Mediaboss Marketing

We should set our sights beyond just primary challenges and reshaping the Democratic Party; this is an opportunity to build a movement that can challenge capital and corporate power.

The Women's March in Washington, DC on Jan. 21, 2017. (Photo by Liz Lemon/ flickr CC 2.0)

This post originally appeared at In These Times.

On Feb. 19, 2009, just 30 days after President Obama was sworn in, Rick Santellis rant on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange launched the tea party. The conservative establishment worked together with the grass roots to fan the flames of opposition. The resulting tidal wave swept Republicans to power at the national and state level in 2010 and set the stage for Trumps victory in 2016.

This isnt just about electoral politics, its about shifting political and economic power across the board.

Since at least 2012, Ive worked in and with organizations that saw the tea party as a model for the left. While we abhorred their politics, we admired their tactics and coveted their success. The tea party pioneered a strategy that enabled grass-roots activists and candidates to work inside and outside of the Republican Party to advance a principled conservative agenda. And they won big time.

In the wake of Trumps election, were seeing a tsunami of progressive activism. The confrontations with lawmakers around the country during the February congressional recess were nearly mirror images of the town halls the tea party crashed as Congress first debated Obamacare. Unsurprisingly, commentators and pundits have quickly drawn parallels between what happened in 2009 and whats happening today.

But the commentators are wrong and if the left continues to take the tea party as our model, we might lose out on our biggest opportunity to make large-scale progressive political change in decades. We are the clear majority

As Trump and the Republicans have begun rather clumsily to manipulate the levers of the federal government, we are under attack from all sides. Republicans have moved with breathtaking speed to roll back progress on immigration and civil rights, on health care and the environment and on regulating Wall Street and the corporate elite. More frightening still, we have seen the Trump administration begin toying with authoritarian tactics and threatening to undo the post-World War II global order. Practically overnight, it feels like everything has changed.

We have seen the Trump administration begin toying with authoritarian tactics and threatening to undo the post-World War II global order.

Given this onslaught, its easy to forget that roughly 3 in 4 Americans didnt vote for Donald Trump in November. If our electoral system wasnt rigged against democracy, Trump wouldnt even be president. But now that hes assumed office, Trump is the least popular president in modern American history. So while Trump and the Republicans control the federal government, we must remind ourselves that the vast majority of the American people are on our side.

In fact, that is the real story of the last six weeks. While the media has been glued to Trumps every tweet, millions of Americans have taken to the streets to protest his agenda. More than 3.7 million people one out of every 100 Americans flooded into the streets to participate in the Womens March. Within 48 hours of Trumps initial Muslim ban, thousands gathered at airports around the country demanding that immigrants and refugees be released from detainment. During the February recess, Peoples Action, MoveOn and the Working Families Party organized more than 600 town hall events. While its difficult to predict how long this level of activity can be sustained, we have already seen resistance to the new administration that is unprecedented in recent history.

This is precisely where comparisons to the tea party start to break down. According to commentators and many in the media, what were seeing now is merely history repeating itself. Republicans have control of the federal government, just as Democrats did in 2009, and now its liberals and the left in the streets instead of old white people dressed in colonial garb.

But the tea party only ever represented a tiny faction of Americans. We, on the other hand, are the clear majority.

Political scientists Theda Skocpal and Vanessa Williamson estimate in their book The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism that at its height only about 200,000 Americans were active in the tea party at the local level. Its too early to say exactly how many Americans are engaged in the current protest movement, but already there are signs that were organizing at a scale that dwarfs the tea party.

For example, the tea party first debuted on the national stage when they held roughly 750 Tax Day events around the country. But only 250,000 Americans attended those events. In other words, the tea partys Tax Day protests were 15 times smaller than the Womens March. Of course, participation at a single event does not necessarily foretell prolonged participation in a social movement. But the fact that a small group of former Hill staffers and progressive organizers could help launch more than 4,500 local groups in less than four weeks suggests a massive groundswell of people interested in sustained political participation.

The scale of active engagement is mirrored by public support. Polling conducted by The Washington Post in April 2010 found that roughly 27 percent of Americans supported the tea party. By contrast, a full 60 percent supported the Womens March.

