|
Posted: 24 Feb 2017 09:15 AM PST
During a freewheeling recent press conference, President Trump declared that America was “drug-infested” country. “Drugs,” Trump said, “are becoming cheaper than candy bars.” What the President failed to mention: the price of one lifesaving medication—naloxone—is more expensive than caviar. “All the politicians, Obama, Trump, everyone says, ‘We’re going to solve it’,” says Gordon Merry, director of West Virginia’s Cabell County EMS, which serves Huntington, a city that saw 26 opioid overdoses over four hours last August. “I haven’t seen anything that has changed.” Meanwhile, the price of naloxone is soaring. Evzio, a form of naloxone manufactured by Kaléo that’s administered through auto-injection, rose from $575 per package in 2014 to a whopping $4,100 in 2016. Another version of the drug, made by Hospira, has risen from from $9.20 for 10 vials in in 2005 to $158.30 in 2014, according to Truven Health Analytics. The price of the naloxone nasal spray Narcan has remained stable—around $125 for a two-pack—since it was approved by the FDA in 2015. “The best word for what’s happening now,” says Paul Ginsburg, director of the Center for Health Policy at the Brookings Institution, “is profiteering.” Naloxone price hikes parallel a spike in demand for the drug that’s fueled by the opioid epidemic, stretching government budgets—the drug is often administered by first responders—while creating a robust market for the drug.
In late November, Dr. Leana Wen, Baltimore City’s Health Commissioner, and 10 other health officials wrote a letter to President Trump asking the new administration to prioritize public health, specifically solutions to the opioid epidemic. “In the campaign, President Trump talked about the problems of drug addiction,” says Wen. “We hope that this will not just be rhetoric but resources will be devoted to this issue too.” So far Wen and her colleagues haven’t received a response.
Experts attribute the rising naloxone prices to a combination of soaring need, drug-industry consolidation and an onerous FDA-approval process, which can stifle competition. Critics contend that price gouging may also be at play. Kaléo CEO Spencer Williamson says Evzio’s list price of $4,100 “is not a true net price to anyone…due to numerous discounts and rebates that are negotiated in the supply chain.” Most patients with insurance pay nothing out of pocket, says Williamson, while uninsured patients with household incomes of less than $100,000 can also access Evzio free of charge. Kaléo says it also offers product grants to some nonprofits and government agencies that demonstrate a need for the drug. For instance, Kaléo has granted 2,200 kits to the Cabell-Huntington Health Department, where the overdose death rate is nearly 10 times the national average. “The more naloxone there is, the more lives will be saved,” says Dr. Michael Kilkenny, physician director of the Cabell-Huntington Health Department. “I have to admit, if we didn’t get the grant, we wouldn’t have the drug. We don’t have the finances.” Yet even beneficiaries of naloxone grants acknowledge that demand outstrips affordable supply. In Palm Beach County, Fla., for instance, the Fire and Rescue department spent nearly $205,400 on naloxone in 2016, compared with $57,500 in 2015.
In Baltimore, first responders are facing similar constraints. “We have to decide who is the most likely to die and make a guess on which patients we distribute naloxone to,” says Wen, the health commissioner, adding that the price they pay for naloxone more than doubled over the course of just a few years. “It doesn’t make sense that at a time of great demand this medication is being priced out of our reach.”
In Newtown, Ohio, police chief Tom Synan says the opioid epidemic in his community is worsening. The county averages up to 70 overdoses a week. “That’s our new normal,” he says. Synan, who serves on the Hamilton County Heroin Coalition steering committee, says his officers use the naloxone nasal spray Narcan, and the department has not been hit with major cost increases. But the overall trend is disconcerting. “These are life and death situations,” says Synan.If his earlier promises hold true, Trump will eventually train his lens on drug companies—and drug prices. A White House spokesperson says the administration is extending grant programs to help get naloxone in the hands of first responders, has encouraged Medicaid programs to include naloxone access for low-income people, and has made sure Veterans Affairs programs offer naloxone for eligible veterans. Still, some say more drastic action will be necessary. Ohio has already taken action: in November the state reached an agreement with Adapt Pharma, the manufacturer of Narcan, to freeze the price of the naloxone nasal spray for Ohio law enforcement, first responders, state and local government agencies, and community-based organizations for a year. These entities can buy 48 or more Narcan units for $75 each, a 40% discount from the $125 wholesale price. “It’s hard to justify the price increases you see on purely economic grounds,” says Darius Lakdawalla, an economist and professor of pharmaceutical development and regulatory innovation at the University of Southern California. “The case is pretty strong for government interference.” Especially when lives are at stake. Laurie Fugitt, co-founder of Georgia Overdose Prevention, a volunteer group, hopscotches across the state teaching people how to administer naloxone to themselves or their loved ones. She equates naloxone to a fire extinguisher. You never want anyone to use it. But it should be there just in case. “A lot of people have no idea that there’s even an antidote for an opioid overdose,” says Fugitt. “Back in the day, a vial of naloxone cost a couple of bucks. Now, everybody is trying to get their piece of the pie.” With reporting by Zeke J. Miller |
Sunday, February 26, 2017
President Trump Vowed to Solve the Opioid Crisis. He Needs to Fix This Problem First - TIME
Saturday, February 25, 2017
These 8 Books Can Help You Finally Understand Business -TIME Business
Posted: 22 Feb 2017 10:13 AM PST
Run rate? M&A? Non-voting shares?
If you’ve never run your own business or considered B-school, it can be tough to wrap your head around how the corporate world works. Thankfully, there’s a wealth of excellent (yes, even enjoyable) tomes out there that can help. Here are eight great ones to start with, a mix of classics and new reads about today’s hottest startups as suggested by writers and editors at TIME and Fortune.
The Innovators Dilemma ($14, Amazon)
Clayton Christensen’s 1997 classic The Innovators Dilemma argues that market-leading companies can become shells of their former selves if they’re unwilling to “disrupt” themselves — because somebody else will come along and do it for them. It’s akin to a religious text in Silicon Valley, where it’s viewed as a guidebook for upstart innovators seeking to take on the world’s biggest firms.
Soul of a New Machine ($10, Amazon)
The Pulitzer-winning Soul of a New Machine, by Tracy Kidder, is considered by many to be one of the best non-fiction books about technology ever written. The 1981 novel follows the now-defunct Data General’s efforts to build a next-generation “minicomputer” in the 1970s. The company’s ability to overcome corporate, engineering and design challenges offers particularly insightful lessons for anybody interested in cross-team project management.
Good to Great ($19, Amazon)
The world is home to billions of companies, but only a few become true corporate powerhouses. What separates the merely good firms from the great? That’s the question Jim C. Collins seeks to answer in his 2001 Good to Great. His ultimate answer: It’s all about focusing on what you do best — what economists might call “comparative advantage.”
The Smartest Guys in the Room ($10, Amazon)
Enron’s demise was perhaps the most infamous corporate collapse in American business history. Here, journalists Peter Elkind and Bethany McLean offer an insightful look at the complex business arrangements that masked Enron’s feeble health, all without requiring that readers have a business degree before diving in. You’ll come away with a far greater respect for accounting principles than you ever thought possible.
Steve Jobs ($15, Amazon)
Steve Jobs, whose 1997 return to Apple sparked a turnaround that helped the Cupertino, Calif. become the world’s largest company by market capitalization, was in many ways a flawed genius. But it’s impossible to deny his business acumen, and anybody interested in business would do well to know his story well. Nobody has captured a better portrait of Jobs than former TIME Managing Editor Walter Issacson, whose 2011 biography leaves readers with a deeper understanding of the man and the now-massive company he helped resurrect.
