Mediaboss Marketing

President Trump is most comfortable when hes on the verbal offensive. He loves a good war of words, whether his target is a foreign adversary, a foreign ally, a Republican rival, or Rosie ODonnell. According to a New York Times tally, Trump has attacked 351 separate people, places, and things on Twitter alone since July 2015.

The president has demonstrated that tendency this week, with his escalating, improvised threats against North Korea and his parallel assault on Mitch McConnell, his most important ally in Washington.

Those feuds make Trumps refusal to criticize Russian President Vladimir Putin all the more conspicuous.

How Trump's Transgender Ban Compromises His Military Authority

On July 30, Putin announced that Russia was forcing the U.S. State Department to reduce its staff in Russia by 755 people. (For the most part, those who were laid off were Russians working for the embassy, not American diplomats.) Trump, who often cant let a provocation on cable news go unanswered for more than a few hours, was uncharacteristically quiet.

He finally broke his silence, after a fashion, on August 3, the day he signed a bill increasing sanctions on Russia in retaliation for interfering in the 2016 election. Trump had opposed the legislation, but it passed Congress with veto-proof majorities, leaving him little choice but to sign it. There are many reasons Russo-American relations are strained: Russian anger at expansion of NATO, longstanding global rivalries, the Russian annexation of Crimea and intervention in Ukraine, years of Russian human-rights abuses, and Russian tampering with the election. Trump chose to place blame for the rocky state of the relationship not on any of those issues, and certainly not on Putin, but squarely on Congress. Just for good measure, he tossed in an unrelated jab at the failure of an Obamacare repeal-and-replace plan:

There was still not a word about Putins forced cuts at the U.S. embassy. Finally, on Thursday, Trump weighed in. His comments were surprisingnot only did he not criticize Putin, but he thanked him:

I want to thank him because were trying to cut down our payroll, and as far as Im concerned Im very thankful that he let go a large number of people because now we have a smaller payroll. There's no real reason for them to go back. I greatly appreciate the fact that weve been able to cut our payroll of the United States. Were going to save a lot of money.

Was Trump speaking with tongue in cheek? Its possible, but he didnt smile when he said it. (The president has often tried to pass off apparently serious comments as jokes after the fact, in order to defuse situations.) The remark fits with his attempt to cut costs at the State Department and his disdain for traditional diplomacy.

But even if the whole thing was a joke, its still astonishing that Trumps response to Russian retaliation was to thank the retaliators. This doesnt mean the only option is an eye for an eye; a simple public complaint is standard in cases of diplomatic retaliation like this. (Part of the problem is that Trump seems to have two modes: conciliation and escalation. The idea of criticizing without raising the stakes is foreign to him.)

The strange thing about Trumps comments about Putin is not merely that he wont criticize him, but that he goes out of his way to avoid it. The tweet about Russian relations and his remarks on Thursday were hardly the only times this has happened. And thats even leaving aside Trumps repeated praise for the Russian leader during the campaign, when he praised Putins leadership, suggested hed allow the annexation of Crimea, and publicly called on Russia to hack Hillary Clintons emails.

Lets draw a line between what Trump said on the campaign trail and what hes said since the election. Although he had been briefed before November 8, it was after the election that he began getting full intelligence briefings on Russian interference. Since then, there has also been an increasing focus on interference among members of the public, press, and Congress. In other words, Trump has had many more incentives to distance himself from Russia. Instead, hes continued to hold his fire.

On February 4, Trump told Bill OReilly, I do respect [Putin]. Well, I respect a lot of people, but that doesnt mean Ill get along with them. OReilly pressed Trump on Putins murders of dissidents and journalists. Trump wouldnt criticize Putin for those crimes, and suggested the United States was no better. There are a lot of killers. We have a lot of killers, Trump said. Well, you think our country is so innocent?

He has also repeatedly declined to accept the idea that Russia meddled in the election, even though it is the conclusion of all the major intelligence agencies, and even though many of his top aides have said they blame Russia for hacking attacks. In June, he called the attacks a big Dem HOAX.

