Robert Capa Capucine, French model and actress, on a balcony, Rome 1951
So many things today about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and about how both left and right are adamant to defend their 180º diffferent positions on whether her seat should be filled before November 3. It’s just politics. But tons of people tweet “burn it all down” if the GOP even tries.
I find the argument interesting that if the Supreme Court is called into action past-election, with a 4-4 vote, that could lead to absolute mayhem and chaos, because no decision could be made either way.
Starbuck on RBG
Don’t let Democrats gaslight about the 'Biden rule'. The rule is that there will be no confirmations in an election year when different parties control the Senate and the White House. That’s it. That’s the rule. Republicans control both and are entitled to make the pick. Period.
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) September 19, 2020
Republican Senators — Remember that Joe Biden said it’s your "constitutional duty" to give the President’s Supreme Court pick a hearing in an election year or else you’re putting us in danger of entering a constitutional crisis. 😁👍🏼 pic.twitter.com/nY6b6u5zde
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) September 19, 2020
Daily cases just short of the Sep 11 record.
Don’t miss this! Why PCR tests are so bad. Replace them with rapid testing!
Awesome update pic.twitter.com/0Q8nXftPti
— CovidSenseBloke (@CovidSenseBloke) September 17, 2020
“Mitch McConnell said in a statement Friday night that now, unlike in 2016, the White House and Senate are both in the hands of the same party.”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died Friday. She was 87. Ginsburg, a feminist and liberal icon, had been diagnosed with cancer four times and had numerous health scares, including several recent hospitalizations. She died of complications from metastatic pancreatic cancer, the court said. In July, Ginsburg announced that she was undergoing chemotherapy treatment for lesions on her liver, the latest of her several battles with cancer. “Our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature,” Chief Justice John Roberts said in a statement to the Associated Press. “We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her – a tireless and resolute champion of justice.
President Trump hailed Ginsburg from the campaign trail in Minnesota as “an amazing woman.” Ginsburg’s death opens up an unexpected opportunity for him to nominate a replacement for the seat – less than 50 days before the election. A Trump nomination will almost certainly set off a heated battle over whether he should nominate, and the Republican-led Senate should confirm, Ginsburg’s replacement, or if the seat should remain vacant until after the outcome of Trump’s presidential race against Democrat Joe Biden is decided. The debate and will also energize the close race in its homestretch. Biden said that the person elected should choose Ginburg’s replacement. “There is no doubt, let me be clear, that the voters should pick the president and the president should pick the justice for the Senate to consider,” Biden told reporters.
When Justice Antonin Scalia died in 2016, also an election year, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to act on Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to fill the opening. The seat remained vacant until after Trump’s surprising presidential victory. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement Friday night that now, unlike in 2016, the White House and Senate are both in the hands of the same party. “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate,” McConnell said.
Trump on RBG
President Donald Trump reacts to news of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death. "She led an amazing life." pic.twitter.com/ZUj9CNJVGh
— NBCWashington (@nbcwashington) September 19, 2020
Good history of attempted coups in the US.
Even though the financial elite of Wall Street had pulled the plug on the system four years earlier, the population had still not been broken sufficiently to accept fascism as the solution which Time magazine told them it was. Instead, the people voted for one of the few anti-fascist presidential candidates available in 1932 when Franklin Roosevelt was elected under the theme of taking the money lenders out of power and restoring the constitution. In his March 4, 1933 inaugural address FDR stated:
“Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men. True they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish. The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.”
During FDR’s famous 100 Days, an all-out war was declared on the “economic royalists” that had taken over the nation. Audits and investigations were conducted on the banks in the form of the Pecora Commission, and the biggest financial houses which had spent billions on fascist parties of Europe were broken up while speculation was reined in under Glass-Steagall. Meanwhile a new form of banking was unveiled more in alignment with America’s constitutional traditions in the form of productive credit and long term public works which created real jobs and increased the national productive powers of labor. Many people remain totally ignorant that even before his March 4, 1933 inauguration, Franklin Roosevelt narrowly avoided an assassination attempt in Florida which saw 5 people struck by bullets and the mayor of Chicago dying of his wounds 3 weeks later.
