Media Search:



The Other Cause of January 6 – The Atlantic

John Eastman. Rudy Giuliani. Donald Trump himself.

These people all bear some responsibility for the events of January 6, 2021. But there is another contributing factoran institution, not a personwhose role is regularly overlooked, and that deserves a focus in the ongoing January 6 committee hearings: the Electoral College. The Electoral College isnt responsible for President Trumps efforts to remain in office despite his clear loss. But it was integral to Trumps strategy, and it has everything to do with how close he came to success.

Read: The secret to beating the Electoral College

Many Americans understand that the countrys anachronistic system of presidential selection, part constitutional and part statutory, can sometimes produce a winner who does not receive the most votes nationwide. In 2016, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by approximately 3 million, but lost in the Electoral College 304227. Sixteen years earlier, Al Gore won 500,000 more votes than George W. Bush nationwide, but Bush prevailed in the Electoral College 271266 after the Supreme Court functionally awarded him Floridas electoral votes. And even without Trumps machinations, the 2020 election came dangerously close to producing yet again a president who did not win the national popular vote. Joe Biden won approximately 7 million more votes than Trump, and prevailed in the Electoral College 306232, but just 44,000 additional Trump votes in Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin could have resulted in a 269269 tie in the Electoral College. If that had happened, the House, voting by state delegation, would almost certainly have anointed Trump president despite his second popular-vote loss.

But theres a problem with the Electoral College thats distinct from the fact that it sometimes selects a winner who does not receive the most votes nationwide, and from the way it creates a political process that overvalues the concerns of voters in an arbitrary subset of states, increasing polarization, dysfunction, and division. (I elaborate on these dynamics in a recent essay in the Michigan Law Review, as does Jesse Wegman in the book thats the subject of my essay, Let the People Pick the President.) The problem is this: The Electoral College today is dangerously susceptible to manipulation. Indeed, as 2020 showed, the complex process through which a candidate becomes president contains a number of postelection opportunities to contest or undermine the results of an electionand to do so for reasons purportedly having to do with law and legal process.

Consider the Trump campaigns many lawsuits designed to delay state certification beyond the safe harbor deadline created by the Electoral Count Act, after which a states slate of electors is no longer deemed conclusive in the event of a dispute. Or Trump supporters efforts to disrupt the statutorily required meetings at which each states electors actually cast their votes, and the attempts of ersatz Trump electors to lay the groundwork for later challenges to official state slates. Trump also personally pressured state election officials to change election results by finding enough additional votes that he would be entitled to all of the states electoral votes. Trump loyalists in the Department of Justice, and Trump supporters such as Ginni Thomas, sought to push state legislatures to take the radical step of throwing out state returns on the basis of spurious fraud claims and appointing Trump electors themselves. Trump and at least one of his attorneys sought to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to count electoral votes from a number of states in which Biden received more votes, pointing to the vice presidents central role in counting electoral votes in the last stage of the Electoral College process created by the Twelfth Amendment. When that failed, what became the January 6 attack on the Capitol was an effort to disrupt that final event in the Electoral College timeline.

Read: The Republican Electoral College contradiction

Put plainly, for a candidate determined to win at all costs, the Electoral College was central to a postelection strategy designed to convert loss into victory. Last nights opening hearings of the January 6 committee made clear that Trump and his advisers were well aware no good-faith legal basis existed to dispute the elections results. In a nationwide popular vote, a deficit of 7 million votes would have been impossible to challenge using ostensibly lawful means; the fact of the Electoral College meant that flipping a few close states, or coercing the vice president into throwing out those states votes, would have been enough to change the elections outcome.

It also seems likely that the very existence of the Electoral College made the public more susceptible to Trumps efforts to subvert democracyor at least lulled the public for a time into believing there was nothing wildly wrong with a process in which a defeated candidate exploited pressure points in an attempt to cling to power. Americans are, after all, acclimated to an undemocratic system of presidential selection; perhaps that primed the public to respond in muted ways to Trumps blatantly antidemocratic moves.

Commonplace political rhetoric about presidential elections suggests as much, framing elections more as complex logic games than crucial acts of self-governance. We discuss paths to 270; we contemplate the prospect of things like running up the score in Broward County.

