Mediaboss Marketing

Like a chubby, orange-haired, 71-year-old version of Edith Piaf, Donald Trump reportedly declared that, after his legendary press conference meltdown on Tuesday, he regrets nothing . And indeed, there did seem to be an unhinged glee in his now notorious performance, reminiscent of Howard Beale in Network, during which he declared, among other things, that there were some very fine people marching with the torch-bearing neo-fascists in Charlottesville.

It was a stark contrast from Monday, when his staff allegedly forced him to choke out a statement that read in part, "Racism is eviland those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups, that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans." Staring at the teleprompter, he wore the look usually seen on a third grader hauled back to the dime store by his mommy and forced to apologize to the salesclerk for shoplifting.

But no such glum expression crossed his visage the following afternoon, as he decried the loss of toppled Confederate statues, castigated something he called the alt-left, and insisted that there was blame on both sides. We should have been able to gauge his mood even before he crossed the gilded threshold of Trump Tower, since that morning he had already tweeted (and then hastily removed) a cartoon of a train running over a CNN reporter, a particularly tasteful, sensitive contribution to the national debate, given the way in which Heather Heyer was murdered in Charlottesville three days before.

Shell-shocked newscasters (even on Fox! Fox!) expected that this Tuesday debacle, this seeming defense of white supremacy and Neo-Nazism, would be the rhetorical straw that would break the inner circles back, that a red line had been crossed, that a whole gallery of profiles would call out the president and stream out of the West Wing.

We are still waiting for the first staffer to (intentionally) jump off this sinking ship (come on guys, you can do it!). Still, a growing number of Republican lawmakers23 at last counthave critiqued the president by name, the highest-placed among them being Senator Bob Corker, who even appeared to hint that he thinks Trump is nuts, or, as he genteelly put it , that he believes the president has yet to demonstrate stability.

Corker followed a posse of businessmen who took a hike immediately after the Tuesday rant, beginning with Kenneth Frazier, the president of Merck Pharmaceuticals, and swiftly joined by other CEOs. In a K Street version of Youre not breaking up with me! I am breaking up with you first!the president suddenly disbanded the councils on which these fat cats sat.

Wait, so now we kind of like Doug McMillon, the CEO of Walmart? At least this captain of industry said, in a message posted to the stores website: "As we watched the events and the response from President Trump over the weekend, we too felt that he missed a critical opportunity to help bring our country together by unequivocally rejecting the appalling actions of white supremacists." (Can McMillon be a member of this mysterious alt-left?)

Apparently, Anthony Scaramucci is not the only former White House official who doesnt know what off-the-record means: following in the bizarre footsteps of "the Mooch," on Wednesday, White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon appeared in an odd chat with Robert Kuttner, the co-editor of the American Prospect, openly sneering at the presidents threats against North Korea and alleging that his enemies inside the White House were wetting themselves. Seventy-two hours later, in yet another Friday afternoon massacre, Bannon was dead in the water , apparently defenestrated by Chief of Staff John Kelly and sent scurrying back to the rats nest of Breitbart News . Rumor is that the Commander-in-Chief was also sick of Stevie, convinced that Bannon was a leaker, contributing to his not-a-minute-too-soon downfall. (Wetting? Leaking? What's with these disgusting figures of speech?)

Anyway, according to the erstwhile Chief Strategist, who gave a manic interview to The Weekly Standard a few hours after being axed, "The Trump presidency that we fought for, and won, is over.

From your evil lips to Gods ears, Mr. Bannon.

See the article here:
Which Republicans Will Desert Trump's Sinking Ship First? - Vogue.com

Just about every week, I contact my State Delegate, begging him to a) speak out and do everything in his power to oppose the pipelines, and b) refuse to take money from Dominion Power. And yet, he hasnt agreed to do either. Its frustrating and disheartening sometimes. Many of my friends know my arguments (heck, my 8 year old son can explain it): these pipelines are bad for our environment, bad for our water quality, dont help anywhere near the numbers of people they claim to help, and most importantly to me, they use eminent domain laws to strip historic land from African American families whove owned it since they were freed from slavery. Its a heartbreaking issue, and one that is very important to me.

So, will I not vote for my Delegate this year then?

