Links 6/28/16

Subscribe to Post Comments

126 comments

1. wbgonne June 28, 2016 at 7:13 am

   Iglesias made the same mistake as Tsipras failed evolution

   Absolutely correct:

   As mentioned previously “Corbyn, Iglesias, Tsipras, and others from the moderate European Left have made completely wrong diagnosis of where things are going. They think that a possible Brexit will be a significant loss against their dreams of a united Europe inside the framework of the Leftist internationalism. They live with the illusion that Europe can change course towards this type of internationalism, while in reality Europe has been directed with high-speed to the exactly opposite direction: the neoliberal internationalism through which the banking-corporate neo-Feudalism will soon become a reality.”

   Globalism has been hijacked by the neoliberals and it is time for the Left everywhere to recognize this and act accordingly.
   1. JTMcPhee June 28, 2016 at 8:23 am

      For any new folks here and anyone wanting a refresher on “how it works,” NC published a wonderfully distressing series of pieces on the Triumph of (Neoliberal) Libertarianism, not so long ago. It’s six articles but not too long a read, and it starts here:

      “Journey into a Libertarian Future, Part I,”

      http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/11/journey-into-a-libertarian-future-part-i-%e2%80%93the-vision.html

      Does GLO (“government-like organizations”) rhyme with WTO (“World Trade Organization”)?

      It happens while we sleep, and 24/7. Individual humans pooling their talents to lock down the shackles and link up the coffles we line up to quietly join…
      1. HopeLB June 28, 2016 at 10:59 am

         Thank you. I missed this somehow.
2. vidimi June 28, 2016 at 7:20 am

   re Brexit,

   i can’t recommend this article enough for a EU perspective. I’ve been saying that the EU will be better off without the UK sabotaging it at every opportunity.
   https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/28/brexit-great-news-eu-britain-sovereignty

   Had remain won the referendum, the EU would have become hostage to British sabotage. Future British prime ministers would veto any fundamental change involving the transfer of sovereignty, arguing, correctly, that their people had voted only for the current set-up of the EU. Britain would continue to demand ever more opt-outs and concessions – playing to the fantasy that membership is a British favour to the rest of Europe. The British press and Europhobe politicians would go on portraying the EU in the most lurid, mendacious and derisory terms, making us look terrible in the eyes of Americans and English-speaking Asians, Africans and Russians.

   The problem with Britain was not that it was critical of the EU. The problem was bad faith and delusional thinking. As the referendum debate has shown, the country has not come to terms with its own global irrelevance – hence its refusal to pool sovereignty. It continues to believe that as a sovereign nation it can get everything it had as an EU member, and more. When Europe’s democrats talk about “EU reform” they mean putting arrangements in place to make Europe’s pooling of sovereignty democratic. Britons mean the rollback of that very pooling of sovereignty. For this reason, Britain’s membership would have hit a wall sooner or later.

   Which brings us to remain’s conception of the EU as merely “a market”. This is a disastrous view. Markets are never neutral arrangements but always political constructs. Consider whether you allow pharmaceutical companies to market antidepressants directly to consumers, as in the US, or not – as in Europe. Both are “markets”, but the difference in impact on society is profound. Think of environmental standards, genetically modified organisms, anti-trust law (when is a market an oligopoly?), privacy or priorities in enforcement of intellectual property violations. Then there is the question of what should be a market in the first place: education, health, the prison system?

   Leaving these decisions to European technocrats means that we effectively hand over control of our society to the corporate lobbies that have direct access to those technocrats. These days global banks and other multinationals operate on a European level while politics still take place on a national level. The consequence is that big corporations can play off one European country against the other in a regulatory race to the bottom, demanding ever lower if not downright homeopathic tax rates.
   1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef June 28, 2016 at 10:18 am

      The EU, in the way it treated Greece, is like the DNC.

      The younger voters in the UK, though, in this case, are for staying with the DNC.

      Can they ‘reform’ or ‘save’ the EU, by going to a superstate EU – is that like the DNC going with more super-delegates?
      1. Take the Fork June 28, 2016 at 11:05 am

         I am skeptical about this old v. young theme that is being pushed so hard by Their Media. Especially in light of the class issues that have been pointed out elsewhere…

         Has anyone bothered to head up to Barnsley to find out how – or if – Billy Casper’s grandchildren voted?
         1. Andrew Watts June 28, 2016 at 2:40 pm

            Never let the truth get in the way of a good story. The voter participation rate among the young was less than 40%. When 2/3rds of the youth aren’t invested in the political system…
         2. Yves Smith Post authorJune 29, 2016 at 3:16 am

            Lord Ashcroft Polls says yes. And the UK readers seem to think that too. Young people see the EU as offering them the opportunity to work in lots of cool places and they think they can be winners in the neoliberal order.
         3. vidimi June 29, 2016 at 4:31 am

            Andrew Watts is correct.

            of those who voted in the 18-24 age bracket, 70% of the young voted to remain. However, only 36% of them bothered to vote.

            i understand not voting for a personality when given a choice between two candidates offering the same policy and only minor differences in how to implement them but democracy doesn’t get more real, more visceral, than a direct vote on a binary choice that will have real impact on your life.
   2. PlutoniumKun June 28, 2016 at 11:21 am

      Yes, in all the fuss there has been little attention paid to the issue of what a UK-less EU would be like – and there are certainly people within the EU who like this thought. Looking at the Directives the UK was most obstructive of – in financial regulation and environmental protection, there are many positives. On the other hand, it will definitely strengthen the arguments of those seeking even greater central control and more direct powers for Brussels.
      1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef June 28, 2016 at 11:32 am

         I reading this morning about a ‘Breturn.’

         It’s like not counting Democratic primary votes – are you feeling deja vu all over again?
      2. vidimi June 28, 2016 at 12:15 pm

         yeah, the UK was an EU member in bad faith. sending saboteurs like Farage to represent them in E Parliament and striking down efforts that would help the majority in favour of extraction and a desire to see the project fail.

         i am in favour of more direct powers for brussels (ie federalisation) if, in return, we get more democratic control over brussels. i think fiscal policy needs to be federalised, for example. no more tax havens in ireland and luxembourg. this will require changes to the constitution, but with Britain out of the way, those changes are more realistic.
3. allan June 28, 2016 at 7:20 am

   Airbnb now claims it is a publisher,
   and so its right to disrupt break the law is protected by the First Amendment:
   
   Airbnb Sues San Francisco Over a Law It Had Helped Pass

   Two years ago, the city and the start-up drafted a law that allowed Airbnb to operate widely there, despite blowback from advocates for affordable housing. The law took effect last February and it became known as the “Airbnb law” for its friendliness to the company.