It is tempting to dismiss the events of January 6 as largely about Donald Trump rather than our system more broadly. And certainly, any electoral system can be targeted by an autocrat determined to hang on to power. But the Electoral College both provided numerous points of entry and brought the country dangerously close to an actual successful coup.

A genuine bipartisan legislative effort is now under way to reform some of the aspects of the Electoral Count Act that Trump sought to exploit in 2020, as well as to address a number of other vulnerabilities of our electoral system. But at the moment, insufficient attention is being paid to the Electoral College itself. One of the goals of these hearings should be to communicate to the public just how dangerous an institution the Electoral College isand perhaps to galvanize a serious effort to change it.

Go here to read the rest:
The Other Cause of January 6 - The Atlantic

Palantir: breaking the big data mould – TheArticle

For fans of The Lord of the Rings, a Palantir is a seeing stone, or crystal ball, that can be used to see events and communicate with other stones. For the followers of technology companies, Palantir is a US company that specialises in big data analytics. One of its co-founders is Peter Thiel, the billionaire venture capitalist who was Facebooks first outside investor. This begs the question: why would a software company, which boasts the US and UK governments among its clients, need defending? The answer lies in the strange values of Big Tech, Silicon Valley and Western progressives (or rather American progressives, whom every other Western progressive seems to ape).

Palantir Technologies, to give the company its full name, stands out for several reasons. Tech companies tend to have meaningless names (Microsoft, for example), or names reflecting what they do: Netflix stands for internet films. The literary origin of Palantirs name makes it stand out. The company is run by Alex Karp. With a PhD in philosophy from Goethe University, Frankfurt, Karp is highly intelligent, but not your typical tech boss. In journalistic terms, Karp is outspoken. In other words, he tells you what he thinks and does not hide behind corporate PR.

One recent example is Karps comments on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The Sunday Times reported him as saying the risk of nuclear war is higher than most people think. He also pointed out that the firm had problems with investors, as Palantir would not sell to US adversaries. He noted as a result Palantir had never entered the Russian market, so they have no business to close down there due to sanctions.

It is this clear embrace of Western values that points to the controversy among progressives. Whereas other Big Tech firms have shied away from working for the CIA and the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Palantir has embraced such work. It sees itself as the contrarian amongst technology firms and explicitly rejects progressive values.

The irony for Silicon Valley progressives is that they are obsessed with diversity of race, gender and nationality, but diversity of thought sends them into a meltdown. This hostility to anyone who varies from progressive groupthink led to protests outside Palantirs Palo Alto headquarters and may well have led to the companys decision to move its headquarters to Denver, Colorado.

The irony is that if it was not for defence spending, there would probably be no Silicon Valley. For Big Tech progressives, history seems to begin in the 1970s with the founding of Apple Computers. In the real world the area around San Francisco has been an area of research for the US Navy for at least the last hundred years. From the 1950s to the 1980s, the largest employer was Lockheed, famous for its US military jets. Palantir is completely in the historic mainstream by seeking to work for the US government. In an era when China has its own tech champions, in the form of Tencent and Alibaba, America needs companies like Palantir more than ever.

The controversy over Palantir is not just limited to the United States. When Palantir began working with the NHS in March 2020 to improve data collection related to the pandemic, the progressive response was predictable. There was a lawsuit from Open Democracy (which was later withdrawn), plus a No Palantir in our NHS campaign established by 50 self-proclaimed healthcare, anti-racist, human rights groups. What is Palantirs crime in their book? It was Peter Thiel, not Palantir, who gave $1 million to Donald Trumps campaign in 2016. Of course, they dont mention that Alex Karp actually voted for Hillary Clinton and gave money to Joe Bidens campaign.

When Huawei, founded in 1987 by a former Chinese Peoples Liberation Party officer, opened offices in the UK, no progressives said or did anything about it. When Russian firms were listing on the London Stock Exchange, there were no mass protests. The double standards at work dont need a Palantir programme to identify them.

