential candidate to assemble an electoral majority in 2024.

That’s why a race for Wisconsin state Supreme Court —
Election Day is April 4 — has extraordinarily high stakes. A Democratic win would deal a big blow to the MAGA movement’s 2024 hopes, underscoring its dramatically weakened hold on must-win territory once dominated by Trump. That outcome would give liberals a 4-3 majority on a court that could thwart any rerun of Trump’s 2020 effort to overturn his loss by legal chicanery.

The conservative candidate for the court seat — Republican lawyer Daniel Kelly — has sterling MAGA credentials. He was reportedly involved in discussions about a “fake electors” scheme to overturn Trump’s loss in the state. Last year, he helped lead “election integrity” events that suggested the state’s 2020 voting was suspect.

In private polls, Kelly is trailing the liberal candidate, Milwaukee County Judge Janet Protasiewicz, and Democrats are outspending Republicans in the race. A liberal court could overturn a state abortion ban, so Democratic ads are highlighting Kelly’s support from anti-choice groups, hoping abortion can deliver another win after driving many 2022 victories.

But this race is also about the future prospects of MAGA — on multiple levels.

A loss for Kelly would effectively constitute a third strike for MAGA in the geographic heart of the movement’s effort to transform U.S. politics. Trump’s 2016 Rust Belt victories were driven by supercharged margins among non-college-educated White voters disproportionately concentrated in that region, which hinted at a long-term MAGA-driven realignment of the electoral map.

But since then, not only did Joe Biden win back Wisconsin (and the other “blue wall” states) in 2020, but in 2022 Democratic Gov. Tony Evers triumphed over a Trump-backed GOP candidate. While GOP Sen. Ron Johnson was reelected there in 2022, Evers’s clear majority win provided vivid evidence of MAGA’s waning influence.

A third Democratic triumph in Wisconsin would suggest the MAGA transformation is proving far less durable than its proponents hoped. Wisconsin has a slightly higher percentage of blue-collar White people than either Pennsylvania or Michigan, so another win would be a big morale booster for Democrats heading into 2024.

“The whole Trump-MAGA strategy is to run up the score with rural voters and White voters without college degrees,” Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler told me. “That describes most voters in Wisconsin.” What’s more, Wikler added, “MAGA can’t win in 2024 without the Badger State.”

MAGA partisans grasp these stakes with perfect clarity. One well-known Trumpist operative has been frantically warning that a liberal majority on the Wisconsin state Supreme Court would spell doom for “election integrity.” That’s MAGA code for saying it would complicate efforts to illicitly subvert a MAGA loss in 2024. And it’s true: If liberals control the court, that will be largely out of reach.

To be fair, one of the court’s current conservative justices did not side with Trump’s efforts to overturn results in 2020, notes election law expert Richard L. Hasen. So even a one-seat conservative majority might not do its worst. But if 2024 comes down to Wisconsin, the pressure would be intense to greenlight dubious efforts to overturn a loss, and a conservative majority joined by Kelly would be “much more risky,” Hasen said.

“A liberal court would make it much less likely that lawsuits meant to disenfranchise voters or subvert election results would get a serious hearing,” Hasen told me.

To the surprise of many observers, Democrats won in 2022 by running as defenders of both abortion rights and democracy, enabling them to defeat election-denying candidates across the country. That combination proved to be Kryptonite to MAGA among swing voters, including in Pennsylvania and Michigan.

In addition to running ads on abortion, Democrats in Wisconsin are also putting big money behind a spot that is entirely about the threat to democracy posed by conservative domination of the state Supreme Court. A win there would once again show the potency of that joint message — against MAGA candidates in particular.

Yet even if Democrats prevail, it would be folly to be overly confident that MAGA’s efforts to realign the region are fully extinguished. As Ronald Brownstein notes for the Atlantic, Democratic performance among non-college White people in 2020 and 2022 improved only marginally relative to 2016, so relying on educated voters alone won’t keep the “blue wall” states in the Democratic column.

But when it comes to MAGA’s dreams of retaking the Rust Belt in 2024 — or even of stealing the election in Wisconsin if the GOP candidate can’t win fairly — a Democratic victory in April would make those hopes a whole lot dimmer.

Today's Recap


WaPo runs a quickie rundown most days.


1. The nation’s biggest banks staged an emergency intervention yesterday.
  • What happened? Eleven Wall Street banks pledged to put $30 billion into First Republic Bank, which had been at risk of becoming the third U.S. bank to fail in less than a week.
  • The big picture: This extraordinary move, which was coordinated by the Biden administration, is designed to put an end to the fears rippling through the U.S. financial industry.
2. Poland said it will give fighter jets to Ukraine.
  • The details: Four planes will be delivered soon, Poland’s president said yesterday. It would be the first time any of Ukraine’s NATO allies have provided jets.
  • Why it matters: Ukraine has long been asking for jets to strengthen its defense against Russia. This could ramp up pressure on other allies, including the U.S.
  • What else to know: Chinese President Xi Jinping will meet with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Monday.
3. Protests erupted in France over its new retirement age.
  • French police fired tear gas and water cannons March 16 to disperse protesters during a rally in Paris against the government's pension reform.
  • What to know: The French government used executive powers yesterday to raise the retirement age by two years — to 64 — avoiding a vote in Parliament on a deeply unpopular bill.
  • The response: There were demonstrations across the country. In Paris, police made hundreds of arrests and fired tear gas and water cannons at protesters.
4. Three hospital workers were charged with murder in a Black man’s death.
  • What happened? Irvo Otieno, 28, died of asphyxiation at a Virginia hospital this month after seven sheriff’s deputies put their body weight on him, according to prosecutors.
  • The latest: The charges, announced yesterday, came after charges this week against the seven deputies. Otieno’s family was shown video of the incident yesterday.
5. A key starfish is in danger of going extinct.
  • The latest: A federal agency announced this week that the sunflower sea star needs protection under the Endangered Species Act.
  • What’s happening? A mysterious disease has devastated this starfish along the Pacific Coast.
  • Why it matters: Starfish are crucial for maintaining huge underwater kelp jungles that store carbon. Without them, the effects of climate change could get even worse.
6. You can blame climate change for making your spring allergies worse.
  • Why? Warmer temperatures mean that trees are blooming earlier and for longer periods of time. More carbon dioxide in the air can also help plants produce more pollen.
  • This year’s outlook: Thanks to record warmth in parts of the U.S., spring has already started in the South and along the East Coast.
  • The worst cities for allergies: Wichita, Dallas and Scranton PA (See the full list.)
7. Volcanic activity on Venus may offer clues about Earth’s “evil twin.”
  • What to know: A new study looked at images of the planet from the 1990s. It found a volcanic vent that changed shape over time, suggesting Venus remains geologically alive.
  • Why scientists are excited: It could help explain why Venus, similar in size and starting ingredients to Earth, became so hot and uninhabitable.

Mar 16, 2023

Odd Quotes




Google "this day in history" = 9.4 billion hits
Google "this day in black history" = 5.6 billion hits

So now all I need is a bot that will look to see how many "black history" events are included in the "history" results.


A cursory, randomly-clicking sampling is not encouraging.
  • White people living today are not to blame for the shitty things black people have had done to them - since even before 1619 - by WASPy white people in the past.
  • That doesn't mean we have no responsibility for what's going on now, and it has to be obvious that some shitty things are still happening to black people.