At the policy level, the difference is even starker. When the tea party held their Tax Day protests, polling showed that 65 percent of Americans actually backed Obamas overall economic plans and 62 percent approved of how he was handling taxes. Their colorful protests may have generated a media frenzy, but the policies they were intended to bolster did not have popular support.

Those who have participated in recent marches, rallies and actions are protesting a wide array of Republican policies. But if we take just two core policies pushed by Trump and the GOP, we can see that the resistance to those policies and support for progressive alternatives is broad.

If we take just two core policies pushed by Trump and the GOP, we can see that the resistance to those policies and support for progressive alternatives is broad.

Last week, Republicans introduced their bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, despite the fact that the law is supported by a majority of Americans. The Republican repeal bill also proposes deep cuts to Medicaid, something that has historically been opposed by 84 percent of Americans. And theres evidence to suggest that public support for a Medicare-for-all system is even greater than support for Obamacare.

Tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy are also a centerpiece of the Republican agenda. Yet, a series of post-election polls compiled by Americans for Tax Fairness show that Americans oppose cutting taxes for big corporations and the rich by roughly a 2-to-1 margin. Gallup polls consistently show that similar margins believe corporations and the wealthy already pay too little in taxes.

Despite widespread support on issues like health care and taxation, the anti-Trump resistanceis clearly an ideologically heterogeneous bunch, encompassing leftists, centrist Democrats, independents and perhaps even some moderate Republicans.

That means our task is to organize. Republicans have used voter suppression, redistricting and other undemocratic aspects of government such as the Electoral College and the Senate to take power, despite the fact that many of their policies are extremely unpopular with large segments of the public. They have also used the media, think tanks and the academy to manufacture public consent to policies that hurt many of the same people who support them.

Our goal must be to bring together different constituencies within the resistance movement, those motivated by diverse struggles, to support a bold platform for social change that will make life better for the working class as a whole. Reshapingthe parties

The tea party was a minority faction within the Republican Party funded by the wealthy elite. Our aim shouldnt be the creation of a faction within the Democratic Party. It should be to forge a new American majority.

Neoliberalism has been in crisis for at least a decade, and the crisis of legitimacy that elites including politicians from both parties face today is far more acute than it was in 2009. As a result, both parties face deep internal rifts. We should not simply aim to pull the Democratic Party to the left. We should work to redraw the lines of the entire political map so that we find ourselves at the center.

We should not simply aim to pull the Democratic Party to the left. We should work to redraw the lines of the entire political map so that we find ourselves at the center.

This doesnt mean abandoning our principled politics or the hardscrabble tactics pioneered by the tea party. We can and should mount primary challenges to corporate Democrats and collaborators, including members of the current Democratic leadership. Efforts like WeWillReplaceYou.org, a new Political Action Committee created by #AllofUs, are an important addition to work that has been done by groups like Peoples Action and the Working Families Party.

Nevertheless, all of these efforts should be seen as tactics inside of a broader strategy to redraw the political map. The aim should be threefold.

First, we should aim to take over the Democratic Party wholesale and make it into a vehicle for the working class. In addition to electing real progressives to office, this means building a greatly expandedcoalition of active voters and a genuinely progressive policy platform.

Second, we should exploit Trumps incompetence and the factions within the Republican Party to decimate it for decades to come. Where possible and without compromising progressive principles, we should aim to peel off sections of the Republican coalition to join our side.

Finally, we should work for structural reforms that make both the party structure and the electoral system itself more democratic. That means everything from giving working people real decision-making power over the direction of the Democratic Partyto making it more feasible for third parties to run and win governing powerto rewriting the rules to eliminate the Electoral College and other undemocratic elements of our political system. Winning more than elections

This isnt just about electoral politics, its about shifting political and economic power across the board. While the tea party propelled electoral victories, it did not generate sustained and politically independent social movements. Since the tea party was funded by the wealthy elite, it didnt put significant pressure on Wall Street and the ruling class, despite being fueled in part by anti-Wall Street sentiment.

While Trump and the Republicans control the White House, Congress and 25 state governments, our goal cant just be to reclaim those seats and offices. Even in places around the globe where Left-leaning political parties have won significant governing power, such as Podemos in Spain and Syriza in Greece, they have been largely unable to achieve their desired reforms in part because of the vast economic power that weighs against them.

