Turnout

I was a little worried that this year's Women's March numbers might be down, and it would indicate that we're sliding into normalization due to Trump Fatigue.

Looks like I didn't have to be concerned at all - except that I haven't seen a great level of solid confirmation, but that could be a priority conflict with the Press Poodles having to decide between the protests and the shutdown.

Still, marches went off as planned, and (apparently) exceeded my expectations.

Vox:

Crowd estimates from Women’s Marches on Saturday now tally over 4 million and political scientists think we may have just witnessed the largest day of demonstrations in American history.

According to data collected by Erica Chenoweth at the University of Denver and Jeremy Pressman at the University of Connecticut, marches held in more than 600 US cities were attended by at least 4.2 million people.

- and -

The turnout at events outside the US was significant, too. Chenoweth and Pressman have recorded over 200 international Women’s Marches with an estimated attendance of more than 307,000.

Half the town of Stanley, Idaho (pop. 63) came out in a snowstorm to march in peace & solidarity w/ men, women, & children on 7 continents. pic.twitter.com/tLPCognu2t

— Carole King (@Carole_King) January 22, 2017

The Nation, John Nichols (pay wall):

A review of the president’s approval ratings from the states that provided Trump with the narrow margin he gained in the Electoral College found across-the-board evidence of decay in enthusiasm. With 55 percent disapproval of Trump in Michigan, 53 percent disapproval in Wisconsin, and 51 percent disapproval in Pennsylvania, a credible case could be made that, were Trump on the ballot today, he would lose both the popular vote and the Electoral College vote by considerable margins.

But Trump is not on the ballot today, or even this year.

If Trump is ever on the ballot again, it will not be until 2020.

What matters now is who else is on the ballot. The 2018 mid-term elections will be a critical test for the president’s Republican Party and, if patterns hold, they could see a turn in the electoral math sufficient to check and balance the president in Washington while removing his allies in the states. That’s an essential combination because it is not just Trump but Trumpism–as practiced by presidential allies such as Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker–that must be addressed if the crisis of conservative hegemony is going to ease.

This Week With Amy

Amy Siskind's list of 45*'s Daddy State bullshit - Week 62:

Trump marked his one-year anniversary in office with a government shutdown, the first shutdown in history when a single party is in control of the House, Senate, and White House. Trump’s erratic behavior and fluid positions on issues were fuel on the flames of a country and Congress torn and divided. Conversely, the anniversary of the Women’s March celebrated millions marching in 250 cities across the country, and marked a record number of women running for office and becoming politically involved.

This week new evidence emerged of Russia’s effort to financially support Trump’s 2016 campaign, while the Mueller probe engulfed more Trump insiders quoted in Wolff’s book. With all the noise and chaos, it was again easy to miss the continued dismantling of our federal agencies, and disappearing rules and protections for women and marginalized communities.

6. On Saturday, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders tweeted a meme, “Fake news is at it again!” accusing the Wall Street Journal of misquoting Trump. The Journal quoted Trump as saying, “I probably have a good relationship with Kim Jong Un.”

7. Late Saturday, the WSJ released the tape of the interview via a tweet. The Journal stated they have reviewed the audio “as well as the transcript provided by an external service, and stand by what we reported.”

8. On Sunday morning, Trump attacked the WSJ, tweeting, “Obviously I didn’t say that,” and in a second tweet, “and they knew exactly what I said and meant. They just wanted a story. FAKE NEWS!”

9. On Sunday, the WSJ issued a statement, again refuting Trump and saying the Journal stands by what was reported.

- and -

13. Economic Policy Institute said if Trump’s Department of Labor proposed rule allowing employers to pocket tips so long as they pay minimum wagegoes into effect, women workers would lose $4.6 billion, 80% of the $5.8 billion lost.

14. Politico reported Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services is planning to expand “conscience” protections for those who do not want to perform abortions or treat transgender patients based on their gender identity on the basis of moral objections.

