Mediaboss Marketing

Eugene Robinson, Washington Post Writers Group 4:00 a.m. CT March 25, 2017

The chairman of the House intelligence committee said Wednesday that the communications of Trump transition officials, possibly including President Donald Trump himself, may have been scooped up in legal surveillance and improperly distributed throughout the intelligence community. (March 22) AP

FILE - In this Monday, Jan. 23, 2017, file photo, President Donald Trump signs an executive order to withdraw the U.S. from the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact agreed to under the Obama administration in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington. With his rejection of an Asian trade pact, Trump has started tackling policy changes that could inadvertently give China room to assert itself as a regional leader and worsen strains over the South China Sea and Taiwan. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)(Photo: Evan Vucci, AP)

President Trump called himself "instinctual" this week, but the word he must have been groping for was "untruthful." He lies incessantly, shamelessly, perhaps even pathologically, and his lying corrodes and dishonors our democracy.

Of course we've had presidents who lied to name a few, Lyndon Johnson about Vietnam, Richard Nixon about Watergate, Bill Clinton about Monica Lewinsky. But the key word in these examples is "about." Other presidents had comprehensible though illegitimate reasons for lying about specific things. Trump often lies for no discernible purpose other than to pump up his own fragile ego.

He even lies about his own lies. In an interview with Time magazine, he made the "instinctual" claim and portrayed himself as a modern-day Nostradamus. "I predicted a lot of things," he claimed. "Some things that came to you a little bit later. But, you know, we just rolled out a list."

His list begins with Sweden. At a rally in Florida last month, Trump made an ominous reference to "what's happening last night in Sweden." In fact, nothing remarkable had happened in Sweden the previous night; Trump apparently saw a news report about immigration issues there, and must have mistakenly thought he heard a reference to a specific recent event an honest mistake, for most people.

But Trump can't admit it was a mistake at all. The day following his remark, Sweden did see unrest in immigrant neighborhoods. So he counts that as a win, as if he had somehow seen the future.

Trump often uses clairvoyance as a justification for falsehoods. The most vivid recent example and perhaps the most damaging to the dignity and credibility of the presidency was the string of tweets that began with this: "Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my 'wires tapped' in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!"

A host of present and former intelligence officials, including FBI Director James Comey and Trump's handpicked chief of the National Security Agency, Michael Rogers, state categorically that there is no evidence any such thing took place. Trump initially sent press secretary Sean Spicer out to stand by the claim and demand a congressional investigation. The White House finally admitted that one version of the allegation came from a Fox News legal analyst who was promptly refuted by his own network and pulled off the air.

But on Wednesday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., dashed to the White House to tell Trump he had learned from unnamed sources that there may have been some "incidental" collection of intelligence from members of the Trump transition team. Asked by reporters if this supported Trump's wiretapping claim, Nunes acknowledged that no, it did not.

Not one of the "facts" Trump claimed was backed up there is no evidence that President Obama ordered anything, no evidence that Trump Tower was wiretapped, no evidence that any of the "incidental" information was collected "before the victory." But the president continues to insist he was right, because "a lot of information has just been learned, and a lot of information may be learned over the next coming period of time. We will see what happens."

Trump offered to Time that same I'm-a-soothsayer defense for his ridiculous claim that millions of people voted fraudulently in the election, thus causing him to lose the popular vote. No election official in any state has reported seeing voter fraud of this magnitude, or in fact of any magnitude. It did not happen.

Except, of course, in Trump's imagination. "You have tremendous numbers of people" who committed fraud, Trump said. "In fact I'm forming a committee on it. ... We'll see after the committee. I have people (who)say it was more than that."

Trump also claimed that "I predicted Brexit," except I can find no record of any such thing. When asked beforehand whether Britain would vote to leave the European Union, he said he didn't know what would happen. That's a shrug, not a forecast.