   Now Airbnb is suing over whether it should have to help enforce the law that it helped create. …

   According to Airbnb, the board of supervisors has violated the company’s right to free speech and the Communications Decency Act, a federal law that prevents the government from holding websites accountable for the content that is published by their users.

   Innovative!
   1. Yves Smith Post authorJune 29, 2016 at 3:18 am

      Not going to work. There are such things as truth in advertising laws.
4. ek hornbeck June 28, 2016 at 7:50 am

   SemperFuxit-

   This is misfiled. It belongs under Brexit. It’s a parody.

   Look at the margin- 51.9% to 48.1%.

   The site in it’s pop-up even says it’s a humor site.
   1. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 8:00 am

      Locals here are familiar with Duffelblog. Yes it’s a humour site, but, as with any good humour, it hides a real bite. See the earlier referenced ‘story’ about the replacement of one kind of terrorist organization, ISIS with another, the Iraqi Army. Duffelblog is most likely internally worried about the likleyhood of the second ‘terrorist’ group mentioned being superseded by a third ‘terrorist’ group, the United States.
      As Rummys’ more realistic acolytes always said: “You have to have ‘boots on the ground’ before you can ‘put the boot in.'”
   2. vidimi June 28, 2016 at 8:03 am

      i think everyone here knows that duffelblog is the military onion
5. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 7:51 am

   The article, really a ‘stub,’ about Carlyle Groups’ dropping ‘volume’ of funds under management is indicative of what exactly? I admit a lack of knowledge about this. Is it a bellwether for the entire ‘industry,’ or is it a lesson in some type of managerial incompetence?
   Thanks in advance.
   1. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 9:33 am

      Probably two missing themes here. First is that low-cost Vanguard, which envious competitors describe as a “cult,” is the rampaging monster gobbling up AUM (Assets Under Management) from other fund managers. They simply cannot compete with Vanguard’s rock-bottom expense ratios.

      Second is that so-called alternatives, which Carlyle defines as private equity, investment solutions [whatever that is], real assets and global market strategies, aren’t doing that great.

      After every sell-off such as l’affaire Brexit, “alternatives” are scrutinized: did they actually perform independently, or did all the correlations go to one under “risk off” as they typically do? If the latter, then they aren’t really “alts,” but just over-priced standard fare with a fancy label.
      1. JohnnyGL June 28, 2016 at 10:45 am

         I really love how it’s a non-profit that “innovates” and just consistently beats the other guys at their own game and squeezes margins down in the asset management business.

         http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-vanguard-effect-on-fund-feeds-in-one-handy-table-2015-11-13

         No one’s done more to prove that money managers are full of crap and should be paid much, much less handsomely. They’ve done it consistently, over many years. The argument seems pretty much beyond dispute at this point.
      2. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 10:57 am

         Thank you for the information Mr. Haygood. Since the decline in AUM for Carlisle looks to be steady over time, then shouldn’t that be a red flag for small investors. I’ve read about “herd mentality” as being short term in effect. So, this being longer term, something else, as in perhaps the pricing strategies you mentioned, is driving the flight of investment to, as you said, the lower fee’d funds. What’s behind this retreat from Boutique funds? Are dropping levels of wealth among the 99percenter investing public pushing a search for yield through reducing expenses for the base investor population? (No pun intended.) The other question mark is; why can’t the other funds cut their fees to compete with Vanguard? More realistically, why won’t they? Simple greed? (I think that I’ve just answered my own question.)
         “Investment solutions?” Really? That’s a good example of form over function. Perhaps it’s code for Corporate bonds.
         Anyway, thank you again. One needs nerves of steel in todays’ markets.
         1. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 11:13 am

            “Saint Jack” Bogle told the NYT,

            “The only way anyone can really compete with us on costs is to adopt a mutual ownership structure,” he says. “I’ve been waiting all these years for someone to do it, but no one has.”

            One reason is surely that there’s no profit in it. Despite Vanguard’s size and success, Mr. Bogle is no billionaire. For comparison, Forbes lists the personal wealth of Edward C. Johnson 3rd, the chairman of Fidelity, as $5.8 billion. By contrast, Mr. Bogle says his own wealth is in the “low double-digit millions.” Most of it is in Vanguard and Wellington mutual funds in which he invested via payroll deduction during his long career.

            http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/business/john-bogle-vanguards-founder-is-too-worried-to-rest.html

            Bogle is certainly right that fees are an investor’s enemy. If he can eat the lunch of the Schwab and Fidelity billionaire families (not to mention the braindead, bankster-owned bulge bracket brokers whose obsolete business model consists of schmoozing clients to whom they don’t even owe a fiduciary duty), then more power to him.

            A site called bogleheads run by his acolytes has a good forum for technical questions.
            1. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 11:32 am

               Bogle comes across as a level headed man. How much is enough is clearly on his radar. Low double digit millions would be more than enough for this groundling.
               I always marveled at “Money and Finances” not being taught in High Schools across this great land of someone elses’. Now I’m told, regular Home Economics isn’t on the menu either. If the ‘youth of today’ cannot manage their own lives with any finesse, how do we all expect them to run the World?
               1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef June 28, 2016 at 11:38 am

                  Ask not what education can do for you, your health and happiness.

                  Ask what education can do for your future bosses.

                  “We only teach wisdom to the rich and virtuous 0.01% – who are expected to have non-profit foundations that will save the world.”
               2. pretzelattack June 28, 2016 at 1:31 pm

                  low single digit millions would suffice for this groundling.
            2. fresno dan June 28, 2016 at 11:51 am

               I am not going to say Bogle is the ONLY ethical person in finance, as I don’t know them all, but it does show something very disconcerting about many humans – good, boring advice is often ignored in favor of get rich quick.

               I actually left my government TSP funds, which actually has lower fees (barely) than Vanguard, to go to Vanguard as it gives me more flexibility in withdrawing funds – I didn’t want to be locked into withdrawing 4% every year, (or any other percentage).
               1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef June 28, 2016 at 11:59 am

                  Boring – tortoises.