15. Intercept reported on a prosecutor in Whatcom County, Washington who sought a warrant to get Facebook to disclose names of anti-pipeline activists. The first two attempts were fought and won by the ACLU and Facebook.

16. Facebook advised the prosecutor to seek formal guidance from the Department of Justice, and on the third request, using a DOJ template, the prosecutor was successful in obtaining a warrant and gained access tomessages to and from the page and a list of everyone “invited” to the protest event.
- and -

27. On Wednesday, 10 of the 12 members of the National Park Service advisory board resigned. In May 2017, Zinke suspended all outside committees while he reviewed their work. No meetings have taken place.
- and -

34. The Washington Post reported Trump has yet to put forth a nominee for 245 of the 633 key roles in the executive branch which require Senate confirmation, including the role of ambassador to South Korea.
132 items on this week's list.

Like Deja Vu All Over Again

History does not repeat - but it sure as fuck rhymes.

The Daily Beast, Betsy Woodruff:

The FBI has not been permitted to see the memo Rep. Devin Nunes and his staff wrote about alleged abuses by the intelligence community, The Daily Beast has learned.

"The FBI has requested to receive a copy of the memo in order to evaluate the information and take appropriate steps if necessary. To date, the request has been declined,” said Andrew Ames, a spokesperson for the FBI.


-and-

The fact that Republicans refuse to show the memo to FBI, which characterizes the intelligence they shared with Nunes, has Democrats concerned. One aide told The Daily Beast it means Nunes’ efforts are just politics.

“If this is about FBI abuses, why wouldn’t they share it with the Trump-appointed director who wasn't at the bureau when the abuses supposedly occurred?” the aide said. “If this is about cleaning up the FBI like they claim, wouldn't they want Wray as an ally?”
McClatchy's Day In History:

During a speech in Wheeling, West Virginia, Senator Joseph McCarthy (Republican-Wisconsin) claims that he has a list with the names of over 200 members of the Department of State that are “known communists.” The speech vaulted McCarthy to national prominence and sparked a nationwide hysteria about subversives in the American government.

Speaking before the Ohio County Women’s Republican Club in Wheeling, West Virginia, Senator McCarthy waved before his audience a piece of paper. According to the only published newspaper account of the speech, McCarthy said that, “I have here in my hand a list of 205 [State Department employees] that were known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department.” In the next few weeks, the number fluctuated wildly, with McCarthy stating at various times that there were 57, or 81, or 10 communists in the Department of State. In fact, McCarthy never produced any solid evidence that there was even one communist in the State Department.

Despite McCarthy’s inconsistency, his refusal to provide any of the names of the “known communists,” and his inability to produce any coherent or reasonable evidence, his charges struck a chord with the American people. The months leading up to his February speech had been trying ones for America’s Cold War policies. China had fallen to a communist revolution. The Soviets had detonated an atomic device. McCarthy’s wild charges provided a ready explanation for these foreign policy disasters: communist subversives were working within the very bowels of the American government.

Breaking News

This just in:
Preliminary results of the president's colonoscopy indicate they've found rather large traces of Mike Pence and Devin Nunes.
More details as we learn them.

One Year Ago

We are one year past Trump's inauguration, and here are a few numbers from Jan 2017 for comparison:

Also:

Federal Budget Deficit: $441 Billion

Federal Debt: $19.9 Trillion

Median Income: $56,500

Minimum Wage: $7.50/hr

Median price of an existing home: $188,900

Median Rental: $1231/mo

CPI (unadjusted as of 12-31-2017): 2.1

Today's Tweet

So lemme see if I've got this straight - according to the Repubs, the DACA kids and the CHIP kids are bullying the world's greatest military machine. Is that about it?

The Brunch Scene:
Dem: "Let's order some eggs for breakfast."
GOP: "I'm not ordering food until you get folks at the next table to eat some Tide Pods. Those things look delicious."
Dem: "No way. Tide Pods aren't food."
GOP: "Well I guess you don't really want eggs, then."