We shouldnt lose sight of the fact that politicians face structural limits on their power. Even progressive governments need outside help. We must build social movements strong enough to win governing power and challenge the dominance of capital, markets and the corporate elite.

Together, we can forge a new American majority. It may become possibleto achieve progressive changefar greater than we would ever have imagined just a few years ago. But doing so will require those of us on the Left to stop confining ourselves to the margins so that we can redefine the center.

Here is the original post:
Forget Building Our Own Tea Party. The Left Can Win So Much More. - BillMoyers.com

Prosecutors alsoshowed CNN documentation they sent to the DOJ in which they told the US authorities that their investigation had "established that the well-known American political strategist Paul Manafort is implicated in the relationship between the Skadden Arps. firm and the Justice Ministry of Ukraine." Of Manafort, the letter said he "was likely the person who advised representatives of the former Government of Ukraine to hire the law firm and was present during talks about this issue."

Right now, Manafort isnt facing charges in this case but its far from his only legal issue.

Why the United States hasn't moved to make Manafort available to Ukraine under a treaty of mutual assistance is unclear.

The final letter was dated September 2016: Ukraine's Prosecutor General, the equivalent of a US Attorney General, sent a letter directly to FBI director James Comey asking for clarification for why the US authorities would not help.

The actions in question happened before Manafort was Donald Trumps manager, but after he had already picked up a nice apartment inTrump Tower. In fact, its not clear when, or even if, Manaforts associationwith pro-Russian forces in Ukraine ended.Several of Manaforts actions in Ukraine continue to be the subject of potentialattention from courts.

Actions such as arranging proteststhat Putin used as an excuse for invasion.

The senior Ukrainian prosecutor alleges that in 2006 Mr. Manafort orchestrated a series of Anti-Nato, Anti-Kiev protests in Crimea led by Viktor Yanukovychs pro-Russian Party of Regionsnow a designated criminal organisation. The protests forced planned Nato exercises there to be cancelled.

And violating U.S. laws on foreign lobbying:

Donald Trump's campaign chairman helped a pro-Russian governing party in Ukraine secretly route at least $2.2 million in payments to two prominent Washington lobbying firms in 2012, and did so in a way that effectively obscured the foreign political party's efforts to influence U.S. policy.

Andarranging a riot in which U.S. Marines were attacked:

We had rocks thrown at us. Rocks hit Marines. Buses were rocked back and forth. We were just trying to get to our base.

And taking more than $12 millionin off the books cash:

government investigators examining secret records have found his name, as well as companies he sought business with, as they try to untangle a corrupt network they say was used to loot Ukrainian assets and influence elections during the administration of Mr. Manaforts main client, former President Viktor F. Yanukovych.

That last claim is already thought to be at the center of an FBI investigation into Manafort. So perhaps the answer to why wont you let us question Manafort about his second-hand involvement in misappropriating $1 million is because were about to indict him for a lot more than that.

It appears that Manafort may have been blackmailed using knowledge of not justhis under-the-table funds for helping out Russian interests in Ukraine ...

Attached to the text is a note to Paul Manafort referring to bulletproof evidence related to Manaforts financial arrangement with Ukraines former president, the pro-Russian strongman Viktor Yanukovych, as well as an alleged 2012 meeting between Trump and a close Yanukovych associate named Serhiy Tulub.

...but also for arranging a meeting between Donald Trump and a pro-Russian Ukrainian official.

The White House did not respond to a question about whether Trump had met with Tulub, a hunting buddy of Yanukovychs who had served as part of government when Yanukovych was prime minister.

None of this has stopped Manafort from seemingly trying to secure Ukraine for Putin, and hes not the only one on the Trump team working to that end.

The new story explains that a group of Trump operatives, including top lawyer Michael Cohen and fired former campaign manager Paul Manafort, along with a pro-Putin Ukrainian parliamentarian named Andrii V. Artemenko and Mr. Sater are pushing President Trump on a 'peace plan' for Russia and Ukraine.

The ManafortArtemenkoCohen plan ended up on Flynns desk shortly before National Security AdviserMichael Flynn left office, supposedly over his conversations with the Russian ambassador and not his failing to register as a foreign agentwhich Trump already knew about. And of course, Trump himself made sure that the Ukraine remained a soft target for Moscow.

