Archives for category: Trump

This is an astonishing petition, created and disseminated within the technology industry, to protest the use of technology to carry out abhorrent policies against Muslim Americans, immigrants, and others who displease the incoming Trump administration. Please read the statement to see the links, recommended readings, and organizations. Some might say that it is too late, that the information is already collected, but it is nonetheless heartening to see so many sign this statement protesting the use of technology to invade privacy and violate human and civil rights.

 

Our pledge

 

We, the undersigned, are employees of tech organizations and companies based in the United States. We are engineers, designers, business executives, and others whose jobs include managing or processing data about people. We are choosing to stand in solidarity with Muslim Americans, immigrants, and all people whose lives and livelihoods are threatened by the incoming administration’s proposed data collection policies. We refuse to build a database of people based on their Constitutionally-protected religious beliefs. We refuse to facilitate mass deportations of people the government believes to be undesirable.

 

We have educated ourselves on the history of threats like these, and on the roles that technology and technologists played in carrying them out. We see how IBM collaborated to digitize and streamline the Holocaust, contributing to the deaths of six million Jews and millions of others. We recall the internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War. We recognize that mass deportations precipitated the very atrocity the word genocide was created to describe: the murder of 1.5 million Armenians in Turkey. We acknowledge that genocides are not merely a relic of the distant past—among others, Tutsi Rwandans and Bosnian Muslims have been victims in our lifetimes.

 

Today we stand together to say: not on our watch, and never again.

 

We commit to the following actions:

 

We refuse to participate in the creation of databases of identifying information for the United States government to target individuals based on race, religion, or national origin.
We will advocate within our organizations:
to minimize the collection and retention of data that would facilitate ethnic or religious targeting.
to scale back existing datasets with unnecessary racial, ethnic, and national origin data.
to responsibly destroy high-risk datasets and backups.
to implement security and privacy best practices, in particular, for end-to-end encryption to be the default wherever possible.
to demand appropriate legal process should the government request that we turn over user data collected by our organization, even in small amounts.
If we discover misuse of data that we consider illegal or unethical in our organizations:
We will work with our colleagues and leaders to correct it.
If we cannot stop these practices, we will exercise our rights and responsibilities to speak out publicly and engage in responsible whistleblowing without endangering users.
If we have the authority to do so, we will use all available legal defenses to stop these practices.
If we do not have such authority, and our organizations force us to engage in such misuse, we will resign from our positions rather than comply.
We will raise awareness and ask critical questions about the responsible and fair use of data and algorithms beyond our organization and our industry.

Matt Taibbi labeled Goldman Sachs “the Vampire Squid” because of its financial power and its ability to manipulate and control whatever it wants.

 

In this article, he points out that Trump ridiculed his opponents for their connections to Goldman Sachs, but is now turning the nation’s economy over to…veterans of Goldman Sachs. The Vampire Squid is now a key player in Trump’s swamp.

 

“In his final pitch to voters in the days before the election, Trump used the image of [Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd] Blankfein in a TV ad to argue that insiders had ruined the lives of ordinary Americans to enrich themselves. Here is the narration you heard when Blankfein’s face came on screen:
“It’s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities.”

 

“One surprise election result and a mountain of jubilant #draintheswamp hashtags later, Donald Trump has filled his White House with, you guessed it, Goldman veterans.
“His chief strategist, the unabashed white-supremacist loon Steve Bannon, is a former Goldman banker, as is adviser Anthony Scaramucci. Steve Mnuchin marks the fourth Goldman-pedigreed treasury secretary in the last four presidencies, after Bob Rubin, Lawrence Summers and Hank Paulson.
“But the real shocker is the recent appointment of Goldman Chief Operating Officer Gary Cohn to the post of director of the National Economic Council. Bannon and Mnuchin were former, past Goldmanites. Cohn, meanwhile, is undoubtedly at least the number-two figure at the world’s most despised bank, if not the outright co-head with Blankfein. He has been at the center of many of its most infamous episodes, including the Greek affair.
“So much for draining the swamp.
“The new party line, emanating both from Washington and from Alt-Right yahoos on the Internet, is that people like Gary Cohn are no longer the swindling scum-lords Trump said they were a few months ago, but simply smart businessmen.”