The Upstarts ($20, Amazon)
Ours is an age dominated not only by decades-old corporate powerhouses, but increasingly by well-funded technology startups, too. In The Upstarts, Bloomberg’s Brad Stone offers a look at how two of these firms in particular — Uber and Airbnb — have remade the world in their image seemingly overnight. It’s especially insightful as a view into how modern companies deal with rules and regulations that stand to disrupt their business strategies.
DisneyWar ($12, Amazon)
Disney is called “the happiest place on Earth,” but its corporate history has long been marked by high-profile infighting and rivalries. James B. Stewart’s DisneyWar focuses on the tenure of former CEO Michael Eisner, along the way revealing how personal squabbles can threaten to derail even the world’s most iconic corporate powers. Read this one if you’re interested in learning about individual leaders’ ability to thrust companies forward — or spin them into chaos.
Losing the Signal ($16, Amazon)
Research in Motion, the Canadian maker of the instantly-recognizable BlackBerry Phones, once dominated the embryonic smartphone market. Today, not so much. What happened? Jacquie McNish and Sean Silcoff’s 2015 Losing the Signaloffers an answer: RIM simply wasn’t able to predict how Apple’s iPhone would change everything about the smartphone world. Read this one after Innovators’ Dilemma for a modern case study featuring a company you probably know well.
Mitch McConnell Unhappy With Donald Trump's Tweets, Fine With Everything Else - Huffington Post
WASHINGTON ― Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Tuesday that he’s happy with everything Donald Trump has done since becoming president ― except for one thing.
Was it his executive order banning refugees and immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries, perhaps, which was so bungled that it’s tied up in court? Was it his praise for Vladimir Putin? His war on the free press? His efforts to undermine the judicial branch of government? It’s none of those things. McConnell is annoyed by Trump’s tweets.
“Am I a fan of all the tweets? Use your imagination,” he chuckled at an event with constituents in Lawrenceburg, Kentucky. “But if you focus on what the president is trying to accomplish, and you believe America needed to go in a different direction, I think he’s been doing all the right things.”
It’s the latest example of just how much GOP leaders are prepared to embrace or turn a blind eye to Trump’s actions, no matter how erratic or potentially dangerous they are, in exchange for the president signing the kinds of laws they’ve desperately wanted for years but couldn’t get under a Democratic president.
Certainly, Trump’s penchant for typo-ridden tirades on Twitter is bizarre and a distraction from the GOP’s agenda. But contrast the outrageousness of his tweets with that of his immigration executive order, for example, which left tens of thousands of immigrants in legal limbo for days and sparked protests nationwide.
Trump’s criticisms of the federal judges who ruled against him on that executive order sparked threats against those judges.
And the ban itself plays right into the hands of Islamic State terrorists, who thrive off the idea that the United States is at war with Islam.
McConnell didn’t raise concerns about any of that with his constituents. He talked about all the things Republicans want to do now that they control Congress and the White House, like comprehensive tax reform, repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act, and confirming Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch.
It’s the same approach House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has been taking, too: Block out the ugly things that are actually happening (e.g. Did Trump’s campaign coordinate with Russia during the election? Nothing to see here!) in favor of focusing on what your party wants to get done (e.g. quickly lining up bills to roll back government regulations).
That, for the moment, appears to be GOP leaders’ strategy for navigating the next four years under Trump.
“These are all the same kind of things a President Rubio or a President Bush or a President Romney would have recommended,” McConnell said of ACA repeal and tax reform at his constituent event. “So, I think we’re doing the kind of things that most Republicans believe can make the country better.”
Friday, February 24, 2017
Trump's company is receiving payments directly from Abu Dhabi - Huffington Post
WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump’s business receives direct payments from a registered foreign agent funded by the government of Abu Dhabi.
The U.S. headquarters for the Abu Dhabi Tourism & Culture Authority is located on the 22nd floor of Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue — just four floors below the president’s penthouse apartment. The authority, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, promotes tourism to Abu Dhabi, which is part of the United Arab Emirates. It has been registered as a foreign agent with the U.S. Department of Justice since 2012.
During his run for president, Trump claimed that Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton “sold her office to corporations and foreign governments, betraying the public trust” by accepting donations from foreign governments to her family’s charity, which focused on delivering vaccines and low-cost HIV/AIDS drugs to people in poor countries. Now he’s benefiting from foreign government payments to his for-profit, privately owned business.
“Normally, the fact that a foreign agent — a registered foreign agent — was paying money to the President of the United States would create blaring headlines around the world, but so vast and scandalous are the President’s conflicts of interest that it hardly raises an eyebrow,” said Norm Eisen, the former top ethics adviser to President Barack Obama.
Trump has not sold his business interests, instead turning over management control to his sons, a move that ensures he will benefit any time any of his companies benefit.
Eisen, along with other ethics experts — including President George W. Bush’s ethics lawyer Richard Painter — and constitutional law professors, filed a federal lawsuit Monday alleging that Trump is in violation of the Constitution for his acceptance of payments from foreign government entities. Under the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, the president is forbidden from receiving gifts or payments from foreign governments and foreign government-owned corporations.
“It does put a sharper point on it, the fact that they’re a foreign agent,” Eisen added. “All of these foreign governments who make payments to Trump’s businesses have a strong interest in the decision-making of the United States.”
The Abu Dhabi Tourism & Culture Authority, like all foreign agents, is registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which is designed to help the federal government monitor foreign nations’ activities in the U.S. FARA requires foreign government-backed influence groups in the United States to register as foreign agents even if they are not lobbying the U.S. government directly.
Many foreign agents focus on promoting their country to the broader American public and media and not on lobbying the government. Based on its publicly available filings, this appears to be the case with the Abu Dhabi Tourism & Culture Authority.
But during his run for president, Trump promised to sign a law banning “registered foreign lobbyists” from contributing to campaigns. FARA is the only law that registers foreign lobbyists.
And since at least 2012, his business has been taking a FARA registrant’s money.
Trump’s transition team initially included several advisers who were also foreign agents ― until they were dropped in the middle of November. One of them survived, however. Former Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.), a registered foreign agent for Taiwan and a senior transition aide, helped broker the controversial phone call between Trump and Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen in December.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Abu Dhabi authority is not the only foreign government-backed organization paying Trump. The Industrial & Commercial Bank of China, which is owned by that nation’s government, is also a Trump Tower tenant. In addition, The New York Times reported that Trump owes money to the Bank of China, another foreign government-owned entity.
The U.S. headquarters for the Abu Dhabi Tourism & Culture Authority is located on the 22nd floor of Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue — just four floors below the president’s penthouse apartment. The authority, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, promotes tourism to Abu Dhabi, which is part of the United Arab Emirates. It has been registered as a foreign agent with the U.S. Department of Justice since 2012.
During his run for president, Trump claimed that Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton “sold her office to corporations and foreign governments, betraying the public trust” by accepting donations from foreign governments to her family’s charity, which focused on delivering vaccines and low-cost HIV/AIDS drugs to people in poor countries. Now he’s benefiting from foreign government payments to his for-profit, privately owned business.
“Normally, the fact that a foreign agent — a registered foreign agent — was paying money to the President of the United States would create blaring headlines around the world, but so vast and scandalous are the President’s conflicts of interest that it hardly raises an eyebrow,” said Norm Eisen, the former top ethics adviser to President Barack Obama.
Trump has not sold his business interests, instead turning over management control to his sons, a move that ensures he will benefit any time any of his companies benefit.