                  Get rich quick – hares.

                  “In life, it’s safer to travel on the Tortoise Lane. You even get to avoid but still smell hare droppings.”
            3. Arizona Slim June 28, 2016 at 12:53 pm

               Yours Truly is a Boglehead. Can’t recommend that site enough. Here’s the linky-link:

               https://www.bogleheads.org/
6. vidimi June 28, 2016 at 7:53 am

   i think the porn-sniffing dog story deserves to be under big brother is watching you watch. the dog sniffs out electronic storage devices: the stasi then rummage through them.
   1. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 11:34 am

      “:the Stasi then rummage through them.” And or add to them.
      1. Peter Pan June 28, 2016 at 12:58 pm

         Excuse me sir/madam, but our porn sniffing dog has signaled that you have an electronic based device located in your crotch area which contains porn. Please come with us to be strip searched.
         1. Peter Pan June 28, 2016 at 1:23 pm

            This porn sniffing dog must be based on a high quality Mormon scientific study funded by the Mormons. Wait, do Mormons believe in science?
            1. craazyboy June 28, 2016 at 2:25 pm

               They believe in scratch&sniff!
               1. vidimi June 29, 2016 at 4:41 am

                  so does german national team soccer coach joachim loew
                  https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/jun/15/joachim-low-says-sorry-for-causing-a-stir-with-scratch-and-sniff
7. EndOfTheWorld June 28, 2016 at 7:56 am

   On the subject of the new president of the Philippines, Duterte, I myself spend a lot of time over there, and I can attest to the fact the Filipinos really like the guy. He can be seen as somewhat of an anti-establishment candidate, going along with the worldwide trend (eg Trump, Sanders, Brexit). He was mayor of the relatively small city of Davao but was known for cleaning up the crime and drugs. Yet he supports medicinal marijuana. He’s showing some balls by going up against the powerful Catholic Church on birth control. He’s also said he might negotiate with China unilaterally, bypassing the US.

   Some of his statements are more for comic theatrical effect: Reward for drug dealers, dead or alive. If dead 100,000 pesos. If alive, 20,000 pesos only. His police chief vows: “We will give drug dealers the right to remain silent…..forever!” (Those aren’t exact quotes, but you get the idea.)
   1. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 8:05 am

      I get the point, but, he runs the risk of becoming a garden variety Caudillo.
      More apropos; does he carry through with his clean up campaign? If he does, I foresee a good future for him, and the Philippines.
8. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 8:16 am

   Ah, I sense a very dry sense of humour at work this morning. “Porn sniffing dog” runs the risk of being a porn item itself. The aminule sniffs out data storage devices. That’s a skill that can be bent to multiple uses. Indeed, the habit of the Law planting electronic evidence makes one worry a bit. Will the dogs’ olfactory sense be legally good enough to constitute probable cause? Will the dog be credited with beginning the chain of custody for evidence? Is anything on electronic media covered by the First Amendment? And, Utah? The state where an influential cadre of the dominant religious establishment tacitly endorses polygamy? What constitutes pornography there?
   I fear that the poor dog is merely a ‘tool,’ in every sense of the word.
   1. inode_buddha June 28, 2016 at 2:48 pm

      Ahem. They did away with polygamy in 1896 or thereabouts, and practising it nowdays is a good way to get excommunicated. So, no they don’t endorse it. Porn *is* a huge cultural scourge in UT lately, and society is scrambling to deal with it somehow (because it is destroying families and breaking homes among other things)
9. Donald June 28, 2016 at 9:10 am

   The McKibben piece at Politico (about the Democratic platform) was good, but even more interesting are the remarks by the Clinton supporters in the comments. The idea that “Bernie bros” are the illogical ones is projection. Most of the Clinton supporters here as in many other places online react to any substantive criticism of their candidate with name-calling. Some say that Clinton won so get over it, some openly advocate “centrism” or pointed to Trump as worse (I agree) and none of them that I read actually engaged the article at all. So on climate change, their only response was that Trump is a denier. If we don’t do enough to solve the problem it won’t matter if Clinton isn’t a denier.

   Electoral politics has the effect of turning a great many people into illogical raving tribalists. They don’t care about issues–they care about their preferred candidate and their tribal identity.
   1. Otis B Driftwood June 28, 2016 at 9:59 am

      Yikes, those are some sore winners in the comments section. I wish I were a psychologist so I could make sense of their level of anger and hatred for Sanders and his supporters like McKibben. Maybe it is tribalism, as you say. I dunno. I rather think Sanders and his message have picked at a scab in their psyche – they are decent people who have grown cynical, complacent and sclerotic and cannot abide confronting the specter of their better angels.
      1. nycTerrierist June 28, 2016 at 10:06 am

         Good read of the Sanders-haters – you must be a PhD in armchair psychology!
      2. Carolinian June 28, 2016 at 10:56 am

         Probably, to coin a phrase, they should “check their privilege.” For those with little vital at stake it’s all a pissing match.

         Plus Hillary supporters are naturally going to be defensive because Hillary.
      3. Lord Koos June 28, 2016 at 7:17 pm

         I’m pretty sure Sanders and his supporters make Clinton-style “liberals” very uncomfortable as the issues raised go to the heart of the traditional DemocraticParty narrative of being “for the people” etc etc. It seems to enrage them to have their liberal cred questioned.
      4. Procopius June 29, 2016 at 8:43 am

         I think Sanders scared them. Fear leads to anger which leads to hatred. He scared them, so he and his followers must be destroyed.
      5. Skip Intro June 29, 2016 at 11:01 am

         How many are remnants of Brock’s $million troll army? They didn’t get the memo, like the apocryphal Japanese soldier alone on the pacific island.
         OTOH, maybe they know that the war is not over.
   2. anon June 28, 2016 at 11:49 am

      Clinton doesn’t have much of a narrative for ‘the people’, so she relies almost entirely on attacking other candidates and the voters themselves with varying degrees of demogoguery. It comes across as an abrasive chip-on-the-shoulder tactic and keeps her from having to make commitments or concessions on policy issues.
10. vidimi June 28, 2016 at 9:14 am

    While there is less evidence that DiNP is problematic, some recent research suggests it very well could be. A study undertaken last year, for instance, found that exposure to the phthalate was associated with higher blood pressure.

    and high blood pressure is linked to diabetes.

    are we getting closer to a smoking gun as with tobacco and lung cancer? will we get to see fast food CEOs lie to congress in unison before settling for 100m and no further liability?
11. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 9:18 am

    From the “More Clinton emails” article:

    An additional 165 pages of emails from Hillary includes 34 new emails Clinton exchanged through her private account with her deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin [who] later gave her copies to the government.