The Wall Street Journal's editorial page, a conservative bastion, had this to say on Tuesday: "If President Trump announces that North Korea launched a missile that landed within 100 miles of Hawaii, would most Americans believe him? Would the rest of the world? We're not sure, which speaks to the damage that Mr. Trump is doing to his presidency with his seemingly endless stream of exaggerations, evidence-free accusations, implausible denials and other falsehoods."

The president's response: "I thought it was a disgrace that they could write that." But no, Mr. Trump, the disgrace is all yours.

Eugene Robinson's email address is eugenerobinson@washpost.com.

Read or Share this story: http://memne.ws/2n1I2wB

Continue reading here:
Trump's incessant lies dishonor our democracy - The Commercial Appeal

Photo: George F. Lee /Associated Press

Our democracy is not so decadent after all

Under the dark gray cloud, amid the general gloom, allow me to offer a ray of sunshine. The last two months have brought a pleasant surprise: Turns out the much feared, much predicted withering of our democratic institutions has been grossly exaggerated. The system lives.

Let me explain. Donald Trumps triumph last year was based on a frontal attack on the Washington establishment, that all-powerful, all-seeing, supremely cynical, bipartisan cartel (as Ted Cruz would have it) that allegedly runs everything. Yet the establishment proved to be Potemkin empty. In 2016, it folded pitifully, surrendering with barely a fight to a lightweight outsider.

At which point, fear of the vaunted behemoth turned to contempt for its now-exposed lassitude and decadence. Compounding the confusion were Trumps intimations of authoritarianism. He declared I alone can fix it and I am your voice, the classic tropes of the demagogue. He unabashedly expressed admiration for strongmen (most notably, Vladimir Putin).

Trump had just cut through the grandees like a hot knife through butter. Who would now prevent him from trampling, caudillo-like, over a Washington grown weak and decadent? A Washington, moreover, that had declined markedly in public esteem, as confidence in our traditional institutions from the political parties to Congress fell to new lows.

The strongman cometh, it was feared. Who and what would stop him?

Two months into the Trumpian era, our checks and balances have turned out to be quite vibrant. Consider:

The courts.

Trump rolls out not one but two immigration bans, and is stopped dead in his tracks by the courts. However you feel about the merits of the policy itself (in my view, execrable and useless but legal) or the merits of the constitutional reasoning of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (embarrassingly weak, transparently political), the fact remains: The president proposed and the courts disposed.

The states.

Federalism lives. The first immigration challenge to Trump was brought by the attorneys general of two states (Washington and Minnesota) picking up on a trend begun during the Barack Obama years when state attorneys general banded together to kill his immigration overreach and the more egregious trespasses of his Environmental Protection Agency. And state governors Republicans, no less have been exerting pressure on members of Congress to oppose a Republican presidents signature health care reform.

Congress.

The Republican-controlled Congress (House and Senate) is putting up epic resistance to a Republican administrations health care reform. True, thats because of ideological and tactical disagreements rather than any particular desire to hem in Trump. But it does demonstrate that Congress is no rubber stamp. And Trumps budget was instantly declared dead on arrival in Congress, as it almost invariably is regardless of which party is in power.

The media.

Trump is right. It is the opposition party. Indeed, furiously so, often indulging in appalling overkill. Its sometimes embarrassing to read the front pages of the major newspapers, festooned as they are with anti-Trump editorializing masquerading as news. Nonetheless, if you take the view from 30,000 feet, better this than a press acquiescing on bended knee, where it spent most of the Obama years in a slavish Pravda-like thrall. Every democracy needs an opposition press. We damn well have one now.

Taken together and suspending judgment on which side is right on any particular issue it is deeply encouraging that the sinews of institutional resistance to a potentially threatening executive remain quite resilient.

Madisons genius was to understand that the best bulwark against tyranny was not virtue but ambition counteracting ambition, faction counteracting faction.

You see it even in the confirmation process for Neil Gorsuch. Hes a slam dunk, yet some factions have scraped together a campaign to block him. Their ads are plaintive and pathetic. Yet I find them warmly reassuring. What a country where even the vacuous have a voice.