Inside the meeting, Diana Denman, a platform committee member from Texas who was a Ted Cruz supporter, proposed a platform amendment that would call for maintaining or increasing sanctions against Russia, increasing aid for Ukraine and providing lethal defensive weapons to the Ukrainian military.

Trump staffers in the room, who are not delegates but are there to oversee the process, intervened. By working with pro-Trump delegates, they were able to get the issue tabled while they devised a method to roll back the language.

One of those Trump staffers has since been identified asJ. D. Gordon:

The Trump campaign's national-security policy representative for the Republican National Convention, J.D. Gordon, told CNN on Thursday that he pushed to alter an amendment to the GOP's draft policy on Ukraine at the Republican National Convention last year to further align it with President Donald Trump's views.

Note thatits not as if Gordon was acting on his own:

The two Trump staffers claimed to a delegate that they had to call and talk to Mr. Trumpperhaps name-dropping as obnoxious staffers, or perhaps Trump really was involved at the highest level with this particular amendment. The Trump staffers told the delegate that they had discussed Ukraine policy directly with Trump.

Donald Trump, whose level of sophistication on foreign policy comes down to shouting about Sweden because he misheard a story on Fox, has detailed views on the language surrounding wording of how Ukraine should be assisted against Russian forces.

Why would that be?

Continue reading here:
Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort wanted for questioning in Ukraine corruption case - Daily Kos

For weeks, conflict has been escalating in eastern Ukraine. Hardly a day goes by without an exchange of fire. Heavy weapons are being used again. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), which should be monitoring to ensure that the long-established cease-fire isrespected, can scarcely deliver more than helpless reports of a war that is still not over after three years.

Politically speaking, all sides - the leadership in Kyiv, as well as the separatists and their supporters in the Kremlin - are pouring fresj fuel on the fire. They are cementing the division of Ukraine step by step. And now it is Kyiv itself that has moved to speed up thisprocess: The Security Council of Ukraine has decided to stop all freight traffic with the rebel-occupied areas in Luhansk and Donetsk.

Armed activists surrendered

The financial transfer between Kyiv and the separatist parts of Donbass has long been interrupted - with devastating consequences for the people, especially the elderly. They must take the dangerous route across the dividing line to retrieve their pensions or other social benefits from Kyiv. With the economic blockade that has now been decided, Kyiv is also cutting back on shipments of all kinds of goods to Donbass.

The Ukrainian government, with President Petro Poroshenko at the head, is thus bendingto the pressure of armed activists who interrupted the railways between Donbass and the rest of Ukraine two months ago. A few politicians in Kyiv have criticized this, as did Poroshenko. Now, a controversial action by activists has become a state blockade in the name of national security.

Residents left to an uncertain fate

Officially, Kyiv continues to stress that the occupied areas around Luhansk and Donetsk belong to Ukraine. The blockade on the movement of goods is theoretically to be stopped as soon as the separatists withdraw the recently decided illegal "nationalization" of factories. Ukraine is apparently taking over the political initiative. But in actual fact it is likely to play into the hands of Russian separatists and Russia itself, who will say that Kyiv has given up the people of Donbass.

The Ukrainian plans for a reintegration could become so much wasted paperwith such action. Politicians in eastern Ukraine - along with many in Kyiv -have long pointed out that Ukraine is doing too little to win back the people of Donbass. Now those goalposts seem to be moving further and further away.

Bernd Johann of DW's Ukrainian desk

Pushing partners away

With this decision, Kyiv is essentially also making fools out of countries that are working to resolve the Donbass conflict. These include Germany and France, which have always stood for the unity of Ukraine within the framework of the Minsk process - which is why they are opposed to any measure that could lead to a worsening of the conflict. The imposition of an economic blockade is precisely such a step. The German government's reaction to the blockade imposed by Kyiv and the illegal seizure of factories by the separatists is correspondingly sharp.

Only Russia, which after the annexation of Crimea launched the conflict in eastern Ukraine as well, will probably be pleased at Kyiv's moves, which provide it with a welcome opportunity. Only recently, the Kremlin began to recognizepassports issued by the separatists in eastern Ukraine as valid travel documents. This recognition accelerates the process of division. The economic blockade in Ukraine is now pushing Donbass furtherinto the arms of Moscowand advancing the division of Ukraine.