Eisen, along with other ethics experts — including President George W. Bush’s ethics lawyer Richard Painter — and constitutional law professors, filed a federal lawsuit Monday alleging that Trump is in violation of the Constitution for his acceptance of payments from foreign government entities. Under the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, the president is forbidden from receiving gifts or payments from foreign governments and foreign government-owned corporations.
“It does put a sharper point on it, the fact that they’re a foreign agent,” Eisen added. “All of these foreign governments who make payments to Trump’s businesses have a strong interest in the decision-making of the United States.”
The Abu Dhabi Tourism & Culture Authority, like all foreign agents, is registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which is designed to help the federal government monitor foreign nations’ activities in the U.S. FARA requires foreign government-backed influence groups in the United States to register as foreign agents even if they are not lobbying the U.S. government directly.
Many foreign agents focus on promoting their country to the broader American public and media and not on lobbying the government. Based on its publicly available filings, this appears to be the case with the Abu Dhabi Tourism & Culture Authority.
But during his run for president, Trump promised to sign a law banning “registered foreign lobbyists” from contributing to campaigns. FARA is the only law that registers foreign lobbyists.
And since at least 2012, his business has been taking a FARA registrant’s money.
Trump’s transition team initially included several advisers who were also foreign agents ― until they were dropped in the middle of November. One of them survived, however. Former Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.), a registered foreign agent for Taiwan and a senior transition aide, helped broker the controversial phone call between Trump and Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen in December.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Abu Dhabi authority is not the only foreign government-backed organization paying Trump. The Industrial & Commercial Bank of China, which is owned by that nation’s government, is also a Trump Tower tenant. In addition, The New York Times reported that Trump owes money to the Bank of China, another foreign government-owned entity.
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Trump Takes Over CPAC — But Will He Own the Conservative Movement Too? - NBC News
Trump Takes Over CPAC — But Will He Own the Conservative Movement Too?
Trump takes over CPAC
A year ago at the height of the Republican presidential primary, not only did Donald Trump skip the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), he also received criticism from some of the speakers. "One of these candidates is not Tea Party at all. I know Donald Trump says he loves the Tea Party, but that's not what it takes to be Tea Party," said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of Tea Party Patriots. "You have to put freedom above your own interest." Well, things have certainly changed: Team Trump has taken over this year's CPAC, which begins today and lasts through Saturday. Indeed, as many as eight high-level Trump administration officials will address the conference over the next three days, including the president himself:
Kellyanne Conway (Thursday at 9:10 am ET)
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos (Thursday at 12:50 pm ET)
Reince Priebus and Steve Bannon (Thursday at 1:05 pm ET)
Vice President Mike Pence (Thursday at 7:30 pm ET)
President Trump (Friday at 10:20 am ET)
KT McFarland (Friday at 7:30 pm ET)
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt (Saturday at 1:50 pm ET)
By contrast, just two members of George W. Bush's team spoke at CPAC in 2001 (Dick Cheney and Karl Rove), but President Reagan and about one-third of his cabinet attended the conference in 1981. Since we started covering politics, CPAC has always featured different strands of the conservative movement -- the Paul libertarians, the Ted Cruz-like social conservatives, the Tea Party crowd, and even pro-immigration-reform conservatives. But this year, and most likely through at least 2020, Trump-ism (with its stances on immigration, race, and trade) is dominating CPAC.
But does he take over conservatism?
The bigger question, however, is whether Trump's time in office actually takes over the conservative movement, too. The Never-Trump crowd isn't so sure. "It's going to take a lot more than what the Trump folks have managed to take conservatism over from Burke and Kirk, to say nothing of Thatcher or Goldwater or Reagan," GOP strategist Liz Mair tells First Read.
Conservative radio host Charlie Sykes adds, "I would say that conservatism is in temporary eclipse. It remains intellectually robust and has deep roots at the local and state level. But for the time being, personality politics has trumped principles. Trump World has exposed how few genuine principled conservative there really were. It turns out that even conservatives were not that into small government, free markets, etc."
Play Trump staffers work to control president's Twitter habit Facebook Twitter Google PlusEmbed
Trump staffers work to control president's Twitter habit 5:19
Setting the CPAC stage
A divided conservative movement: NBC's Benjy Sarlin sets the stage for this year's CPAC. "Trump enjoys strong approval ratings among Republicans, but the rocky lead-up to the event this year is a reminder that the conservative movement is still divided over the president and the ideas raised by his campaign.
On Monday, CPAC dropped planned speaker Milo Yiannopoulos, a popular figure in so-called alt right circles who refers to Trump as "Daddy," after videos surfaced in which he discussed whether sex between young teenagers and adults might be considered consensual. Yiannopoulos also resigned from Breitbart News, which Bannon ran until leaving to oversee Trump's campaign last year. The outrage over the footage was amplified by prominent figures on the right who argued from the start that inviting Yiannopoulos was a mistake. 'The alt right is not part of the conservative movement,' ACU board member Ned Ryun said Tuesday on MSNBC's Hardball. 'I don't think we need to normalize them.'"
Trump administration rescinds Obama guidance on transgender protections
Meanwhile, in non-CPAC news… "In a complete reversal of the Obama administration's position, President Donald Trump's administration formally rescinded past guidance on transgender bathroom protections in public schools," per NBC News.
MORE: "Letters from the Justice and Education departments late Wednesday notified the Supreme Court and the nation's public schools that the administration is changing its position on the issue. Former President Barack Obama instructed public schools that they must allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that align with a child's chosen gender identity. The guidance was issued as an interpretation of Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in education. Now, the administration is revoking key guidance on which that policy was based. The letter informs the court that the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division will no longer 'rely on the views expressed in that guidance, and instead will consider further and more completely the legal issues involved.'"
A sidelined secretary of state?
That's message from a pair of news articles out this morning. The Washington Post: "The Trump administration in its first month has largely benched the State Department from its long-standing role as the preeminent voice of U.S. foreign policy, curtailing public engagement and official travel and relegating Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to a mostly offstage role. Decisions on hiring, policy and scheduling are being driven by a White House often wary of the foreign policy establishment and struggling to set priorities and write policy on the fly."
And Politico: "Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has asked his aides to find ways to improve his media profile, a request that comes as U.S. diplomats increasingly worry about the direction of the State Department and whether their new boss has enough influence with President Donald Trump." NBC's Andrew Rafferty looks at Tillerson's trip to Mexico.
The big elephant in the room of the race for DNC chair
As DNC members travel to Atlanta to choose the party's next chair on Saturday, there's an elephant in the room that no one is talking about it — but that everyone is thinking about: Keith Ellison's Muslim faith.
Don't get us wrong, this isn't an issue among the 447 DNC members. As we've written, many/most voting members would be happy with either Ellison or Tom Perez. But some outside the party seem to be goading Democrats to pick Ellison, as David Duke did earlier this month. Even President Trump weighed in on Ellison yesterday, tweeting: "One thing I will say about Rep. Keith Ellison, in his fight to lead the DNC, is that he was the one who predicted early that I would win!"
Trump Cabinet watch
Secretary of State: Rex Tillerson CONFIRMED
Attorney General: Jeff Sessions CONFIRMED
Treasury: Steve Mnuchin CONFIRMED
Defense: JamesMattis CONFIRMED
Homeland: John Kelly CONFIRMED
Interior: Ryan Zinke NOMINATED
HHS: Tom Price CONFIRMED
HUD: Ben Carson NOMINATED
Education: Betsy DeVos CONFIRMED
Commerce: Wilbur Ross NOMINATED
Transportation: Elaine Chao CONFIRMED
Labor: Alexander Acosta NOMINATED
Agriculture: Sonny Perdue NOMINATED
Energy: Rick Perry NOMINATED
Veterans Affairs: David Shulkin CONFIRMED
OMB Director: Mick Mulvaney CONFIRMED
U.S Trade Representative: Robert Lighthizer NOMINATED
UN Ambassador: Nikki Haley CONFIRMED
Environmental Protection Agency: Scott Pruitt CONFIRMED
Small Business Administration: Linda McMahon CONFIRMED
CIA Director: Mike Pompeo CONFIRMED
Official Swedish Twitter account debunks Trump lying tweets one by one - Independent
An official Swedish Twitter account that is controlled by a different citizen each week has taken Donald Trump to task over his claims about the country.