— reconstructed pat (@panarmstrong) January 20, 2018

 

The Basics

Too many people who should know better keep telling us the Dems don't have a message - that they don't have a platform the average guy can understand and relate to.

Bullshit.

Get your swag on at the OFA Store

It's The GOP, Stupid.

The Professional Left

We have a Republican Senate, and a Republican House, and a Republican President - and a Republican Judiciary to back it all up - and we get a Republican Shutdown because the Republican Senate Majority Leader can't figure out what the Republican White House means when they "articulate" their "policy" because nobody fucking knows what this numbskull POTUS means when he says anything.



(paraphrasing): 45*'s wall has nothing to do with stopping people from entering the US illegally - it's a monument to White Supremacy.

It's The Daddy State

...but (so far) without the usual efficiencies that go along with such evil-doing.

Charlie Pierce:

So, as two frenzied days begin here, we see that the substantial Republican majorities in both Houses of the Congress have completely abdicated their constitutional functions simply because the Republican Party can’t get out of its own way, and because the president* is a grandiose simpleton who could be talked into cutting off his own head. Both McConnell, and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, the zombie-eyed granny starver from Wisconsin, theoretically could get pretty much anything they want passed. But Ryan has the Freedom Caucus leading him around by the nose, and McConnell is pretending that the White House has to move first, which turns the constitutional order on its head.

What the GOP is doing is not governance - they hate government, remember? What they're doing is called extortion.

They believe if they cause us enough pain and anxiety, we'll knuckle under and go along with whatever Daddy State bullshit they feel like dictating to us - because of course, it's for our own good.

Nobody deserves to feel like they're being forced to live their lives at the broken end of a bottle.

GOP:

The assholes who make my mom cry almost every day because she's scared of the shit they threaten to do.

hat tip = driftglass & Blue Gal

Today's Tweet

Knowing a little something about yesterday helps prevent people like Paul Ryan fucking us over today.

“What’s that you say, statue?”
[silence]
“Starve the poor? Oh gosh...”
[silence]
“AND take their health care? Oh wow...”
[silence]
“Well, if you INSIST.” pic.twitter.com/qLLFimehuz

— Parker Molloy (@ParkerMolloy) January 15, 2018

 

Jeff Flake

Good, Senator, but y'know what?  Pick a cliché:

• Put up or shut up 
• Step up or step aside 
• Put your money where your mouth is

One of the things that bugs the fuck outa me about this is that it's so little traction. Seems like he's saying some important things, and it also seems like the Press Poodles oughta be picking it up and running with it.

The other thing is that Mr Flake continues to vote for the policies that give 45* the "wins" he needs to let him keep doing the shitty things Mr Flake wants him to stop doing.

So I don't wanna just shit on Flake's attempts (honest, I don't), but if he wants any of it to stick, he has to make it plain - "I'm not going along with that asshole in the White House until  or unless he gets real, and I'm not doing anything the Republican Caucus wants me to do until they stop being the same kinda assholes as that asshole."

Today's Tweet

A little cyberspace justice?

And I wonder if it says anything about the Trump Campaign not having the horsepower to do anything even approaching what happened last year - which would almost certainly mean they had to have gotten help from Uncle Walt.

JUST IN: Trump's #FakeNewsAwards website crashes immediately after the President tweets about it, which is definitely not a metaphor https://t.co/LaZIJwL4l8 pic.twitter.com/FBtVZuEhxM

— New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) January 18, 2018

 

What We're Looking For

We keep hearing the same old bullshit arguments about how horrible everybody thinks American Press Poodles are - and they are (or have been), but in very different ways.

Straight up criticism comes more vociferously from 'the right'; to the point now that we're all the way into Daddy State fantasy land projections of Fake News. 

But there's plenty of bitching from 'the left' as well - tho' for different reasons.