 

 

 

Investigative journalist David Sirota reviews the issues that ExxonMobil has lobbied the State Department for.

 

ExxonMobil wants sanctions lifted on Russia and Iran because it wants to do business there. It has also lobbied for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Trump opposed during the campaign.

 

If Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil and lifelong employee of the vast corporation, is confirmed as Secretary of State, will he give his company what they want?


 

 

Trump’s choice of ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be his Secretary of State is deeply troubling. Tillerson has worked at ExxonMobil for 41 years. He is a company man. His salary in 2015 was $27.2 million. He has apparently never worked anywhere else. Some have focused on his close friendship with Vladimir Putin as a problem. But even more troublesome is the record of the corporation to which Tillerson has devoted its life.

 

The Rockefeller Family Foundation recently announced that it was divesting its holdings in ExxonMobil because of the company’s abysmal record on climate issues. David Kaiser and Lee Wasserman wrote a two-part essay-review of several books about ExxonMobil.

 

See here and here.

 

They began:

 

“Earlier this year our organization, the Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF), announced that it would divest its holdings in fossil fuel companies. We mean to do this gradually, but in a public statement we singled out ExxonMobil for immediate divestment because of its “morally reprehensible conduct.” For over a quarter-century the company tried to deceive policymakers and the public about the realities of climate change, protecting its profits at the cost of immense damage to life on this planet.

 

Our criticism carries a certain historical irony. John D. Rockefeller founded Standard Oil, and ExxonMobil is Standard Oil’s largest direct descendant. In a sense we were turning against the company where most of the Rockefeller family’s wealth was created. (Other members of the Rockefeller family have been trying to get ExxonMobil to change its behavior for over a decade.) Approached by some reporters for comment, an ExxonMobil spokesman replied, “It’s not surprising that they’re divesting from the company since they’re already funding a conspiracy against us.”

 

What we had funded was an investigative journalism project. With help from other public charities and foundations, including the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF), we paid for a team of independent reporters from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism to try to determine what Exxon and other US oil companies had really known about climate science, and when. Such an investigation seemed promising because Exxon, in particular, has been a leader of the movement to deny the facts of climate change.3 Often working indirectly through front groups, it sponsored many of the scientists and think tanks that have sought to obfuscate the scientific consensus about the changing climate, and it participated in those efforts through its paid advertisements and the statements of its executives.
It seemed to us, however, that for business reasons, a company as sophisticated and successful as Exxon would have needed to know the difference between its own propaganda and scientific reality. If it turned out that Exxon and other oil companies had recognized the validity of climate science even while they were funding the climate denial movement, that would, we thought, help the public understand how artificially manufactured and disingenuous the “debate” over climate change has always been. In turn, we hoped this understanding would build support for strong policies addressing the crisis of global warming.

 

Indeed, the Columbia reporters learned that Exxon had understood and accepted the validity of climate science long before embarking on its denial campaign, and in the fall of 2015 they published their discoveries in The Los Angeles Times.4 Around the same time, another team of reporters from the website InsideClimate News began publishing the results of similar research. (The RFF has made grants to InsideClimate News, and the RBF has been one of its most significant funders, but we didn’t know they were engaged in this project.) The reporting by these two different groups was complementary, each confirming and adding to the other’s findings.

 

Following publication of these articles, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman began investigating whether ExxonMobil had committed fraud by failing to disclose many of the business risks of climate change to its shareholders despite evidence that it understood those risks internally. Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey soon followed Schneiderman with her own investigation, as did the AGs of California and the Virgin Islands, and thirteen more state AGs announced that they were considering investigations.

 

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton each called for a federal investigation of ExxonMobil by the Department of Justice. Secretary of State John Kerry compared Exxon’s deceptions to the tobacco industry’s long denial of the danger of smoking, predicting that, if the allegations were true, Exxon might eventually have to pay billions of dollars in damages “in what I would imagine would be one of the largest class-action lawsuits in history.” Most recently, in August, the Securities and Exchange Commission began investigating the way ExxonMobil values its assets, given the world’s growing commitment to reducing carbon emissions. An article in The Wall Street Journal observed that this “could have far-reaching consequences for the oil and gas industry.”