The anti-Trump opposition flatters itself as the resistance. As if this is Vichy France. Its not. Its 21st-century America. And the good news is that the checks and balances are working just fine.

letters@charleskrauthammer.com

Link:
Our democracy is not so decadent after all - mySanAntonio.com

On April 16th, Turkey will vote on a referendum that, if passed, would dramatically increase the powers of President Recep Tayyip Erdoan.CreditPHOTOGRAPH BY KAYHAN OZER / ANADOLU AGENCY / GETTY

The first time I met Selahattin Demirta, the leader of Turkeys largest Kurdish political party, known as the H.D.P., he arrived at a restaurant in Istanbul with a single assistant accompanying him. Demirta is warm and funny. Among other things, he is anaccomplished playerof the saz, a string instrument that resembles the oud. At the timeit was 2011Demirta was trying to lead his party and people away from a history of confrontation with the countrys central government. It wasnt easy. Like other Kurdish leaders in Turkey, Demirta had spent time in prison and seen many of his comrades killed. I remember him telling me how, in the nineteen-nineties, when civil unrest in the countrys Kurdish areas was hitting its bloody peak, a particular make of cara white Renaulthad been notorious in Kurdish towns. The cars were used by Turkish intelligence officers, who had developed a terrifying reputation for torturing and executing Kurds. Ive been inside the Renaults, Demirta told me. A lot of people I know never made it out of them.

The last time I met Demirta, in September, it was at a tea shop in the trendy neighborhood of Taksim. He was surrounded by bodyguards. Things were going badly for himnot because he had given up on democratic politics but because he had succeeded so well; in 2015, the H.D.P. captured an astounding eighty seats in the Turkish parliament. The Party had even begun to attract non-Kurdish voters. Soon, however, Turkeys President, Recep Tayyip Erdoan, began cracking down on the Kurds. Thousands of members of the H.D.P. were detained. In November, two months after our last meeting, Demirta, who is forty-three years old, was arrested and jailed. Now, facing what appear to be preposterous chargessupporting an armed terrorist organizationhe is facing a prison sentence of as long as a hundred and forty-two years.

If you follow Turkish politics, you know that Demirtas case is not uniquein fact, in the Erdoan era, it is unremarkable. Erdoan, who came to power following nationwide elections in 2002, has spent the past decade doing his best to strangle Turkeys democratic order. It now seems clear that Erdoan, who is sixty-three, intends to arrogate dictatorial powers to himself, have them ratified by a subservient political order, and stay in power for years to come.

This hardly seemed possible as recently as three years ago. In late 2013, Erdoan seemed to be on the ropes, entangled in a corruption scandal that appeared to implicate both him and his son Bilal. (In a series of taped conversations that weremade public, Erdoan could be heard telling Bilal, Eighteen peoples homes are being searched right now with this big corruption operation . . . So Im saying, whatever you have at home, take it out. O.K.? Later, Bilal responded, So theres something like thirty million euros left that we havent been able to liquidate.)

But Erdoan is a master at self-preservation. He beat back his accusers and then, last July, in what must be regarded as a political gift from the heavens, elements inside the Turkish military tried to overthrow his government. Erdoannot without some justificationblamed the attempted coup on the movement of Fethullah Glen, a Muslim preacher who lives in exile in the United States. After successfully putting down the attempted putsch, Erdoan launched a sweeping, and still ongoing, campaign to destroy the countrys democratic opposition. Since July, more than forty thousand people have been arrested, and a hundred thousand government employeesincluding judges, prosecutors, and academicshave been fired. Tens of thousands remain in prison, including more than a hundred and fifty journalists and media workers. The government has closed a hundred and seventy-nine newspapers, television stations, and Web sites. Turkey is now the most prolific jailer of journalists in the world.