The US President was greeted with a mixture of confusion and ridicule after he told a campaign-style rally in Florida: “We've got to keep our country safe. You look at what's happening in Germany, you look at what's happening last night in Sweden. Who would believe this? Sweden! They took in large numbers, they’re having problems like they never thought possible.”
In response, Swedish politicians, news outlets and ordinary citizens, took to social media to question what had happened on a relatively peaceful Friday night in the Scandinavian country.
Charged with operating the @Sweden Twitter handle this week, Max Karlsson decided to debunk Mr Trump’s claims about his homeland.
The 22-year-old paralegal from Stockholm, told The Independent that he was driven to speak out because he believes passionately that even the US President should be held accountable for unverified claims.
“His comment felt so out of place, and in line with the image of Sweden that the so called 'alt-media' is trying to push,” he said. “Initially I thought I would address the issue with a lot more humour, but after speaking with friends I saw that this was a great opportunity to draw a line in the sand with facts.”
He added that he felt compelled to set the record straight "grounded in facts."
“Let's be clear: a lot happened #lastnightinsweden. Things happen all of the time. Just not the things @realdonaldtrump are spreading,” he wrote on Twitter.
Taking aim at claims Sweden is suffering from rising crime rates, he wrote: "We have around 100 murders per year. That's like two days in the US. Two. Days."
He added: “Crime in Sweden has not increased over the last 20 years. On the contrary, Sweden is safer.”
He also cited official commerce and industry statistics to demonstrate the positive impact of immigration on the country, after Mr Trump claimed it had created “problems like they never thought possible.”
“During the time Sweden received 250,000 refugees, unemployment has fallen with 1,2%-points,” he said.
“More people are working in Sweden than ever before…and in % a higher share is working than in 25 years.”
Sweden took in more refugees per capita than any other European country in 2016.
The former real-estate mogul focused on Europe's migrant crisis at last week's rally, linking migration to terror attacks in Brussels, Nice and Paris - before adding Sweden to the list.
Jeremy Corbyn and Donald Trump are cut from the same cloth
Mr Trump later explained he had seen a Fox News segment featuring a documentary filmmaker that accused the Swedish government of covering up an epidemic of immigration-related crime.
“When I found out it was based on the Horowitz clip, I felt a solid mixture of sadness and irritation that the world's most powerful man believes anything he sees on TV as long as it fits in his own narrative,” Mr Karlsson told The Independent.
It came as a 2016 report found immigration had helped fuel Sweden's biggest economic boom in five years.
A poll also rated the country the best for serving the interests of its citizens, when it was taken last year.
Wednesday, February 22, 2017
Canada accepts illegal immigrants fleeing USA - Reuters
Ottawa: Canada will continue to accept asylum seekers crossing illegally from the United States but will ensure security measures are taken to keep Canadians safe, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Tuesday.
The number of would-be refugees crossing into Canada at isolated and unguarded border crossings has increased in recent weeks amid fears that US President Donald Trump will crack down on illegal immigrants, and photos of smiling Canadian police greeting the migrants have gone viral.
Opposition Conservatives want Trudeau's centre-left Liberal government to stem the flow of asylum seekers from the United States because of security fears and a lack of resources to deal with them.
"One of the reasons why Canada remains an open country is Canadians trust our immigration system and the integrity of our borders and the help we provide people who are looking for safety," Trudeau told Parliament.
rigorous system and accepting people who need help."
The reassurance comes as the country announced it will resettle 1200 Yazidi refugees facing genocide at the hands of Islamic State in Iraq, the Agence France-Press reported.
Yazidi women and children would arrive on commercial flights at a "controlled pace" to avoid overwhelming Canada's refugee system.
Mr Hussen also told Reuters Canada would continue to honour the Canada-US Safe Third Country Agreement, which requires it to turn back refugees if they make asylum claims at Canadian border crossings with the US. Refugee advocates have argued this drives asylum seekers to cross illegally at isolated locations, risking their lives in frigid weather.
Amnesty International and other groups are pressuring the Canadian government to abandon the agreement, arguing the United States is not safe for refugees. US President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced measures to deport thousands of undocumented migrants.
Last week, a family of eight from Sudan crossed the border under the noses of US officers who didn't stop women and children from scrambling in the snow to reach Canada.
bolstered their presence at the Quebec border and that border authorities had created a temporary refugee centre to process the asylum seekers.
The number of people making refugee claims at Quebec-US border crossings more than doubled from 2015 to 2016. Last month, 452 people made claims in Quebec compared with 137 in January 2016.
The influx is straining resources in the western prairie province of Manitoba and in Quebec, where taxis drop asylum seekers off metres away from the border, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) said.
The right-leaning Conservative opposition have called on Canadian authorities to hand illegal immigrants over to US authorities, but Hussen said Canada can honour its refugee agreement with the United States while helping asylum seekers who enter the country illegally.
Reuters
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
Mike Pence to visit EU but Steve Banon gave wrong message - Reuters
In the week before U.S. Vice President Mike Pence visited Brussels and pledged America's "steadfast and enduring" commitment to the European Union, White House chief strategist Steve Bannon met with a German diplomat and delivered a different message, according to people familiar with the talks.
Bannon, these people said, signalled to Germany's ambassador to Washington that he viewed the EU as a flawed construct and favoured conducting relations with Europe on a bilateral basis.
Three people who were briefed on the meeting spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter. The German government and the ambassador, Peter Wittig, declined to comment, citing the confidentiality of the talks.
A White House official who checked with Bannon in response to a Reuters query confirmed the meeting had taken place but said the account provided to Reuters was inaccurate. "They only spoke for about three minutes and it was just a quick hello," the official said.
The sources described a longer meeting in which Bannon took the time to spell out his world view. They said his message was similar to the one he delivered to a Vatican conference back in 2014 when he was running the right-wing website Breitbart News.
In those remarks, delivered via Skype, Bannon spoke favourably about European populist movements and described a yearning for nationalism by people who "don't believe in this kind of pan-European Union."
Western Europe, he said at the time, was built on a foundation of "strong nationalist movements", adding: "I think it's what can see us forward".
The encounter unsettled people in the German government, in part because some officials had been holding out hope that Bannon might temper his views once in government and offer a more nuanced message on Europe in private.
By Noah Barkin | BERLIN
In the week before U.S. Vice President Mike Pence visited Brussels and pledged America's "steadfast and enduring" commitment to the European Union, White House chief strategist Steve Bannon met with a German diplomat and delivered a different message, according to people familiar with the talks.
Bannon, these people said, signalled to Germany's ambassador to Washington that he viewed the EU as a flawed construct and favoured conducting relations with Europe on a bilateral basis.
Three people who were briefed on the meeting spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter. The German government and the ambassador, Peter Wittig, declined to comment, citing the confidentiality of the talks.
A White House official who checked with Bannon in response to a Reuters query confirmed the meeting had taken place but said the account provided to Reuters was inaccurate. "They only spoke for about three minutes and it was just a quick hello," the official said.