Conservatives point at the press and yell 'Liberal Bias' while every study for at least the last 25 has found the opposite.

Liberals mostly complain about False Equivalence and The Horse Race.

I come down pretty solidly in the 'liberal' camp these days because I think I detect a brand of rhetoric that's quite a bit less toxic coming from 'the left'.

Of course, there're loonies on the extremes of both ends of the spectrum, but by sheer volume and rate of incidence, 'the right' has way more crazies pimping the bullshit, and way more rubes lapping it up.

Suffice to say we get lots of trouble because we all tend to agree the American Press is kinda fucked up.  

Conservatives bitch about Fake News, and then the studies come out (refuting the bias), but that little tidbit can be safely ignored because the standard narrative is that everybody knows it's all fucked up, so the conservative audience will only hear, "See? Even the liberals agree there's bias in the Mainstream Media."

It works the same way for Congress. Nobody's particularly happy with Congress, but Dems are a lot more likely to think their reps need to be more progressive and push the Repubs harder etc etc etc. The polls come out and because the notion that "everybody thinks Congress is all fucked up" fits the GOP's framing of the issue, once again the Repubs can point and say, "See? The liberals think we're right too - better keep voting for the guys who know what the problem is blah blah blah."

Anyway - back to the point of how we're supposed to go about determining what is and what ain't, here's a golden oldie from FAIR:

How To Detect Bias In News Media

Media have tremendous power in setting cultural guidelines and in shaping political discourse. It is essential that news media, along with other institutions, are challenged to be fair and accurate. The first step in challenging biased news coverage is documenting bias. Here are some questions to ask yourself about newspaper, TV and radio news.

Who are the sources?

Be aware of the political perspective of the sources used in a story. Media over-rely on "official" (government, corporate and establishment think tank) sources. For instance, FAIR found that in 40 months of Nightline programming, the most frequent guests were Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig, Elliott Abrams and Jerry Falwell. Progressive and public interest voices were grossly underrepresented.

To portray issues fairly and accurately, media must broaden their spectrum of sources. Otherwise, they serve merely as megaphones for those in power

• Count the number of corporate and government sources versus the number of progressive, public interest, female and minority voices. Demand mass media expand their rolodexes; better yet, give them lists of progressive and public interest experts in the community.

Is there a lack of diversity?

What is the race and gender diversity at the news outlet you watch compared to the communities it serves? How many producers, editors or decision-makers at news outlets are women, people of color or openly gay or lesbian? In order to fairly represent different communities, news outlets should have members of those communities in decision-making positions.

How many of the experts these news outlets cite are women and people of color? FAIR's 40-month survey of Nightline found its U.S. guests to be 92 percent white and 89 percent male. A similar survey of PBS's NewsHour found its guestlist was 90 percent white and 87 percent male.

• Demand that the media you consume reflect the diversity of the public they serve. Call or write media outlets every time you see an all-male or all-white panel of experts discussing issues that affect women and people of color.

From whose point of view is the news reported?

Political coverage often focuses on how issues affect politicians or corporate executives rather than those directly affected by the issue. For example, many stories on parental notification of abortion emphasized the "tough choice" confronting male politicians while quoting no women under 18--those with the most at stake in the debate. Economics coverage usually looks at how events impact stockholders rather than workers or consumers.

• Demand that those affected by the issue have a voice in coverage.

Are there double standards?

Do media hold some people to one standard while using a different standard for other groups? Youth of color who commit crimes are referred to as "superpredators," whereas adult criminals who commit white-collar crimes are often portrayed as having been tragically been led astray. Think tanks partly funded by unions are often identified as "labor-backed" while think tanks heavily funded by business interests are usually not identified as "corporate-backed."

• Expose the double standard by coming up with a parallel example or citing similar stories that were covered differently.

Do stereotypes skew coverage?