 

ExxonMobil is an ethically challenged corporation. Should its lifetime employee set our foreign policy? Will he serve the interests of the corporation to which he devoted his life or of the United States?

 

 

 

Peter Dreier is professor of politics at Occidental College in Los Angeles.

 

He writes here about Trump’s awful cabinet choices.

 

“Donald Trump, America’s Pathological Liar-in-Chief and First Bully, has nominated a cabinet of billionaires, corporate raiders, right-wing conspiracy theorists, and war hawks. In many cases, they oppose the mission of the agencies they’ve been picked to run. As a group, their web of affiliations and disdain for the common good should disqualify them from any policy-making position. As a group, they should be called the Conflict of Interest Network (COIN).”

 

They include:

 

“1. A Secretary of Labor (Andrew Puzder), CEO of the company that operates Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s restaurants, who hates workers, unions, the minimum wage, and worker safety laws and whose company was found guilty (by the DOL) of labor violations – including wage theft offenses, such as failing to pay the minimum wage or overtime – in 60% of its inspections at these two fast food chains.

 

2. A Secretary of Education (Betsy DeVos) who opposes public education and has spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting private charter schools.

 

3. An EPA director (Scott Pruitt) who, as Oklahoma Attorney General, sued the EPA to help oil companies and who doesn’t believe climate change is real

 

4. A Secretary of HUD (Ben Carson) who believes that government efforts to end racial discrimination is a form of socialism and who made a fortune shilling for a scam diet supplement company.

 

5. A Secretary of State (Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobil) who has made billions by endangering the planet with fossil fuels and is good friends with the leader of country (Russia) that interfered with the U.S. election.

 

6. A national security advisor (Michael Flynn) who was fired as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, has promoted what the New York Times called “unsubstantiated claims about Islamic law’s spreading in the United States and about the attack on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, .” has profited from his work for defense contractors, and whose penchant for lying led his one-time employees at the DIA to identify his falsehoods as “Flynn facts.”

 

7. A director of the National Economic Council (Gary Cohn) who is president of Goldman Sachs, a bank that helped bring down the economy with reckless and risky lending practices.

 

8. A Secretary of the Treasury (Steve Mnuchin) who, as head of OneWest Bank, engaged in racial discrimination, foreclosed on tens of thousands of innocent homeowners, and preyed on senior citizens. He used his political connections to purchase the bank throught a sweetheart deal with the federal government. Judges and government regulators criticized OneWest for its predatory practices. He’s soon be in charge of dismantling the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

 

9. A Secretary of Commerce (Wilbur Ross) who “made a fortune purchasing bankrupt businesses and flipping them for a profit,” according to Forbes, and who owned a coal mining company that responsible for the deaths of 12 coal miners who suffocated after an explosion at its Sago coal mine in West Virginia mine that had a history of safety violations. Earlier this year, his private equity firm, WL Ross & Co. agreed to pay a $2.3 million fine to the Securities and Exchange Commission for failing to properly disclose fees it charged investors.

 

10. An Attorney General (Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III), Senator from Alabama, who was rejected for a federal judgeship by the Senate because of his racist views. He once called the NAACP “un-American” and “Communist-inspired” and that he thought the KKK was “OK until I found out they smoked pot.” He is against any form of immigration reform, is pro-life, opposes the Voting Rights Act, and opposes same-sex marriage.

 

11. A Budget Director (Cong. Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina) who is an member of the extremist Freedom (Tea Party) Caucus and, according to the New York Times, “a fierce advocate of deep spending cuts.”

 

12. A Secretary of Enegy (Rick Perry) who in 2012 wanted to eliminate the Department of Energy (but, “oops,” forgot its name), never saw an oil well he didn’t love and who, as Texas guv, was an outspoken climate change denier and a fierce champion of the oil and gas industry, from whom he raised more than $11 million from 1998 to 2010.”

 

 

 

 

James Dowson, an extremist in Britain, ran a pro-Trump, anti-Hillary website, spreading fake news and conspiracy theories.