The sources described a longer meeting in which Bannon took the time to spell out his world view. They said his message was similar to the one he delivered to a Vatican conference back in 2014 when he was running the right-wing website Breitbart News.
In those remarks, delivered via Skype, Bannon spoke favourably about European populist movements and described a yearning for nationalism by people who "don't believe in this kind of pan-European Union."
Western Europe, he said at the time, was built on a foundation of "strong nationalist movements", adding: "I think it's what can see us forward".
The encounter unsettled people in the German government, in part because some officials had been holding out hope that Bannon might temper his views once in government and offer a more nuanced message on Europe in private.
One source briefed on the meeting said it had confirmed the view that Germany and its European partners must prepare for a policy of "hostility towards the EU".
A second source expressed concern, based on his contacts with the administration, that there was no appreciation for the EU's role in ensuring peace and prosperity in post-war Europe.
"There appears to be no understanding in the White House that an unravelling of the EU would have grave consequences," the source said.
The White House said there was no transcript of the conversation. The sources who had been briefed on it described it as polite and stressed there was no evidence Trump was prepared to go beyond his rhetorical attacks on the EU - he has repeatedly praised Britain's decision to leave - and take concrete steps to destabilise the bloc.
But anxiety over the White House stance led French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and Wolfgang Ischinger, chairman of the Munich Security Conference, to issue unusual calls last week for Pence to affirm during his visit to Europe that the U.S. was not aiming to break up the EU.
Pence obliged on Monday in Brussels, pledging strong ties between the United States and the EU, and making clear his message was shared by the president.
"President Trump and I look forward to working together with you and the European Union to deepen our political and economic partnership," he said.
But the message did not end the concerns in European capitals.
"We are worried and we should be worried," Thomas Matussek, senior adviser at Flint Global and a former German ambassador to the Britain and the United Nations, told Reuters.
"No one knows anything at the moment about what sort of decisions will be coming out of Washington. But it is clear that the man on top and the people closest to him feel that it's the nation state that creates identity and not what they see as an amorphous group of countries like the EU."
With elections looming in the Netherlands, France and Germany this year, European officials said they hoped Pence, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson could convince Trump to work constructively with the EU.
The worst-case scenario from Europe's point of view was described by Ischinger in an article published last week, entitled "How Europe should deal with Trump".
He said that if the U.S. administration actively supported right-wing populists in the looming election campaigns it would trigger a "major transatlantic crisis".
(Additional reporting by Roberta Rampton and Alastair Macdonald in Brussels, Jeff Mason in Washington; editing by Mark John)
Bannon, these people said, signalled to Germany's ambassador to Washington that he viewed the EU as a flawed construct and favoured conducting relations with Europe on a bilateral basis.
Three people who were briefed on the meeting spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter. The German government and the ambassador, Peter Wittig, declined to comment, citing the confidentiality of the talks.
A White House official who checked with Bannon in response to a Reuters query confirmed the meeting had taken place but said the account provided to Reuters was inaccurate. "They only spoke for about three minutes and it was just a quick hello," the official said.
The sources described a longer meeting in which Bannon took the time to spell out his world view. They said his message was similar to the one he delivered to a Vatican conference back in 2014 when he was running the right-wing website Breitbart News.
In those remarks, delivered via Skype, Bannon spoke favourably about European populist movements and described a yearning for nationalism by people who "don't believe in this kind of pan-European Union."
Western Europe, he said at the time, was built on a foundation of "strong nationalist movements", adding: "I think it's what can see us forward".
The encounter unsettled people in the German government, in part because some officials had been holding out hope that Bannon might temper his views once in government and offer a more nuanced message on Europe in private.
By Noah Barkin | BERLIN
In the week before U.S. Vice President Mike Pence visited Brussels and pledged America's "steadfast and enduring" commitment to the European Union, White House chief strategist Steve Bannon met with a German diplomat and delivered a different message, according to people familiar with the talks.
Bannon, these people said, signalled to Germany's ambassador to Washington that he viewed the EU as a flawed construct and favoured conducting relations with Europe on a bilateral basis.
Three people who were briefed on the meeting spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter. The German government and the ambassador, Peter Wittig, declined to comment, citing the confidentiality of the talks.
A White House official who checked with Bannon in response to a Reuters query confirmed the meeting had taken place but said the account provided to Reuters was inaccurate. "They only spoke for about three minutes and it was just a quick hello," the official said.
The sources described a longer meeting in which Bannon took the time to spell out his world view. They said his message was similar to the one he delivered to a Vatican conference back in 2014 when he was running the right-wing website Breitbart News.
In those remarks, delivered via Skype, Bannon spoke favourably about European populist movements and described a yearning for nationalism by people who "don't believe in this kind of pan-European Union."
Western Europe, he said at the time, was built on a foundation of "strong nationalist movements", adding: "I think it's what can see us forward".
The encounter unsettled people in the German government, in part because some officials had been holding out hope that Bannon might temper his views once in government and offer a more nuanced message on Europe in private.
One source briefed on the meeting said it had confirmed the view that Germany and its European partners must prepare for a policy of "hostility towards the EU".
A second source expressed concern, based on his contacts with the administration, that there was no appreciation for the EU's role in ensuring peace and prosperity in post-war Europe.
"There appears to be no understanding in the White House that an unravelling of the EU would have grave consequences," the source said.
The White House said there was no transcript of the conversation. The sources who had been briefed on it described it as polite and stressed there was no evidence Trump was prepared to go beyond his rhetorical attacks on the EU - he has repeatedly praised Britain's decision to leave - and take concrete steps to destabilise the bloc.
But anxiety over the White House stance led French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and Wolfgang Ischinger, chairman of the Munich Security Conference, to issue unusual calls last week for Pence to affirm during his visit to Europe that the U.S. was not aiming to break up the EU.
Pence obliged on Monday in Brussels, pledging strong ties between the United States and the EU, and making clear his message was shared by the president.
"President Trump and I look forward to working together with you and the European Union to deepen our political and economic partnership," he said.
But the message did not end the concerns in European capitals.
"We are worried and we should be worried," Thomas Matussek, senior adviser at Flint Global and a former German ambassador to the Britain and the United Nations, told Reuters.
"No one knows anything at the moment about what sort of decisions will be coming out of Washington. But it is clear that the man on top and the people closest to him feel that it's the nation state that creates identity and not what they see as an amorphous group of countries like the EU."
With elections looming in the Netherlands, France and Germany this year, European officials said they hoped Pence, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson could convince Trump to work constructively with the EU.
The worst-case scenario from Europe's point of view was described by Ischinger in an article published last week, entitled "How Europe should deal with Trump".
He said that if the U.S. administration actively supported right-wing populists in the looming election campaigns it would trigger a "major transatlantic crisis".
(Additional reporting by Roberta Rampton and Alastair Macdonald in Brussels, Jeff Mason in Washington; editing by Mark John)
UK parliament debates cancelling Trump's state visit - Independent
A cross-party group of MPs has called on Theresa May to rescind an invitation for Donald Trump to attend a state visit to the UK later this year.
As thousands of people protested outside Westminster, MPs branded the US President “disgusting” and “immoral” as they criticised the Prime Minister for appearing to act in “desperation” by extending the offer to Mr Trump just seven days after he entered the White House.
The debate was triggered after a petition to block Mr Trump’s state visit reached almost two million signatories. A separate petition, defending the state visit, which attracted more than 300,000 signatures, also formed part of the debate.
READ MORE
Tory MP says he has seen no evidence of Donald Trump being racist
Calling on the Government to reconsider its offer, Labour's Paul Flynn compared the US President's behaviour to a "petulant child", while fellow Labour MP Daniel Zeichner branded him “a disgusting and immoral man” who “represents the very opposite of the values we hold”.