Oh, is that where you thought this was going? You couldnt be farther from the truth! I absolutely adore my Delegate, and he knows it! He has my vote for as long as he runs. If a Republican challenged him, Id be the first person out campaigning my tail off for him. Id give him my time, my money, and my energy. In fact, and I had to think about this one for a minute, if he were primaried by a Democrateven if that Democrat opposed the pipelines and refused Dominion moneyI would still not change my vote.

Does that mean the pipelines arent really that important to me? No, they really are one of the most important issues being decided right now. And this is not a single issueit cuts across economic justice, environmentalism, economics, social justice.

So why will I still vote for my Delegate? For one thing, because hes outstanding on so many other issues. He had the worst batting average of anyone in the House last year, and given that progressives are in a very small minority there, I consider that a badge of honor. Second, he works his tail off, all year round, serving my town, and Virginia. Theres rarely a minute outside of his real job (the one that almost all of our legislators still have to hold down, because we dont actually pay legislators a living wage, since its technically a part-year job) that he isnt meeting with constituents or attending events or speaking truth to power all over social media.

But the most important reason I would still walk through walls for my Delegate is that every week I contact him about this pipeline/Dominion issue that matters so much to me. And every week, he genuinely listens to me. He doesnt patronize me or attempt to diminish my strong views on this. The fact that we can have this back and forth dialogue about issues we differ on is exactly how democracy SHOULD work. Its up to us as representees to convince representers.

So, where does that leave me with Ralph Northam? Well, he has my vote, for reason number one above. Thats been true since the minute he won the primary. But for me to get from there to walk through walls? Well, theres a little ways to go on that for me, more of that number three reason needs to happen. Its not about some purity test; its about him being my representative, my voice, and to do that he needs to listen.

Northam made a start a week ago, attending an energy discussion in Arlington where he stayed and took questionsmostly about the pipelinesfor an hour. And sure enough, I found myself just a couple days later, arguing online with someone (a Democrat) about why they should vote for him. It turns out its not that hard to inspire people and turn out your baseyou just have to be willing to listen to them!

Read more from the original source:
Pipeline Voting for Progressives - Blue Virginia (press release) (blog)

Famed lawyer Alan Dershowitz said Sunday that liberals had a special obligation to condemn bigotry on the left side of the political spectrum, just as President Trump did for those on the right who claim to speak on his behalf.

"I don't want to make moral equivalence," Dershowitz told AM 970's John Catsimatidis, responding to a question about the Charlottesville violence and the ensuing national conversation around race relations and Confederate monuments. "But having said that, that doesn't give a pass to the people on the hard left, who are themselves engaged in violence and also some bigotry of their own."

He continued, saying Confederate statues needed to be put in context -- for example, in a museum -- rather than simply being destroyed.

Turning to the Russian probe, Dershowitz said that special counsel Robert Mueller was endangering democracy because the investigation could criminalize politics.

"The idea of trying to create crimes just because we disagree with (President Trump) politically and target him really endangers democracy," Dershowitz said. "We should only be using the criminal justice system against obvious crimes, crimes that are not stretched and manufactured to fit a particular person."

Congress ought to have appointed a special committee like it did in the aftermath of Sept. 11, Dershowitz said.

"To give it to a special counsel means it goes behind closed doors to a grand jury where people are not represented, where things happen in darkness and secrecy," he said. "We don't know what's going on. We get leaks, but the leaks are selective leaks. They shouldn't happen."

Dershowitz added that former FBI director James Comey was one of the worst leakers and slammed him for setting "a very bad" precedent for those working with classified information.

Read the original:
Alan Dershowitz: Liberals have a special obligation to condemn bigotry of the Left - Washington Examiner

The Washington Post reported Sunday that President Donald Trump will move to disband a government committee that advises on climate change.

And liberals are not happy.

The panel, aptly named, Advisory Committee for the Sustained National Climate Assessment, is a 15-member panel comprised of people from different backgrounds whose purpose was to simplify the findings of the National Climate Assessment for people in and out of the government, according to The Hill.

Ben Friedman, acting administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, informed the committee on Friday that its charter would not be renewed, according to the Washington Post.

The National Climate Assessment was intended to be updated and released every four years, but only three reports have been released since 1990. The next report was due to be released next year.

Former President Barack Obama established the committee in 2015.

There was controversy surrounding the panel earlier this month after the New York Times reported that next years report had been leaked to them. However, the reported wasnt leaked and it had been publicly available for months.