Within days of the mayor’s death, the assassin Giuseppe Zingara was speedily labelled a “lone gunman” and executed without any serious investigation into his freemasonic connections. This however was just a pre-cursor for an even greater battle which Wall Street financiers would launch in order to overthrow the presidency later that year. This effort would only be stopped by the courageous intervention of a patriotic marine named Smedley Darlington Butler.
But if Trump loses, wouldn’t she be replaced again within days?
Sidney Powell, the lawyer for Gen. Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, is on the White House shortlist of candidates to replace FBI Director Christopher Wray, reports Newsmax TV’s Emerald Robinson. During a Friday update on Newsmax TV’s “John Bachman Now,” Robinson said she was exclusively told that the White House “is formulating a list of replacements right now” for Wray. She said the list has been in the works for over a month, but a change won’t be made until after the election. Robinson shared Powell’s name as one being floated for the job. Minutes later, Powell made an already scheduled appearance on the show. She told host John Bachman that she has not been contacted about serving in the position, but said she has “seen comments like that on Twitter.”
“I am honored to be considered for it,” she said of Robinson’s announcement that her name could be on the shortlist, adding “I can only imagine the number of people in Washington, and elsewhere, that would need laundry service upon that announcement.” Powell, a former federal prosecutor, has been critical of Wray, especially when it comes to his handling of the Flynn case. Back in May, she retweeted a post that called for Wray’s firing, according to Axios. During her Friday appearance on Newsmax TV, she said she has “never been favorably impressed” by Wray. According to Robinson, Trump’s advisers are urging him to keep Wray in his role until after the election in order to avoid any fallout similar to what happened after the president fired James Comey from the position.
Can anyone please ask Hunter?
An explosive detailed report from the Senate Homeland Security Committee, is expected to be released on former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden’s dealings with Ukraine gas company Burisma ‘within days,’ Sen. Ron Johnson told this reporter Friday. Moreover, Johnson’s Senate committee voted on Wednesday to authorize more than three dozen subpoenas and depositions of former senior Obama administration officials’ involved, or who had knowledge of the FBI’s probe into President Donald Trump. The issue, however, says Johnson, is that FBI Director Christopher Wray has refused to cooperate with his panel for information and documents that would aid in questioning witnesses.
The damning report is expected to detail Joe and Hunter Biden’s business connections to the Ukrainian gas giant Burisma, in which Hunter Biden was a paid board member. According to reports Hunter Biden was paid roughly $50,000 plus per month by the energy giant. His position on the gas company’s board has been questioned by both members of the GOP and some Democrats, who have noted that the former Vice President’s son has no experience in energy companies and does not speak Russian. Moreover, as previously reported by SaraACarter.com, Johnson’s committee has been investigating Hunter Biden’s employment to Burisma because it came at the same time his father was heading the Ukraine policy for former President Obama during his tenure.
“My game plan is to get this Ukraine report out as quickly as possible,” said Johnson, who chairs the Senate committee, and wants Americans to understand that there are numerous questions regarding Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden that have not have been answered or investigated. “I’m hopeful our report will turn some heads because my goal is to get the truth out to the American people,” he said. “The truth is a simple and important concept, don’t you think?” [..] the former official added that the connections between the former Vice President, his son and the Ukrainian gas giant are substantial and “shouldn’t be ignored. The real issue is what the Democrats aren’t discussing – if they try to blame Trump without any evidence of compromise with Russia, how can they ignore Biden and his very real connections with a foreign company connected to Ukraine, Russia.”