In early July, during a trip to Poland, he halfway accepted that Russia might have been behind them, then backed off the statement and worked to muddy the waters.

I think it was Russia, and I think it could have been other people in other countries. It could have been a lot of people. I said it very simply. I think it could very well have been Russia, but I think it could well have been other countries. I wont be specific. I think a lot of people interfere. I think its been happening for a long time, its been happening for many, many years.

Yet he added: Nobody really knows. Nobody really knows for sure.

Later that week, Trump had his first face-to-face meeting with Putin, at the G20 summit in Hamburg, Germany. U.S. and Russian accounts of the meeting initially diverged, with the United States saying Trump had pressed Putin forcefully on the hacking, and Russia saying Trump had accepted Putins denials.

Two days later, Trump cleared things up with a pair of tweets that basically confirmed the Russian account:

Given that Trump had already said he was dubious of Russian interference, that tweet reads as an acknowledgment that he accepted their denial. But even if that wasnt the case, Trumps next one made clear that he had no interest in holding Russia to account:

The question is why Trump has worked so hard to avoid criticizing Putinespecially when theres a clear political downside to appearing cozy with the Russian bear.

There is little obvious foreign-policy advantage. During the campaign and early in his presidency, Trump argued that the United States ought to launch a charm offensive in order to improve relations with Russia. Whether that was right or wrong, and whether Congress or someone else is to blame, that approach is obsolete today. As Trump, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and Russia have all admitted, relations are now at a low ebb.

Even if Trump fully believes that Putin is a spotless, admirable leader falsely accused of various crimes, it would be to his benefit to create some separation, and a matter as simple as expulsion of diplomats offers a good chance for Trump to stand up for his country. Putin, like any foreign leader, understands that sometimes a head of state has to shore himself up domestically and would surely interpret a few hostile words from Trump in that light. (Alternatively, even if one believes Trump is a bought-and-paid-for puppet of the Kremlin, why wouldnt he publicly denounce Putin to buy himself some maneuvering room?)

Given Trumps affection for authoritarian leaders and fixation on projecting strength, the simplest explanation for Trumps refusal to criticize Putin might be that he doesnt want to give the impression that he has been cowed into changing his view. Perhaps hes thinking that if he allows his critics to troll him into offering harsh words, it would show that they are stronger than himand if he acknowledges Russian interference in the election, it undermines the legitimacy of his victory in 2016.

In fact, his actions are making him look weak, but not in the way he thinks. His refusal to criticize Putin even in the case of diplomatic retaliation gives the impression that he is intimidated by the Kremlin and doesnt have it in him to be tough. The president has cut off his nose to spite his face, and is now willing to cut off an ear or a lip if he must.

During his only press conference between the election and inauguration, on January 11, Trump fielded questions about his affection for the Russian leader.

If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what, folks, thats called an asset, not a liability, he said. Now, I dont know that Im going to get along with Vladimir Putin. I hope I do. But theres a good chance I wont. And if I dont, do you honestly believe that Hillary would be tougher on Putin than me? Does anybody in this room really believe that?

Seven months later, it seems clear that she couldnt have been any less tough.

Visit link:
Why Does Trump Still Refuse to Criticize Putin? - The Atlantic

Trump's longtime personal assistant Rhona Graff makes a rare appearance at Olympus Fashion Week in 2005.

By Astrid Stawiarz/Getty Images.

The list of Trump associates to come under Robert Muellers magnifying glass may soon include the presidents longtime assistant, Rhona Graff. Amid the escalating Justice Department probe into Kremlin interference in the 2016 election and multiple congressional investigations, lawmakers reportedly want to speak with Graff, who has served as Donald Trumps gatekeeper for decades.

Graff, a senior vice president at the Trump Organization, first entered the roving spotlight in the Russia saga when Donald Trump Jr. shared a string of e-mails related to his now-infamous meeting with a Kremlin-connected lawyer at Trump Tower last summer, which has emerged as a key focus in the various Trump-Russia investigations. I can also send this info to your father via Rhona but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first, Rob Goldstone, the British publicist and Trump family business partner who helped arrange the controversial meeting, wrote in an e-mail to the eldest Trump son. The exchange raised the possibility that the president himself might have been informed of the alleged Russian government effort to assist his campaign.