    The emails, not among the 55,000 pages of work-related messages that Clinton turned over to the agency, include a March 2009 message where the then-secretary of state discusses how her official records would be kept.

    “I have just realized I have no idea how my papers are treated at State,” Clinton wrote to Abedin and a second aide. “Who manages both my personal and official files? … I think we need to get on this asap to be sure we know and design the system we want.”

    With the new release Monday, more than 50 work-related emails sent or received by Clinton have since surfaced that were not among those she provided.

    Based on last week’s release of one missing email from Huma’s stash, Honest Hillary’s spokesman commented “Secretary Clinton had some emails with Huma that Huma did not have, and Huma had some emails with Secretary Clinton that Secretary Clinton did not have.”

    A vociferous critic, Judge Nap, pointed out that Hillary certified under oath that her original handover of 55,000 pages of “work-related messages” was complete. He suggested that even the one email from Huma, which Hillary evidently deleted despite it containing Hillary’s damning remark “I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible,” was sufficient to indict Hillary for perjury on top of other charges.

    Maybe, just maybe, Hillary’s attorney could claim that one omitted email was somehow an oversight, despite its embarrassing content which implies intentional deletion. But an “oversight” claim won’t fly when over fifty work-related emails were vacuumed from Hillary’s 55,000 page submittal.

    This is obstruction of justice with malice aforethought.

    p.s. A memo with phrases such as “I have just realized …” and “Who manages …” and “We need to get on this asap” indicates that the writer is a clueless n00b.
    1. Pirmann June 28, 2016 at 9:48 am

       Unfortunately, all this email outrage will ultimately be to no effect. She won’t be indicted, won’t be asked to be replaced as the nominee, and her supporters do not care about email.
       1. cwaltz June 28, 2016 at 1:19 pm

          It may not be to an effect on the campaign. However, I do believe she could be impeached after the election season is over.
    2. Otis B Driftwood June 28, 2016 at 10:06 am

       Yeah, it’s easy to make fun of Clinton’s lack of sophistication with technology. Many decent and honest people from her generation, however, are in the same boat. But they aren’t demonstrable perjurers.

       It saddens me that I do not expect anything to come of this. The MSM is in hyperdrive to make Clinton the only safe alternative to a Trump presidency and so when stuff like this happens, (if does come up at all) expect a resounding chorus of, “Everybody does it!” and, “Look, the great Elizabeth Warren is campaigning for her.”

       Now that I think of it, Warren discarding her credibility with such nonchalance is even more saddening.
       1. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 10:24 am

          Didn’t mean to make fun of Hillary’s lack of tech savvy, but rather the bureaucratic instincts of a manager who would fire off a memo asking “Who manages …” instead of picking up the phone or walking round the office to find out.

          Her phrase “I have just realized …” combines cluelessness with grandiosity, reminiscent of this gem:

          “I have just realized that it is due to you, and to Mr. James Thomas and his staff of the Army Navy Country Club, that the putting green here on the White House lawn is already in such excellent condition.”

          — Dwight Eisenhower
          1. Carolinian June 28, 2016 at 11:05 am

             Oh go ahead and make fun. We enjoy it. Dwight too.
       2. sd June 28, 2016 at 11:09 am

          Can someone explain to me what exactly Clintons difficulty is with using a computer? Can she type? Can she click a mouse? Or is it something else? Did she use a computer when she was a Senator? What exactly is the deal with only being able to use a Blackberry?

          And it’s already been noted, she couldn’t use a Blackberry in the office, so what did she use for communication? Did staff read and write emails for her? Or did she just avoid going to the office?

          I feel like there’s something missing and that there’s more to this than what’s being said.
          1. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 11:20 am

             Can she type? Can she click a mouse?

             Has she lost her mind?
             Can she see or is she blind?
             Can she walk at all
             Or if she moves will she fall?
             Is she alive or dead?
             Has she thoughts within her head?
             We’ll just pass her there
             Why should we even care?

             Black Sabbath, Iron Man
             1. wbgonne June 28, 2016 at 1:15 pm

                War Pigs might be an even better choice.
          2. F900fixr June 28, 2016 at 11:36 am

             Her issues with tech make a convenient way to muddy the waters, when it comes to the “private server”.

             Her rants about the system not working the way she thought it should are very familiar to those who have tried to teach their moms how to use the computer.

             In the meantime, what we really need is for the “Romanions” to find and release the transcripts of her Wall Street bankster speaches.
             1. craazyboy June 28, 2016 at 11:58 am

                The Wall Street speeches are private. They are neither state business or your business. STFU and move along to the voting booths now! You’re with ME!
             2. sd June 28, 2016 at 12:59 pm

                Has anyone filed an FOIA for Senator Clintons emails and whether they were sent from a computer? It might help prove or disprove her knowledge and use of email.
          3. Arizona Slim June 28, 2016 at 12:56 pm

             And it wasn’t if she didn’t know tech-savvy people. I mean, jeez Louise, there was Al Gore. An uber-geek if there ever was one. He would have been happy to show Bill and Hill how to use those newfangled computer thingies.
             1. craazyboy June 28, 2016 at 2:20 pm

                Al Gore invented e-mail!
       3. optimader June 28, 2016 at 1:47 pm

          Yeah, it’s easy to make fun of Clinton’s lack of sophistication with technology. Many decent and honest people from her generation, however, are in the same boat.
          

          Yes it is easy to make fun of her on this.

          But it’s best to take pause and critically consider the honesty of someone that poses to be the smartest person in the room, while claiming she cant muster the modest intellectual resources to manager her interaction with an email program (but just on a computer,not her Crackberry)??? Cant have it both ways. This is just utter bllsht and it’s insulting to the American Voter.