You can leave a comment below this article. We look forward to hearing from you!

Originally posted here:
Opinion: Kyiv risks divided Ukraine - Deutsche Welle

Roman Nasirov (left, in orange), the suspended head of Ukraine's tax service, lies inside the defendant's cage during his court hearing in Kiev on March 5. He was first detained in a hospital, claiming illness. Nasirov is accused in an embezzlement scheme amounting to more than $70 million. NurPhoto/NurPhoto via Getty Images hide caption

Roman Nasirov (left, in orange), the suspended head of Ukraine's tax service, lies inside the defendant's cage during his court hearing in Kiev on March 5. He was first detained in a hospital, claiming illness. Nasirov is accused in an embezzlement scheme amounting to more than $70 million.

Kiev's Solomyansky District Court is a four-story pink building squeezed between an Orthodox church with golden domes and the soaring office tower of Ukraine's tax service.

"It's a very symbolic place," said Maxim Eristavi, a journalist and activist, as he returned to the site of a dramatic standoff that took place in early March.

Inside the court, a judge was preparing to rule on extending the pre-trial detention of Roman Nasirov, the suspended head of Ukraine's State Fiscal Service. Afraid that Nasirov would be allowed to escape the country's first major graft trial, Eristavi and other protestors blocked the narrow access ways to the courthouse for 48 hours straight.

Feeling the pressure from the street, the judge prolonged Nasirov's detention by 60 days and set bail at nearly $4 million, a record for Ukraine.

Activists gather March 5 outside a Kiev court to prevent the release of tax chief Roman Nasirov. Protests took place over the course of 48 hours. NurPhoto/NurPhoto via Getty Images hide caption

Activists gather March 5 outside a Kiev court to prevent the release of tax chief Roman Nasirov. Protests took place over the course of 48 hours.

Activists like Eristavi call this the biggest victory in the fight against corruption since Ukraine became an independent country in 1991. Three years after bloody protests took place on the Maidan, Kiev's main square, against then-President Viktor Yanukovych, Ukrainians are impatient with the pace of reform under President Petro Poroshenko.

"Those two nights showed us that there is still public anger and civil society is a powerful force," said Eristavi. "It doesn't mean the revolution is a success. But it means it's not dead yet."

Ukraine aspires to join the European Union, but is considered one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Activists and international donors like the International Monetary Fund are placing their hope in the fledgling National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and special prosecutors, who brought Nasirov's case to court.

Nasirov is accused of benefiting from an embezzlement scheme amounting to more than $70 million. NABU officers detained him March 2 in a Kiev hospital, where he claimed to be recovering from an illness. Nasirov was wheeled in on a gurney and lay in the courtroom without a shirt. Prosecutors suspected the 38-year-old tax chief of feigning sickness a tradition for Ukrainian officials caught up in legal troubles.

"This is a person who is extremely close and indispensable for President Poroshenko and his administration," Eristavi said, so it was "mind-blowing" to see him in court.

Thanks to the peaceful outcome of the courthouse protest, Ukraine avoided a major political crisis, says political scientist Volodymyr Fesenko. The country suffers from a "Maidan syndrome," he says, with activists using blockades and other direct action to put pressure on the government.

"If they use them too often and for any reason, they could end up destroying the state. That's the biggest danger," Fesenko said.

Stickers on a wall at Kiev's Solomyansky District Court demand justice for Ukraine's tax chief, Roman Nasirov, who is accused of corruption. Lucian Kim/NPR hide caption

Stickers on a wall at Kiev's Solomyansky District Court demand justice for Ukraine's tax chief, Roman Nasirov, who is accused of corruption.

Daria Kaleniuk, the director of the non-governmental Anti-Corruption Action Center, says the protesters were justified in blocking the exits to the court.

"In an ideal world, there'd be no need for citizens to enter the courtyard and wait for the judge to appear," she said. "But in the Ukrainian reality, where the court system is not reformed yet, we have to introduce enhanced civil society control."

A new generation of professionals is beginning to go into government, Kaleniuk said, and the introduction of anti-corruption courts should help justice runs its course.