It is not apparent from those e-mails whether Goldstone ever connected with Graff about the Trump Tower meetingone question congressional investigators reportedly hope to answer. Since her name is in the e-mail, people will want her to answer questions, Peter King, a Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee, told ABC News. If you go into Trump Tower, youre going to mention her name. Eric Swalwell, who also serves on the House Intelligence Committee, echoed the sentiment. I think we should hear from every individual who is mentioned in the Don Jr. e-mail chain to understand what was happening, the California lawmaker said. Graff is not accused of any wrongdoing.

Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr demurred when asked whether his own committee would be seeking information from Graff. But it is unsurprising that Congress would want to talk to Trumps right hand, who has played a pivotal role in his businesses for years. Graff has reportedly maintained her position in Trumps orbit even since he became president, suggesting that she could be a wealth of knowledge for investigators.

Lawmakers interest in Graff is likely to infuriate Trump. Last month, the presidentwho has continually dismissed the Russia investigation as a witch hunt orchestrated by allies of Hillary Clinton as an excuse for losing the electionsaid that special counsel Robert Mueller would be crossing a line if he began to investigate the Trump family, their finances, and the Trump Organization in a way that exceeded the initial scope of the Russia probe. Calling Graff to testify before Congress, or otherwise requesting information from her, might fall into that category.

News of Graffs involvement comes as Muellers investigation rapidly escalates. At the end of last month, the F.B.I. raided the home of Paul Manafort, Trumps former campaign chairman, for documents related to the Trump-Russia probe. Trumps lawyer John Dowd blasted the aggressive tactic on Thursday, characterizing it as an extraordinary invasive tool that he argued was employed for its shock value to try to intimidate Mr. Manafort and bring him to his [knees]. Investigators are also reportedly seeking information from a handful of Manaforts associates, including his estranged son-in-law Jeffrey Yohai, fueling speculation that the F.B.I. might be trying to pressure Trump allies to turn cooperating witnesses. On Thursday, Manafort switched up his legal team, opting for a Washington firm that reportedly specializes in financial investigations. Mr. Manafort is in the process of retaining his former counsel, Miller & Chevalier, to represent him in the office of special counsel investigation. As of today, WilmerHale no longer represents Mr. Manafort, Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni said in a statement.

More:
The Russia Investigation Is Getting Dangerously Close to Trump - Vanity Fair

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe has placed the National Guard on standby in preparation for a rally in Charlottesville on Saturday, where at least 1,000 nationalists are expected to attend.

The Unite the Right rally is scheduled to take place Saturday at McIntire Park in Charlottesville, the city said on its website. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) said in a statement that the event could be the "largest white supremacist gathering in a decade."

McAuliffe said in a statement that while he believes the majority of the rally's participants will express their views "safely and respectfully," he believes that some attendees may be violent.

Virginia is the birthplace of the rights to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly that make our country great," McAuliffe said. "...However, in advance of tomorrows rally, there have been communications from extremist groups, many of which are located outside of Virginia, who may seek to commit acts of violence against rally participants or law enforcement officials."

The "alt-right" movement is characterized by a mix of racism, white nationalism and populism, according to The Associated Press.

McAuliffe urged residents who plan to attend -- whether in support or opposition of the rally -- to make alternative plans.

"Many of the individuals coming to Charlottesville tomorrow are doing so in order to express viewpoints many people, including me, find abhorrent," he said. "As long as that expression is peaceful, that is their right. But it is also the right of every American to deny those ideas more attention than they deserve."

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is representing the event's organizer -- right-wing blogger Jason Kessler -- in a lawsuit filed Aug. 10 against the city of Chartlottesville and City Manager Maurice Jones. The suit claims that Kesslers first amendment and constitutional rights were violated because on Aug. 7, city officials initially tried to revoke his original event permit, and then changed the location of the event.