          Personally I have a serious issues with someone that makes such a lamely vacuous claim about their incompetence yet wants to be hired in what is perhaps the most important/influential job in the world.
          At least Cheney and possibly Bush(?) were candid about their desire to minimize their virtual email paper-trail. HRC naively wanted to enjoy the convenience of email communication but doubled down on the desire to not take responsibility for her actions and thoughts by obscuring/eliminating Public Records.
          How she did it is an object lesson, for those honest enough to receive the lesson, whether or not she remains an unprosecuted felon.
    3. James Levy June 28, 2016 at 12:36 pm

       Jim, you are dealing with a Yale-trained lawyer. She can create so much confusion around the term “work-related” that other lawyers and any jury that would ever hear such a case wouldn’t know that water was wet after she and her team got through with them. You and I know in our bones she perjured herself, but knowing and proving in a court of law are two different things. I heard on the radio yesterday that in the Stairway to Heaven plagiarism trial the judge ruled that the jury didn’t need to hear the tapes of the song that Lead Zeppelin purportedly ripped off because he ruled that they were not pertinent to the trial and the rules of evidence did not extend to their having to be heard. If you’ve got good enough lawyers you can make almost anything disappear.
       1. voteforno6 June 28, 2016 at 1:03 pm

          That’s not quite true regarding Led Zeppelin. The judge ruled that other suits for different songs brought against Led Zeppelin were not pertinent to the trial over “Stairway to Heaven.”
          1. jonboinAR June 28, 2016 at 11:31 pm

             What I want to know is how the Beach Boys got away with BLATANTLY plagiarizing Chuck Berry’s “Sweet Little Sixteen” for “Surfin’ USA”? The basic melody sounds practically note-for-note the same. Lyric-wise, the chorus, listing places familiar by name, at least, to the audience, is also an unimaginative ripoff of the original. Did they somewhere acknowledge that this was just SLS redone?
       2. A June 28, 2016 at 6:18 pm

          Actually, musical copyright doesn’t “control” sound but music notation (arrangement). Whatever music notation (however limited) is presented is what is copyright. Limited notation creates a limited protection.

          The music notation that was “copyright” is actually a commonly used chromatic descending sequence from a relative minor chord (6th) – to a diminshed 7th – to a Dominant (5th) – to a diminished 7th – to a Major chord (4th) then ascending to the Dominant (5th) and ending the pattern back on the Minor (6th).

          The pattern can be used in ANY tonal key (though each tonal key has unique qualities).

          The Stairway trial was pure ambulance chasing.
    4. Alex morfesis June 28, 2016 at 12:54 pm

       Eloquent ignorance…$hillary reminds me of a few women I have dated along the way…great vocabulary, demonstrative personality, empty beyond belief…the annoying perky kindergartner who “knew how to say stuff” & never learned to do anything…

       maybe I am beginning to fall for the cover story, the bernaze sauce laced mesmerization…but if so, she does not qualify to be vice chair of the theater committee at the local garden club…

       oh…well…never mind…I forgot…

       It’s her turn…
12. Pirmann June 28, 2016 at 9:54 am

    I also believe Brexit will not end up happening. TPTB are already selling off / tanking markets in an effort to crush the rebellion. Even though markets have little to do with the issues at hand, expect the propaganda machine to convince us that they do, resulting in a second vote being held because markets.
    1. juliania June 28, 2016 at 1:17 pm

       I beg to disagree. The Brits are good at going it alone. The ordinary Brits, I mean. They have something in common with the Russian people that way. It’s in their history. Which is our history as well, if you come right down to it.
       1. Lord Koos June 28, 2016 at 7:20 pm

          I dunno about comparing the Brits to Russians. The Russians didn’t colonize half the world and as a result make a mess of it.
          1. VietnamVet June 28, 2016 at 9:59 pm

             Russia is the world’s largest country. Not bad for a Viking tribe from Kiev.
          2. vidimi June 29, 2016 at 4:48 am

             at the height of it’s size, the USSR was, though not half, a significant chunk of the world’s land mass.
13. ChrisFromGeorgia June 28, 2016 at 10:17 am

    Did Brexit Kill The Oil Price Rally?

    Law of headlines means …

    I’d pose a different question, “did massive financial engineering, central bank collusion and fraud cause the oil price rally?”
    1. That Which Sees June 28, 2016 at 10:28 am

       There is certainly a correlation in play. Oil contracts are priced in USD. USD strengthening versus the world basket of currencies tends to decrease oil prices reported USD.

       Doing the math shows that USD/bbl oil prices are flattening while GBP/bbl and EUR/bbl prices are rising.
    2. Carolinian June 28, 2016 at 11:00 am

       As Lambert would say, “ding.”
14. That Which Sees June 28, 2016 at 10:23 am

    Italy eyes €40bn bank rescue as first Brexit domino falls

    Italian officials are studying a direct state recapitalisation of the banks, to be funded by a special bond issue. They also want a moratorium of so-called ‘bail-in’ rules and bondholder write-downs, but these steps are impossible under EU laws.

    Very important.

    As Greece and Cyprus have demonstrated, the currency EuroZone is fatally flawed and very fragile. Banks in Italy, Portugal, and Spain are so large that their impending failure will either force the EuroZone policy to change (which Germany will oppose), or more likely permanently eliminate the Euro in favor of reintroducing national currencies in all current Euro member states.
    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef June 28, 2016 at 12:07 pm

       Is that why ‘they’ have stopped trying to crash stock markets in order to punish the UK?
       1. Mark P. June 28, 2016 at 2:39 pm

          Probably.
    2. Emma June 28, 2016 at 9:40 pm

       Mmmmm……’bailing in’ depositors to save equity holders……Wonder who has a substantial percentage of equity as they’d presumably have to declare it, wouldn’t they? Unless they ‘Da Vinci Code’ things like that…..
15. wbgonne June 28, 2016 at 10:35 am

    Is Bernie Sanders inching towards a third party run? This short C-SPAN video clip was posted at Caucus99percent, the web site where many of the progressives from Daily Kos have taken refuge:

    Whoa! Bernie mentions third party on C-Span interview!
    

    Maybe the platform humiliation will be his last straw. Give Jill Stein a call, Bernie!
    1. Andy June 28, 2016 at 11:08 am

       There are not many refuges left for true liberal leaning folks. Which is ridiculous.
       Thanks Obama.
       1. Jonathan Holland Becnel June 28, 2016 at 2:57 pm

          Ain’t dat da truth!