She gives little credit to Poroshenko, elected on a reform platform in May 2014, for the changes. She calls him part of the old system.

Rostyslav Pavlenko, the deputy head of the presidential administration, insists there has been progress.

"Much was done to cut this tail that goes into the Soviet times or post-Soviet times and actually kick-start the new institutional outfit," he said. "In three years, we have had to do the work that was neglected for more than 20."

Pavlenko lists tough reforms that Poroshenko's government has pushed through: the reorganization of the armed forces in wartime conditions, asset declarations for government officials, the establishment of NABU and hiring of special anti-corruption prosecutors.

Still, 72 percent of Ukrainians believe their country is headed in the wrong direction, according to a poll taken in the fall. Corruption is named as the No. 2 problem, after the war against Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine.

"I think now, we're probably at the most critical point because all the externalities and collateral damage have happened," Pavlenko said, referring to the war and economic hardship. "The positive results are only starting to surface."

Passersby pay tribute to activists who were killed during 2014 anti-government protests near the Maidan, Kiev's main square. Lucian Kim/NPR hide caption

Passersby pay tribute to activists who were killed during 2014 anti-government protests near the Maidan, Kiev's main square.

The presidential administration is a three-minute walk from the Maidan, where there are memorials to the anti-Yanukovych protesters who were picked off by snipers back in 2014.

Yevgeniy Bulgakov, an engineering student crossing the square, draws a blank when asked if he knows who Nasirov, the disgraced tax chief, is. The 19-year-old says he hasn't seen any serious changes since the Maidan protest.

"The old guys left, some new guys came in," he said. "Since independence, we've been fighting corruption without any result. It's how we live."

Yuliya Laktionova, 32, who works in publishing, disagrees. Many Ukrainians complain that when they interact with officials, teachers, even doctors, they are expected to pay bribes to get what they need. Laktionova says the Maidan protest made people more aware of their civic duty not to pay bribes.

"I think that's a personal decision for each individual," she said. "Either you play by those rules or you don't. There's always a choice."

The European Union, the United States and the IMF have all prodded the Ukrainian government to change its ways.

"We know that many of these high-level officials might not have been so genuine when they were pressing for anti-corruption measures and steps," said David Stulik, spokesman for the EU delegation in Kiev. "On the other hand, there was such wide pressure from the international community and their own society that they could not have behaved differently."

While acknowledging progress, Stulik says there is still significant institutional resistance to independent anti-corruption courts and investigators. In the case of the former tax chief, Nasirov posted bail on Thursday and was released from prison in advance of the trial. Activists like Eristavi say that doesn't change anything for them, since civil society has shown that it's still a force to be reckoned with.

Ukraine's reformers know that if they are successful, their victory will send a powerful signal to neighboring Russia.

And Kaleniuk of the Anti-Corruption Action Center believes the United States can also learn from her country.

"Ukraine is a case study for Americans on what close ties between politics and business could result in: the abuse of power, large-scale corruption, embezzlement of state funds, abuse of natural resources," she said.

When business and government are too close, Kaleniuk said, it impoverishes citizens and gives rise to authoritarianism.

Read the original here:
In Ukraine, Some Signs Of Progress In Uphill Battle Against Corruption - NPR

Ukrainian lawmakers have approved a bill that requires national television and radio stations to have at least 75 percent of their programming in the Ukrainian language.

The issue is controversial among Ukraines Russian-speaking population, and pro-Russia separatists fighting in eastern Ukraine claim Kyiv is deliberately reducing the use of the Russian language. Kyiv denies the allegation.

The legislation is still going through parliament and requires presidential approval. The first reading of the bill was approved on March 16.

The bill also requires local TV and radio stations to have 50 percent of their content in Ukrainian.

The language quotas would be in place between 0700 and 2200.

The bill also requires that foreign films aired on Ukrainian television channels, including Russian movies, must carry Ukrainian subtitles.

Viktoria Syumar, chairwoman of the parliamentary committee for freedom of speech and information policies, told a session that some Ukrainian broadcasters have up to 90 percent of their programming in Russian.

She added that the Crimean Tatar language was included in the Ukrainian language quota.

Excerpt from:
Ukrainian Lawmakers Approve Language Quotas - RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty