Mediaboss Marketing

Not even the president is above the law.

This seems like such an ironclad principle, one upon which both Democrats and Republicans would readily agree, regardless of which party holds the Oval Office. But that principle is being tested in a way that we have rarely experienced in our nations history. President Trumps firing of FBI Director James Comey and the patently transparent ruse that the action was in response to the Hillary Clinton email investigation shocked many across the political spectrum. Not since the days of Watergate have we experienced such corruption at the highest levels of government, and I am profoundly concerned for the future of our democracy.

This is far from the first instance of President Trump considering himself exempt from the law. Since his inauguration, the president and his Republican enablers have ignored the fact that he stands in violation of the Constitutions Emoluments Clause, intended by the framers to prevent foreign influence of our elected officials. This is, of course, the very charge that has ensnared the presidents former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and threatens still others within his inner circle. Lets also not forget the presidents firing of acting Attorney General Sally Yates after she refused to implement his illegal Muslim ban, even though Yates decision was entirely within her authority and subsequently reaffirmed by federal courts.

The presidents pattern is clear: When provoked, he lashes out.

During a congressional hearing March 20, Comey directly contradicted the presidents wild and irresponsible tweets about wiretapping. So the president responded by manipulating Chairman Devin Nunes into spreading baseless propaganda that supposedly supported the presidents claims. This time, the FBI issued subpoenas to associates of Flynn and requested a significant increase in resources for the Russia investigation. So the president responded by unceremoniously firing the head of the investigation that was following a trail of evidence to the Oval Office.

Make no mistake: Many Democrats, including myself, disagreed with Comeys handling of the investigation into Clintons private email server. But its utterly ridiculous to think that the president and the attorney general would suddenly, in May 2017, lose confidence in Comey for his actions taken in July 2016.

As a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I have had several opportunities to hear from and question Comey on the progress of his Russia investigation. Though a smoking gun has yet to be discovered, the director left me with no doubt that he was leading the investigation with the utmost seriousness, and would direct the FBI to go wherever the evidence led them.

This, of course, is what most terrified the president.

I am deeply skeptical that the president will nominate an impartial and independent FBI director who would charge ahead from where Comeys Russia investigation left off. The attorney general and his deputy are also tainted with this farce of a dismissal. The appointment of an independent special counsel is the only clear way to ensure a comprehensive investigation that the American people expect and deserve.

Those in public service, including elected officials, swear an oath upon assuming the responsibilities of office to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States. Our allegiance is not to any individual, but to the founding principles of our nation and the laws that safeguard them. The Constitution is under siege, and all who love it Democrats and Republicans alike must join forces to defend it.

Jackie Speier represents the 14th District in the U.S. House of Representatives. She serves on the House Permanent Selection Committee on Intelligence and is ranking member of the House Armed Services Military Personnel Subcommittee.

Excerpt from:
Moment of peril for democracy - San Francisco Chronicle

American democracy is in crisis. Part of that crisis has to do with technology. But theres another, often overlooked, factor at play.

Im a professor, so I think that fixing America starts with education. We can help improve our democratic processes by using technology to improve schools. I dont mean that we should put iPads into every school, or give every child a laptop. I mean something more fundamental: We should use technology to make sure every public school in America has all of the books, supplies, and learning materials that they need.

A shocking number of public schools dont have these basic tools. Without the basics, we cant properly educate the next generation of informed citizens.

Technology is the only way to keep track of how many students are in each school, and what books and supplies each teacher needs. A few years ago, I did an investigative project in which I looked at whether Philadelphia schools had enough books for their students. They didnt. The same people write the books and write the standardized tests; my not-so-radical suggestion was that the students needed the books to prepare for the tests. The average Philly school had only 27 percent of the books they would need to teach the students in the building. Since then, Philadelphia has allocated $36 million for new textbooks and curriculum materials, provided a new computer to each pre-K-12 teacher, and allocated $7.8 million as a one-time investment for additional supplies and educational materials for every school. Its a step in the right direction.

I know that books arent the whole story (I teach computational journalism). Students also need spacious, well-lit classrooms with working internet connections. They need safe schools with bathrooms that work and are cleaned regularly. They need unleaded water in school buildings with roofs that dont leak and grow mold. In too many cases, these basic needs are not met in Philadelphias public schools, nor in other major American cities.

A few more items at the top of my lets-improve-democracy wish list: We should pay public school teachers more, and hire more of them so class sizes are smaller. Teachers arent paid enough, and yet they are so dedicated that they spend their own money on supplies. (Thank you, teachers.)