As for Johnson, he said he is also pushing FBI Director Christopher Wray to produce a slew of documentation that his committee has been requesting throughout the year so that the panel can appropriately question witnesses that are being subpoenaed. The chairman, whose committee has subpoenaed a number of former senior Obama officials, stressed that the FBI has done everything to keep the documents they’ve requested from the lawmakers and from being revealed to the public. Wray has put up roadblocks at every turn and used Attorney General William Barr’s appointed Connecticut Prosecutor John “Durham’s investigation into the FBI’s handling of the Trump Russia probe as an excuse,” said Johnson.
The history of empires rhymes.
There are three problems that are coming together, so it’s important to understand them individually and how they collectively make a bigger problem. There is a money and credit cycle problem, a wealth and values gap problem, and an emerging great power challenging the existing dominant power problem. What’s going on is an economic downturn together with a large wealth gap and the rising power of China challenging the existing power of the United States. It’s a fact that there has been a weakening of the competitive advantages of the United States over the last couple of decades. For example, the United States lost a lot of the education advantage relative to other countries, our share of world GDP is reduced, the wealth gap has increased which has contributed to our political and social polarization.
But we haven’t lost all of our competitive advantages. For example in innovation and technology, the United States is still the strongest, but China is coming on very strong and at existing rates will surpass the United States. Militarily, the U.S. is stronger but China also has come on very strong and is probably stronger in the waters close to China that include Taiwan and other disputed areas. Finances for both countries are challenging, but for the U.S. more so. The U.S. is in the late stages of a debt cycle and money cycle in which we’re producing a lot of debt and printing a lot of money. That’s a problem. As a reserve currency status, the U.S. dollar DXY, +0.03% is still dominant though its being threatened by its central bank printing of money and increasing the debt production problem.
[..] If you look at the history — for example, the Dutch Empire, the British Empire — both experienced the creation of debt and the printing of money, less educational advantages, greater internal wealth conflict, greater challenges from rival countries. Every country has stress tests. If you look at British history, the development of rival countries led them to lose their competitive advantages. Their finances were bad because they had accumulated a lot of debt. So, after World War II those trends went against them. Then they had the Suez Canal incident and they were no longer a world power and the British pound is no longer a reserve currency. These diseases almost always play out the same way. The United States’ relative position in the world, which was dominant in almost all these categories at the beginning of this world order in 1945, has declined and is exhibiting real signs that should raise worries.
There’s a lot of baggage. The U.S. has a lot of debt, which is adding to the hurdles that typically drag an economy down, so in order to succeed, you have to do a pretty big debt restructuring. History shows what kind of a challenge that is. I just want to present understanding and facts. There’s a life cycle. You’re born and you die. As you get older you can see certain things that are symptoms of being later on in life. To know the life cycle and to know that these symptoms are emerging is what I’m trying to convey. The United States is a 75-year-old empire and it is exhibiting signs of decline. If you want to extend your life, there are clear things you can do, but it means doing things that you don’t want to do.
No. Stop it. We’ve seen an enormous amount of incompetence, but Britain sure is high on the list. How do all these people hold on to power? What’s the mechanism for that?
Many countries still don’t have enough tests, or facemasks. How is that possible? After 9 months?
Prime Minister Boris Johnson says the UK is “now seeing a second wave” of Covid-19. Expanding “local” restrictions mean more than 13 million people (one-fifth of the UK population) have extra curbs on their lives. And the surge in cases is not contained to just the hotspots, but is widespread across the UK. Local restrictions do not suppress a virus that is spreading outside of those areas. It is against this backdrop the government is deciding what to do next. One idea is a “circuit-break” – a short, sharp period of tightened restrictions for everyone to curb the spread of coronavirus. So why might a circuit break be needed and what could it achieve? Let’s do some rough maths.
Take 6,000 cases a day, double them every week – as the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) suggests is happening – and by mid-October you have more than 100,000 infections a day as we did at the peak. That is not sophisticated disease modelling, it is not written in stone and measures such as the “rule of six” should slow the spread. But that simple sum gives a sense of how quickly a small problem can be become a huge one. A circuit break is all about trying to change that trajectory. “The evidence is hospitalisations are increasing, it is a worry and the concern is what happens if we don’t do something,” Dr Mike Tildesley, from the University of Warwick, told me.