The city claimed that this was a result of the high number of expected attendees, and not because of public pressure to stop the rally from taking place, Claire Gastaaga, executive director of the ACLU of Virginia, told ABC News.

While Gastaaga said the ACLU disagrees with Kessler's speech, she criticized city officials for attempting to revoke the permit without due process.

"We think it's important the government make decisions in the sunlight," she said.

A representative for the city of Charlottesville did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for a comment in regard to the lawsuit.

The rally is expected to draw at least 1,000 participants, according to an affidavit from Charlottesville Police Chief Al Thomas, which was provided to ABC News from the ACLU. Emancipation Park, the original event location, would have been unable to accommodate a peaceful crowd safely, Jones said in an affidavit.

"There is no doubt that Mr. Kessler has a First Amendment right to hold a demonstration and to express his views," the city manager wrote in a statement on Aug. 7. "Nor is there any doubt that we, as a city, have an obligation to protect those rights, the people who seek to exercise them, and the broader community in which they do. We have determined that we cannot do all of these things effectively if the demonstration is held in Emancipation Park."

Large crowds are also expected in downtown Charlottesville on Saturday, the city said, with high numbers of protesters demonstrating against the rally expected to be among those in attendance.

When Kessler applied for the permit on May 30, he proposed the event as a "free speech rally in support of the Lee monument," according to Jones' affidavit. The city has plans to remove a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee from Emancipation Park, which was formerly known as Lee Park, according to the complaint.

"Just as the Unite the Right participants have the right to air their views, so do those who want to protest against those views," said Charlottesville Mayor Mike Signer in a statement. "Democracy can be noisy, and it can be messy. But by ensuring we protect both public safety and the Constitution through the city manager's decision, I firmly believe that we will emerge from the weekend of August 12 a stronger community than ever."

ADL CEO Jonathan A. Greenblatt said the organization agrees with Signer.

The white supremacist rally in Charlottesville is the latest indication that the darkest corners of society are emboldened to come forward and openly parade their bigotry on main street, said Greenblatt. We continue to stand with Charlottesville Mayor Signer and those who reject intolerance. Hate has no place in our communities."

On May 13, noted white nationalist Richard Spencer led protesters with torches in a Charlottesville rally against the planned removal of Confederate statues in the city.

Link:
Virginia governor orders National Guard on standby ahead of 'alt-right' rally - ABC News

A Cooperative Baptist Fellowship partner church in Charlottesville, Va., hosted a community prayer service Aug. 8 in anticipation of an alt-right rally this weekend protesting planned removal of a Confederate monument that has the community bracing for violence.

The 50-minute service at University Baptist Church in Charlottesville is one of a series of advocacy events countering Saturdays Unite the Right rally protesting a decision earlier this year to remove a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee from a downtown park.

Organized by white nationalist Richard Spencer and local activist Jason Kessler, it is expected to be one of the largest white supremacist rallies in recent U.S. history. Congregate Charlottesville, an organizing group, has called for 1,000 clergy and faith leaders to show up in Charlottesville this weekend to confront the protesters.

Charlottesville survived a July protest by the Klan without serious incident, but city officials fear this weekends rally could be more dangerous.

During the 50-minute prayer service, University Baptist Church Senior Pastor Matthew Tennant asked God to keep us from violence as some of the news points to what could be a powder keg.

Jillian Andrzejewski

Jillian Andrzejewski, pastor of Mooreland Baptist Church and 2010 graduate of Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond, prayed that activists and protesters will express themselves in ways that are kind, helpful and loving and may both sides see each other as humans.

Allison Hager Jackson, an Alliance of Baptists-endorsed chaplain at Legacy Hospice, prayed for healing for all parties involved.

Heal the fear that builds barriers and divides us from our neighbors, she said. Heal the fear that keeps us seated when you would have us stand up alongside the least of these. Heal the pride that allows us to see the sin of others but not our own sin.

We pray that you will heal us that we may heal in our community the systems in which we so often participate that cause people of color and others to be oppressed, Jackson continued. We pray that you will heal the fear that causes police officers to react violently when violence is not necessary, and in doing so heal the rift that exists between police and citizens.