We need to fix the copiers and printers in every school and keep them stocked with plenty of paper. If you are a school district that doesnt buy books and workbooks, and instead you make teachers teach using random stuff they find on the Internet, then you dont even provide a copier and printer that workwell, youve just created major obstacles to your students becoming educated citizens. If the copier doesnt work, the teacher is stranded. Broken technology hurts democracy.

I truly wish there were a single technological solution that would fix every problem in every classroom. Then, I could wave a magic wand and declare, Make it so! But public school is a complex system that doesnt really work without humans in the loop.

Weve certainly tried replacing teachers with computer-based training. It has not gone well. Have you attempted to do any of the online learning modules that kids get assigned? I have. Most are deathly boring. Or there are the modules that claim to be fun, where the creators package up a mundane, repetitive arithmetic task as some kind of animal flying around the screen or navigating some kind of ridiculous maze. Kids recognize this. This is the kind of fun that your mom means when she says its going to be fun to learn how to do laundry, or to clean the smelly, rotten leaves out of the gutters.

We need technology to run our schools. Not glamorous cutting-edge technology, but workhorse technology: databases, and staff to enter the data into the databases, and database administrators to keep everything running and do the load-balancing at the beginning and end of the semester when hundreds of schools are trying to enter in their updated inventory data simultaneously. We need more accurate budgeting that factors in everything a school needs, from pencils to laptops to tater tots. We could use artificial intelligence if that makes it seem more exciting. To investigate the book situation (and offer a solution) in Philadelphia, I built A.I. software. Its open source, and its available online, for free. School districts have not yet come knocking on my door, begging me to implement it so they can update their budgeting and inventory management processesbut hope springs eternal.

Thomas Jefferson once wrote: Educate and inform the whole mass of the people they are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. I believe this. And I believe that technology can help us make a better world. However, I dont believe that we need radically new, different technology to fix Americas public schools. We can start by fixing and funding what we already have.

This article is part of a collaboration with the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University.

Follow this link:
Broken Technology Hurts Democracy - The Atlantic

A Hungarian Member of the European Parliament (MEP) leveled harsh criticism at the EU and its globalist allies for accusing Hungary, and by extension other, more conservative Central European nations, of undermining democracy.

In an interview with German newspaper Deutsche Welle, published this week, outspoken Hungarian MEP Gyorgy Schpflin said that comparisons between Hungary and autocratic countries such asRussia and Turkey are false and politically motivated.

They perform this virtue signaling in order to deflect attention from equivalent problems at homethis is an old rhetorical trick.

Undermining democracy is very much a question of what one means by democracy is it rule by the consent of the governed or domination by the values of the liberal elite, regardless of consent? Schpflin said.

Accusing Central European countries like Hungary, which resists mass migrationand open borders, of being anti-democratic and illiberal is a favorite tactic of progressive globalists.

Less than two weeks ago, now-French President Emmanuel Macron accused both Hungary andPoland both NATO members and EU member-states of being anti-Democratic regimes in a roundaboutattack on his then-opponent, Marine Le Pen.

We all know who Le Pens allies are: the regimes of [Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor] Orban, [Polish Law and Justice Party chairman Jaroslaw] Kaczynski, [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, Macron said. These arent regimes with an open and free democracy. Every day they break many democratic freedoms.

An April headline from The New York Times Editorial Board decried Hungarys Assault on Freedom. A recent sub-headline in The Economist declared that In Europes illiberal east, populist nationalism is alive and well, while a 2016 article in the same magazinewas titled, Illiberal Central Europe: Big, Bad Visegrad.

In 2016, the EU parliament on two occasions officially accused the Polish government of being anti-democratic. In September 2016 it issued a resolution saying that the Polish governments endanger[s] democracy, fundamental rights and the rule of law in Poland. A New York Times headline from April of this year described Polands Anti-Democratic Drift.

Contrary to the widespread liberal narrative of democratic backsliding in Central Europe, the institutional order in Hungary works well, said Schpflin. The Constitutional Court regularly quashes draft laws passed by parliament, and the EUs Justice Scoreboard places Hungary in the top third of EU member states, he continued.

As far as the media are concerned, even a casual sampling of what is published will show that there is very wide-ranging, often very harsh, criticism of the government, of Fidesz and of Orban personally, Schpflin said. No journalist has been arrested, so parallels with Turkey or Russia are nonsense.