          My daily rounds have decreased significantly since #brandishedchair…
    2. MyLessThanPrimeBeef June 28, 2016 at 11:52 am

       That would be ‘Berniexit.”
    3. Pirmann June 28, 2016 at 12:23 pm

       Won’t happen. He’ll be at the convention with an I’m With Her button on his lapel touting Hillary Clinton as the best candidate to lead our country.

       He’s a politician and a member of the Democrat party. As such, expect him to play it safe and endorse the nominee.

       Just as Liddy Warren is doing.

       We won’t be fooled again.
       1. cwaltz June 28, 2016 at 1:05 pm

          Up until recently he wasn’t a member of the Democrat Party though.

          Yes, he caucused with them. He NEEDED to work with other politicians in order to accomplish anything in Congress. That’s how the system works. He, however, at this point, is in his seventies. He may be looking at this at one of his last shots at accomplishing some of the things he wants to see done.
          I expect to see him play it safe, however, I’m hoping that he’ll reconsider and look at how hard the Democrat Party has fought him on changing and how basically they’ve thumbed their noses at everything his campaign has stood for. There is little there for him to back(Pro tpp, pro war, anti labor, anti single payer…..that’s what the party has said with their platform and their platform member choices.) He’s better off working with people who want the same thing he wants. Yes, the Green Party has some organization issues but better to work with people with common goals then getting knifed in the back by a party that just wants your money and your lists.
          1. wbgonne June 28, 2016 at 1:13 pm

             Yes, and if you look at the platform votes, Sanders is losing nearly every one 7 to 6, giving the false impression that this is an equal contest, when it is completely rigged just like the primary. The Progressives are being played by the Democrats. Do they have enough self-respect to bolt? Does Bernie?
             1. so June 28, 2016 at 6:52 pm

                It’s what his life will stand for. It’s up to him.
16. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 10:38 am

    Corpworld:

    Amazon plans to make a major foray into the education technology market for primary and secondary schools, a territory that Apple, Google and Microsoft have heavily staked out.

    Monday morning, Amazon said that it would introduce an online marketplace with free lesson plans, worksheets and other instructional materials for teachers in late August or early September.

    Called Amazon Inspire, the education site has features that may seem familiar to frequent Amazon shoppers. Search bar at the top of the page? Check. User reviews? Check. Star ratings for each product? Check.

    By starting out with a free resources service for teachers, Amazon is establishing a foothold that could expand into a one-stop shopping marketplace — not just for paid learning materials, but for schools’ wider academic and institutional software needs.

    “Amazon is very clearly positioning itself as a disrupter with this move,” Tory Patterson of Owl Ventures said.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/28/technology/amazon-unveils-online-education-service-for-teachers.html

    After sufficient disruption, one anticipates that that mergers will occur to establish a new Big Three in education: Microsoft Harvard, Amazon Yale, and Google Stanford.

    Better keep your grades up, kid, or Hamburger U. will be your “safety school.”
    1. tegnost June 28, 2016 at 10:46 am

       don’t you mean McDonalds Hamburger U, plus it’s kind of suggestive and now I need a hamburger for breakfast….
       1. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 10:59 am

          Just trying out the technique called “ellipsis” they taught me in Order Taker English 101.

          That’s where you omit words if the meaning is preserved. Like the way New Yorkers order “scrambled” on a bagel without saying “egg.”

          Hamburger U. is prestigious enough that “McDonalds” has become redundant. :-)

          But it bothers me when they call it “Hamu” on Planet Japan, the same way they contract U. of Tokyo to “Todai.”
       2. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 11:11 am

          Hamburger U is a law school founded by Perry Masons’ arch-nemesis DA Hamilton Berger. Being closely associated with the West Coast Crowd, it is a decent fallback position. Plus, due to it’s location and associations it is known as the premiere institution for Jurisprudential Histrionics Studies. It also has an institutional sense of humour. It’s ethics courses are numbered in negative number order, eg. Basic Ethics -101, Advanced Ethics -301 etc.
          1. ewmayer June 28, 2016 at 6:21 pm

             “Your honor, it’s clear Mr. Ambrit is up to one of his usual tricks…”

             MeTV shows PM episodes twice each day, and have a very funny ad-for-same in which they splice together a dozen-or-so clips of HamBurger objecting and getting overruled, presented rapid-fire with a “Will Hamilton Burger ever win…?” lead-in.
    2. sd June 28, 2016 at 11:19 am

       I had read that one of the difficulties facing teachers is the copyright on simple common lesson plans and their materials. They have to pay for materials that really are not that complicated. Consequently, poorer communities get dated or inferior materials.

       Any teachers who could weigh in on what Amazon is doing?
    3. craazyboy June 28, 2016 at 11:51 am

       Enough of the 3Rs already. Binging, Googling, Shopping…and a degree from Twitter U.

       Besides, this doesn’t need to be disruptive if they beat the educational textbook market by only a buck. That should be simple. And highly profitable.
       1. Skip Intro June 29, 2016 at 12:11 pm

          English Composition 301: Tweets through history, with an emphasis on emoji.
    4. Carolinian June 28, 2016 at 12:31 pm

       Amazon also has tentacles extended into public library systems like mine, where you can check out digital books using a Kindle account. Then there’s Blue Origin, his own personal space program. Clearly Bezos is a bit of a megalomaniac.

       But hey he does make it easy to order some cool stuff. As Ben Franklin might say, “those who trade liberty for convenience…..”
17. paul June 28, 2016 at 10:54 am

    Red Tories threaten to form new party?

    They wouldn’t last tens seconds.
    We already have a conservative party.
    1. vidimi June 28, 2016 at 12:33 pm

       corbyn lost his secret vote of confidence 170-40. that is a huge betrayal.

       however, the vote is not binding and he has promised to stay on.
       1. James Levy June 28, 2016 at 12:44 pm

          The implications are stark: there will be no coherent or strong Left alternative to Boris Johnson/UKIP Brexit policies. Whatever people may tout the vote to have meant, what it is almost certainly going to mean is anti-labor, anti-environment, and pro-austerity policies going forward. Perhaps that magical Left alternative will emerge among the ruins, but boy are working class Brits in for it for at least several years going forward.
          1. vidimi June 29, 2016 at 4:25 am

             correct. and as things get worse, politics get more reactionary.

             labour, through their own doing, lost the working class a long time ago and thus lost the credibility to control the narrative. the tories, through their media partners, were able to convince middle englanders that their troubles were due to immigration. trying to change that narrative now by an integration-sympathetic corbyn would be like trying to change the flow of a river with a stick. nah gah happen.

             so we ain’t seen nothing yet.
18. L June 28, 2016 at 11:16 am

    From the

    Here is the key takehome point, emphasis mine:

    Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon on Monday repeated past statements that Clinton had provided “all potentially work-related emails” that were still in her possession when she received the 2014 request from the State Department.