Their views appeared to echo the protesters outside Parliament. Carrying colourful placards and banners, separate groups led rallying cries, including "Hey hey, hey ho; Trump and Brexit's got to go," and "No Trump, no Brexit; no racist EU exit."
Inside the house, Liberal Democrat MP Alistair Carmichael said Ms May was left looking “desperate and craven” while Labour’s Dawn Butler said the US had a “pretty nasty virus, and it’s important that virus doesn’t spread”.
Green MP Caroline Lucas attacked Mr Trump’s “effrontery to basic climate science” and the SNP’s Alex Salmond suggested there was “desperation for a trade deal” driving Ms May’s Government.
They clashed with several Conservative MPs who insisted Ms May was right to prioritise Britain’s national interest by fostering good relations with its historic ally.
Tory Nigel Evans said he had seen no evidence from the first four weeks of the Trump administration to suggest that the President was “racist”.
"When we stand up in this country and condemn him for being racist, and I have seen no evidence of that, I have seen no evidence of him being racist, we are actually attacking the American people,” he said.
Leigh also defended Mr Trump, saying his unsuccessful travel ban on seven majority-Muslim countries did not amount to racism.
“I don’t think there is any proof that this travel ban is racist,” he said.
“Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, there is no question of a travel ban on Indonesia.
“These countries are riddled by civil war, this travel ban builds on work done by [Barack] Obama.
“So to accuse the new President of the US of racism, misogyny and all the rest is overstated.”
Much of the debate centred on the timing of the offer, coming just a week after Mr Trump was inaugurated and during a hastily-arranged visit to Washington by Ms May.
Barack Obama only received an invitation after 758 days, while his predecessor, George W Bush, waited 978 days before he was offered a state visit.
Tory MP Crispin Blunt said he was not opposed to a state visit but said it should be delayed until 2020 – the 400th anniversary of the voyage of the Mayflower.
However, Foreign Office Minister Sir Alan Duncan said Mr Trump's state visit to the UK "should happen and will happen".
He told MPs in the Westminster Hall debate: "This is a special moment for the special relationship. The visit should happen, the visit will happen and when it does I trust the United Kingdom will extend a polite and generous welcome to president Donald Trump."
The debate over the US President’s impending trip took place against the backdrop of protests across the UK against the state visit.
READ MORE
Donald Trump's state visit debate live: MPs discuss President's trip
The faint shouts of demonstrators could be heard inside Westminster Hall while outside in Parliament Square, thousands of protesters had gathered.
Organisers of the rally said they expected more than 20,000 people to take part.
Shadow home secretary Diane Abbott, addressing the crowds, warned about the "dark shadow of racism and anti-immigrant sentiment" that were beginning to emerge.
She said: "We know the values that Trump represents. With Donald Trump, you don't have to look into a crystal ball, you can read the book.
"He was supported in his presidential campaign by white supremacists. And even in the first weeks of his presidency he has had a viscerally anti-immigrant line."
Calls for the state visit to be cancelled have been backed by Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, who criticised the president's "cruel and shameful" policies.
But the Government has remained steadfast in its commitment to honour the invite.
In its official response to the petitions, it stressed ministers believed "the President of the United States should be extended the full courtesy of a state visit".
As thousands of people protested outside Westminster, MPs branded the US President “disgusting” and “immoral” as they criticised the Prime Minister for appearing to act in “desperation” by extending the offer to Mr Trump just seven days after he entered the White House.
The debate was triggered after a petition to block Mr Trump’s state visit reached almost two million signatories. A separate petition, defending the state visit, which attracted more than 300,000 signatures, also formed part of the debate.
READ MORE
Tory MP says he has seen no evidence of Donald Trump being racist
Calling on the Government to reconsider its offer, Labour's Paul Flynn compared the US President's behaviour to a "petulant child", while fellow Labour MP Daniel Zeichner branded him “a disgusting and immoral man” who “represents the very opposite of the values we hold”.
Their views appeared to echo the protesters outside Parliament. Carrying colourful placards and banners, separate groups led rallying cries, including "Hey hey, hey ho; Trump and Brexit's got to go," and "No Trump, no Brexit; no racist EU exit."
Inside the house, Liberal Democrat MP Alistair Carmichael said Ms May was left looking “desperate and craven” while Labour’s Dawn Butler said the US had a “pretty nasty virus, and it’s important that virus doesn’t spread”.
Green MP Caroline Lucas attacked Mr Trump’s “effrontery to basic climate science” and the SNP’s Alex Salmond suggested there was “desperation for a trade deal” driving Ms May’s Government.
They clashed with several Conservative MPs who insisted Ms May was right to prioritise Britain’s national interest by fostering good relations with its historic ally.
Tory Nigel Evans said he had seen no evidence from the first four weeks of the Trump administration to suggest that the President was “racist”.
"When we stand up in this country and condemn him for being racist, and I have seen no evidence of that, I have seen no evidence of him being racist, we are actually attacking the American people,” he said.
Leigh also defended Mr Trump, saying his unsuccessful travel ban on seven majority-Muslim countries did not amount to racism.
“I don’t think there is any proof that this travel ban is racist,” he said.
“Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, there is no question of a travel ban on Indonesia.
“These countries are riddled by civil war, this travel ban builds on work done by [Barack] Obama.
“So to accuse the new President of the US of racism, misogyny and all the rest is overstated.”
Much of the debate centred on the timing of the offer, coming just a week after Mr Trump was inaugurated and during a hastily-arranged visit to Washington by Ms May.
Barack Obama only received an invitation after 758 days, while his predecessor, George W Bush, waited 978 days before he was offered a state visit.
Tory MP Crispin Blunt said he was not opposed to a state visit but said it should be delayed until 2020 – the 400th anniversary of the voyage of the Mayflower.
However, Foreign Office Minister Sir Alan Duncan said Mr Trump's state visit to the UK "should happen and will happen".
He told MPs in the Westminster Hall debate: "This is a special moment for the special relationship. The visit should happen, the visit will happen and when it does I trust the United Kingdom will extend a polite and generous welcome to president Donald Trump."
The debate over the US President’s impending trip took place against the backdrop of protests across the UK against the state visit.
READ MORE
Donald Trump's state visit debate live: MPs discuss President's trip
The faint shouts of demonstrators could be heard inside Westminster Hall while outside in Parliament Square, thousands of protesters had gathered.
Organisers of the rally said they expected more than 20,000 people to take part.
Shadow home secretary Diane Abbott, addressing the crowds, warned about the "dark shadow of racism and anti-immigrant sentiment" that were beginning to emerge.
She said: "We know the values that Trump represents. With Donald Trump, you don't have to look into a crystal ball, you can read the book.
"He was supported in his presidential campaign by white supremacists. And even in the first weeks of his presidency he has had a viscerally anti-immigrant line."
Calls for the state visit to be cancelled have been backed by Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, who criticised the president's "cruel and shameful" policies.
But the Government has remained steadfast in its commitment to honour the invite.
In its official response to the petitions, it stressed ministers believed "the President of the United States should be extended the full courtesy of a state visit".
Monday, February 20, 2017
What a broken down White House looks like ? - New York Times
I still have trouble seeing how the Trump administration survives a full term. Judging by his Thursday press conference, President Trump’s mental state is like a train that long ago left freewheeling and iconoclastic, has raced through indulgent, chaotic and unnerving, and is now careening past unhinged, unmoored and unglued.
Trump’s White House staff is at war with itself. His poll ratings are falling at unprecedented speed. His policy agenda is stalled. F.B.I. investigations are just beginning. This does not feel like a sustainable operation.