Schpflin also challenged the attacks on Hungarys new education law targeting Soros Central European University, which critics charge is an assault on democratic freedoms. Academic freedom is intact, said Schpflin. Again, a sampling of what is published will demonstrate this. Much of academia lean to the liberal left and remain in their posts.

"As far as the CEU is concerned, it enjoys a privileged position inasmuch as it grants both Hungarian and American diplomas, but without its having an American mother university, hence American academic oversight," Schpflin said.

"The higher education law is about regulating this. Whether the CEU will want to regularize this is their decision. There is no commitment on the part of the Hungarian government to expel the CEU." If Hungary can be in any way accused of "illiberalism," it is only in the economic sphere, said Schpflin.

Schpflin suggested globalist voices use the vilification of Hungary as somehow anti-democratic to divert attention from pressing problems in their own nations.

"They perform this virtue signaling in order to deflect attention from equivalent problems at home, along the lines of 'yes, there may be difficulties here, but look how much worse things are in illiberal, authoritarian, autocratic Hungary,'" he said, "this is an old rhetorical trick."

Read the original here:
Hungarian MP blasts progressive vilification of countries' pursuing their national interest - LifeZette

Joshua Wong is running late for lunch but can we blame him? The 20-year-old political activist just finished a final exam, and hes heading into town via the MTR, Hong Kongs metro, which is packed during the midday rush. And besides, hes jetlagged: only 24 hours earlier he got back from a week in the U.S., where he met with such high-profile political figures as Marco Rubio and Nancy Pelosi, who have been actively sympathetic to his fight for democracy in the semi-autonomous Chinese city.

All of this serves to underscore the most improbable life of the face of protest, as TIME dubbed Wong in 2014 , when his role as a figurehead of the pro-democracy Umbrella Revolution here earned him a spot on the magazines cover. Two and a half years have passed. The primary demand of the Umbrella protests Hong Kongs right to directly elect its top official, who is known as the Chief Executive went unheeded. Beijings interference in Hong Kongs affairs has only increased . This summer marks the twentieth anniversary of whats known in China as reunification but locally, and tellingly, as the Handover when the U.K. relinquished its subtropical colony to Chinese rule under a political dynamic known as one country, two systems, intended to preserve the city's capitalist liberties while allowing it to become part of the Chinese nation.

But now its more like one country, one and a half systems, Wong says.

In the time that has passed since the Umbrella Revolution, Wong and his colleagues in the pro-democracy activist camp here have not given up their fight. One of them, 23-year-old Nathan Law, was elected to Hong Kongs Legislative Council last September, the youngest lawmaker in the territorys history . Wong has kept up with his university studies he has three more exams left this term but moonlights as a globetrotting spokesperson for democracy: giving speeches on college campuses; meeting with prominent political figures; penning op-eds for TIME and the New York Times .

In January, he flew to Utah for the Sundance Film Festival, for the premiere of a documentary about the Hong Kong protests called Joshua: Teenager versus Superpower. In its treatment of the protests, the film presents Wong as something between a general and a martyr, a characterization he disagrees with. The Hongkongers who confronted tear gas in the streets are the real heroes.

TIME caught up with Wong over lunch at a bistro across the street from Hong Kongs government headquarters to catch up on the film, his travels to the U.S., and what will come next in the fight for democracy in Chinas freest city.

Nearly three years have passed since the Umbrella Movement. Have things gotten better or worse in Hong Kong, and are you optimistic for the future of democracy here? Freedom of press and speech have been eroded. People who have criticized the Chinese government have been kidnapped. Even some business people who support Beijing have faced abduction. But Im still optimistic. The fight against the largest authoritarian regime in the world is a long-term battle.

A lot of people overseas are somewhat confused by Hong Kong: they dont know if its a city in China, or an autonomous city-state like Singapore. Whats the most important thing they should know? Hong Kong was promised democracy under the framework known as one country, two systems, and China is ignoring this promise. The international community should be more attuned to this. It matters. Im hoping this documentary brings more attention to it.

The documentary portrays you as the hero and leader of the Umbrella protests. Is this fair? Im not a hero. The Hongkongers who confronted tear gas in the streets are the heroes. But of course the reality when making a documentary like this is that its hard to focus on everyone.

You just returned from Washington, where you met with some high-profile U.S. politicians who support your fight. But does the current state of U.S. politics make you second-guess the merits of democracy? Not at all. At the end of the day, people in the U.S. can still go to the polls and choose their leader every four years. People in the U.S. are downhearted right now. Under Chinese rule, were also depressed but we cant even vote.