So next time you read a hostile article in the New York Times or a news report on the BBC about Palantir, you might want to ask yourself: if these guys are so sinister, why were they not working for the Russian government or cosying up to the Chinese Communist Party, unlike so many other Western firms and Big Tech companies? I, for one, am thankful that there is one tech firm out there that proudly stands up for Western values. Long Live Palantir.

We are the only publication thats committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one thats needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a donation.

Continued here:
Palantir: breaking the big data mould - TheArticle

Death Toll Rises: Man Dies Of Heart Attack Year-And-A-Half After Eating Corndog At January 6 Riot – The Babylon Bee

U.S.The death toll is continuing to rise in connection with the devastating January 6th riots, as one of the attendees has died of a heart attack a year-and-a-half after he was pictured eating a corndog there.

"Over a year after this horrific attack on our holy democracy, the catastrophic death toll continues to rise," said Congressman Adam Schiff. "The death of Bob Billings of a massive heart attack after eating one of theartery-clogging corndogs sold at the Capitol Riot again reminds us of how deadly and dark this dark-deadly day was. That must be, like, a thousand dead now.Those of us still here are lucky to be alive."

Congress is investigating more charges that can be brought against Trump in connection with Billings' death, in addition to the other casualtiessuch as those who got in car accidents on the way home from the rally, those who died of January 6th-connected myocarditis, and those who died of heartbreak due to Biden being inaugurated.

"It may be many years before we really know the true death toll of January 6th, but you can be sure we will continue to talk about it until it no longer effectively raises campaign funds for us," said Schiff.

At publishing time, Congress announced the additional January 6th death of a protestor who claimed to have dirt on Hillary Clinton.

To celebrate Pride Month, Mattel has released its first-ever pregnant man doll: Pregnant Ken! You can have all sorts of fun with the clearly MALE Ken doll and his pregnant belly! Available wherever non-gender-specific toys are sold.

Read more:
Death Toll Rises: Man Dies Of Heart Attack Year-And-A-Half After Eating Corndog At January 6 Riot - The Babylon Bee

Libya’s Oil Output Almost Halts With New Wave of Shutdowns – Bloomberg

  1. Libya's Oil Output Almost Halts With New Wave of Shutdowns  Bloomberg
  2. Libya Loses 1.1 Million Bpd As It Shuts Down Nearly All Its Oil Fields  OilPrice.com
  3. Libya oil shutdown expands with threat to close new port | | AW  The Arab Weekly
  4. Libya's oil production is down by about 1.1 million barrels a day, says minister  Libya Update
  5. Libya's crude output level uncertain  Argus Media
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

See the original post here:
Libya's Oil Output Almost Halts With New Wave of Shutdowns - Bloomberg

Fighting between rival militias rocks Libyas capital Tripoli – Al Jazeera English

The intense fighting involved two influential militias aligned to rival prime ministers vying for power.

Clashes between armed groups have erupted in Libyas capital, according to local media, as the country reels amid a violent power struggle.

Heavy exchanges of gunfire and explosions ricocheted across several districts of Tripoli on Friday night, while images broadcast by local press and circulated on social media showed civilians fleeing heavily trafficked areas.

Local media reported medical sources saying four civilians were wounded in the clashes.

The intense fighting involved two influential militias from western Libya, according to local media, which identified armed groups as the Nawasi Brigade a militia loyal to politician Fathi Bashagha and the Stability Support Force, which backs interim premier Abdul Hamid Dbeibah.

No motive for the fighting was immediately apparent, but it is the latest violence to rock the country as two rival prime ministers vie for power.

After a 2011 revolt toppled longtime dictator Muammar Gaddafi, political infighting to fill the power vacuum has plagued oil-rich Libya.

Last month, Bashagha attempted to seize power by force, sparking pre-dawn clashes between armed groups supporting him and those backing Dbeibah.

Dbeibah was appointed under a troubled United Nations-led peace process early last year to lead a transition to elections set for December 2021, but the vote was indefinitely postponed.

In February, parliament appointed Bashagha, a one-time interior minister, to take over, arguing that Dbeibahs mandate had ended.

But Dbeibah has insisted he will only relinquish power to an elected administration.

More here:
Fighting between rival militias rocks Libyas capital Tripoli - Al Jazeera English