That bring us to a constitutional referendum scheduled for next month, and to Demirta. On April 16th, Turkish voters will be asked to approve a series of changes to the constitution that wouldyou guessed itgrant extraordinary powers to the job that Erdoan now holds. On paper, Turkey still has a parliamentary system, with significant powers reserved for the Prime Minister, parliament, and the judiciary. The referendum proposes to radically alter that system, eliminating the position of Prime Minister, drastically curtailing the powers of parliament, scaling back the independence of the judiciary, and vesting sweeping powers in the Presidency. Whats more, the new constitution would give Erdoan the right to run for two more five-year terms, potentially giving him another decade in power.

What the referendum amounts to, essentially, is an attempt to overturn Turkish democracy, and to rubber-stamp the authoritarian powers that Erdoan has been pursuing for the past decade. (You wont hear any criticism of Erdoan from Europe, by the way. Erdoan, having agreed last year to hold back the tide of refugees from the Middle East,hasthe continents political leaders over a barrel.)

Yet for all of Erdoans bullying, its not at all clear that Turkish voters will approve the referendum. Erdoan, sensing how high the stakes are, has been trying to flatten his opposition in the run-up to the vote. This is where Demirta and his colleagues fit into the picture. After the failed coup last summer, Erdoan began moving to crush the H.D.P.s leadershiphe knew, given the history of the relationship between Kurds and the central government, that they would never endorse an expansion of the Presidents powers. Along with Demirta, twelve other H.D.P. members of parliament have recently been jailed. According to Human Rights Watch, which released anew reporton Turkeys deteriorating situation this week, more than five thousand members of the H.D.P. and another locally based Kurdish party, the B.D.P., are currently behind bars, and the mayors of eighty-two Kurdish towns have been summarily sacked and replaced by Erdoans agents. Erdoan knew that he couldnt count on the H.D.P., so he just took them out of the picture, Emma Sinclair-Webb, Human Rights Watchs Turkey director, told me.

Polls show that the referendum has the support of only around fifty per cent of likely Turkish voters. A no vote would be a crushing rebuke to the Turkish President, and, in the short-term, could provoke a violent reaction from him. But, if the Turkish people are serious about stemming Erdoans drive to dictatorship, this may be their last chance.

View original post here:
A Last Chance for Turkish Democracy - The New Yorker - The New Yorker

Gov Oluwarotimi Akeredolu of Ondo State on Saturday hailed the victory of former Deputy Governor of the state, Alhaji Ali Olanusi, at the Court of Appeal in Akure, saying it was great for democracy.

The commendation is in a statement in Akure by the Chief Press Secretary (CPS) to the Governor, Mr Segun Ajiboye.

Ajiboye quoted the governor as saying the 79-page judgment delivered by Justice Muhammed Danjuma was well deserved, a triumph for democracy and light over darkness.

The governor also said that the judgment would discourage political leaders from arbitrary actions and decisions and ensure that the tenets of democracy were promoted.

He added that this judgment confirmed that Alhaji Ali Olanusi was maltreated, abused and humiliated by the crop of lawmakers who planned and executed the illegal impeachment.

In the judgment on Friday, Justice Muhammed Danjuma said Olanusis impeachment did not follow due process because he was not personally served the originating summons.

He was also denied presentation before an panel set up to investigate the alleged gross misconduct against him.

Akeredolu said that the judge maintained that Olanusi remained the Deputy Governor of Ondo State from April 27, 2015, the date he was wrongly impeached by the state House of Assembly.

Olanusi, will therefore remain the states deputy governor till Feb. 24, 2017 when the tenure of the former administration will expire.

UNIJOS students reject N45,000 fee, urge management to be considerate

Farmers in Sokoto appeal for carrot processing plant

More here:
Akeredolu hails Olanusi's victory, says great for democracy - NIGERIAN TRIBUNE (press release) (blog)

Saturday March 25 2017

Former Mungiki leader Maina Njenga shakes hands with one of his supporters in a Nairobi court on March 9, 2017 before the hearing of a case in which he has sued Jubilee Party for refusing to accept his nomination papers for the Laikipia senate seat. Some ex-gangsters are campaigning for office. PHOTO | PAUL WAWERU | NATION MEDIA GROUP

India holds the title of the worlds largest democracy. When it gets into rhythm during its elections cycle, its sheer magnitude is a wonder to behold.