Hong Kong was for years one of the worlds great financial capitals, but many people are now saying its on the decline. The quality of life has fallen; the cost of living has climbed; the rise of cities like Shanghai has made it less important in the global marketplace. Do you agree? If Hong Kong people keep silent and do nothing, of course Hong Kong will become just another second-tier Chinese city. But Hong Kong is unique, and weve been lucky that Hong Kong people have been trying their best to fight for our core values. We still have hope.

What will it take for Hong Kong to achieve the sort of democratic system you and your peers are fighting for? Weve organized the largest public disobedience movement in China since Tiananmen Square in 1989. But apart from straight activism, we need to increase our influence within institutions, especially global institutions. The support of the international community really matters to us. This is why Ive been going to Washington. Before the Handover in 1997, the world really endorsed the implementation of one country, two systems, and now it is being eroded. People should not keep silent.

You just turned 20 a few months ago. You have a long way to go and so does Hong Kong. Where do you see yourself 10, 20, even 30 years from now? I will try my best to fight for democracy in Hong Kong however I can. I hope to get a chance to run for office here. As far as the international community goes, I think I can be the one to stand up and explain to the world whats going on in Hong Kong.

Many people are cynical about Hong Kongs future. But whats been the most promising change youve witnessed here in your lifetime? Hong Kong was once just an economic animal a financial hub, a business city. But weve proven that we want and deserve democracy. Weve proven that we dont just care about money.

Go here to see the original:
8 Questions for Hong Kong Democracy Activist Joshua Wong - TIME

My GOP cronies bridled. "This is America," one insisted. "When one side gets into power, they let the other side retire quietly -- they don't stick their predecessors' heads on spikes. We don't use the law as a tool to punish political opponents. That's what makes us different from banana republics in Africa. That's what makes us the greatest democracy in the world."

Regardless of what you think about George W. Bush -- or this characterization of the entire African continent -- my friend summed up what many Americans believe about their nation's strengths. From Thomas Jefferson onward, the rhetoric of the democratic example has been fundamental to the mythology of American exceptionalism.

Central to this reverence is the faith Americans have in their Constitution: a document which promises to punish corrupt representatives, constrain executive overreach and protect judicial independence. But beyond America's borders, even its greatest admirers reserve a dose of skepticism. America's confidence that its Constitution uniquely protects against abuse of power feels, at best, nave.

People are concerned about traveling to the US, even concerned about doing business in a country that no longer seems to uphold the rule of law. No longer is America a shining example, as my college friends would have it, to the tin pot dictatorships of Africa.

It seems much more revealing that Comey's firing took place a day after he reportedly stepped up his own inquiry into the Trump campaign's alleged links to Russia. (It is worth noting, too, that Rosenstein, an Obama appointee, does not explicitly call in his memo for Comey's dismissal -- just as Comey himself criticized Hillary, but declined to recommend charges. Precision matters in high-stakes legal inquiries.)

None of this makes comfortable watching for America's allies. Should British Prime Minister Theresa May trust her friend Donald to treat her as professionally as he has treated James Comey? Should she direct her intelligence agencies to share with American colleagues their information on Vladimir Putin's activities?

If there is a scrap of hope to be gleaned from President Trump's obvious misdirection this week, it is that Trump has veiled his attack on his own FBI director in the language of bipartisan constitutionalism. The attempt to present this sacking as a favor to Democrats -- who blame Comey for styming Clinton's campaign -- at least suggests that he knows the directors of major civic infrastructure should command bipartisan support.

Or does it? The problem with being European, looking at America, is that we know dictators have always used the language of constitutionalism to camouflage their land grabs.

If there's a single question on every European's lips, it is: How long can Trump last? To those of us who've heard Americans wax lyrical about the legacy of the Founding Fathers, now is the time when we expect to see the US Constitution's checks and balances swing into action. We know that Americans are good at getting rid of presidents: In the American TV series that form our stable diet, it happens all the time, from "Veep" to "24." It's happened in living memory, too. If you can impeach a president simply for lying about sex, surely you can impeach a president who sacks the person investigating him?

Now, however, it's American observers who sound more skeptical. If you're actually living in America, you know that it'll be hard to get much of the congressional GOP on board for an impeachment; that nothing really constrains the executive branch's power over civic appointments.

It is evident that separation of powers only truly exists in the United States when separate parties control the executive and legislature.

Smug Europeans are congratulating themselves that Americans were always wrong about their exceptional democracy. Those of us with a foot in both continents are not so much smug as heartbroken.

Original post:
Europe view: American democracy isn't as strong as you think - CNN