 

 

The Patriot News Agency website popped up in July, soon after it became clear that Donald J. Trump would win the Republican presidential nomination, bearing a logo of a red, white and blue eagle and the motto “Built by patriots, for patriots.”

 

Tucked away on a corner of the site, next to links for Twitter and YouTube, is a link to another social media platform that most Americans have never heard of: VKontakte, the Russian equivalent of Facebook. It is a clue that Patriot News, like many sites that appeared out of nowhere and pumped out pro-Trump hoaxes tying his opponent Hillary Clinton to Satanism, pedophilia and other conspiracies, is actually run by foreigners based overseas.

 

But while most of those others seem be the work of young, apolitical opportunists cashing in on a conservative appetite for viral nonsense, operators of Patriot News had an explicitly partisan motivation: getting Mr. Trump elected.

 

Patriot News — whose postings were viewed and shared tens of thousands of times in the United States — is among a constellation of websites run out of the United Kingdom that are linked to James Dowson, a far-right political activist who advocated Britain’s exit from the European Union and is a fan of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. A vocal proponent of Christian nationalist, anti-immigrant movements in Europe, Mr. Dowson, 52, has spoken at a conference of far-right leaders in Russia and makes no secret of his hope that Mr. Trump will usher in an era of rapprochement with Mr. Putin.

 

His dabbling in the American presidential election adds an ideological element that has been largely missing from the still-emerging landscape of websites and Facebook pages that bombarded American voters with misinformation and propaganda. Far from the much-reported Macedonian teenagers running fake news factories solely for profit, Mr. Dowson made it his mission, according to messages posted on one of his sites, to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites into sections of the population too disillusioned with politics to have taken any notice of conventional campaigning.”

 

He said his mission was to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites.”
“Together, people like us helped change the course of history,” one message said, adding in another: “Every single one of you who forwarded even just one of our posts on social media contributed to the stunning victory for Trump, America and God.”

 

In a recent email interview from Belgrade, where he has met with Serbian nationalists, Mr. Dowson explained how his decision to establish an American social media presence was similar to the move into European markets by Breitbart News, the conservative provocateur media operation run by Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist.

 

“Simple truth is that after 40 years of the right having no voice because the media was owned by the enemy, we were FORCED to become incredibly good at alternative media in a way the left simply can’t grasp or handle,” Mr. Dowson said. “Bottom line is: BREXIT, TRUMP and much more to follow.”

 

While it is easy to overstate the influence of fringe elements whose overall numbers remain very small, the explosion of fake news and propaganda sites and their possible impact on the presidential election have ignited alarm across the American political spectrum. A recent study found that most people who read fabricated stories on Facebook — such as a widely circulated hoax about Pope Francis endorsing Mr. Trump — were inclined to believe them.

 

Then there is the added element of Russian meddling. The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that Moscow put its thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump through the release of hacked Democratic emails, which provided fodder for many of the most pernicious false attacks on Mrs. Clinton on social media.

 

Some of those attacks found a home on Russian websites such as the one for Katehon, a right-wing Christian think tank aligned with Mr. Putin. Katehon recirculated anti-Clinton conspiracies under headlines like “Bloody Hillary: 5 Mysterious Murders Linked to Clinton.”

 

Nicholas Kristof can’t understand why Trump continues to deny that Putin hacked into our election to help Trump. Why would Trump support Putin over the professionals at the CIA and FBI?

 

“Let’s be clear: This was an attack on America, less lethal than a missile but still profoundly damaging to our system. It’s not that Trump and Putin were colluding to steal an election. But if the C.I.A. is right, Russia apparently was trying to elect a president who would be not a puppet exactly but perhaps something of a lap dog — a Russian poodle.

 

“In Britain, Prime Minister Tony Blair was widely (and unfairly) mocked as President George W. Bush’s poodle, following him loyally into the Iraq war. The fear is that this time Putin may have interfered to acquire an ally who likewise will roll over for him.
“Frankly, it’s mystifying that Trump continues to defend Russia and Putin, even as he excoriates everyone else, from C.I.A. officials to a local union leader in Indiana.

 

“Now we come to the most reckless step of all: This Russian poodle is acting in character by giving important government posts to friends of Moscow, in effect rewarding it for its attack on the United States.