On the other hand, I have trouble seeing exactly how this administration ends. Many of the institutions that would normally ease out or remove a failing president no longer exist.
There are no longer moral arbiters in Congress like Howard Baker and Sam Ervin to lead a resignation or impeachment process. There is no longer a single media establishment that shapes how the country sees the president. This is no longer a country in which everybody experiences the same reality.
Everything about Trump that appalls 65 percent of America strengthens him with the other 35 percent, and he can ride that group for a while. Even after these horrible four weeks, Republicans on Capitol Hill are not close to abandoning their man.
The likelihood is this: We’re going to have an administration that has morally and politically collapsed, without actually going away.
What does that look like?
First, it means an administration that is passive, full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing. To get anything done, a president depends on the vast machinery of the U.S. government. But Trump doesn’t mesh with that machinery. He is personality-based while it is rule-based. Furthermore, he’s declared war on it. And when you declare war on the establishment, it declares war on you.
The Civil Service has a thousand ways to ignore or sit on any presidential order. The court system has given itself carte blanche to overturn any Trump initiative, even on the flimsiest legal grounds. The intelligence community has only just begun to undermine this president.
President Trump can push all the pretty buttons on the command deck of the Starship Enterprise, but don’t expect anything to actually happen, because they are not attached.
Second, this will probably become a more insular administration. Usually when administrations stumble, they fire a few people and bring in the grown-ups — the James Baker or the David Gergen types. But Trump is anti-grown-up, so it’s hard to imagine Chief of Staff Haley Barbour. Instead, the circle of trust seems to be shrinking to his daughter, her husband and Stephen Bannon.
Bannon has a coherent worldview, which is a huge advantage when all is chaos. It’s interesting how many of Bannon’s rivals have woken up with knives in their backs. Michael Flynn is gone. Reince Priebus has been unmanned by a thousand White House leaks. Rex Tillerson had the potential to be an effective secretary of state, but Bannon neutered him last week by denying him the ability to even select his own deputy.
In an administration in which “promoted beyond his capacity” takes on new meaning, Bannon looms. With each passing day, Trump talks more like Bannon without the background reading.
Third, we are about to enter a decentralized world. For the past 70 years most nations have instinctively looked to the U.S. for leadership, either to follow or oppose. But in capitals around the world, intelligence agencies are drafting memos with advice on how to play Donald Trump.
The first conclusion is obvious. This administration is more like a medieval monarchy than a modern nation-state. It’s more “The Madness of King George” than “The Missiles of October.” The key currency is not power, it’s flattery.
The corollary is that Trump is ripe to be played. Give the boy a lollipop and he won’t notice if you steal his lunch. The Japanese gave Trump a new jobs announcement he could take to the Midwest, and in return they got presidential attention and coddling that other governments would have died for.
If you want to roll the Trump administration, you’ve got to get in line. The Israelis got a possible one-state solution. The Chinese got Trump to flip-flop on the “One China” policy. The Europeans got him to do a 180 on undoing the Iran nuclear deal.
Vladimir Putin was born for a moment such as this. He is always pushing the envelope. After gifting Team Trump with a little campaign help, the Russian state media has suddenly turned on Trump and Russian planes are buzzing U.S. ships. The bear is going to grab what it can.
We’re about to enter a moment in which U.S. economic and military might is strong but U.S. political might is weak. Imagine the Roman Empire governed by Monaco.
That’s scary. The only saving thought is this: The human imagination is vast, but it is not nearly vast enough to encompass the infinitely multitudinous ways Donald Trump can find to get himself disgraced.
Trump’s White House staff is at war with itself. His poll ratings are falling at unprecedented speed. His policy agenda is stalled. F.B.I. investigations are just beginning. This does not feel like a sustainable operation.
On the other hand, I have trouble seeing exactly how this administration ends. Many of the institutions that would normally ease out or remove a failing president no longer exist.
There are no longer moral arbiters in Congress like Howard Baker and Sam Ervin to lead a resignation or impeachment process. There is no longer a single media establishment that shapes how the country sees the president. This is no longer a country in which everybody experiences the same reality.
Everything about Trump that appalls 65 percent of America strengthens him with the other 35 percent, and he can ride that group for a while. Even after these horrible four weeks, Republicans on Capitol Hill are not close to abandoning their man.
The likelihood is this: We’re going to have an administration that has morally and politically collapsed, without actually going away.
What does that look like?
First, it means an administration that is passive, full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing. To get anything done, a president depends on the vast machinery of the U.S. government. But Trump doesn’t mesh with that machinery. He is personality-based while it is rule-based. Furthermore, he’s declared war on it. And when you declare war on the establishment, it declares war on you.
The Civil Service has a thousand ways to ignore or sit on any presidential order. The court system has given itself carte blanche to overturn any Trump initiative, even on the flimsiest legal grounds. The intelligence community has only just begun to undermine this president.
President Trump can push all the pretty buttons on the command deck of the Starship Enterprise, but don’t expect anything to actually happen, because they are not attached.
Second, this will probably become a more insular administration. Usually when administrations stumble, they fire a few people and bring in the grown-ups — the James Baker or the David Gergen types. But Trump is anti-grown-up, so it’s hard to imagine Chief of Staff Haley Barbour. Instead, the circle of trust seems to be shrinking to his daughter, her husband and Stephen Bannon.
Bannon has a coherent worldview, which is a huge advantage when all is chaos. It’s interesting how many of Bannon’s rivals have woken up with knives in their backs. Michael Flynn is gone. Reince Priebus has been unmanned by a thousand White House leaks. Rex Tillerson had the potential to be an effective secretary of state, but Bannon neutered him last week by denying him the ability to even select his own deputy.
In an administration in which “promoted beyond his capacity” takes on new meaning, Bannon looms. With each passing day, Trump talks more like Bannon without the background reading.
Third, we are about to enter a decentralized world. For the past 70 years most nations have instinctively looked to the U.S. for leadership, either to follow or oppose. But in capitals around the world, intelligence agencies are drafting memos with advice on how to play Donald Trump.
The first conclusion is obvious. This administration is more like a medieval monarchy than a modern nation-state. It’s more “The Madness of King George” than “The Missiles of October.” The key currency is not power, it’s flattery.
The corollary is that Trump is ripe to be played. Give the boy a lollipop and he won’t notice if you steal his lunch. The Japanese gave Trump a new jobs announcement he could take to the Midwest, and in return they got presidential attention and coddling that other governments would have died for.
If you want to roll the Trump administration, you’ve got to get in line. The Israelis got a possible one-state solution. The Chinese got Trump to flip-flop on the “One China” policy. The Europeans got him to do a 180 on undoing the Iran nuclear deal.
Vladimir Putin was born for a moment such as this. He is always pushing the envelope. After gifting Team Trump with a little campaign help, the Russian state media has suddenly turned on Trump and Russian planes are buzzing U.S. ships. The bear is going to grab what it can.
We’re about to enter a moment in which U.S. economic and military might is strong but U.S. political might is weak. Imagine the Roman Empire governed by Monaco.
That’s scary. The only saving thought is this: The human imagination is vast, but it is not nearly vast enough to encompass the infinitely multitudinous ways Donald Trump can find to get himself disgraced.
Sunday, February 19, 2017
Facebook Mark Zuckerberg on rise of Trumpism - NBC News
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg is reframing his platform — at times a cesspit of political outrage — for the Trump era.
In a long letter on his Facebook pageThursday, Zuckerberg lamented the rise of isolationism and the backlash against globalization. When Facebook first launched in 2004, supporting a more connected, global community was not controversial, he wrote.