The Times seized on the opportunity to posture the Trump administration in a negative light because the report concluded that human activities were causing a rise in global temperatures. The Times report quoted scientists who suggested the Trump administration was trying to suppress the report. However, that was proven false.

Liberals and progressives were quick to voice their outrage with Trump over his decision.

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray told the Post that the move is an example of the president not leading, and the president stepping away from reality.

Others shared their disdain on social media:

Either way, it appears Trump is making good on his promise to downsize the scope of the federal government. Well, at least a little.

See original here:
Trump disbands beloved progressive government committee liberals everywhere are triggered - TheBlaze.com

The B.C. NDP outpaced the B.C. Liberals in campaign donations leading up to the 2017 election, according to new reports from Elections BC. For some, the data signals a needto push political finance reform forward.

The Liberals have long brought in the most donations in B.C.politics, but thegap between the NDP and the Liberals began tonarrow in the 2013provincial election,when most pollsters suggested a win for the NDP.

Although polls were generally more cautious about predicting an NDP government this time around, the donationtrend favouring the NDP appears to have continued.

The reports show that the NDP brought in a total of $9,442,746, and the Liberals $7,934,581. The B.C. Green Party, which refused to accept corporate and union donations during its campaign, brought in $869,308.

According to the Elections BC report, about 40 percentof the NDP'sdonations came from unions duringthis most recent election,with individual donations a close second.

Almost 60 per cent of the donations for the Liberals came from corporations.

The numbers have been released amid ongoing pressure to reform the province's political donation system dubbed the "wild west" of political finance.

Attorney General David Eby says putting forward a bill with "very strict limits" on political donations will be his first priority as soon as the legislature sits in early September.

Dermod Travis, executive director of non-partisan group Integrity B.C., noted that some corporations, traditional Liberal supporters,appear to have switched their allegiance this year.

Notably, mining giant Teck and developer Aquilini Investments both donated to the NDP. The latter was the party's biggest corporate donor with a $100,000 donation in 2017.

"A lot of traditional donors to the B.C. Liberal party don't appear in the 2017 list,or if they appear it is a dramatically different size donation than before," Travis said.

Aquilini wasn't the only developer to donate to the NDP. Travis thinks that some in the industry may have switched loyalty because of policy shifts last year, in particular a 15 per taximposed onforeign homebuyers.

"I suspect they were not happy with the foreign tax and other measurements that the government had moved on under Christy Clark, and they took it out on the government through their bank account," Travissaid.

Christopher Cotton, a political economist at Queen's University whose work focuses on political finance reform, says it's not unusual for companies to support the party they think is best placed to win an election.

Cotton acknowledges that many believe thatdonations are made to curry specific political favours, but he says there is little evidence to support that this is widespread.

Instead, Cotton says there is more evidence to support the notionthat donations are madeto gain access to the party donatedto, in order to ensure a more favourable regulatory environment.

"You might want to have your foot in the door no matter which party it is," he said.

Despite the NDP's fundraising advantage this past election, Cotton thinks finance reform will still benefit the party in the long term.

"I don't see anything in the data to suggest that the NDP now has a permanent fundraising advantage over the Liberals," he said.

"The Liberalsalmost certainly continue to have more corporate support and are able to raise higher total donation over an entire election cycle than the NDP."

Whatever the reason for the donations to the NDP or the Liberals, both Cotton and Travis agree reform is necessary in B.C.

"B.C.is really behind the trend across Canada, across Western democracies, in terms of eliminating corporate and union money from politics," Cotton said.

"If nothing else this is creating the impression of corruption."

Political donation rules in Canada2:28

Until the reform bill is put forward and passes, the NDP continues to accept corporate, union and unlimited individual donations. Eby says that's because the Liberals are still amassing a "war chest" that could be used for years to come.

Part of the new bill, he says, will apply retroactively to donations received after the election.

"We want to make sure that the last election was the last big money election in B.C. and we will do that," Eby said.

The party is still deciding where to set limits for personal limits for donations. He says they currently range from $100 to about $3,000 across the country.

See the complete results of the CBC's analysis and download the raw datahere

With files fromCBCdata journalist TaraCarman

Visit link:
BC NDP outpace Liberals in donations leading up to 2017 elections - CBC.ca