    So we have moved from “she shared all the emails” to “she shared all the ones she had not yet deleted.” At which point this moves from using a homebrew setup but releasing records on demand to a case where she destroyed work related mail in advance of receiving requests.

    The open questions then become:

    How far in advance did she destroy them?
    What legal guidance did she rely on when she decided to destroy state department records?
    1. L June 28, 2016 at 11:18 am

       Ooops, forgot the article link:

       More Clinton emails released, including some she deleted Associated Press (martha r)
    2. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 11:37 am

       “While it is not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi, said in a statement.

       http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/gowdy-clinton-wiped-her-server-clean-116472#ixzz4Ct9nBxjT

       As any attorney will tell you (I speak from personal experience), destroying documents requested by a Congressional subpoena is contempt of Congress, punishable by jailing.

       Why the Republiclowns didn’t pursue a contempt citation at that time is one of those bipartisan mysteries. Destroying subpoenaed documents is a flagrant red flag.
       1. F900fixr June 28, 2016 at 12:13 pm

          “Punishable by jailing”

          If you are one of the “little people”. Others will be unaccountable, because they are “too big to jail”.

          It is becoming apparant that the private server/disappearing emails circle jerk is another wasted excersise.

          How much more evidence do you need to decide that the Clintons are scumbags? But it seems that Democrats prefer winning by cheating scumbags.
       2. James Levy June 28, 2016 at 12:52 pm

          Jim, the Republicans had Obama when he attacked Libya without invoking the War Powers Act. They could have impeached him right then and there, and had an air-tight case. They did nothing. The great imperative in the Imperial Capital is to “keep all our options on the table.” They want to be able to circumvent the FOIA. They want unaccountable power at the top doing the dirty work of maintaining the American Imperial Project. If Clinton is going down she’s taking a lot of powerful people with her. There will be no “look forward, not back.” You bet she knows where the Bush/Cheney bodies are buried, and will disinter them if Congress gets uppity. She knows who signed off on torture and death squads and the full panoply of NSA shenanigans. She knows that the Bushies made 3 million emails disappear when they walked out the door in clear violation of the law.

          None of that condones her criminality. But it does explain why that criminality goes unpunished.
          1. Andrew Watts June 28, 2016 at 2:49 pm

             It isn’t necessary to invoke the War Powers Act. The 2001 AUMF is still available to provide any legal justification for aggressive war. It’s the imperial president’s “I can attack any country I want because 9/11” card.
             1. James Levy June 28, 2016 at 4:37 pm

                First off, Impeachment is a political as well as a criminal procedure, so although he might pull that card, Obama would have to take to the American people over the heads of Congress an appeal that intervening in the Libyan civil war to overthrow the recognized government had something to do with 9/11 and the AUMF. Obama couldn’t sell that for an instant. If Congress wanted him out on that, they could easily have gotten him out. They didn’t want him out at the cost of “tying the hands” of future imperial presidents.
19. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 11:50 am

    Angry euroclowns:

    “We must respect British democracy and the way it has expressed its view,” EC Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker said in a speech to parliament, words that were greeted by rare applause from the UKIP members present.

    “That’s the last time you are applauding here… and to some extent I’m really surprised you are here. You are fighting for the exit. The British people voted in favor of the exit. Why are you here?” Juncker continued, breaking from his speech text.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-europarliament-juncker-idUSKCN0ZE0QV

    We came here to “junck” you, bro.

    *gets on bike and rides home*
    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef June 28, 2016 at 12:04 pm

       Never say never.

       The last time was the last time. This time is this time. The next time will be the next time.

       X = X, Y = Y and Z = Z.

       They are always true.
    2. Jim Haygood June 28, 2016 at 1:28 pm

       OUTRAGE: the junck man refuses to speak English like normal people do:

       European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker didn’t speak English Tuesday as he lamented the U.K.’s departure from the bloc.

       Juncker’s official speech to EU lawmakers was made only in French and German.

       He did, however, respond to hecklers among the British EU lawmakers in English.

       Previously, Juncker has often used the EU’s most widely spoken and written language as well, particularly when addressing issues close to British hearts.

       http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/latest-sweden-6x-britons-applying-citizenship-40183136

       Vous vous vous yer damned self, buddy.
       1. William C June 28, 2016 at 3:35 pm

          Have I ever been prouder that I am Scottish?

          http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36652065
20. F900fixr June 28, 2016 at 12:02 pm

    Hillary is a perfect example of a type of manager/leader all too common.

    Start a position. Make decisions that appear to be good from a superficial examination, but end up being bad when the chickens come home to roost.

    Their talent is picking the precise time between candy crapping unicorns and the SHTF to leverage their “success” into a higher position.

    That, and knowing that, like the Mafia, you can always create plenty of “buffers”.
21. carycat June 28, 2016 at 12:22 pm

    The GOP (as directed by their true owners) needs Clinton much more than Trump, so their operatives in Congress and the MSM are pulling their punches. But there is no quid-pro-quo, so all the MIC, bankster, TPP friendly policies in the new Clinton administration will have nothing to do with the huge increase in contributions by world wide humanitarians to the Clinton Foundation. Just a happy win-win outcome. So don’t expect the GOP establishment to do anything other than make weak noises to keep up appearances. They can’t afford to upset the apple cart.
    1. sd June 28, 2016 at 12:49 pm

       Apple carts can quickly turn into tumbrels. Violence is always best avoided. Something the 1% can do by simply sharing the wealth.
       1. pretzelattack June 28, 2016 at 2:00 pm

          i think there is a potential market for a tumbrel hiring app. i may call it “unter”. special discounts for revolutionaries.
22. JTMcPhee June 28, 2016 at 12:34 pm

    Hey, I just succumbed to the Game of Thrones thralldom. Interesting parallels between commentariat here and the players in the Game.