 

“Rex Tillerson, Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, is a smart and capable manager. Yet it’s notable that he is particularly close to Putin, who had decorated Tillerson with Russia’s “Order of Friendship.”

 

“Whatever our personal politics, how can we possibly want to respond to Russia’s interference in our election by putting American foreign policy in the hands of a Putin friend?

 

“Tillerson’s closeness to Putin is especially troubling because of Trump’s other Russia links. The incoming national security adviser, Michael Flynn, accepted Russian money to attend a dinner in Moscow and sat near Putin. A ledger shows $12.7 million in secret payments by a pro-Russia party in Ukraine to Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort. And the Trump family itself has business connections with Russia.

 

“It’s true that there will be counterbalances, including Gen. James Mattis, the former Marine commander who has no illusions about Moscow and is expected to be confirmed as defense secretary. But over all it looks as if the Trump administration will be remarkably pro-Putin — astonishing considering Putin’s Russia has killed journalists, committed war crimes in Ukraine and Syria and threatened the peaceful order in Europe.

 

“So it’s critical that the Senate, the news media and the public subject Tillerson to intense scrutiny. There are other issues to explore as well, including his role in enabling corruption in Chad, one of the poorest countries in the world. The same is true of his role in complicity with the government of Angola, where oil corruption turned the president’s daughter into a billionaire even as children died of poverty and disease at a higher rate than anywhere else in the world.”

 

https://apple.news/A1C6kVIGlSD2AMo2pAdgMzQ

 

Michael D’Antonio writes opinion pieces for CNN. He previously wrote a book “The Truth About Trump.”

 

This article is fascinating in a morbid way, about Trump’s contempt for rules, conventions, promises, commitments. Breaking the rules and ignoring what others think have been his lifelong practices.

 

(CNN) President-elect Donald Trump signaled who he is when he announced he was going to remain executive producer of “The Apprentice” and then dismissed as “ridiculous” the Central Intelligence Agency’s concern that Russia hacked his opponent’s computers to help him win the White House. When given a choice between unreality as represented by TV and the real-world work of protecting the United States from Vladimir Putin, Trump stayed loyal to the money-making fiction and threw the CIA under the bus.

Consider that Trump has refused to sit for nearly all the daily intelligence briefings, which have been prepared for presidents since the 1960s, and his response to the CIA seems consistent with his view of himself and the world. He said he doesn’t need intelligence briefings because he’s so “smart.” By this measure, each one of his predecessors, from Kennedy to Reagan to Obama, must have been woefully unintelligent. At the very least, they worried far too much about the norms that traditionally guided the presidency.
Trump has long used manipulative techniques to get what he wants. These tendencies to shade the truth, break the rules and ignore the damage he does were apparent when he first made himself known as a publicity hound and developer in New York, and they continue to be an essential part of his character.

 

No rules for me

 
When Donald Trump proposed his first big project in the 1970s, he called on politicians whom his father had befriended and funded to grease the skids. In those days, local politics was the kind of swamp Trump now says he wants to drain, and yet he swam as well as anyone. The last step in his bid for approval required that he provide a signed contract indicating he owned the right to develop the site. Trump submitted paperwork, but since it was unsigned it shouldn’t have been accepted. Mysteriously, the city approval came, and Trump later bragged to me about pulling off the deception.

 
Less obvious, but no less significant, was Trump’s decision to use a contractor who hired scores of undocumented workers, in violation of the law, to tear down the Bonwit Teller department store at the site of what is now Trump Tower. In the same period, he destroyed architectural artwork he was supposed to preserve and adopted a fake persona to serve as a spokesman for himself. In Trump’s estimation, the deception was good business.

 

Fast forward to the 2016 election, and Trump is insulting war hero John McCain, inciting the kind of violent practices against protesters used in “the good old days” and demeaning almost every one of his opponents. When he was concerned about losing the election, he began speaking of a “rigged” system, undercutting public confidence in the foundation of the American democracy. The norms of politics have prevented every candidate in modern history from making such dangerous statements. However, Trump has not accepted those rules.