She also asked God to heal whatever brokenness exists within these people of the alt-right that causes them to spew hatred rather than the love that you so freely give to them and all us.

Will Brown, associate minister for community at University Baptist Church, reminded the audience that tensions suddenly coming to a head in Charlottesville are nothing new.

They run deep, Brown said. Many have looked at our nations history of slavery and Jim Crow, of racial discrimination, and call this Americas original sin. It is a stain on our collective conscience that we just cant seem to get rid of. There is no easy answer for this. There is no quick fix. This stain is deeply set.

The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship does not issue public pronouncements on social issues, but in June the Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution denouncing every form of racism, including alt-right white supremacy, as antithetical to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Previous stories:

In annual meeting do-over, Southern Baptists denounce alt-right white supremacy

Alt-right isnt new to Christianity, says author Brian McLaren

Clash continues two months after SBC alt-right resolution snafu

See the original post here:
Churches in Charlottesville, Va., brace for alt-right protesters - Baptist News Global

Montreal Skyline at Wikimania. John Lubbock/Wikimedia Commons. CC BY-SA 4.0.Closed governments hate open systems. Its so obvious, theres almost no point in saying it. Yet Wikipedias very obviousness, its ubiquitousness in the information ecosystem of modern Western societies is the very thing that seems to make it go unnoticed. It doesnt invade your life with its push notifications and little red update buttons that offer you a dopamine release in exchange for clicking them until they disappear. Its not about you and your personal brand, offering you a way to advertise in exchange for making you the product.

Wikipedia is now (in terms of hours of work), the largest collaborative human endeavour ever undertaken.

It wont hit you over the head with constant advertising, except for its own when it asks for donations. These donations go towards the server costs, the staff who support the website and update the MediaWiki software it all runs on, develop new projects, and support the community of Wikimedians around the world who volunteer millions of hours to create what is now (in terms of hours of work), the largest collaborative human endeavour ever undertaken. Yet unlike the pyramids announcing the greatness of some king or other, Wikipedia is a self-effacing humanist project, dedicated to creating "a world where every human being has access to the sum of all knowledge", in their own language, and for free.

This weekend the community of people who contribute to Wikipedia (and its sister projects) meets in Montreal for their annual conference, Wikimania. Hundreds of editors, developers, staff and other community members meet every year in a different location to talk about where our work is heading, and I find it wonderful that so many people care so much about creating free, open source information which can benefit the world in ways we have not even imagined yet.

Last week, our community learned of the murder of Bassell Khartabil, a Palestinian Wikimedian who was head of Creative Commons Syria and started a website to record Syrias cultural heritage before it was obliterated by the civil war. The news did not come as much of a surprise to those of us who had followed his case, but though we may never have met him, there was a feeling of losing a fellow traveller, and that our community was under attack.

In May, the Turkish government decided to blockthe entire Wikipedia domain.

In May, the Turkish government decided to block the entire Wikipedia domain, comprising all 298 language versions of Wikipedia, including Latin, Scottish Gaelic and a number of native American languages. All this because it objected to references in two articles to claims that Turkeys security services had been smuggling arms to extremist groups in Syria. Due to Wikipedias secure servers, individual pages cannot be blocked, so the only answer for an angry authoritarian is to block it all.

China did exactly the same thing in 2015, though in both of these countries, using a VPN or changing your DNS can usually get around the filtering. Turkish techies have also mirrored Wikipedia on numerous servers, and there is also the option to download a partial offline version of Wikipedia if you want to do so. Unlike some commercial companies, Wikimedia has no incentive to cave into authoritarian demands to self-censor. Part of the way the charity protects itself legally is by not controlling the content the community creates. Its not up to us to edit pages or remove content people dont like.

English Wikipedia has close to 5.5 million articles, and around 130,000 regular editors, meaning that it is constantly patrolled and peer-reviewed, helping it to stay free from vandalism and systemic bias. Dont be fooled by the lazy journalism that especially sports writers like to do about how X sports player had his page hacked; the offending content was probably removed about 5 minutes after they screenshot it.