    Most interesting is that Cersei, she’s who is mistress of making up history (and making it, too, along the lines of “We create reality, and you mopes study and chatter about it, and while you are waking up to what is being done with your wealth and bodies and yawning and thinking ‘someone ought to do something about that,’ we create a new reality — you can never even catch up, can you?” as she goes along, looks to be about to take over the Iron Throne for her family. Speaking of breeding to the true lineage…
23. ambrit June 28, 2016 at 12:40 pm

    “Apple cart?” That should be “honey bucket wagon;” the contents of which are used to fertilize a bumper crop of noxious weeds.

    This is a reply to ‘carycat’ just above.
24. fresno dan June 28, 2016 at 12:42 pm

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/W270RE1A156NBEA

    So that is America, but I would bet its the same in Great Britain….and Davos man just don’t get it….WAIT, he does get it…he gets it all….
25. juliania June 28, 2016 at 1:10 pm

    “Bittner also seems to think that the voting majority was unaware that he views them with contempt and wishes to do everything possible to prevent the majority’s views from determining policy. The reality is that the majority that voted for BREXIT was acutely aware of the elite contempt for their views and for ‘traditional democracy.’ That contempt is the single most important reason why a majority voted for BREXIT.”

    Kudos to Bill Black!
26. Peter Pan June 28, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    Russia’s attack on U.S.-backed rebels in Syria puzzles, frustrates the Pentagon – Military Times

    I suspect that Russia is sending an action message to the USA:

    Segregate your so-called moderate rebels away from terrorist groups. Stop them from co-mingling forces, weapons & supplies with terrorists. Otherwise we’ll assume rebels are terrorists & attack.

    Tell the 51 neo-cons in the State Dept that suggested the bombing of the Syrian Army is a really bad idea & that they can go stuff it.

    We’re not very happy that the CIA in conjunction with Turkey & the Gulf States have resupplied terrorist groups in NE Syria with weapons, supplies and militants during the cessation of hostilities agreement. Here is our response; bombs away!
    1. Andrew Watts June 28, 2016 at 3:06 pm

       These attacks are the kind of thing that I expected to see when US/Russia weren’t getting along. By striking the New Syrian Army (NSyA) the Russians proved to other US-backed rebels that Uncle Sam is a paper tiger and that they’d better be prepared to sit down and negotiate. This wasn’t ever a problem with the Syrian Democratic Forces who have maintained an uneasy cease fire with Assad well before the cessation of hostilities agreement. When Arab SDF Jaysh al-Thuwar (Revolutionary Army) looked like it was going to infringe on Assad territory the Russians dropped a few bombs in their vicinity to make a point.

       *edited/added*

       According to Russian sources we’re back to cooperating. I’m guessing the Obama administration quietly consented to the Syrian Arab Army’s offense on al-Nusra positions in Aleppo city. While the Russians greenlit the NSyA offensive into Deir Ezzor province. If Aleppo falls to Assad the Civil War would mostly be over in the west and Islamic State is hurting pretty bad in northern Aleppo and eastern Syria. The Syrian Civil War could potentially be over by 2018.
27. cwaltz June 28, 2016 at 1:16 pm

    I’m trying to understand why the Pentagon is “puzzled” that the Russians would want to keep a regime that essentially was friendly to their interests and would be doing everything they can to thwart rebels, ANY rebels?

    I mean yes, publically Russia has said they would be willing to see regime change but being willing to see regime change is not the same thing as WANTING it and certainly they are going to want to have a say in who runs the region at their border. Is the military leadership that stupid?
    1. James Levy June 28, 2016 at 4:48 pm

       I can’t tell you if they are stupid or not. I’m sure they are arrogant and most of the General Staff weren’t around when Russia was considered a threatening giant. If you graduated from West Point the year the Soviet Union collapsed you’d be a 47 year old Colonel by now. All your professional life Russia has been considered a second-rate joke with leaky subs and H-bombs with aging tritium on rusty old missiles. Your eyes and the eyes of your superiors have been fixed on the Middle East and China for decades. Russia getting its house in order is seen as obstreperous and offensive. Didn’t we teach them their place when Yeltsin was boozing it up on the CIA payroll? The urge to hustle Russia to the back of the bus has got to be strong. We can only pray that Trump, if he gets his chance, won’t catch the fever (although I am certain from his personality and lack of foreign policy experience he will). And yes, we all know that Clinton is a card carrying member of the “Slap Russia Down Hard” society. It’s scary to think that many in the Pentagon are in the club.
       1. vidimi June 29, 2016 at 5:02 am

          i was listening to a dan carlin podcast on this issue and he made a similar point. we currently have a generation in power who have an infantile view of the world and of russia in particular shaped by the yeltsin years.
28. RMO June 28, 2016 at 2:43 pm

    Thank you for the wonderful antidote. Good Dog I needed one.

    Syria: So, Russia is fighting U.S. backed rebels… and U.S. backed rebels are fighting U.S. special forces. Sounds like everything’s going well. Want to bet that most of the western media coverage of that mentions only the former and not the latter?
29. B1whois June 29, 2016 at 1:15 am

    A sad but powerful story is implied by this petition, which calls out the UK media for recklessly stirring up racial hatred.
    
    https://secure.avaaz.org/en/uk_reject_racism_/?fqfrTkb&pv=99

    My understanding is that the media did this as part of a fear mongering effort meant to discredit the leave campaign leading up to the Brexit vote. Since the same playbook is being followed by US media, I wonder if the US would face similar repercussions from a Trump victory.

    While it will be something to watch carefully, I feel that while many things are said about Trump (and by Trump), his pitch to the electorate is as yet unwritten, particularly as to the use of race-based rhetoric going forward. In contrast, with Clinton, I feel the person is known and the pitch to the electorate as well: Trump is RACISM incorporated and personified.

    So what if Clinton wins, how are the racist elements among our society likely to respond? Empowered by a Trump campaign for President, only to be demonized and scapegoated by the new president as the absolute worst thing wrong with the US (they are not). (Maybe I am overthinking this, because partisans are already this extreme.)

    One thing seems likely: that a platform will be created for another racist leader to step onto in the future. How ironic it would be if the proverbial “next Hitler” were the result of a media campaign conducted to elect a President from the Democrat Party.

    Laura

Comments are closed.