He is part of the government’s disease modelling group of scientists, called SPI-M, which has been discussing circuit-breakers this week. Dr Tildesley added: “To be perfectly frank, none of us want this, but we’re stuck between a rock and a hard place. “However, with a managed short-term lockdown you buy yourself some time.” A bout of tighter restrictions should result in cases falling instead of rising, but how far they drop is uncertain and will depend on how severe the restrictions are. It is suggested schools and workplaces would remain open, but the hospitality sector (think bars and restaurants) would be hit. This is not Lockdown 2.0.
The US no longer has a press.
A Spanish security firm apparently contracted by US intelligence to carry out a campaign of black operations against Julian Assange and his associates spied on several US reporters including Ellen Nakashima, the top national security reporter of the Washington Post, and Lowell Bergman, a New York Times and PBS veteran. To date, Nakashima and her employers at the Washington Post have said nothing about the flagrant assault on their constitutional rights by UC Global, the security company in charge of Ecuadorian embassy in London, which seemingly operated under the watch of the CIA’s then-director, Mike Pompeo. PBS, the New York Times, and other mainstream US outlets have also remained silent about the US government intrusion into reporters’ personal devices and private records.
The Grayzone has learned that several correspondents from a major US newspaper rebuffed appeals by Wikileaks to report on the illegal spying campaign by UC Global, privately justifying the contractor’s actions on national security grounds. US Global spied on numerous journalists were with the aim of sending their information to US intelligence through an FTP server placed at the company headquarters and through hand-delivered hard drives. Nearly all of those reporters have so far ignored or refused invitations to join a criminal complaint to be filed in Spanish court by Stefania Maurizi, an Italian journalist whose devices were invaded and compromised during a visit to Assange.
Proof of UC Global’s illegal spying campaign and the firm’s relationship with the CIA emerged following the September 2019 arrest of the company’s CEO, David Morales. Spanish police had enacted a secret operation called “Operation Tabanco” under a criminal case managed by the same National Court that orchestrated the arrest of former Chilean military dictator Augusto Pinochet years before. Morales was charged in October 2019 by the Spanish court with violating the privacy of Assange and abusing his attorney-client privileges, as well as money laundering and bribery. A mercenary former Spanish special forces officer, Morales also stood accused of illegal weapons possession after two guns with the serial numbers filed off were found during a search of his property.
The documents and testimony revealed in court have exposed shocking details of UC Global’s campaign against Assange, his lawyers, friends, and reporters. Evidence of crimes ranging from spying to robberies to kidnapping and even a proposed plot to eliminate Assange by poisoning has emerged from the ongoing trial. [..] For the past four years, the Washington press corps has howled about Trump’s angry browbeating of the White House press pool, treating his resentful outbursts as a grave threat to press freedom. At the same time, it has reacted with a collective shrug to revelations that a firm that was, by all indications, contracted by the Trump administration’s CIA to destroy Assange had spied on prominent American national security reporters.
For revealing this, Assange must hang. What a world.
Khaled El Masri, a survivor of CIA kidnapping, torture, rendition, and detention, submitted testimony in support of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange during his extradition trial. The Central Criminal Court in London was prepared for El Masri to testify. An interpreter was lined up for the ninth day of proceedings. However, technical problems prevented him from addressing the court beyond his written statement. Prosecutors also objected to El Masri giving live testimony. According to Court News UK reporter Charlie Jones, that prompted Assange to stand up and declare, “I will not accept you censoring a torture victim’s statement to this court.”
El Masri’s testimony directly relates to the defense argument that Assange published classified information from the United States in order to reveal abuses and misconduct, such as torture and war crimes. In the United Kingdom, Assange’s legal team has been allowed to enter this evidence into the public record. However, during a potential trial in the United States, it will likely be excluded as irrelevant because the Espionage Act does not allow a public interest defense. Assange is accused of 17 counts of violating the Espionage Act and one count of conspiracy to commit a computer crime that, as alleged in the indictment, is written like an Espionage Act offense.