 
Now, as President-elect, Trump believes the standards accepted by other newly elected presidents out of respect for America’s political culture don’t apply to him. Others held press conferences almost immediately after the votes were tallied. Trump has yet to hold one. Others put their assets in trust to avoid conflicts of interest. Trump will not.
He has never acted as if the rules applied to him and, so far, he’s keeping up the practice.

 

One of Trump’s oft-used methods for getting what he wants involves flipping narratives to benefit him. He first did this in the early 1970s, when the federal government charged the Trump Organization with discriminating against minority applicants for apartments. Instead of acknowledging the public good in equal housing and respecting a GOP administration’s effort to encourage equality, Trump put himself above all other considerations. Crying “reverse discrimination,” he claimed he was the real victim in the situation. And though the Trump Organization eventually agreed to comply with fair housing rules, he fought hard against doing the right thing.

More opposite talk came from Trump when he argued that black men have advantages in life that he would have wanted in his youth. “I would love to be a well-educated black, because I believe they do have an actual advantage.” Every bit of data available suggested that the opposite was true, but the facts wouldn’t get in the way of Trump making a point that played to the racial fears and anxieties of many whites.
In the election campaign, Trump indulged in opposite talk almost every time he was challenged about his fitness for office. Well known for wild rants, he nevertheless insisted he had the best temperament of anyone running for president. Now, as President-elect, Trump is practicing opposite talk without saying a word. By appointing a climate change denier to run the Environmental Protection Agency and a fierce critic of public schools to run the Department of Education, President-elect Trump is communicating that he’s willing to move from opposite talk to opposite action.

 

Read on to see the many rules that Trump has broken and ignored and will continue to ignore. He has said that the president is exempt from conflicts of interest, so he will continue to own his many properties.

 

We are about to see four years of unprecedented corruption as foreign powers clear the way for Trump hotels, casinos, and golf clubs, and curry favor with the president by enriching his children and his company.

 

All this violates the “emoluments” clause of the Constitution, which forbids government officials from accepting any gifts from foreign powers, but no one can enforce the Constitution other than Congress, by impeachment. What are the odds of that?

 

 

The New York Times contains a column that expresses the fears of many people and asks whether our democracy is sturdy enough to survive the reign of Trump.

 

Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, professors of government at Harvard, write:

 

 

“Donald J. Trump’s election has raised a question that few Americans ever imagined asking: Is our democracy in danger? With the possible exception of the Civil War, American democracy has never collapsed; indeed, no democracy as rich or as established as America’s ever has. Yet past stability is no guarantee of democracy’s future survival.

 

“We have spent two decades studying the emergence and breakdown of democracy in Europe and Latin America. Our research points to several warning signs.

 

“The clearest warning sign is the ascent of anti-democratic politicians into mainstream politics. Drawing on a close study of democracy’s demise in 1930s Europe, the eminent political scientist Juan J. Linz designed a “litmus test” to identify anti-democratic politicians. His indicators include a failure to reject violence unambiguously, a readiness to curtail rivals’ civil liberties, and the denial of the legitimacy of elected governments.

 

“Mr. Trump tests positive. In the campaign, he encouraged violence among supporters; pledged to prosecute Hillary Clinton; threatened legal action against unfriendly media; and suggested that he might not accept the election results….

 

“Mr. Trump is not the first American politician with authoritarian tendencies. (Other notable authoritarians include Gov. Huey Long of Louisiana and Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin.) But he is the first in modern American history to be elected president. This is not necessarily because Americans have grown more authoritarian (the United States electorate has always had an authoritarian streak). Rather it’s because the institutional filters that we assumed would protect us from extremists, like the party nomination system and the news media, failed.

 

“Many Americans are not overly concerned about Mr. Trump’s authoritarian inclinations because they trust our system of constitutional checks and balances to constrain him.

 

“Yet the institutional safeguards protecting our democracy may be less effective than we think. A well-designed constitution is not enough to ensure a stable democracy — a lesson many Latin American independence leaders learned when they borrowed the American constitutional model in the early 19th century, only to see their countries plunge into chaos.
“Democratic institutions must be reinforced by strong informal norms. Like a pickup basketball game without a referee, democracies work best when unwritten rules of the game, known and respected by all players, ensure a minimum of civility and cooperation. Norms serve as the soft guardrails of democracy, preventing political competition from spiraling into a chaotic, no-holds-barred conflict.