Does coverage of the drug crisis focus almost exclusively on African Americans, despite the fact that the vast majority of drug users are white? Does coverage of women on welfare focus overwhelmingly on African-American women, despite the fact that the majority of welfare recipients are not black? Are lesbians portrayed as "man-hating" and gay men portrayed as "sexual predators" (even though a child is 100 times more likely to be molested by a family member than by an unrelated gay adult—Denver Post, 9/28/92)?

• Educate journalists about misconceptions involved in stereotypes, and about how stereotypes characterize individuals unfairly.

What are the unchallenged assumptions?

Often the most important message of a story is not explicitly stated. For instance, in coverage of women on welfare, the age at which a woman had her first child will often be reported—the implication being that the woman's sexual "promiscuity," rather than institutional economic factors, are responsible for her plight.

Coverage of rape trials will often focus on a woman's sexual history as though it calls her credibility into question. After the arrest of William Kennedy Smith, a New York Times article (4/17/91) dredged up a host of irrelevant personal details about his accuser, including the facts that she had skipped classes in the 9th grade, had received several speeding tickets and-when on a date-had talked to other men.

Is the language loaded?

When media adopt loaded terminology, they help shape public opinion. For instance, media often use the right-wing buzzword "racial preference" to refer to affirmative action programs. Polls show that this decision makes a huge difference in how the issue is perceived: A 1992 Louis Harris poll, for example, found that 70 percent said they favored "affirmative action" while only 46 percent favored "racial preference programs."

• Challenge the assumption directly. Often bringing assumptions to the surface will demonstrate their absurdity. Most reporters, for example, will not say directly that a woman deserved to be raped because of what she was wearing.
• Demonstrate how the language chosen gives people an inaccurate impression of the issue, program or community.

Is there a lack of context?

Coverage of so-called "reverse discrimination" usually fails to focus on any of the institutional factors which gives power to prejudice—such as larger issues of economic inequality and institutional racism. Coverage of hate speech against gays and lesbians often fails to mention increases in gay-bashing and how the two might be related.

• Provide the context. Communicate to the journalist, or write a letter to the editor that includes the relevant information.

Do the headlines and stories match?

Usually headlines are not written by the reporter. Since many people just skim headlines, misleading headlines have a significant impact. A classic case: In a New York Times article on the June 1988 U.S.-Soviet summit in Moscow, Margaret Thatcher was quoted as saying of Reagan, "Poor dear, there's nothing between his ears." The Times headline: "Thatcher Salute to the Reagan Years."

• Call or write the newspaper and point out the contradiction.

Are stories on important issues featured prominently?

Look at where stories appear. Newspaper articles on the most widely read pages (the front pages and the editorial pages) and lead stories on television and radio will have the greatest influence on public opinion.

• When you see a story on government officials engaged in activities that violate the Constitution on page A29, call the newspaper and object. Let the paper know how important you feel an issue is and demand that important stories get prominent coverage.

Lies, Damned Lies, Statistics and Politicians

Jennifer Rubin, WaPo:

There is no honor among anti-immigrant advocates and liars, I suppose. After dutifully lying on behalf of the president regarding his abhorrent language (“shithole countries”), Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.) were outed by the White House. The Post reports:

Three White House officials said Perdue and Cotton told the White House that they heard “shithouse” rather than “shithole,” allowing them to deny the president’s comments on television over the weekend. The two men initially said publicly that they could not recall what the president said.

Not only did these two repeatedly lie, but Cotton also impugned the integrity of Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), who told the truth. Asked whether the accusation that Trump spoke the offending words or the sentiment was phony, Cotton lied, “Yes.” He went on to say, “Senator Durbin has misrepresented what happened in White House meetings before, and he was corrected by Obama administration officials by it.”
And there it is.

"If we get 'em arguing over piddling details, then the fact that we said some really heinous shit becomes secondary."

"Plus, by slagging the messenger - he's painted as the real liar - and that means we can claim victimhood."

So the rhetorical attack on Durbin is a good fit for Daddy State Rule #1:

Every accusation is a confession

 

Today's Pix