The charges criminalize the act of merely receiving classified information, as well as the publication of state secrets from the United States government. It targets common practices in newsgathering, which is why the case is widely opposed by press freedom organizations throughout the world. El Masri declared, “I record here my belief that without dedicated and brave exposure of the state secrets in question what happened to me would never have been acknowledged and understood.” He added threats and intimidation are “not diminishing but expanding for all concerned.” “I nevertheless believe that the exposure of what happened was necessary not just for myself but for law and justice worldwide. My story is not yet concluded.”
As El Masri noted, he submited testimony because “WikiLeaks publications were relied on by the [European Court of Human Rights] in obtaining the redress” he received. While reading parts of El Masri’s statement for the court, defense attorney Mark Summers said that, as a result of cables, it is known that the German government bowed to pressure from the U.S. to not seek the extradition of the CIA rendition team. El Masri also mentioned the WikiLeaks cables similarly showed that the U.S. government interfered in a judicial investigation in Germany and in Spain. (The rendition flight in question traveled from Palma airport in Spain.)
Assange stands up
US lawyer: We see no utility whatsoever in having Mr el-Masri in court. None whatsoever.
Julian Assange stands up: Madam I will not accept you sensoring a torture victim’s statement to this court.
Judge: you are represented.
Assange: I have tried to convey those instructions. https://t.co/o3sTFwJEjO
— Charlie Jones (@CharlieDanJones) September 18, 2020
Pilger changed mood
Today, at the #Assange trial, I was struck by a changed mood. Julian's defence is winning hands down, aided by the US prosecution's abuse of witnesses and idiotic attempt to prove journalism is espionage. Even Judge Reaper has gone quiet. Trashing British justice has its dangers.
— John Pilger (@johnpilger) September 18, 2020
Assange could and would never identify a source. Not one potential future source could ever trust him again. Rohrabacher appears to deny what Robinson said she heard him say.
It has been alleged by members of the Democratic Party and elements of the press that the source of the DNC Leaks published by WikiLeaks is linked to the Russian state, a position that has been consistently denied by both Julian Assange and the Russian state. US President Donald Trump was “aware of and had approved of” US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher and Mr Charles Johnson meeting with Julian Assange in order to secure the source of the DNC Leaks, in exchange for some form of “pardon, assurance or agreement” which would “both benefit President Trump politically” and prevent a US indictment against and extradition of Mr Assange, the Old Bailey heard on Friday.
The assertions were read into open court on behalf of barrister Jennifer Robinson, who was present at the meeting in the Ecuadorian Embassy on 15 August 2015. This was before any indictment was issued against the WikiLeaks publisher, The US government’s representative told the court that they do not dispute the offer was made during the meeting but do appear that they will contest the truthfulness of the offer itself. Ms Robinson’s statement notes that Mr Rohrabacher and Mr Johnson told Ms Robinson and Mr Assange that they “wanted to resolve the ongoing speculation of Russian involvement in the Democratic National Convention” and that it was “damaging to US Russia relations and reviving old Cold War politics”.
Ms Robinson has represented Mr Assange on numerous matters since 2010, both as a solicitor and a barrister. Ms Robinson states that the Congressman made clear that “the source of the DNC leaks would be of interest value and interest” to the President. Mr Rohrabacher apparently described what would be a “win/win solution” for Mr Assange to leave the embassy and “get on with his life”. Ms Robinson’s notes that Mr Rohrabacher said he would “then return” and see what “would be done” to prevent Mr Assange’s indictment and extradition. Mr Assange did not provide the identity of any source”, the statement said.
Charles Johnson, who accompanied former Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, denies that the pair offered Julian Assange a pardon from Trump, but asked Assange to share what he knew about his sources with the US govt.
— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) September 18, 2020
We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site.
Thank you for your support.
Support the Automatic Earth in virustime.