 

“Among the unwritten rules that have sustained American democracy are partisan self-restraint and fair play. For much of our history, leaders of both parties resisted the temptation to use their temporary control of institutions to maximum partisan advantage, effectively underutilizing the power conferred by those institutions. There existed a shared understanding, for example, that anti-majoritarian practices like the Senate filibuster would be used sparingly, that the Senate would defer (within reason) to the president in nominating Supreme Court justices, and that votes of extraordinary importance — like impeachment — required a bipartisan consensus. Such practices helped to avoid a descent into the kind of partisan fight to the death that destroyed many European democracies in the 1930s….

 

“Unlike his predecessors, Mr. Trump is a serial norm-breaker. There are signs that Mr. Trump seeks to diminish the news media’s traditional role by using Twitter, video messages and public rallies to circumvent the White House press corps and communicate directly with voters — taking a page out of the playbook of populist leaders like Silvio Berlusconi in Italy, Hugo Chávez in Venezuela and Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey.

 

“An even more basic norm under threat today is the idea of legitimate opposition. In a democracy, partisan rivals must fully accept one another’s right to exist, to compete and to govern. Democrats and Republicans may disagree intensely, but they must view one another as loyal Americans and accept that the other side will occasionally win elections and lead the country. Without such mutual acceptance, democracy is imperiled. Governments throughout history have used the claim that their opponents are disloyal or criminal or a threat to the nation’s way of life to justify acts of authoritarianism.

 

“The idea of legitimate opposition has been entrenched in the United States since the early 19th century, disrupted only by the Civil War. That may now be changing, however, as right-wing extremists increasingly question the legitimacy of their liberal rivals. During the last decade, Ann Coulter wrote best-selling books describing liberals as traitors, and the “birther” movement questioned President Obama’s status as an American.

 

“Such extremism, once confined to the political fringes, has now moved into the mainstream. In 2008, the Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin linked Barack Obama to terrorism. This year, the Republican Party nominated a birther as its presidential candidate. Mr. Trump’s campaign centered on the claim that Hillary Clinton was a criminal who should be in jail; and “Lock her up!” was chanted at the Republican National Convention. In other words, leading Republicans — including the president-elect — endorsed the view that the Democratic candidate was not a legitimate rival.

 

“The risk we face, then, is not merely a president with illiberal proclivities — it is the election of such a president when the guardrails protecting American democracy are no longer as secure.

 

“American democracy is not in imminent danger of collapse. If ordinary circumstances prevail, our institutions will most likely muddle through a Trump presidency. It is less clear, however, how democracy would fare in a crisis. In the event of a war, a major terrorist attack or large-scale riots or protests — all of which are entirely possible — a president with authoritarian tendencies and institutions that have come unmoored could pose a serious threat to American democracy. We must be vigilant. The warning signs are real.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The U.S. Department of Education, in the Trump regime, is starting to look like a Jeb Bush sweep.

 

Betsy DeVos was on the board of Jeb’s Foundation for Education Excellence, which is noted for its advocacy for vouchers, charter schools, digital learning, and high-stakes testing.

 

Hanna Skandera, State Superintendent in New Mexico, worked for Jeb Bush, was a member and chair of Jeb’s Chiefs for Change, and is a supporter of Common Core (and president of the PARCC consortium).

 

Now Politico reports that Paul Pastorek of Louisiana, also a member of Jeb’s Chiefs for Change, is under consideration for the ED Department’s general counsel. Pastorek was a leader and cheerleader for the complete privatization of the public schools in New Orleans.

 

As superintendent [of Louisiana] from 2007 to 2011, he helped oversee the rebuilding of New Orleans schools after Hurricane Katrina. He has held a number of education reform leadership positions, serving as co-executive director of The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation, for example. Pastorek helped found the PARCC consortium and he’s chairman of PARCC Inc.’s board of directors.

 

In other words, Trump has forgotten that he promised to eliminate Common Core (which he can’t do unless the states want to do it.) He said repeatedly that Common Core is a “disaster.” But all of his likely top appointments are Common Core advocates, like Jeb Bush.