"Yet now, across the world there are people left behind by globalization, and movements for withdrawing from global connection," wrote Zuckerberg. "There are questions about whether we can make a global community that works for everyone, and whether the path ahead is to connect more or reverse course."
Facebook and the wider tech community have been reeling since the election of President Donald Trump, which seemed to underline just how out of touch Silicon Valley has been with the rest of the U.S. There's growing concern that Trumpian policies that emphasize protectionism and prioritize old technology over new will precipitate a backlash against the tech companies themselves.
The anti-globalization movement has taken hold in other countries as well, with the U.K. voting to withdraw from the European Union and rightist Marine LePen showing a strong chance of becoming France's next president.
With this post, Zuckerberg seems to be speaking directly to those who might feel disenfranchised in light of the rise of new technologies. "The best solutions for improving discourse may come from getting to know each other as whole people instead of just opinions — something Facebook may be uniquely suited to do."
He also addressed critics who believe that Facebook has not done enough to combat fake news, including posts that some people said influenced the presidential election — an idea Zuckerberg previously called "pretty crazy."
He is not, however, suggesting taking a hard-line approach against fake news: "Our approach will focus less on banning misinformation, and more on surfacing additional perspectives and information, including that fact checkers dispute an item's accuracy," he wrote.
The post — which makes no mention of Facebook as a business — is likely to fuel speculation about Zuckerberg's interests beyond steering the social media giant to greater profitability.
Related: Zuckerberg's New Year's Resolution Is to Meet You
The young CEO's annual New Year's resolution — to meet people in every U.S. state — ignited discussion about whether Zuckerberg waspositioning himself for a role in politics, something he has denied.
Zuckerberg concluded with a kind of get-out clause and attempt to reassure the community.
"Facebook is a work in progress, and we are dedicated to learning and improving," he wrote. "We take our responsibility seriously, and today I want to talk about how we plan to do our part to build this global community."
In a long letter on his Facebook pageThursday, Zuckerberg lamented the rise of isolationism and the backlash against globalization. When Facebook first launched in 2004, supporting a more connected, global community was not controversial, he wrote.
"Yet now, across the world there are people left behind by globalization, and movements for withdrawing from global connection," wrote Zuckerberg. "There are questions about whether we can make a global community that works for everyone, and whether the path ahead is to connect more or reverse course."
Facebook and the wider tech community have been reeling since the election of President Donald Trump, which seemed to underline just how out of touch Silicon Valley has been with the rest of the U.S. There's growing concern that Trumpian policies that emphasize protectionism and prioritize old technology over new will precipitate a backlash against the tech companies themselves.
The anti-globalization movement has taken hold in other countries as well, with the U.K. voting to withdraw from the European Union and rightist Marine LePen showing a strong chance of becoming France's next president.
With this post, Zuckerberg seems to be speaking directly to those who might feel disenfranchised in light of the rise of new technologies. "The best solutions for improving discourse may come from getting to know each other as whole people instead of just opinions — something Facebook may be uniquely suited to do."
He also addressed critics who believe that Facebook has not done enough to combat fake news, including posts that some people said influenced the presidential election — an idea Zuckerberg previously called "pretty crazy."
He is not, however, suggesting taking a hard-line approach against fake news: "Our approach will focus less on banning misinformation, and more on surfacing additional perspectives and information, including that fact checkers dispute an item's accuracy," he wrote.
The post — which makes no mention of Facebook as a business — is likely to fuel speculation about Zuckerberg's interests beyond steering the social media giant to greater profitability.
Related: Zuckerberg's New Year's Resolution Is to Meet You
The young CEO's annual New Year's resolution — to meet people in every U.S. state — ignited discussion about whether Zuckerberg waspositioning himself for a role in politics, something he has denied.
Zuckerberg concluded with a kind of get-out clause and attempt to reassure the community.
"Facebook is a work in progress, and we are dedicated to learning and improving," he wrote. "We take our responsibility seriously, and today I want to talk about how we plan to do our part to build this global community."
McCain on Trump : Dictators all started by attacking free press
(CNN)Sen. John McCain slammed President Donald Trump's attacks on the media this week by noting dictators "get started by suppressing free press."
It was a startling observation from a sitting member of Congress against the President of the United States, especially considering McCain is a member of Trump's party.
"I hate the press," the Arizona Republican sarcastically told NBC News' Chuck Todd on "Meet the Press." "I hate you especially. But the fact is we need you. We need a free press. We must have it. It's vital."
But he continued, "If you want to preserve -- I'm very serious now -- if you want to preserve democracy as we know it, you have to have a free and many times adversarial press," McCain said in the interview. "And without it, I am afraid that we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time. That's how dictators get started."
McCain has been a frequent critic of the President, particularly in the areas of foreign policy and national security, since before Trump entered the White House.
The 2008 Republican presidential nominee said Americans must pay attention to history to understand the past connections between leaders of oppressive governments and efforts to stifle the media.
"They get started by suppressing free press, in other words, a consolidation of power -- when you look at history, the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press," McCain said. "And I'm not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator. I'm just saying we need to learn the lessons of history."
Trump tweeted Friday that CNN and other major media outlets were "the enemy of the American people."
McCain has been a frequent critic of the President, particularly in the areas of foreign policy and national security, since before Trump entered the White House.
The 2008 Republican presidential nominee said Americans must pay attention to history to understand the past connections between leaders of oppressive governments and efforts to stifle the media.
"They get started by suppressing free press, in other words, a consolidation of power -- when you look at history, the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press," McCain said. "And I'm not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator. I'm just saying we need to learn the lessons of history."
Trump tweeted Friday that CNN and other major media outlets were "the enemy of the American people."
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!8:48 AM · Feb 18, 2017
Carl Bernstein @carlbernstein
The most dangerous 'enemy of the people' is presidential lying--always. Attacks on press by @realDonaldTrump more treacherous than Nixon's.7:04 PM · Feb 18, 2017
It was a startling observation from a sitting member of Congress against the President of the United States, especially considering McCain is a member of Trump's party.
"I hate the press," the Arizona Republican sarcastically told NBC News' Chuck Todd on "Meet the Press." "I hate you especially. But the fact is we need you. We need a free press. We must have it. It's vital."
But he continued, "If you want to preserve -- I'm very serious now -- if you want to preserve democracy as we know it, you have to have a free and many times adversarial press," McCain said in the interview. "And without it, I am afraid that we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time. That's how dictators get started."
McCain has been a frequent critic of the President, particularly in the areas of foreign policy and national security, since before Trump entered the White House.
The 2008 Republican presidential nominee said Americans must pay attention to history to understand the past connections between leaders of oppressive governments and efforts to stifle the media.
"They get started by suppressing free press, in other words, a consolidation of power -- when you look at history, the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press," McCain said. "And I'm not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator. I'm just saying we need to learn the lessons of history."
Trump tweeted Friday that CNN and other major media outlets were "the enemy of the American people."
McCain has been a frequent critic of the President, particularly in the areas of foreign policy and national security, since before Trump entered the White House.
The 2008 Republican presidential nominee said Americans must pay attention to history to understand the past connections between leaders of oppressive governments and efforts to stifle the media.
"They get started by suppressing free press, in other words, a consolidation of power -- when you look at history, the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press," McCain said. "And I'm not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator. I'm just saying we need to learn the lessons of history."
Trump tweeted Friday that CNN and other major media outlets were "the enemy of the American people."
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!8:48 AM · Feb 18, 2017
Carl Bernstein @carlbernstein
The most dangerous 'enemy of the people' is presidential lying--always. Attacks on press by @realDonaldTrump more treacherous than Nixon's.7:04 PM · Feb 18, 2017
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