In the last count there were 814 million eligible voters and 8,251 aspiring parliamentary candidates in an election that had to be staggered for weeks.

However, it is a deeply flawed democracy. In the last national election of 2014, a shocking 34 per cent of the 543 MPs elected to the powerful Lower House (Lok Sabha) faced criminal charges, up from 30 per cent in the previous 2009 election and 24 per cent in 2004.

The actual charges facing 20 per cent of the MPs were serious ones such as murder, attempted murder, assault and theft.

All political parties were tainted, including the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party. Eight members of Prime Minister Narendra Modis cabinet face serious criminal cases themselves.

Indian political scientist Milan Vaishnav, in his book titled When Crime Pays, has detailed this astounding link between criminality and Indian politics.

A key factor in motivating parties to select candidates with criminal records, he says, comes down to cold, hard cash.

The crooks are self-financing, so they are not a drain to their parties coffers. Many parties are also essentially personal fiefdoms, which welcome links with well-heeled thugs.

ELECTING CRIMINALS Indian politics could be unique in this aspect. Whereas the Mafia in Italy and their cousins in North America are content to buy protection by financing politicians, their Indian counterparts go outright for elective office.

In one startling revelation by Dr Vaishnav, Indian government Whips once sprung six MPs out of prison to help in a crucial parliamentary vote.

It didnt seem to matter that between them, the felons faced 100-odd cases of kidnapping, murder, arson and the like.

There are a number of reasons Indian democracy sustains these sleazy types.

They have no qualms in intimidating voters and rivals in critical constituency races.

Voters also prefer them because when it comes to delivering government goodies, they can circumvent the normal bureaucratic process by simply knocking heads.

If we dont watch out, our young Kenyan democracy could be heading in this alarming direction.

A growing number of ex-gangsters, conmen, hoodlums, goons, hooligans, outlaws, charlatans and thieves are either in elective office or campaigning to be elected.

In recent weeks we have seen a glimpse of what is in store. A former leader of a savage tribal gang who has been moving from party to party seeking a ticket for senatorial office.

A clown with a popular following who has been engaging everybody in loud theatrics while seeking gubernatorial office.

Alleged drug dealers who hold high county offices. And suspected warlords who sit in Parliament and have been on the spotlight in the recent wave of banditry in pastoral counties.

ROLE OF COURTS Under Kenyan law, a person convicted of an offence who has served a prison term of at least six months is ineligible to run for office.

That is the legal theory. Many of the rogues like to split hairs by insinuating they have never been convicted, or were released by higher courts once imprisoned. The courts, for one, remain a problem.

When last did you hear them jail a crooked politician? Even in open-and-shut cases?

Political parties should also sidestepthe loose vetting procedures of the IEBC, the EACC and the Registrar of Political Parties so as to impose their own clear integrity rules.

If the courts insist dubious candidates must be allowed to run, let them do so as independents.

In particular, the narrowly legalistic way the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal sometimes handles individual complaints can be a hindrance.

Ultimately the buck stops with the voter. Still, political parties have a duty to play their rightful gate-keeping role.

Chapter Six of the constitution, which sets out a code for leadership and integrity, has remained dead in the water due to deliberate intent.

The statute law that was meant to give bite to Chapter Six was weakened during passage. I doubt many current elected leaders would be left standing if the Chapters guidelines were faithfully enforced.

The excessive focus on academic qualifications is rather misplaced.

It is actually a scandal that no financial disclosures are required of elected officials in a country where corruption has become a real menace.

Appointed state officers are subjected to some stricter vetting, which is not the case with their elected colleagues.

If the courts insist dubious candidates must be allowed to run, let them do so as independents.

Kalonzo restates commitment to alliance and draws pledge from principals to focus on ousting

They pretend to rush their victims child to hospital after a bad road accident

See original here:
Our democracy could be headed in the wrong direction, unless we act - Daily Nation