Participants at the hackathon at Wikimania 2017 in Montreal. John Lubbock/Wikimedia Commons. CC BY-SA 4.0.This is not to say that the information is complete by a long way. There are still too many companies who go around inserting advertising copy into their Wikipedia articles, and there are still millions of people who do not have access to the internet. Global internet penetration has recently passed 50% with 66% of people now using mobiles globally. As billions of people connect to the internet in the coming decades, it is vital they have access to free, unbiased information.

Wikipedias biggest problem, of diversity, is also related to the way closed societies seek to control the information their citizens have access to. The answer to bad information is more information, and our biggest challenge is to get more information on Wikipedia about women and non-Western cultures. Surveys have shown that the big majority of Wikipedia editors are men from Europe and North America.

Wikipedias biggest problem, of diversity, is also related to the way closed societies seek to control the information their citizens have access to.

This systemic imbalance in the people who contribute to Wikipedia (and the other Wikimedia projects) creates a systemic bias which will take a lot of work to reduce. If you want information about Kurdish culture, or you want to study Basque or find sources in Arabic or Kiswahili, the available information on Wikipedia is only a fraction of that in English.

Authoritarian governments like Kazakhstan, Syria or Zimbabwe are afraid of a fast, unmonitored internet infrastructure which offers access to this kind of information, so if they cant control the information, they will probably block the IP address on the network. But governments change, and access to better information will always be a part of that change.

Some people I talk to still dont realise that they can edit Wikipedia themselves. We often get people phoning our office to ask us to remove something from the site that they find objectionable (including, once, their own date of birth). This is another aspect of the fact that Wikipedia is not-for-profit and doesnt spend any money on advertising itself, despite the fact that English Wikipedia alone receives 7.3 billion pageviews a month.

In emerging economies, understanding and knowledge of Wikipedia and how it works is even more limited, with over 75% of people in Nigeria and India saying they have never heard of Wikipedia. Then theres the very many people who think that Wikileaks is part of the same organisation. Wikileaks is not even based on a Wiki software that allows anyone to edit pages.

In the UK, we are trying to encourage our diaspora and minority language communities to get involved with editing Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is already very good, and if we are to realise the goal of giving everyone in the world access to the sum of all knowledge, we need to encourage more people to contribute to smaller Wikipedias, like Kurdish or Scottish Gaelic, both of which have just a fraction of the articles that exist on the English Wikipedia.

With the Kurdish community in particular, we are trying to encourage people to look at the reconstruction and development of the Kurdish regions in the long term, and to show them how important a free, open encyclopaedia will be to the future development of the education sector in Kurdistan.

You have to chip away at oppression and prejudice over decades, and small acts of defiance build up like a hill.

Open Access technology is a prerequisite to a more open society. If you want to contribute to reducing global inequalities, improving a minority language Wikipedia is one of the best ways you can do it, short of giving away all your possessions or dedicating your life to building schools in sub-Saharan Africa. You probably wont receive any recognition for your work, but in 100 years, many millions of people may have read your words, never knowing that it was you who wrote them. You may have helped a doctor save a life, or helped someone to get a job, but you will never be aware of it. That is not something you can put a value on, but there is a kind of beauty to it.

Authoritarian regimes are never toppled in a day. You have to chip away at oppression and prejudice over decades, and small acts of defiance build up like a hill that you climb every day,depositing a small amount of dirt until the hill becomes a mountain that cant be ignored. We always say that Wikipedia is a work in progress; its not perfect, but its pretty amazing, and nobody needs anybodys permission to help improve it.

Ive no idea what humanity will look like in 100 years, but as long as we are still here, we hope that Wikipedia will be here too, educating millions of people and providing transparent, free and neutral information that will be used in ways we cannot anticipate yet. One thing I think is certain is that todays dictators will be long dead, and it is unlikely that history, or their Wikipedia pages, will look favourably on their crimes.

Go here to see the original:
Authoritarian governments hate Wikipedia, which is why you should get involved - Open Democracy